Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[Rethan]

While I think this is mostly an issue of semantics, I still disagree with your statement that adhering to commonly accepted guidelines is "giving up" control of your nation in an OOC respect. At least, no more so than not covering yourself in peanut butter and running through Times Square in tighty whities while singing "Yankee Doodle Dandee" at the top of your lungs. Sure, there's nothing stopping you, but you're likely to find that locating individuals willing to associate with you will be far more difficult.

You are also more likely to find RP partners by being an MT nation. But surely you wouldn't suggest that?

And in my personal experience, I have met far more players who fall outside of the recommended guidelines than who stay inside them... Mostly in the case of empire size, where it seems a large number of FT players claim hundreds to thousands of star systems.

Gonna be honest, I have no idea who you're referring to with this. I can think of one, maybe two who might have that many systems but that's hardly a "large number".

But that's not really the point I was trying to make. People are clearly willing to follow guidelines that limit what their nation can do. So the failure of the Galactic Assembly should not be blamed on national sovereignty.

There's a distinction there. The galactic assembly was an IC thing and, ICly, nobody's nations were willing to sign up to something they weren't getting any bonus from. With alliances and so forth, you have trade partners, mutual defensive pacts. The Galactic Assembly didn't offer any of that, it offered less than even the modern day UN offers member states. It was asking people to limit themselves in a galaxy that has literal monsters in order to be "humane". Which is a ridiculous thing to ask with the hugely differing biologies and psychologies of the NS alien species.

Players already submit themselves to the rules of alliances, economic organizations, etc.
So why would submitting to rules be the problem with the Galactic Assembly? If players already do it anyway, why would that be the cause?

Surely there is some other reason?

See what I mentioned above. Those alliances all offer something in exchange for giving up a few pieces of national sovereignty (and, come to think of it, one of the more recent alliances I knew about didn't even do that. It was little more than a "come help us out when someone kicks us" agreement). Plus, the GA and things like it have left a very poor taste in people's mouths for a variety of reasons, and people don't particularly care for trying it again. ICly, the first major GA meeting I was around for ended with one of the delegates getting drunk and another one getting shot, and more than a few non-human species were openly subjected to horrific amounts of bigotry (the Xiscapians, IIRC, were not even allowed attend because...I dunno, fuck anything with fur or something I guess). Another one got attacked by Space Persia. OOCly, as was mentioned, the GA was used as a tool by certain individuals to promote their own agendas - both in-game and out-of-game.

[Kyrusia]

[snip]

You are more likely to find roleplayers involved in MT than in FT, meaning statistically speaking you are far more likely to find roleplay partners there. You are also far more likely to find FT'ers who do not acknowledge the World Assembly as existing at all than you are to find those who acknowledge it has any binding over them. You are also far more likely to find roleplayers in FT, even those in closed roleplaying groups and those whom participate in P2TM and those who participate almost exclusively via Regional Message Boards who adhere to the fundamental precepts outlined in this thread (C4 by any other name) than you are not to.

People are, indeed, willing to accept and follow guidelines that allow them to get more roleplay partners because over a decade's time has taught the members of the community that those players whom egregiously violate those guidelines (as opposed to working a bit above or below the guideline, but still within the largely unconsciously acceptable range) tend to be involved in roleplaying for reasons other than actually to roleplay. This is irrelevant as to whether their states are willing to.

In roleplaying, there is a hard line between In-Character (the state, country, civilization, etc. and its wants and desires and what it is willing [or not willing] to do) and Out-of-Character (the player and his/her wants and desires and what he/she is willing [or not willing] to do). The guidelines as outlined in this thread numerous times now, helping to define what some have come to call "FT-Prime" (which is simply another way of saying "Future Tech roleplaying, with particular emphasis upon the Diplomacy category of the forum and its interconnected network[s] of canon and continuity"), are guidelines for the player not the star-state. I would be hard pressed to find any In-Character state that acknowledges "C4" as anything other than an ancient Terran form of plastique explosive.

As for why the Galactic Assembly was not (and likely never will) be submitted to is a similar reason the World Assembly won't ever be by everyone: some players simply don't like the idea, and thus it halts, and some states execute policies which are antithetical to venturing into such an enterprise. Does this mean that for the folks who attended the multiple GA's that it wasn't fun? No. Does this mean there aren't people who acknowledge the World Assembly? No. Does this mean there will never be international or supranational organizations that players don't abide by for the purpose of OOC mutual interest and IC for reasons all their own? Also, "no." League of the Raumreich/Alpha Centauri Accords, Triumvirate of Yut, MIDAS, etc. are just a few examples where states have entered into effectively binding, international treaties of law; that does not mean that everyone will want to and does not mean that similar ideas executed at times different from when those were executed will, in turn, succeed simply because those have; conversely, it doesn't mean new and novel ideas executed now will automatically fail.

This all, however, is possibly completely unconnected to when players (Mentors and non-Mentors alike) provide evidence of their experiences in the community where they regularly interact with other players and have gauged, over years of involvement in that community, that such ideas tend to not have broad appeal as a matter of course. Does that mean not to do it? No. But it does mean, which is what people have been saying for years about a variety of things, that a player will have to work harder and overcome years of disaffection with a similar idea just to make it work. For one reason or another, it's true: the Galactic Assembly is not something many in FT would like to do, were that false, it would have been repeated again by now since the one the Valinor hosted. Since it hasn't been, we can logically conclude at least one of (at least) two things: either no one has the time to put into such an effort, or no one has a desire to attempt such a thing again - though there are probably far more reasons.

