NationStates

Hi
I'm stacked at 12 ROs but I think it would be fun and helpful to have extra RO space (such as 15 or 20)
Currently the maximum Regional Officers any region can have is 12 Officers, and that can be really restrictive to large UCRs and GCRs. Increasing the limit from 12 to 15-30 would be helpful. Thanks ^^

I agree, I think more ROs would be cool. At the very least GCRs should get a few more I think. Maybe allow more for older regions? I would love to be allowed to add more in Hell.

If we do this, can we have a second option to put selected ROs into a spoiler-like thing under the Founder, WA Delegate, and whatever ROs that you don't select? Something like a check box in a column saying 'Show in spoiler'.

If I remember correctly TSP has issues with this too.

Only problem I have with this is more raider ROs during raids. While I'm not entirely against this idea, can we keep the number of BC ROs at 12 or less?

Lenlyvit wrote:Only problem I have with this is more raider ROs during raids. While I'm not entirely against this idea, can we keep the number of BC ROs at 12 or less?

Is there currently no limit on the number of BC RO's a region can have (other than the limit on the total number of ROs, of course)? I'd personally like to see a harder limit on allowable numbers of BC ROs, even if the number of total ROs increases.

Galiantus III wrote:

Lenlyvit wrote:Only problem I have with this is more raider ROs during raids. While I'm not entirely against this idea, can we keep the number of BC ROs at 12 or less?

Is there currently no limit on the number of BC RO's a region can have (other than the limit on the total number of ROs, of course)? I'd personally like to see a harder limit on allowable numbers of BC ROs, even if the number of total ROs increases.

We already have an ejection rate limit, slower than what one good person can do manually, to counter the added utility of RO's, that even applies to the delegate themselves because scripting or whatever. Do we need to hamstring things further?

Altmoras wrote:If I remember correctly TSP has issues with this too.

Can confirm.

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:We already have an ejection rate limit, slower than what one good person can do manually, to counter the added utility of RO's, that even applies to the delegate themselves because scripting or whatever. Do we need to hamstring things further?

It's not just the ejection rate limit; it's being able to tell pilers to "endorse Del + all ROs", and giving all those points BC to perform ejections for when you're griefing a region. Yes, this can be worked around by reappointing and/or slingshotting and giving explicit links for the pilers and whatnot, so the difference is marginal.

TL;DR: Lenly does have a point, but the difference probably isn't big enough to matter.

More RO slots please. From a personal viewpoint, they don't need to be able to use BC. Ideally there wouldn't be a limit or there would be a really high one (like, if someone wants to put their entire region as officers, that's not a bad thing), and you would be able to appoint officers without having any powers.

Flanderlion wrote:and you would be able to appoint officers without having any powers.

But surely you can do that already, just by listing them in the WFE without going through the region's Admin page?

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:

Galiantus III wrote:
Is there currently no limit on the number of BC RO's a region can have (other than the limit on the total number of ROs, of course)? I'd personally like to see a harder limit on allowable numbers of BC ROs, even if the number of total ROs increases.

We already have an ejection rate limit, slower than what one good person can do manually, to counter the added utility of RO's, that even applies to the delegate themselves because scripting or whatever. Do we need to hamstring things further?

Without restricting the number of BC officers increasing the number allowed RO would have an effect on gameplay. This isn't hampering anything, just preserving status quo.

Aclion wrote:

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:
We already have an ejection rate limit, slower than what one good person can do manually, to counter the added utility of RO's, that even applies to the delegate themselves because scripting or whatever. Do we need to hamstring things further?

Without restricting the number of BC officers increasing the number allowed RO would have an effect on gameplay. This isn't hampering anything, just preserving status quo.

In fairness to Souls, I was actually suggesting a stricter limit on BC ROs. But yeah - if we increase the maximum allowable ROs it should at least be done in a way to maintain the status quo on BC powers.

Galiantus III wrote:

Aclion wrote:Without restricting the number of BC officers increasing the number allowed RO would have an effect on gameplay. This isn't hampering anything, just preserving status quo.

In fairness to Souls, I was actually suggesting a stricter limit on BC ROs. But yeah - if we increase the maximum allowable ROs it should at least be done in a way to maintain the status quo on BC powers.

And my point remains that adding more does not

-increase ejection speed. There's already a per-region cap that's low enough that any more than 2 people even trying at once just makes it harder, and one fast person alone is better than one fast person and one slow person, all because of the low cap and the way the cap is structured. (the same cap which has made refounding liberated regions near-impossible)

-increase odds of someone being online to fight a lib. Because a) with the time delay on adding BC powers, you're in the same exact place early on in ops, and b) by the time we're at 12, there's already going to be someone on, period. 15, 20, makes no difference if you're already long past 100% coverage. and really, 3-4 BC RO's is the point where all updates can easily have at least one person on.

-Make any major change to long-game influence. Roavin noted a few minor points there, but also conceded the ultimate points - adding more RO's does nothing that isn't done just the same by listing more people to be endorsed in the WFE, and then just removing/adding BC powers around as needed when it comes time to use that influence.

More RO slots at this point would not have a substantial impact on the "active R/D operations" side of GP. The biggest Gameplay effect I'd imagine you'd see, overall, is, well, more RO's being appointed. In less update-focused regions, i.e. native regions, this might mean higher odds of someone being on to prevent a raid. It might mean lower standards to be some type of RO, which could help sleepers/coupers, but *mostly* only if they're given BC powers. etc etc.

I agree. It'd keep things interesting, and I like interesting.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:If we do this, can we have a second option to put selected ROs into a spoiler-like thing under the Founder, WA Delegate, and whatever ROs that you don't select? Something like a check box in a column saying 'Show in spoiler'.

