NATION

PASSWORD

Regional Officers

Bug reports, general help, ideas for improvements, and questions about how things are meant to work.
User avatar
[violet]
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14325
Founded: Antiquity

Regional Officers

Postby [violet] » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:30 pm

First News post:
Over the next few days, regions will gain the ability to appoint nations as Regional Officers, with authority over specific areas. For example, a Diplomacy Officer can be given the authority to establish embassies with other regions, and a Communications Officer to recruit and manage welcome telegrams. The name and authority of each office is up to you.

To identify the power a nation holds in its region, you'll begin seeing new icons on nation pages beneath the region, signifying their authority: Executive, World Assembly, Appearance, Border Control, Embassies, Communications, and Polls.

This feature has come from much community discussion over a long time: thank you very much to everyone who contributed! It's a big change (affecting over 5,000 lines of code) and could make a big difference to regional dynamics.

Summary
  • Regions may appoint up to 12 Regional Officers.
  • Executive authority is required to appoint, dismiss, or modify Regional Officers. Only Founders and Delegates can have Executive authority.
  • Apart from Executive authority, Regional Officers can be granted the ability to do anything a Founder or Delegate does.
  • No Influence is required to appoint, dismiss, or modify a Regional Officer.
  • Influence costs are doubled for Regional Officers. That is, most functions can be used freely, but some Border Controls, such as ejecting nations, are harder to use.
  • Regional Officers retain power until dismissed.
  • The Delegacy can be given a specific set of powers, rather than (as is the case today) being either powerless or fully executive. For example, a region could set their Delegacy to grant authority over Border Control but not Appearance.


Second News post:
Regional Officers are now available to all regions!

Thank you all who provided feedback during the initial few days of rollout. That led to the fixing of many bugs, as well as one major change:
  • The power to suppress and unsuppress posts on the Regional Message Board has shifted from Border Control to Communications
The forums are also hosting intense discussion about what limits we need to restrict the use of Regional Officers as a weapon for raiders, who attempt to seize control of other people's regions. The most popular proposals are:

  1. New Delegates should be unable to appoint new Regional Officers for the first 72 hours (but can immediately dismiss any existing Officers).
  2. New Delegates should be unable to make any changes at all to Regional Officers for the first 26 hours.
  3. Regional Officers should lose office if they're outside the region's borders at update time. (Alternately: only lose Border Control authority.)
  4. Regions should be limited to no more than three Officers with Border Control authority.
  5. Regional Officers with Border Control authority should face a small additional "flat fee" of influence for ejecting nations. (Currently, Delegates and Regional Officers can eject brand new arrivals at no influence cost, which helps when holding a newly captured region against would-be liberators.)
  6. Regions should be unable to eject more than one nation per second. (This would reduce the effectiveness of a team of Border Control Officers working together to hold a newly-captured region against liberators).
So we have to figure out which of these will work and which, like every other thing we've tried to restrict raiders, will actually be subverted into a weapon for raiders. If you have feedback, please contribute! This is a community-driven process and we want to come out with a feature set that accurately reflects community thinking.

There are also a few other tweaks and additional features to come, such as notifications and the ability to resign an office. And are we keeping Founder/Delegate names at the top of region pages as well as listing them under Officers or what?! I don't know. But stay tuned.


See also: R/D Summit "Regional Officers" discussion thread

Update! The feature is now live in a small selection of regions for testing. Please report any bugs you find!

FAQ

#1: Various
[violet] wrote:
Todd McCloud wrote:Most excellent! I take it this will be available for both game-created and userite regions?

Correct!

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:Are officers' powers come into effect as soon as an executive adds them?
Do delegates need to be in power for a certain amount of time to add officers?

Powers take effect immediately, and there's no minimum time limit.

Alustrian wrote:I am very interested in hearing the reasoning behind this particular change.

What came out of the Summit (and other discussions) is a set of points everyone agrees upon, such as Regional Officers being a good thing in principle, plus another bag of points people don't agree on, such as whether additional rules are required to prevent particular scenarios. I wrote code for much of this, but in the end we've gone with the simpler, optimistic implementation, rather than the conservative, complex one, with a view to seeing how it actually goes. If we decide additional rules are necessary, like time delays and influence costs, then okay. But we didn't want to start with those because they remove a lot of the power and flexibility of the feature.