At the bottom line, it boils down to this: if a player wants to make an international body of law, go for it. There really likely are people who would enjoy it, but that does not mean it can be forced upon everyone and attempting to do so is a very quick way to find one's star-state miraculously "ceasing to exist" for any player whom feels truly disaffected or like they are being coerced to participate. FT - like the entirety of roleplaying on NS - is consent based. This includes, frankly, these guidelines often re-spoken in this very thread: players are not forced to adhere to them by any means, but players whom do consent to them (by-in-large most FT'ers, in some form, consent to the aforementioned 'C4' even if they have disagreements over other, often unspoken guidelines) are free to simply ignore the existence of the non-adhering player and his/her star-state if they so choose - no reasoning, justification, etc. required.

Hope that helps.

Edit: To add to this, since my second to last paragraph is rather... jumbled in what I was trying to say: there have been very few instances (the Shivan Invasion, the Rethast Pathogen, the Ikrahk, the IRON Wall, and possibly one or two more) where the virtual entirety (or, at least, a significant plurality of those active) have "united under a common goal or in a common cause" in Future Tech. These tended to be quite short-lived and almost universally in response to an enemy force that was a) played by a respected member of the community and/or b) arose naturally in the networks of canon without coercion and without forcing other players to acknowledge them. The GA's were semi-successful in this for the brief periods of time they were active, but this was also during a time of NSFT where the Thousand Per Billion Rule existed (even in part), where the TPB Rule was dying or being replaced with Code of Bro/Rule of Cool (what we now call "C4"), and, frankly, when clique-like OOC behavior of certain organizations were thinly veiled under In-Character veneers. In short: FT was a different time and place, and the mechanics that let the Galactic Assembly exist and get as many behind it as there were are no longer in-force like they once were, with special focus upon the "NS Alliance Mechanic" that was the craze at the time (both as an IC method of mutual protection and OOC method of organization) in the community.

[Excidium Planetis]

You are also more likely to find RP partners by being an MT nation. But surely you wouldn't suggest that?

And in my personal experience, I have met far more players who fall outside of the recommended guidelines than who stay inside them... Mostly in the case of empire size, where it seems a large number of FT players claim hundreds to thousands of star systems.

Gonna be honest, I have no idea who you're referring to with this. I can think of one, maybe two who might have that many systems but that's hardly a "large number".

Might that be because you only roleplay with people who have already meshed with the FT Prime community?

Stormwrath holds nearly a whole galaxy, and has posted here occasionally (both as Sotrmwrath and the Perseid Federation
Singaporean Transhumans holds hundreds of worlds at least, mostly across different but connected universes, and has also posted in this very thread
Tinfect holds several dozen (like 50 or so) interior territories and many exterior territories not listed. Don't believe he's posted here but he is an FT player active in the WA and some roleplay groups.
The Second Brotherhood of Planets has quite a few star systems... Not sure of the exact number but a lot more than recommended. Not really sure where they are most active, but I've roleplayed twice with them.
Menelmacar seems to have control over a significant portion of the galaxy, and some in a few others.
Doom Legions possesses a lot of worlds. Mostly through never ending conquest.
Ancient Humans controls literally the entire Milky Way, if factbooks are to be believed.
Nexus of Man controls a needlessly big chunk of the Milky Way.
Allancia ditto (FT version, not PMT version.
Acheronis too, although now this is starting to look like a roleplay group I'm most active in rather than a random sample of nations I've encountered.
Wrapper is an active WA member, also has lots of worlds, I think. Not too sure about it.
Novum Alexandria
HYDRA-Russian Empire... To be fair, I met them on GE&T before they joined the League of Mechanocracies
Atomic Utopia has posted in this thread, has a version of their nation which possesses something like a thousand systems.
Auricium
The Martian Hegemony doesn't exist anymore, but they did have an unusual number of systems.
Soulcraftia RPs as the Galactic Empire from Star Wars.

I could go on, but I need to eat eventually. Hope you get the picture.

[Western Pacific Territories]

Gonna be honest, I have no idea who you're referring to with this. I can think of one, maybe two who might have that many systems but that's hardly a "large number".

Might that be because you only roleplay with people who have already meshed with the FT Prime community?

Stormwrath holds nearly a whole galaxy, and has posted here occasionally (both as Sotrmwrath and the Perseid Federation
Singaporean Transhumans holds hundreds of worlds at least, mostly across different but connected universes, and has also posted in this very thread
Tinfect holds several dozen (like 50 or so) interior territories and many exterior territories not listed. Don't believe he's posted here but he is an FT player active in the WA and some roleplay groups.
The Second Brotherhood of Planets has quite a few star systems... Not sure of the exact number but a lot more than recommended. Not really sure where they are most active, but I've roleplayed twice with them.
Menelmacar seems to have control over a significant portion of the galaxy, and some in a few others.
Doom Legions possesses a lot of worlds. Mostly through never ending conquest.
Ancient Humans controls literally the entire Milky Way, if factbooks are to be believed.
Nexus of Man controls a needlessly big chunk of the Milky Way.
Allancia ditto (FT version, not PMT version.
Acheronis too, although now this is starting to look like a roleplay group I'm most active in rather than a random sample of nations I've encountered.
Wrapper is an active WA member, also has lots of worlds, I think. Not too sure about it.
Novum Alexandria
HYDRA-Russian Empire... To be fair, I met them on GE&T before they joined the League of Mechanocracies
Atomic Utopia has posted in this thread, has a version of their nation which possesses something like a thousand systems.
Auricium
The Martian Hegemony doesn't exist anymore, but they did have an unusual number of systems.
Soulcraftia RPs as the Galactic Empire from Star Wars.

