[Change #5] Reformation SC proposal [ON HOLD]

[Sedgistan]

Please see this announcement first.

This Security Council proposal type could be targeted at a region, and would remove the ability of the delegate to access regional controls for a set amount of time. The resolution would be in effect for a set amount of time before expiring automatically. Reformation proposals would be targeted at a region, and could be used on any type of region.

The intention of this change is to:

• Combat situations where a group through weight of endorsements cannot realistically be removed from the delegacy through other means.
• Offer the opportunity for other political maneuverings.

The following aspects in particular need further discussion:

• How long the resolution would be in effect for before it expires.
• Whether any level of access to regional controls, such as the ability to modify the WFE, would still be possible.
• Security Council proposal rules issues, especially regarding duplication.

Discussion in this thread is open to everyone. Please use this thread for discussion of this change only - off-topic posts, regional bickering and so on will be dealt with swiftly and punished for as necessary.

[SkyDip]

To give the SC any sort of clout behind this proposal, I propose that the during of such should not be something trivial (i.e. an update, two updates). I'd like to see something actually punishing a target nation along the lines of three days/six updates. To make it interesting, perhaps this should be extended to the amount of time it would hypothetically take a Liberation/Condemnation/Commendation to pass through the SC. That'd be interesting.

As to the actual effect, I'd like to see full removal of any powers - mass TGs to the region, WFE alterations, ejections, banning, the lot. What's the point in making this a reality if it doesn't carry some actual weight?

Lastly, the rules issue. Would it be possible to implement a sort of time effect on this proposal? Say the SC passes a Reformation of Testlandia and their 3-4 days of punishment go by. Would it be possible to make this type of legislation self-repealing after the intended effect has passed? That would be a quick way to avoid duplication, but I'm not sure how possible it would be technical-wise.

[Mallorea and Riva]

This proposal creates essentially the same problems that I listed in the thread devoted to the delegate elect concept, due to the fact that they are very similar ideas. Implementing either one would discourage active gameplay in larger regions enough, both would be truly irritating and stagnating.

[The Blaatschapen]

To give the SC any sort of clout behind this proposal, I propose that the during of such should not be something trivial (i.e. an update, two updates). I'd like to see something actually punishing a target nation along the lines of three days/six updates. To make it interesting, perhaps this should be extended to the amount of time it would hypothetically take a Liberation/Condemnation/Commendation to pass through the SC. That'd be interesting.

As to the actual effect, I'd like to see full removal of any powers - mass TGs to the region, WFE alterations, ejections, banning, the lot. What's the point in making this a reality if it doesn't carry some actual weight?

Lastly, the rules issue. Would it be possible to implement a sort of time effect on this proposal? Say the SC passes a Reformation of Testlandia and their 3-4 days of punishment go by. Would it be possible to make this type of legislation self-repealing after the intended effect has passed? That would be a quick way to avoid duplication, but I'm not sure how possible it would be technical-wise.

I think (i'm talking as a player here; not a mod) that the Reformation targets a region, not a nation. So it would target a region and whomever a delegate is during the reformation period will not have the delegate powers.

My personal suggestion for the reformation period is to have it equal to queue time + voting time. So that in theory you can have a region indefinitely in reformation. But at the price of really tiring out all ambassadors in the SC. Though this might give even more influence to late bloc voters who are watching the region. "Okay, my side is winning the pile race, let's be against a continuation." or "My side is losing, time to vote FOR another reformation period".

This proposal also 'breaks' the current expectation that a resolution is in effect until repealed. I'm not sure if that's a good precedent for the whole GA/SC?

[SkyDip]

Blaat - yes, sorry - I saw this was region-targeted but didn't write clearly as such.

I don't like the idea of having a perpetual limbo for, as you said, the clogging of the SC. Shorter than your suggestion would be good, but I'd agree that in general a longer amount of time is better than shorter.

Like I said, would a self-repealing proposal be applicable/code-able?

[Mahaj]

Like I said, would a self-repealing proposal be applicable/code-able?

Probably?

I mean repeals themselves are already codeable.

How long the resolution would be in effect for before it expires.

A week maybe?

Less? Four days, the length of time voting takes?

Whether any level of access to regional controls, such as the ability to modify the WFE, would still be possible.

WFE access, suppression, those are the two I can think of.

Security Council proposal rules issues, especially regarding duplication.

I think for this type of proposal duplication (mentioning the events also mentioned in a previous proposal), so long as its not outright plagiarism, should be allowed.

[Auralia]

Perhaps "Revolution" would be a better name than "Reformation"? I've only heard the latter associated with Christian schisms.

[Sedgistan]

This would be a new type of resolution, and yes it would self-expire automatically.

[Mahaj]

Or "Transformation"?

[Ballotonia]

Like I said, would a self-repealing proposal be applicable/code-able?

Non-codeable items would not be on the list of items we intend to implement

Ballotonia

[Mahaj]

Like I said, would a self-repealing proposal be applicable/code-able?

Non-codeable items would not be on the list of items we intend to implement

Ballotonia

Who doesn't love a challenge?

[Cerian Quilor]

If something like this passes on a region, occupying it becomes literally impossible.

[Mahaj]

If something like this passes on a region, occupying it becomes literally impossible.

Well, yes, nobody can control regional controls.

It becomes a sort of piling war.