Jakker wrote:If regional officers can eject, will that include delegates if the officer has enough influence?

Yes, a Regional Officer could eject (and ban) a Delegate, given sufficient Influence. If the Delegate has Border Control authority, though, they could unban themselves again. Or if the Delgate have Executive authority, they could give themselves Border Control authority, then unban themselves.

Astarial wrote:1) How will the WA power work? Does the WA Officer cast their own endorsements in the WA, or the delegate's? Can both the WA Officer and the delegate have WA power at the same time, or can you have multiple WA officers?

Regional Officers cannot be given World Assembly powers. Nor can World Assembly powers be removed the Delegate.

Astarial wrote:2) In founderless regions (including GCRs), can the delegate permanently remove certain powers from their position? Can they be temporarily deactivated?

Technically, yes: They can go in and remove powers from the Delegacy. But in practice, no, because Delegates always automatically have Executive authority in a founderless region, so can always restore those powers.

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:Question: Do nations have to be in the region to use said powers, or, like founders and delegates, can they use powers when not in the region?

Like Delegates & Founders, Regional Officers don't need to be present in the region to wield their powers. However, nations do need to be present to be appointed as an Officer in the first place.

Amerika I wrote:do you have to be a WA member to be a regional officer?

No.

Alustrian wrote:can a nation be RO in multiple regions?

Yes. Nation pages, however, only show icons signifying authority in the current region.


#2: What about problems?
[violet] wrote:
Cormac Stark wrote:How many years will we have to wait for the code to fix the problems we all know are going to occur?

Unless we decided to go in a different direction, I don't think we'd have a delay on code. Regional Officers required a rewrite of the fundamental system for determining who's allowed to do what. But to add a minimum period of time after election before a Delegate can appoint a Regional Officer, for example, that's only a few lines of code.

But I don't expect to rush in new rules at the first sign of trouble. This is a big change with big implications; there will be trouble, but that doesn't mean we run in and gut the feature. Even when the implications are pretty clear, like the increased difficulty of executing liberations, it will still take time to see it through and establish what sort of problems we have and what it may be worth giving up to solve.

And I do appreciate that to many people, they see a really obvious, specific problem, which can easily be solved by removing part of the feature. And they may be 100% right about that, and we end up doing it, but we're talking about a feature that's going into 17,600 regions and will probably be used in thousands of different ways. Before we take away a lot of ways that we haven't even thought of yet, and which may turn out to be pretty great, we're going to give that a chance.
Last edited by [violet] on Thu Oct 15, 2015 4:33 pm, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
Lord Ravenclaw
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 400
Founded: Dec 31, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Lord Ravenclaw » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:41 pm

Thank you, thank you, thank you! :bow:
Lord Ravenclaw
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Security Councillor, Twice-Elected Delegate and former Vice Delegate of The North Pacific

User avatar
Kaboomlandia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7338
Founded: May 22, 2013
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Kaboomlandia » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:41 pm

It's been a long time coming. :bow:
In=character, Kaboomlandia is a World Assembly member and abides by its resolutions. If this nation isn't in the WA, it's for practical reasons.
Author of GA #371 and SC #208, #214, #226, #227, #230, #232
Co-Author of SC #204
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result."
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

"Your legitimacy, Kaboom, has melted away in my eyes. I couldn't have believed that only a shadow of your once brilliant WA career remains."

User avatar
Todd McCloud
Senator
 
Posts: 4055
Founded: Oct 11, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Todd McCloud » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:46 pm

Most excellent! I take it this will be available for both game-created and userite regions?
Hey I wrote a second book! Feel like reading?
This is the first book!

"Your uniform doesn't seem to fit. You're much too alive in it."

"You must be the change you want to see in the world" - Gandhi
"The worst prison would be a closed heart." - Pope John Paul II
Vekaiyu's Wiki Page | Ikrisia Levinile's Wiki Page | Vekaiyu & Kelssek co-hosted the XII Summer Olympiad

User avatar
Leveat
Diplomat
 
Posts: 524
Founded: Aug 10, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Leveat » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:51 pm

IT'S OPTION OCTOBER AT LAST
FINALLY
Thank you so much!
The Leveat that can be spoken of is not the true Leveat,
but it is a pretty close alternative, in any case. You can talk about it if you want.
History · Constitution · That One Issue · All Hail · Miscellany · Meet Levball (drawn by Ismeil)

User avatar
Benevolent Thomas
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1378
Founded: Jun 10, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Benevolent Thomas » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:53 pm

[violet] wrote:[*]No Influence is required to appoint, dismiss, or modify a Regional Officer.