I could go on, but I need to eat eventually. Hope you get the picture.

Don't forget about my puppet, Imperium av Lux Nis. It controls it's entire galaxy and regularly influences other galaxies.

[Ferret Civilization]

That's something, well that wasn't meant for me. That certainly was helpful to look at all of those, thank you for sharing some of those. It's been interesting looking for stuff like that around. I would be interested in actually seeing a complete list like that, or even just more, it's really helpful to someone like me at least.

[Neornith]

Gonna be honest, I have no idea who you're referring to with this. I can think of one, maybe two who might have that many systems but that's hardly a "large number".

Might that be because you only roleplay with people who have already meshed with the FT Prime community?

Stormwrath holds nearly a whole galaxy, and has posted here occasionally (both as Sotrmwrath and the Perseid Federation
Singaporean Transhumans holds hundreds of worlds at least, mostly across different but connected universes, and has also posted in this very thread
Tinfect holds several dozen (like 50 or so) interior territories and many exterior territories not listed. Don't believe he's posted here but he is an FT player active in the WA and some roleplay groups.
The Second Brotherhood of Planets has quite a few star systems... Not sure of the exact number but a lot more than recommended. Not really sure where they are most active, but I've roleplayed twice with them.
Menelmacar seems to have control over a significant portion of the galaxy, and some in a few others.
Doom Legions possesses a lot of worlds. Mostly through never ending conquest.
Ancient Humans controls literally the entire Milky Way, if factbooks are to be believed.
Nexus of Man controls a needlessly big chunk of the Milky Way.
Allancia ditto (FT version, not PMT version.
Acheronis too, although now this is starting to look like a roleplay group I'm most active in rather than a random sample of nations I've encountered.
Wrapper is an active WA member, also has lots of worlds, I think. Not too sure about it.
Novum Alexandria
HYDRA-Russian Empire... To be fair, I met them on GE&T before they joined the League of Mechanocracies
Atomic Utopia has posted in this thread, has a version of their nation which possesses something like a thousand systems.
Auricium
The Martian Hegemony doesn't exist anymore, but they did have an unusual number of systems.
Soulcraftia RPs as the Galactic Empire from Star Wars.

I could go on, but I need to eat eventually. Hope you get the picture.

At this point you're just being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.
The advice was given as to why it hasn't been done as well as the consequences of trying to force it on people.
If you want to do it go do it, no point in filling up the advice thread with a topic that's been thoroughly beaten to death

[Tinfect]

[...]Tinfect holds several dozen (like 50 or so) interior territories and many exterior territories not listed. Don't believe he's posted here but he is an FT player active in the WA and some roleplay groups.[...]

I've posted in this thread once, maybe twice by now. Might be better to say Thrice, counting this post, though.
But, just to clarify, only 29 of those Systems in the Interior Territories are actually Colonies, and I think that about 4 of them don't actually have anyone living on them yet, as they were established to deal with future population growth. 10 of the rest of them are Industrial Systems, and happen to be where all Agriculture and Production takes place in the Imperium, and also where we store materials. The last 17 are Shield Worlds, which is something of a misnomer, as all planets in the system that weren't destroyed or harvested, were militarized, and the system itself is full of Battlestations. We get around people just, not going to our shield worlds through some minor techwank that I'll not get into here.

The Exterior Territories on the other hand, is an arbitrarily large region of space, that, 70 years ago, the Imperium purged of anything Sapient. Some of the systems have old defense grids, sensor networks, the like, but most of it is malfunctioning from lack of maintenance, and all of it is extremely outdated. Most of the Mining the Imperium does, is done out there, but other than that, nothing is really out there. Third Fleet Patrols are rare, partially because the Exterior Territories are, as previously mentioned, arbitrarily massive, and in most cases, we don't even bother to enforce Imperial Jurisdiction out there unless you try to set up something up.

Finally, I don't really like associating with the Galactic Empires of FT. Few of them have all that much of a handle on the logistics of such a thing, and, in more than a few cases, just use it as an excuse for their Techwank and why everyone should fear their ultimate 300 Kilometer Dreadnought of Doom and Destruction.

[Neornith]

And this

Finally, I don't really like associating with the Galactic Empires of FT. Few of them have all that much of a handle on the logistics of such a thing, and, in more than a few cases, just use it as an excuse for their Techwank and why everyone should fear their ultimate 300 Kilometer Dreadnought of Doom and Destruction.

Is why the guidelines are just that guidelines

[Excidium Planetis]

At this point you're just being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.

No, I was supporting my statement with examples. That isn't even an argument.

The advice was given as to why it hasn't been done

It has been done. I was questioning the reasoning for why it isn't being done now, which I feel Rethan and Kyrusia finally answered.

as well as the consequences of trying to force it on people.

Um, no, no one has really even discussed trying to force it on people, which is certainly not what I'd recommend.

[quote]If you want to do it go do it[/quot
I don't see the point in doing so, because the WA does everything the GA would do and already has a large player based and gameside implementation. Basically, superior to the GA in every way. The only way I would make a Galactic Assembly would be if there seemed to be even the slightest interest in it, which as this thread has demonstrated, there is none from the senior members of FT Prime. "If you want to, do it" is not encouraging, it's confirmation that no one cares.

[Lubyak]

I don't see the point in doing so, because the WA does everything the GA would do and already has a large player based and gameside implementation. Basically, superior to the GA in every way. The only way I would make a Galactic Assembly would be if there seemed to be even the slightest interest in it, which as this thread has demonstrated, there is none from the senior members of FT Prime. "If you want to, do it" is not encouraging, it's confirmation that no one cares.