[Punk Reloaded]

I don't really like this one. We don't have the NPO if this were around back in 2003.

It strips the only method of warfare an invader has at his disposal and gives all the power back to the liberators. I would welcome this if there were a higher-than-majority standard set for these types of resolutions.

[Mahaj]

I don't really like this one. We don't have the NPO if this were around back in 2003.

It strips the only method of warfare an invader has at his disposal and gives all the power back to the liberators. I would welcome this if there were a higher-than-majority standard set for these types of resolutions.

It doesn't give "all power back to the liberators".

The defenders still don't get control of the region for a while, both sides have an opportunity to fight for it.

The raiders start at an advantage, actually, because they're already pre-piled.

[Punk Reloaded]

I don't really like this one. We don't have the NPO if this were around back in 2003.

It strips the only method of warfare an invader has at his disposal and gives all the power back to the liberators. I would welcome this if there were a higher-than-majority standard set for these types of resolutions.

It doesn't give "all power back to the liberators".

The defenders still don't get control of the region for a while, both sides have an opportunity to fight for it.

The raiders start at an advantage, actually, because they're already pre-piled.

Not at all. If the raiders find themselves victim of such a proposal, it will take at most 2 updates to remove them especially if it is in the early stages of a war effort. It's likely to be less because this will be a deathnell to all invasions.

Unless raiders become a little more savvy and start bringing in 'seconds' who try to fly under the radar, I don't see how this effectively kills all wars.

[Mahaj]

It doesn't give "all power back to the liberators".

The defenders still don't get control of the region for a while, both sides have an opportunity to fight for it.

The raiders start at an advantage, actually, because they're already pre-piled.

Not at all. If the raiders find themselves victim of such a proposal, it will take at most 2 updates to remove them especially if it is in the early stages of a war effort. It's likely to be less because this will be a deathnell to all invasions.

Unless raiders become a little more savvy and start bringing in 'seconds' who try to fly under the radar, I don't see how this effectively kills all wars.

Well a reformation just triggers a pile war, no?

So the raiders would just have to pile more.

[Mallorea and Riva]

I don't really like this one. We don't have the NPO if this were around back in 2003.

It strips the only method of warfare an invader has at his disposal and gives all the power back to the liberators. I would welcome this if there were a higher-than-majority standard set for these types of resolutions.

It doesn't give "all power back to the liberators".

The defenders still don't get control of the region for a while, both sides have an opportunity to fight for it.

The raiders start at an advantage, actually, because they're already pre-piled.

Actually we start at a massive disadvantage, because we have to actually take the region first, then deal with every single do gooder on ns after this gets passed.

[Mahaj]

It doesn't give "all power back to the liberators".

The defenders still don't get control of the region for a while, both sides have an opportunity to fight for it.

The raiders start at an advantage, actually, because they're already pre-piled.

Actually we start at a massive disadvantage, because we have to actually take the region first, then deal with every single do gooder on ns after this gets passed.

Yes, but taking the region is not particularly difficult.

You're not going up against an active delegate, in all likelihood you're able to take the region with ease.

And you don't have to deal with every single do gooder, because not everyone is available for every 12 hours. People cannot be permanently on alert. Defenders would have to be. Raiders would not.

[Cerian Quilor]

Except if we can't eject you, you can come in over the course of multiple updates to outnumber us.

[Mahaj]

Except if we can't eject you, you can come in over the course of multiple updates to outnumber us.

And your guys can come in over the course of multiple updates to support you.

[Cerian Quilor]

And as has been pointed out, no matter what raiders do, Defenders will always be able to draw on more people.

Raiders Take Region X.
Region X has a reformation on it.
Defenders can simply come in over the course of say a day. Any time. At all. And defenders can't be ejected.

What you're proposing is nothing but an absolute numbers game, in every sense, and in absolute total numbers, with no capacity to eject incoming nations, defenders will always topple a raider delegate.

[Mahaj]

And as has been pointed out, no matter what raiders do, Defenders will always be able to draw on more people.

Raiders Take Region X.
Region X has a reformation on it.
Defenders can simply come in over the course of say a day. Any time. At all. And defenders can't be ejected.

What you're proposing is nothing but an absolute numbers game, in every sense, and in absolute total numbers, with no capacity to eject incoming nations, defenders will always topple a raider delegate.

You're missing the step where
Raiders can simply come in over the course of say a day. Any time. At all. And raiders can't be ejected.

And if the defender toppled the raider in a short period, they'd *still* have to deal with the reformation and lack of controls.


The idea that defenders will always topple a raider delegate is wildly inaccurate. Frankly, many times the raider will win because the people who would be relied upon to pile, couldn't be bothered, for various reasons.

[Cerian Quilor]

If the UDL can, at times, assembly some 40+ people for a liberation attempt at midnight EST, then they can damn well assemble 40+ people over the course of a single day.

[Astarial]

This proposal combined with the delegate-elect seems like overkill.

1) Raiders take a region. It's a close victory, so DE status is triggered.
2) After 12/24/whatever hours, raiders are ahead. Delegate controls activate.
3) Defenders, who couldn't pull the numbers to win, push through a reformation
4) DE status is essentially reactivated
5) Repeat 3 and 4 until defenders scrape together the numbers to force a liberation

One of the two seems fine. Both... meh. Sieges lose their fun when they happen constantly.