So tag raiders can still tag a region and fire the natives that were tasked with functions that could remove the tags after the invaders left? That's pretty disappointing. It also stinks that an invader delegate can instantly appoint officers to help them banject would-be liberators the following update.
The Battle of Fort Triumph

Co-Founder of Fort Triumph
Founder of The Order of the Grey Wardens

Ballotonia wrote:Personally, I think there's something seriously wrong with a game if it willfully allows the destruction of longtime player communities in favor of kids whose sole purpose is to enjoy ruining the game for others.

User avatar
Volga Tataria
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 189
Founded: Sep 29, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Volga Tataria » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:54 pm

YAY!
Communist Joseph Ulyanov takes power in a coup as Chairman. The Volga Tatar People's Republic is founded. Volga Tataria wins the Tatar-Nicaraguan War by destroying the Nicaraguan States and with WMDs


Tatar-Nicaraguan War - WON

User avatar
Deian salazar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10454
Founded: Sep 01, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Deian salazar » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:54 pm

This brings in a new level of political intrigue....
And arguments :p

To the new era of Regional Gameplay! *Raises glass*

User avatar
Gelug
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 43
Founded: Aug 02, 2015
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Gelug » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:55 pm

Finally! Such an important new gameplay feature!

User avatar
Luziyca
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34905
Founded: Nov 13, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Luziyca » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:56 pm

It is pretty interesting, and I cannot wait to see how it impacts my region.
|||The Kingdom of Rwizikuru|||
[22:00] <Lanos> nobody here in ESQ should be proud to be somehow remotely related to Luziyca
IIwikiFacebookKylaris: the best region for four years runningAbout meYouTubePolitical compass

User avatar
Transdavisia
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 5
Founded: Jul 16, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Transdavisia » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:57 pm

Thank you, Max and [violet]!

User avatar
Ever-Wandering Souls
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6357
Founded: Jan 01, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ever-Wandering Souls » Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:59 pm

Questions:

Are officers' powers come into effect as soon as an executive adds them?
Do delegates need to be in power for a certain amount of time to add officers?


Can't wait to have 13 people online with the hammer ready when we smell a lib coming xD
Last edited by Ever-Wandering Souls on Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Proud Raider; General of The Black Hawks
TG me anytime; I'm always happy to talk about anything!

The Alicorns (Equestria) wrote:Let them stay, no need to badmouth them...From our view a bunch of nations just came in, seized the delegate position, and changed a few superficial things...we play NationStates differently...there's really no reason for us to be butthurt.
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8944227
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8951258

Misley wrote:
Hobbesistan wrote:Don't think I understand the question.
The color or what?..

Jesus, Hobbes, it's 2015. You can't just call someone "the color".

Reploid Productions wrote:Raiders are endlessly creative

How Do I Telegram API?

Omnis delenda est.

User avatar
Cormac Stark
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1417
Founded: Apr 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Cormac Stark » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:04 pm

Benevolent Thomas wrote:It also stinks that an invader delegate can instantly appoint officers to help them banject would-be liberators the following update.

Emphatically this. This is actually really unacceptable; game administration has tilted R/D massively in favor of raiders with this, and part of the purpose of the R/D summit was to restore more competitive balance to R/D. You've just obliterated it, to be honest; defenders will no longer be able to liberate any raided region, and you've still taken no action to make defending against raids any less difficult.

Epic fail here. I'm honestly in shock at how little thought must have gone into this before rolling it out.
Last edited by Cormac Stark on Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Whovian Tardisia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 774
Founded: Jun 25, 2015
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Whovian Tardisia » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:06 pm

This is really interesting. Glad to see change after seeing so much whining about there being none. Hopefully this will make smaller regions more tight knit and easier to defend.
An FT (Class W11) nation capable of space travel, but has never attempted invading another planet. The Space Brigade is for defense only! Also, something happened to Ambassador Pink.
From the desk of Rupert Pink:
The Grand Gallifreyan Republic of Whovian Tardisia
Floor 12, Office 42 of WAHQ
Proud patron of the World Assembly Stranger's Bar.
The Interstellar Cartographers are back! This time, they explore Methuselah.