Really, while I'm sure the WA is a load of fun for people who do it, I have very little interest in doing so. I would have more interest in being a part of a Galactic Assembly specifically because it doesn't have gameplay based implementation, nor an already present player base and systems. If there would be a GA, it would have to be made bearing in mind the context of FT as a whole, rather than trying to twist FT to fit into the already extant systems of the WA.

[Excidium Planetis]

And this

Finally, I don't really like associating with the Galactic Empires of FT. Few of them have all that much of a handle on the logistics of such a thing, and, in more than a few cases, just use it as an excuse for their Techwank and why everyone should fear their ultimate 300 Kilometer Dreadnought of Doom and Destruction.

Is why the guidelines are just that guidelines

To be honest, I'm not really sure what you are trying to say here.

[Telros]

So, had a question for the pool to chew on and toss about like playful dogs:

Special Forces, what have you? What is their doctrine, what are they deployed for, what kind of kit do they have? And most importantly..

WHAT KIND OF SILLY HAT DO THEY HAVE?

[Taledonia]

The only correct answers are top, stovepipe or bowler, Telros.

[The V O I D]

I have a question; would it be logical to have "mass produced super soldiers"? Essentially, I have these things called "Deathsquads" and they are made up of Slates. Slates is a short-term for a Blankslate, or a human-clone with 'blank' DNA. Essentially, grey eyes, albino hair/skintone... everything is 'blank' and they look exactly the same. With an adjusted, fixed height, weight-limit, etc. Slates are programmed genetically to be "slated" in terms of physical appearance aside from height/weight, and are modified to have strength, speed, etc. that makes humans look like ants. Deathsquads are grouped in threes, and tend to be able to (depending on situation, scenario and who we're up against) take down enemy planetary military bases on their own. And basically, since they are formed up of Slates and are augmented, given powerarmor and special weapons... well, they are basically bred to live, fight whatever purpose and then die in a hole probably on some battlefield, only to be replaced. And they are incredibly hard to kill, due to their augmentations genetically and technologically making them like cockroaches. A single Slate, especially one for Deathsquad or D-Squad usage, can survive five years without food, twenty minutes without oxygen, indefinitely without hydration, and at has a spare part-computer brain sync'd into the armor's sensor array and such in their bodies so they can keep fighting even after decapitation.

The motto of the Deathsquad/D-squads is: "Live. Fight. Die. And then keep fighting."

In other words, nigh-impossible-to-kill cannonfodder that is massproduced for the purpose of kill-crush-destroy!

[Lubyak]

So, had a question for the pool to chew on and toss about like playful dogs:

Special Forces, what have you? What is their doctrine, what are they deployed for, what kind of kit do they have? And most importantly..

WHAT KIND OF SILLY HAT DO THEY HAVE?

TRICORNES ARE NOT SILLY.
THEY ARE MIGHTY.

[Stormwrath]

Gonna be honest, I have no idea who you're referring to with this. I can think of one, maybe two who might have that many systems but that's hardly a "large number".

Might that be because you only roleplay with people who have already meshed with the FT Prime community?

Stormwrath holds nearly a whole galaxy, and has posted here occasionally (both as Stormwrath and the Perseid Federation)
Singaporean Transhumans holds hundreds of worlds at least, mostly across different but connected universes, and has also posted in this very thread
Tinfect holds several dozen (like 50 or so) interior territories and many exterior territories not listed. Don't believe he's posted here but he is an FT player active in the WA and some roleplay groups.
The Second Brotherhood of Planets has quite a few star systems... Not sure of the exact number but a lot more than recommended. Not really sure where they are most active, but I've roleplayed twice with them.
Menelmacar seems to have control over a significant portion of the galaxy, and some in a few others.
Doom Legions possesses a lot of worlds. Mostly through never ending conquest.
Ancient Humans controls literally the entire Milky Way, if factbooks are to be believed.
Nexus of Man controls a needlessly big chunk of the Milky Way.
Allancia ditto (FT version, not PMT version.
Acheronis too, although now this is starting to look like a roleplay group I'm most active in rather than a random sample of nations I've encountered.
Wrapper is an active WA member, also has lots of worlds, I think. Not too sure about it.
Novum Alexandria
HYDRA-Russian Empire... To be fair, I met them on GE&T before they joined the League of Mechanocracies
Atomic Utopia has posted in this thread, has a version of their nation which possesses something like a thousand systems.
Auricium
The Martian Hegemony doesn't exist anymore, but they did have an unusual number of systems.
Soulcraftia RPs as the Galactic Empire from Star Wars.

I could go on, but I need to eat eventually. Hope you get the picture.

While Perseid Federation is indeed a part of FT-Prime, Stormwrath isn't. In fact, the reason why I didn't use Stormwrath very often to interact with many FTers was that because it would be too large for them to handle, and in many ways would break a lot of the guidelines by which I stand by as both nations. Many if not most of the nations you mentioned were in canons separate from the greater FT community. So it isn't that helpful in bringing all of those FT nations up to support your previous statement.

So, had a question for the pool to chew on and toss about like playful dogs:

Special Forces, what have you? What is their doctrine, what are they deployed for, what kind of kit do they have? And most importantly..

WHAT KIND OF SILLY HAT DO THEY HAVE?

For Perseid Federation, most special forces are under the Diokisi Eidikon Epicheiriseon (similar to SOCOM). Many of these spec ops forces are primarily to counter piracy and terrorism, and can be deployed much faster than Geostratos or Astronautikon troops. Their kits may vary on the situation at hand, but they are often involving cutting-edge technology yet to see service with the rest of the Astrostratos. Should these tech work excellently with these elite of the elite, then it will work with the rest of the Perseid armed forces.