A spoiler box is already there. When you appoint many officers, it shows the list of officers and "+3 more". Clicking this will lead you to the admin page. I agree with others on this forum that a limit around 20 would be a good idea.

Why do we have a limit on regional officers in the first place? Is it to prevent spam?

A second idea could be to remove the RO limit completely

Queen Yuno wrote:A second idea could be to remove the RO limit completely

You know and trust all 6,782 nations in your region to always do the right thing when given extra powers? I know I don't. We manage to moderate the entire site with less than 20 moderators. Why would any one region require a larger staff than the site?

Erithaca wrote:Why do we have a limit on regional officers in the first place?

The abilities to eject, suppress, create polls, communicate, request embassies, and so on should only be given to players who have proven to be trustworthy and reliable. They're effectively region moderators. I've certainly seen (and had to deal with) signs of RO abuse. Giving those abilities to anyone who just shows up can wreck your region.

Frisbeeteria wrote:

Queen Yuno wrote:A second idea could be to remove the RO limit completely

You know and trust all 6,782 nations in your region to always do the right thing when given extra powers? I know I don't. We manage to moderate the entire site with less than 20 moderators. Why would any one region require a larger staff than the site?

Erithaca wrote:Why do we have a limit on regional officers in the first place?

The abilities to eject, suppress, create polls, communicate, request embassies, and so on should only be given to players who have proven to be trustworthy and reliable. They're effectively region moderators. I've certainly seen (and had to deal with) signs of RO abuse. Giving those abilities to anyone who just shows up can wreck your region.

And is that your problem? Given even just one RO or even the delegate can do such a thing anyways if they wanted.

Your first point is sound, no limit would be absurd. Your second point is silly and I've never heard of NS Mods having some jurisdiction on how regions should govern themselves in game outside of the already existing game rules. What right do you have to say who is or isn't trustworthy or who should or should not be made RO? I don't recall you being the delegate of TRR, I'm pretty sure I am and it's my call not yours.

If the mods don't want anyone "abusing" RO, then maybe don't allow ROs to "abuse" things within their power. Might as well go back to the age of raiding being illegal and mods get to judge who is raiding and have to what was it you said "deal with it"?


Anyways, I'd like to expand ROs but not BC. I don't see any reason to go beyond 20.

Frisbeeteria wrote:You know and trust all 6,782 nations in your region to always do the right thing when given extra powers? I know I don't. We manage to moderate the entire site with less than 20 moderators. Why would any one region require a larger staff than the site?

Erithaca wrote:Why do we have a limit on regional officers in the first place?

The abilities to eject, suppress, create polls, communicate, request embassies, and so on should only be given to players who have proven to be trustworthy and reliable. They're effectively region moderators. I've certainly seen (and had to deal with) signs of RO abuse. Giving those abilities to anyone who just shows up can wreck your region.

I trust 40 people who could use the RO, also, untrustworty people could simply be given Polls authority. Secondly, if they do wreck (or raid) the region, that's extra entertainment, it's a politics game. But 20 ROs would be a tremendous improvement.

The moderator's job is not the same as the RO's job. The RO's job is to engage/work on region-building (or even build/participate in RPs, which there are countless #s of, and multiple cartographers dealing with map claims from everyone via regional telegrams.) These are just some examples. Many people who run regions feel the burnout and want more staff to be hired (more than 12 because those 12 get burnout too but at the same time, don't want to lose their responsibilities) and that's where new players come in. I feel expanding the limit even just a little, gives more room for regions to determine their own internal affairs.

(PS, I posess another nation which is the founder of Yuno and it's exceeded the RO limit too, and I wanted to appoint a few more for that. I met other user-created-region founders who share the same concerns.)

Bears Armed wrote:

Flanderlion wrote:and you would be able to appoint officers without having any powers.

But surely you can do that already, just by listing them in the WFE without going through the region's Admin page?

One practical use for such an officer would be to allow it to post on other RMBs. An ambassador-like position would have no need for powers, but might still need to be an officer to post on another region's RMB depending on that region's settings.

I like the idea of more ROs per region. I like the idea of ROs without power as well.

I wrote a long post yesterday, realised it said almost the same thing as my post above a few months back. Still want more/unlimited ROs and ROs who can be appointed without a power, and agree with the other posters.

Topid wrote:

Bears Armed wrote:But surely you can do that already, just by listing them in the WFE without going through the region's Admin page?

One practical use for such an officer would be to allow it to post on other RMBs. An ambassador-like position would have no need for powers, but might still need to be an officer to post on another region's RMB depending on that region's settings.

Okay, that's a reasonable point, if your Ambassadors don't feel like creating puppets to send into other regions concerned.

Here's an idea. Have a scaling limit on general ROs, that increases with the total number of nations within the region, and a separate, lower scaling limit for ROs with BC powers. Regions that need more ROs for non-BC purposes get the ones they need, and regions that want more BCOs get them, but at a reduced rate.

Would like to give this a bump. Basically allowing more ROs (although not allowing more BC ROs past the current number to avoid causing imbalance in gameplay) and allowing ROs to be appointed without powers.

While we're bumped:

Frisbeeteria wrote:The abilities to eject, suppress, create polls, communicate, request embassies, and so on should only be given to players who have proven to be trustworthy and reliable. They're effectively region moderators. I've certainly seen (and had to deal with) signs of RO abuse. Giving those abilities to anyone who just shows up can wreck your region.

Literally any nation can have access to all those powers just by founding a region.