Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 212

Thread: The Role of the Neutrals

  1. #161
    Originally posted by VonVolks

    where do u find that then?

    shh! Now _everybody_ is going to want to be a neut
    Neutral Nanomage Bureaucrat RK1
    Veteran, The Independant Rubikans

  2. #162
    Ehhhhehehehe, heheheh! Ghuntar wants one!!!

  3. #163

    neutral goodies?

    Since there's now a neut-specific peice of armor in the 14.2 database (per antiguardians at least), I would like to request another one:

    A white shirt (like the omni med suit) with a large red circle surrounding a red dot on the back.

    Give it a -200 to all AC's and a -100 runspeed debuff and call it the "your PVP grace period has expired" shirt.
    Neutral Nanomage Bureaucrat RK1
    Veteran, The Independant Rubikans

  4. #164


    No, no, it should be a run speed BONUS, where's the fun in shooting slow targets? (meep-meep)

  5. #165

    Jumping in late

    Okay, so I'm a bit of a latecomer to this argument, but:

    A neutral whompa network is a GOOD idea! Andromeda hardly features on most people's 'visit' list simply because it has no whompa. Newlands is the 'center of the universe' because it has an easily accessible gridpoint, and whompas. While I understand the political reason for Newlands being on the Tir-Athen route (Neutrality was only recently granted to Newlands, according to the Tir Accord), it still swings Neutrals very much in the Clan direction.

    Neutral places such as Harry's and (to a much lesser extent) 20k may as well be Omni-Tek outposts in the current environment. Opening these places up to the Neutral population via Whompa is a fantastic idea. Why is the 20k Whompa connected to Omni-1 Trade instead of Newlands? And why can't I take a ferry from Harry's to Stret West?

    For me one of the key things would be making Andromeda a more prominent feature. As ICC headquarters it should be THE place where clans and OT meet 'diplomatically' and, as such, should be somewhere with lots of 'roleplay' rooms. As it stands most meetings I've been arranging for various events are taking place in Borealis, because it is neutral, easy to get to and not as laggy as Newland, or Reets Retreat for the same reason. Reets is a pub, not a council hall!

    * * *

    As far as neutrals 'as a faction' I think there is some merit in this statement, but it misses the point. Saying that the world is polarised into black and white as an 'optimum' is, IMHO, throwing away so much value that the world has (see my comments on the 'devils and angels' in the Shadowlands). The strength of AO for me is that it isn't black and white. Each side has valid points and invalid points, and I see the neutral community as the ones who look at both sides and say 'y'know, actually it all bites.'

    To say there are two factions and some people who 'haven't decided yet' is a gross oversimplification of the situation. There are clansmen who preach war, death and terror and are wholly evil, and there are Omni-Tek staff who preach reason and peace as a solution (of which Philip Ross is a prime example!). There are also many 'good' clanners and 'bad' OT people as well. You can't draw hard lines across AO's political environment without destroying what makes the political environement.... realistic.

    Philip Ross stated in a dated TaG interview that Omni-Tek was fully aware of the upcoming lease expiration and part of its objectives were to ensure a stable, independent government was in place before they withdrew planetary governance. Of course OT want to keep a controlling interest in Rubi-Ka, but a corporation of that size can't be so blind as to not see an 'alternative' to independent government that is growing under their very noses. And one that is much less hostile to Omni-Tek presence than the Council of Truth and the rabid clan freedom-fighters.

    Because this is a world of shades of grey, the neutrals are a very valid group that should be recognised as such.

    Oh, and I don't think that 'change to neutral' should be an option. To be honest, I don't think 'change to clan' or 'change to omni' should be something the average person can do more than once ever. Something along the lines of 'you made your bed, now lie in it' - there should be a flag set when you use a side-changing pack that prevents you from ever changing back to the side you left. Except for Agents, of course.

    For both OT and the Clans their propaganda paints the political situation in pure black and white. Please, FC, don't believe your own propaganda. We all know that the situation is much more complex than that.

  6. #166
    Why is neutrality the shade of grey? Why must the clans be all black and omni be all white or vice versa? Both Omni-Tek and The Clans are massive organizations that easily allow for shades of grey, it is quite easy for an Omni-tek person to not endorse all of the actions taken by Omni and it's even easier for various Clans to hate the actions of other more extreme clans.

    Of course the world isn't one of black and white, it's just the people who reduce it to Clan = white, Omni = black, Neutral = gray, that make it so. There's room for massive variety if you're willing to play it as so.
    Oren "Ironheel" Fadri
    Clan Enforcer

  7. #167
    This thread has been too quiet lately, so...........BUMP!
    Nealandbob Headbasher Burninsword-RK1
    Deathfyst Tonofbricks -RK2
    Tonofbricks Nealandbob -RK Test embracing my inner Brat
    Finally back from Iraq
    Enforcers ONLY vote here!
    WoW-Pahani, Skywall/Horde and Barthilas/Horde
    "A good Enforcer dies a lot"-Deng
    "FC didn't create Enforcers, Deng did" -Tza

  8. #168
    Along with a group of others, I have recently started a new neutral RP org on RK2. It has few members at the moment, as we just formed it a few days ago, and have yet to go recruit all the people we have lined up for it yet.