Also, silly helmet hat depends on the SpecOps team.

TRICORNES ARE NOT SILLY.
THEY ARE MIGHTY.

They are silly.

[Excidium Planetis]

I don't see the point in doing so, because the WA does everything the GA would do and already has a large player based and gameside implementation. Basically, superior to the GA in every way. The only way I would make a Galactic Assembly would be if there seemed to be even the slightest interest in it, which as this thread has demonstrated, there is none from the senior members of FT Prime. "If you want to, do it" is not encouraging, it's confirmation that no one cares.

Really, while I'm sure the WA is a load of fun for people who do it, I have very little interest in doing so. I would have more interest in being a part of a Galactic Embassy specifically because it doesn't have gameplay based implementation, nor an already present player base and systems. If there would be a GA, it would have to be made bearing in mind the context of FT as a whole, rather than trying to twist FT to fit into the already extant systems of the WA.

Why would you need to twist FT to fit in the WA? The WA can accommodate FT nations just as easily as MT nations. In fact, the problem with the GA mentioned earlier about differing treatment of species has already been settled by the WA... Resolutions are almost always written to apply to non-humans.

And I don't see why you have a reluctance to join a group that already has a present player base... FT Prime already has a present player base, would you avoid joining it if you were a new player?

While Perseid Federation is indeed a part of FT-Prime, Stormwrath isn't. In fact, the reason why I didn't use Stormwrath very often to interact with many FTers was that because it would be too large for them to handle, and in many ways would break a lot of the guidelines by which I stand by as both nations. Many if not most of the nations you mentioned were in canons separate from the greater FT community. So it isn't that helpful in bringing all of those FT nations up to support your previous statement.

My exact statement was

And in my personal experience, I have met far more players who fall outside of the recommended guidelines than who stay inside them... Mostly in the case of empire size, where it seems a large number of FT players claim hundreds to thousands of star systems.

I never said they were part of FT Prime. They are however, FT Players.

I repeat my statement: I have met far more players who fall outside the recommended guidelines than who stay inside them.

In at least a few cases, those players are not part of FT Prime for the specific reason that they don't agree with FT Prime's guidelines. That does not mean they are not FT Players.

[SquareDisc City]

@ Void:

ICly, a nation with that kind of biotech would use it to the extent it's affordable. It's not really much different to a nation making extensive use of droids, just a case of biological rather than mechanical engineering for it. Just like making an army of droids it isn't going to be free, so the costs and benefits want comparing with those of training and equipping real soldiers and the value of their lives. And of course politics and ideology can play into it - a nation could keep making expensive and rubbish supersoldiers because the factory is in a key swing state for elections, for example.

OOCly, "super soldiers" often end up wanky. I'd suggest some caution when RPing if you don't want to come across that way.

[Singaporean Transhumans]

It's fun how I am being used by Excidium every time as a prime example of elusively gargantuan space/multiversal empires.

Well let's just say I'm more focusing on the planetary dimension...there's a reason why I copied the Combine.

So, had a question for the pool to chew on and toss about like playful dogs:

Special Forces, what have you? What is their doctrine, what are they deployed for, what kind of kit do they have? And most importantly..

WHAT KIND OF SILLY HAT DO THEY HAVE?

PTFS special forces are OpTic clan kwikscopers.

That should provide a firm answer to the last question.

[Kyrusia]

Why would you need to twist FT to fit in the WA? The WA can accommodate FT nations just as easily as MT nations. In fact, the problem with the GA mentioned earlier about differing treatment of species has already been settled by the WA... Resolutions are almost always written to apply to non-humans.

Because the community of roleplayers in the General Assembly board does not equal the community of roleplayers on the Diplomacy boards, by-in-large. Because the In-Character history in the General Assembly board does not equal the In-Character history on the Diplomacy boards, by-in-large. Because, largely, the Diplomacy boards and their communities, standards, conventions, guidelines, player-to-player expectations, play style, etc. is not automatically conterminous with those of the General Assembly and Security Council boards; much the same way the standards, conventions, play styles, etc. of the P2TM are not conterminous with the Diplomacy boards. Even the boards of "International Incidents" and "NationStates," while there is significant overlap, still actually differ in nuanced aspects.

This is of course combined with the fact that for what I would hasten to say is the majority of FT roleplayers in the Diplomacy boards, the World Assembly as an In-Character entity is treated as either a) binding only to MT nations, b) relevant only to Earth/Terra or "NSEarth" to use the old MT term back when the Cake Layer Theory was employed (the term "world" being defined strictly as to Earth/NSEarth), or c) not existing at all with respect to the interconnected network of canon and continuity established in FT, replaced by-in-large as a historical concept with the Galactic Assembly conferences.

This is, of course, without bringing into mention the historical divide between "roleplay and gameplay" that has existed as a standard convention on the Diplomacy boards since the Cake Layer Theory fell-out of favor, population capping and "closed world" roleplaying in MT became popular, and the Code of Bro/Rule of Cool supersede the Thousand Per Billion Rule (a rule enforced through emphasis on gameplay statistics, thus further engendering a dislike of concepts linked intrinsically to things not based on the forums in the FT community). It's a matter of simple acceptance that for most (as in all but a handful of players I am aware of), the World Assembly is simply not something they desire to roleplay as and, typically, refuse to acknowledge as existing at all. Simply because a "Sapient Rights" resolution and some space-oriented resolutions exist in the WA now does not overturn over a decade of time where (whether rightly or wrongly being irrelevant), much of the roleplaying community outside of the WA boards (II, NS, GE&T, NSSport [though possibly less-so], P2TM and F7 before the split) did not see acknowledging the WA as a) desirable, b) beneficial, or c) enjoyable. Those that have, while for a time more prevalent than now (particularly in MT; I remember quite a few "Peacekeeper" threads, despite no such thing existing in the WA, but still being ICly roleplayed as existing when I was originally active in MT years ago), have largely been few and far between in my personal experience.