User avatar
Ever-Wandering Souls
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6357
Founded: Jan 01, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ever-Wandering Souls » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:06 pm

Cormac Stark wrote:
Benevolent Thomas wrote:It also stinks that an invader delegate can instantly appoint officers to help them banject would-be liberators the following update.

Emphatically this. This is actually really unacceptable; game administration has tilted R/D massively in favor of invaders with this, and part of the purpose of the R/D summit was to restore more competitive balance to R/D. You've just obliterated it, to be honest; defenders will no longer be able to liberate any raided region, and you've still taken no action to make defending against raids any less difficult.

Epic fail here. I'm honestly in shock at how little thought must have gone into this before rolling it out.


Nothing has said those officers come into effect immediately yet, or that new delegates can appoint them immediately, which is why I asked. For all we know, it might take a day before a delegate can add/dismiss them (like with regionwide TG's), and they might take an update to come into effect. If they cannot be immediately dismissed, that would provide an equal boost the other way - properly empowered officers could eject a raider point, even if the delegate has been deposed.
Proud Raider; General of The Black Hawks
TG me anytime; I'm always happy to talk about anything!

The Alicorns (Equestria) wrote:Let them stay, no need to badmouth them...From our view a bunch of nations just came in, seized the delegate position, and changed a few superficial things...we play NationStates differently...there's really no reason for us to be butthurt.
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8944227
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8951258

Misley wrote:
Hobbesistan wrote:Don't think I understand the question.
The color or what?..

Jesus, Hobbes, it's 2015. You can't just call someone "the color".

Reploid Productions wrote:Raiders are endlessly creative

How Do I Telegram API?

Omnis delenda est.

User avatar
TheStonedSurfers
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 119
Founded: Apr 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby TheStonedSurfers » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:08 pm

It's appreciated that this is finally here, but considering Ever-Wandering Souls' response, it seems natives will still be subjected to raids that regional officers are ill-equipped to dismiss if the founder is, say, at work or AFK. While it is a step in the right direction, it isn't what is needed to fix the underlying problem.
Last edited by TheStonedSurfers on Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
His Total Awesomeness, the Big Kahuna of the Surfernate of The Beach

User avatar
Karputsk
Envoy
 
Posts: 259
Founded: May 10, 2007
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Karputsk » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:10 pm

I imagine if they intended for Officers to have a setup/removal period then they would have outlined that already.
Evil Wolf wrote:All Hail The FRA!

User avatar
Ever-Wandering Souls
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6357
Founded: Jan 01, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ever-Wandering Souls » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:11 pm

Karputsk wrote:I imagine if they intended for Officers to have a setup/removal period then they would have outlined that already.


Fair point. That said, the details of some features have been intentionally left obscure for us to research before :P
Proud Raider; General of The Black Hawks
TG me anytime; I'm always happy to talk about anything!

The Alicorns (Equestria) wrote:Let them stay, no need to badmouth them...From our view a bunch of nations just came in, seized the delegate position, and changed a few superficial things...we play NationStates differently...there's really no reason for us to be butthurt.
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8944227
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8951258

Misley wrote:
Hobbesistan wrote:Don't think I understand the question.
The color or what?..

Jesus, Hobbes, it's 2015. You can't just call someone "the color".

Reploid Productions wrote:Raiders are endlessly creative

How Do I Telegram API?

Omnis delenda est.

User avatar
Mousebumples
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 8425
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Mousebumples » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:12 pm

Karputsk wrote:I imagine if they intended for Officers to have a setup/removal period then they would have outlined that already.


Like perhaps in this section that is yet to come?

[violet] wrote:FAQ

To come!
Leader of the Mouse-a-rific Mousetastic Moderator Mousedom of Mousebumples
Past WA Delegate for Europeia & Monkey Island
Proud Member of UNOG
I'm an "adorably marvelous NatSov" - Mallorea and Riva
GA Resolutions (sorted by category) | Why Repeal? | Reppy's Sig Workshop

User avatar
Consular
Minister
 
Posts: 3026
Founded: Apr 10, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Consular » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:14 pm

Glad this is here broadly, but I agree that there should be a delay before new WADs can exercise the 'appoint/modify/dismiss officer' powers (ideally similar to the delay before they can send regional telegrams).

User avatar
Alustrian
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 106
Founded: May 06, 2009
Anarchy

Postby Alustrian » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:15 pm

First - great for all the non-border control additions. fun stuff, etc.