Does this mean some folks don't acknowledge it? No. Does it mean, on average, it has a minimal, if not zero impact on most roleplays, roleplayers, states, and star-states on the Diplomacy boards? Yes. Does it mean that people can't acknowledge it, roleplay it, and respect the WA as binding to a "world" in the liberally-defined sense of an "assembly for reality/realities"? No. Does it mean that, automatically, it will be treated by most players this way or that most players, as of now, do treat it this way? No.

As it sits, I have yet to ever participate personally in a Future Tech roleplay (especially considering Fractal Sol, Earth, and the unique history of Sol System and the systems nearest to it in FT [see: Raumreich, Martian Free Trade Agreement, Earth: Empires, MIDAS, Yut, etc.]) where the World Assembly has had bearing, or personally interacted with a star-state In-Character where said state has acknowledged the "World Assembly" as established through gameplay mechanics on this website as an In-Character body existing in their canon and binding. Even if one is to accept the World Assembly exists (and players are free, obviously, to have their states do this if they so choose), assuming they abide by the mechanics of the WA itself, then it is only binding to those whom voluntarily consent to be bound by such.

Hope that helps.

Edit: Short version: for most roleplayers in the Diplomacy boards that I am personally aware of, the WA doesn't exist for them in any capacity because they find it silly, personally not enjoyable, are not interested, or any other number of reasons. Even among the few (mostly in MT) roleplayers that do acknowledge (and are a part of) the WA, they often do not actually roleplay or even participate on the WA boards, but selectively use its resolutions as an addendum to their own play style and canon, often roleplaying the WA contrary to how it is actually roleplayed (some resolutions they do not acknowledge as existing or that WA Peacekeepers exist, for example) on its boards, or actually through not recognizing it beyond as a, "Examplestan is a WA member," badge.

Players, in short, often like doing things their way, and often dislike the idea of something they are otherwise not involved with telling them what they can do, cannot do, or otherwise altering their In-Character canon without their consent (a major reason the WA [and the whole of gameside statistics, activities, etc.] do not exist for many who roleplay on the forums).

[Socialist Dwarven Republics]

[Why would you need to twist FT to fit in the WA? The WA can accommodate FT nations just as easily as MT nations.

Because players don't want to be a part of the WA, full stop, if they did they are, if they're not they have good reason to be

And I don't see why you have a reluctance to join a group that already has a present player base... FT Prime already has a present player base, would you avoid joining it if you were a new player?

Maybe it's an IC reason maybe it's an OOC reason either way if they don't want to be a part of it or choose to recognize it they do not have too

I never said they were part of FT Prime. They are however, FT Players.

I repeat my statement: I have met far more players who fall outside the recommended guidelines than who stay inside them.

I'll point to the Local Cluster region as well as the Milky War Galaxy region as a list of players that do use C4, even if only half of them followed the guidelines that's still over a hundred players in FT prime

In at least a few cases, those players are not part of FT Prime for the specific reason that they don't agree with FT Prime's guidelines. That does not mean they are not FT Players.

And no one has ever said they aren't, so why would you imply that others don't consider them a part of FT?

[Excidium Planetis]

Why would you need to twist FT to fit in the WA? The WA can accommodate FT nations just as easily as MT nations. In fact, the problem with the GA mentioned earlier about differing treatment of species has already been settled by the WA... Resolutions are almost always written to apply to non-humans.

Because the community of roleplayers in the General Assembly board does not equal the community of roleplayers on the Diplomacy boards, by-in-large.

The community of GE&T does not equal the community of II. But it requires no twisting for a player in one to also participate in the other.

Because the In-Character history in the General Assembly board does not equal the In-Character history on the Diplomacy boards, by-in-large.

Nations can rarely synch their IC history with each other, and yet that does not stop them from participating in each others roleplay. Why would the IC history matter?

Because, largely, the Diplomacy boards and their communities, standards, conventions, guidelines, player-to-player expectations, play style, etc. is not automatically conterminous with those of the General Assembly and Security Council boards; much the same way the standards, conventions, play styles, etc. of the P2TM are not conterminous with the Diplomacy boards. Even the boards of "International Incidents" and "NationStates," while there is significant overlap, still actually differ in nuanced aspects.

And yet I've seen many FTers on P2TM... That's an insignificant barrier to participation.

This is of course combined with the fact that for what I would hasten to say is the majority of FT roleplayers in the Diplomacy boards, the World Assembly as an In-Character entity is treated as either a) binding only to MT nations, b) relevant only to Earth/Terra or "NSEarth" to use the old MT term back when the Cake Layer Theory was employed (the term "world" being defined strictly as to Earth/NSEarth),

Both absolutely false, and falsities do not require anyone to twist FT to fit the WA.

or c) not existing at all with respect to the interconnected network of canon and continuity established in FT, replaced by-in-large as a historical concept with the Galactic Assembly conferences.

Once again, FT nations cannot even reconcile their canon with each other, and continue to interact. Why would being unable to reconcile the WA canon prove any different?

This is, of course, without bringing into mention the historical divide between "roleplay and gameplay" that has existed as a standard convention on the Diplomacy boards since the Cake Layer Theory fell-out of favor, population capping and "closed world" roleplaying in MT became popular, and the Code of Bro/Rule of Cool supersede the Thousand Per Billion Rule (a rule enforced through emphasis on gameplay statistics, thus further engendering a dislike of concepts linked intrinsically to things not based on the forums in the FT community).

First, you can find Gameplay on the Diplomacy boards... I've seen threads on GE&T regarding the hiring of Raiders. Not common, but still present.

Second, Gameplay has very little to do with the General Assembly, which is mostly roleplay. NS Stats are really the only Gameplay effected, and even that is mostly ignored.

Third, the involvement of Gameplay (which need not be acknowledged, I may add), does not constitute a reasonable barrier to FT nations attempting to join the WA any more than having a WA delegate in The Local Cluster is a barrier to FT nations seeking to join FT Prime.

It's a matter of simple acceptance that for most (as in all but a handful of players I am aware of), the World Assembly is simply not something they desire to roleplay as and, typically, refuse to acknowledge as existing at all. Simply because a "Sapient Rights" resolution and some space-oriented resolutions exist in the WA now does not overturn over a decade of time where (whether rightly or wrongly being irrelevant), much of the roleplaying community outside of the WA boards (II, NS, GE&T, NSSport [though possibly less-so], P2TM and F7 before the split) did not see acknowledging the WA as a) desirable, b) beneficial, or c) enjoyable. Those that have, while for a time more prevalent than now (particularly in MT; I remember quite a few "Peacekeeper" threads, despite no such thing existing in the WA, but still being ICly roleplayed as existing when I was originally active in MT years ago), have largely been few and far between in my personal experience.

So far, the only reason for not joining I've seen that has any merit is simply... Not desiring to join. And even a lack of desire is not a cause for twisting FT to fit the WA... It's simply a reason not to join the WA.

Does this mean some folks don't acknowledge it? No. Does it mean, on average, it has a minimal, if not zero impact on most roleplays, roleplayers, states, and star-states on the Diplomacy boards? Yes. Does it mean that people can't acknowledge it, roleplay it, and respect the WA as binding to a "world" in the liberally-defined sense of an "assembly for reality/realities"? No. Does it mean that, automatically, it will be treated by most players this way or that most players, as of now, do treat it this way? No.

As it sits, I have yet to ever participate personally in a Future Tech roleplay (especially considering Fractal Sol, Earth, and the unique history of Sol System and the systems nearest to it in FT [see: Raumreich, Martian Free Trade Agreement, Earth: Empires, MIDAS, Yut, etc.]) where the World Assembly has had bearing, or personally interacted with a star-state In-Character where said state has acknowledged the "World Assembly" as established through gameplay mechanics on this website as an In-Character body existing in their canon and binding. Even if one is to accept the World Assembly exists (and players are free, obviously, to have their states do this if they so choose), assuming they abide by the mechanics of the WA itself, then it is only binding to those whom voluntarily consent to be bound by such.

Of course. That is the reality of the situation. But it has no bearing on my statement: The WA can accommodate FT nations just as easily as MT nations.

Players, in short, often like doing things their way, and often dislike the idea of something they are otherwise not involved with telling them what they can do, cannot do, or otherwise altering their In-Character canon without their consent (a major reason the WA [and the whole of gameside statistics, activities, etc.] do not exist for many who roleplay on the forums).

But joining the WA requires consent... So there isn't any altering of canon without their consent, because they consented to it. The WA is voluntary.

Now, if you make the argument that players don't like their canon being affected by other players even when they have consented, then why roleplay? Roleplay with other players affects your canon.

[Excidium Planetis]

[Why would you need to twist FT to fit in the WA? The WA can accommodate FT nations just as easily as MT nations.

Because players don't want to be a part of the WA, full stop, if they did they are, if they're not they have good reason to be

That's not an explanation for why you'd need to twist FT to fit the WA... That's a reason why they aren't in the WA.

And I don't see why you have a reluctance to join a group that already has a present player base... FT Prime already has a present player base, would you avoid joining it if you were a new player?

Maybe it's an IC reason maybe it's an OOC reason either way if they don't want to be a part of it or choose to recognize it they do not have too

I was specifically addressing Lubyak's given reason for not wanting to join. Lubyak apparently did not want to join because it already had a player base... So I question Lubyak, not you, as to why an existing player base was an issue.

I never said they were part of FT Prime. They are however, FT Players.

I repeat my statement: I have met far more players who fall outside the recommended guidelines than who stay inside them.

I'll point to the Local Cluster region as well as the Milky War Galaxy region as a list of players that do use C4, even if only half of them followed the guidelines that's still over a hundred players in FT prime

Which is nowhere near half the FT Players total on NS.

In at least a few cases, those players are not part of FT Prime for the specific reason that they don't agree with FT Prime's guidelines. That does not mean they are not FT Players.

And no one has ever said they aren't, so why would you imply that others don't consider them a part of FT?

Stormwrath stated stated that because they were not FT Prime, they didn't support my claim that many FT Players used large Empires. The implication there is that they are not FT Players and thus do not support my claim that there are many FT Players who use large empires.

So yes, Stormwrath did apparently consider them not FT Players.

[Neornith]

Because the community of roleplayers in the General Assembly board does not equal the community of roleplayers on the Diplomacy boards, by-in-large.

The community of GE&T does not equal the community of II. But it requires no twisting for a player in one to also participate in the other.