Second - I have always tried to understand where ADMIN/MOD were coming from. But here...the thread you cite is from the "Gameplay 'R/D' Summit," yet you have totally lost it when it comes to R/D. As BT pointed out - this solution will not help with the tag problem. As EWS pointed out - (and I am far more concerned about this) no lib will ever be successful if there are 13 raiders waiting on the banject button (and even if they do not max out, raiders can easier have 3-5 "leads" online on any given update). I am very interested in hearing the reasoning behind this particular change.

User avatar
Ever-Wandering Souls
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6357
Founded: Jan 01, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ever-Wandering Souls » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:16 pm

It will open up raiding to more people as well - being able to make most all updates for a decent period will no longer have to be a factor in picking points, arguably the most exciting role in a raid. We can get many more people involved and keep their interest, in theory.
Proud Raider; General of The Black Hawks
TG me anytime; I'm always happy to talk about anything!

The Alicorns (Equestria) wrote:Let them stay, no need to badmouth them...From our view a bunch of nations just came in, seized the delegate position, and changed a few superficial things...we play NationStates differently...there's really no reason for us to be butthurt.
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8944227
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8951258

Misley wrote:
Hobbesistan wrote:Don't think I understand the question.
The color or what?..

Jesus, Hobbes, it's 2015. You can't just call someone "the color".

Reploid Productions wrote:Raiders are endlessly creative

How Do I Telegram API?

Omnis delenda est.

User avatar
Karputsk
Envoy
 
Posts: 259
Founded: May 10, 2007
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Karputsk » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:17 pm

Mousebumples wrote:
Karputsk wrote:I imagine if they intended for Officers to have a setup/removal period then they would have outlined that already.


Like perhaps in this section that is yet to come?

[violet] wrote:FAQ

To come!

Since it was explicitly stated that Officers would not cost influence to appoint or remove I figured a time delay would have also been mentioned. *shrug*
Evil Wolf wrote:All Hail The FRA!

User avatar
Jakker
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2181
Founded: May 17, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Jakker » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:18 pm

If regional officers can eject, will that include delegates if the officer has enough influence?
One Stop Rules Shop
Getting Help Request (GHR)

The Bruce wrote:Mostly I feel sorry for [raiders], because they put in all this effort and at the end of the day have nothing to show for it and have created nothing.

User avatar
Ever-Wandering Souls
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6357
Founded: Jan 01, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ever-Wandering Souls » Sun Oct 11, 2015 6:21 pm

Alustrian wrote:First - great for all the non-border control additions. fun stuff, etc.

Second - I have always tried to understand where ADMIN/MOD were coming from. But here...the thread you cite is from the "Gameplay 'R/D' Summit," yet you have totally lost it when it comes to R/D. As BT pointed out - this solution will not help with the tag problem. As EWS pointed out - (and I am far more concerned about this) no lib will ever be successful if there are 13 raiders waiting on the banject button (and even if they do not max out, raiders can easier have 3-5 "leads" online on any given update). I am very interested in hearing the reasoning behind this particular change.


To be fair, I've stated a number of times that adding a 13 hour wait period on things like WFE changes could easily kill tagging, and the feeling I've gotten in return has been that killing tagging is not a goal - which is backed up by previous staff statements as well.

On 2 - yes, if we can immediately appoint/dismiss, this'll be huge for us. If we can immediately dismiss but not appoint, this'll be huge for us. If we cannot immediately dismiss, this'll be huge IF we survive the first update - which'll be a lot harder, since in any region where a member has ejection abilities it'll basically be like raiding a foundered region for the first 12/24 hours.
Proud Raider; General of The Black Hawks
TG me anytime; I'm always happy to talk about anything!

The Alicorns (Equestria) wrote:Let them stay, no need to badmouth them...From our view a bunch of nations just came in, seized the delegate position, and changed a few superficial things...we play NationStates differently...there's really no reason for us to be butthurt.
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8944227
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8951258

Misley wrote:
Hobbesistan wrote:Don't think I understand the question.
The color or what?..

Jesus, Hobbes, it's 2015. You can't just call someone "the color".

Reploid Productions wrote:Raiders are endlessly creative

How Do I Telegram API?

Omnis delenda est.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Technical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: The Imperium Collectives

Advertisement

Remove ads