Because the In-Character history in the General Assembly board does not equal the In-Character history on the Diplomacy boards, by-in-large.

Nations can rarely synch their IC history with each other, and yet that does not stop them from participating in each others roleplay. Why would the IC history matter?

Because, largely, the Diplomacy boards and their communities, standards, conventions, guidelines, player-to-player expectations, play style, etc. is not automatically conterminous with those of the General Assembly and Security Council boards; much the same way the standards, conventions, play styles, etc. of the P2TM are not conterminous with the Diplomacy boards. Even the boards of "International Incidents" and "NationStates," while there is significant overlap, still actually differ in nuanced aspects.

And yet I've seen many FTers on P2TM... That's an insignificant barrier to participation.

This is of course combined with the fact that for what I would hasten to say is the majority of FT roleplayers in the Diplomacy boards, the World Assembly as an In-Character entity is treated as either a) binding only to MT nations, b) relevant only to Earth/Terra or "NSEarth" to use the old MT term back when the Cake Layer Theory was employed (the term "world" being defined strictly as to Earth/NSEarth),

Both absolutely false, and falsities do not require anyone to twist FT to fit the WA.

or c) not existing at all with respect to the interconnected network of canon and continuity established in FT, replaced by-in-large as a historical concept with the Galactic Assembly conferences.

Once again, FT nations cannot even reconcile their canon with each other, and continue to interact. Why would being unable to reconcile the WA canon prove any different?

This is, of course, without bringing into mention the historical divide between "roleplay and gameplay" that has existed as a standard convention on the Diplomacy boards since the Cake Layer Theory fell-out of favor, population capping and "closed world" roleplaying in MT became popular, and the Code of Bro/Rule of Cool supersede the Thousand Per Billion Rule (a rule enforced through emphasis on gameplay statistics, thus further engendering a dislike of concepts linked intrinsically to things not based on the forums in the FT community).

First, you can find Gameplay on the Diplomacy boards... I've seen threads on GE&T regarding the hiring of Raiders. Not common, but still present.

Second, Gameplay has very little to do with the General Assembly, which is mostly roleplay. NS Stats are really the only Gameplay effected, and even that is mostly ignored.

Third, the involvement of Gameplay (which need not be acknowledged, I may add), does not constitute a reasonable barrier to FT nations attempting to join the WA any more than having a WA delegate in The Local Cluster is a barrier to FT nations seeking to join FT Prime.

It's a matter of simple acceptance that for most (as in all but a handful of players I am aware of), the World Assembly is simply not something they desire to roleplay as and, typically, refuse to acknowledge as existing at all. Simply because a "Sapient Rights" resolution and some space-oriented resolutions exist in the WA now does not overturn over a decade of time where (whether rightly or wrongly being irrelevant), much of the roleplaying community outside of the WA boards (II, NS, GE&T, NSSport [though possibly less-so], P2TM and F7 before the split) did not see acknowledging the WA as a) desirable, b) beneficial, or c) enjoyable. Those that have, while for a time more prevalent than now (particularly in MT; I remember quite a few "Peacekeeper" threads, despite no such thing existing in the WA, but still being ICly roleplayed as existing when I was originally active in MT years ago), have largely been few and far between in my personal experience.

So far, the only reason for not joining I've seen that has any merit is simply... Not desiring to join. And even a lack of desire is not a cause for twisting FT to fit the WA... It's simply a reason not to join the WA.

Does this mean some folks don't acknowledge it? No. Does it mean, on average, it has a minimal, if not zero impact on most roleplays, roleplayers, states, and star-states on the Diplomacy boards? Yes. Does it mean that people can't acknowledge it, roleplay it, and respect the WA as binding to a "world" in the liberally-defined sense of an "assembly for reality/realities"? No. Does it mean that, automatically, it will be treated by most players this way or that most players, as of now, do treat it this way? No.

As it sits, I have yet to ever participate personally in a Future Tech roleplay (especially considering Fractal Sol, Earth, and the unique history of Sol System and the systems nearest to it in FT [see: Raumreich, Martian Free Trade Agreement, Earth: Empires, MIDAS, Yut, etc.]) where the World Assembly has had bearing, or personally interacted with a star-state In-Character where said state has acknowledged the "World Assembly" as established through gameplay mechanics on this website as an In-Character body existing in their canon and binding. Even if one is to accept the World Assembly exists (and players are free, obviously, to have their states do this if they so choose), assuming they abide by the mechanics of the WA itself, then it is only binding to those whom voluntarily consent to be bound by such.

Of course. That is the reality of the situation. But it has no bearing on my statement: The WA can accommodate FT nations just as easily as MT nations.

Players, in short, often like doing things their way, and often dislike the idea of something they are otherwise not involved with telling them what they can do, cannot do, or otherwise altering their In-Character canon without their consent (a major reason the WA [and the whole of gameside statistics, activities, etc.] do not exist for many who roleplay on the forums).

But joining the WA requires consent... So there isn't any altering of canon without their consent, because they consented to it. The WA is voluntary.

Now, if you make the argument that players don't like their canon being affected by other players even when they have consented, then why roleplay? Roleplay with other players affects your canon.

At this point this is nothing but a blatant threadjack and entirely disruptive to the purpose of this thread, I don't know why you are insisting others join the WA, and to be frank at this point I don't care, is been explained to time again why players are not interested across two RMBs and in this thread
If you would like to start an FT WA thread I suggest the gameplay forum for you

[Delta Eridanus]

Apparently, I'm interrupting an argument here, but are there any good PMT-FT roleplaying regions? All that I have found are somewhat inactive.