    We had a long discussion with a fairly sizable group regarding our objectives as a neutral RP org, and these were our conclusions...

    As well said by another member:
    Being neutral is a choice, not a waffle.

    What this means, is that--in our mind, at least--neutrality is a valid choice, and not merely a stepping-stone to Clan/Omni that Funcom intended.

    By and large, these seem to be two reasons for being neutral:
    1) Neutral for the sake of financial/trade reasons (this applies to mercenary work as well), as to facilitate easy access to both sides.
    2) Neutral because those involved disagree to varying degrees with BOTH sides approach/views.

    Most neutrals I know seem to be of the opinion that the Clan/Omni forces are neither all-good, or all-bad. They both have good members, however they have their fair share of war-mongers as well.

    After much discussion, we came to the conclusion that our "mission" would basically be this: to bridge the gap between the "moderate" Clan/Omni groups in order to displace the "extreme" groups which consistently impede the peace process.

    It is an unfortunate misunderstanding that most Clan/Omni members think they MUST hate each other. That is not true. Clan and Omni leadership have been on semi-peaceful terms, as well as engaged in negotiations many times. Obviously, the higher-ups desire a peaceful arrangement, although they seem to have no ability to reign in the more radical factions within their own organizational structure.

    At any rate, after the discussion, we were all pretty firm on the belief that the neutral position in the conflict should not be avoided by Funcom. Unfortunately, all neutrals serve as are helpless targets at the moment.

    Large numbers of us traveling in political zones still make us quite vulnerable, as one group or person could be attacked without the ability for others to assist. This is terrible, and has lead to some tragic situations already. As silly as it may sound, 0% zone are much safer for neutrals than 25% zone--and that seems a bit backwards to me. I realize the "can't attack first" rule was create to keep neutrals from becoming their own warring faction, however it severely limits our ability to defend ourselves while under attack.

    In yet another strike against neutrals, Funcom has placed sided enemies in almost every town now. Every patch seems to increase the amount of guards and sided MOBs hanging about.

    For example, Bliss is filled with Rookie's--making in a death-trap to any neutral character below level 60-ish. (As the guards will join in as soon as one aggros) Almost all higher-end mission locations in areas like 4 Holes are surrounded by Seasoned and higher MOBs.

    Neutrals also have limited protection. Neutrals guards are the single weakest set of guards in the game--and constantly ganked. Newland also serves as a target for exploits, as high-levels can drag Greasy Joints down to the Newland entrance, get the guards aggroed on it, yet the guards have no hope of killing him. Instead Greasy's constant area-attacks on the guards kill anyone emerging from the city. Neutral guards cannot protect their inhabitants very well at all.

    It is also unfortunate the lack of neutral outposts. Certain areas that seem like they should be neutral aren't, which is unfortunate. Wine should be neutral, but instead is Clan--and crawling with sided Clan MOBs. Until recently, ICC was Clan. I see no reason for Home to be Clan either. Certain outposts have a few neutral terminals, yet non-neutral scanners. Varmint Wood's whompah outpost has neutral mission terminals, but a Clan-only scanner. (On the other hand, the Clan outpost outside of The Longest Road in Athen Shire has an ICC scanner.) Therefore, hunting and the intended "traveling" is nearly impossible. We have to avoid all outposts in fear of sided mobs camped out there, we cannot scan hardly anywhere but Newland/Borealis/Last Ditch, nor can we buy supplies elsewhere as well. Sorry, but a small trade outpost in the middle of nowhere seems like they should be neutral--most independent traders are.

    So, IMO, there's still a lot of work to be done here. Especially with Shadowlands coming, and Funcom's Project manager telling me at E3 that Funcom envisions pushing people away from neutrality and "forcing them to pick a side."


  9. #169
    "Along with a group of others", you are trying to continue to "screw up" (from a certain perspective, of course) the game.

    Everyone who complained about Omni portrayed as "devils" missed the point that Omni is supposed to be "evil". The clans are supposed to be "good".

    People don't bother to pay attention, or read the fiction, or grasp anything else that, in some areas such as this, Funcom has actually covered fairly well, and then decide that the game the way they want to play it is more important than the game the way FC wants it to be, and they try to get the game changed to suit them.

    Sorry. One of my primary characters is a neutral and I'm content accepting that both sides, from an RP aspect, consider me a target. They are "right" to do so.

    Yep. Hateful, "evil" twits joined Clan.
    Yep. Decent, "good" people joined Omni.

    Yep. People didn't pay attention, haven't read anything, don't care, want to play it their way and have no interest in the fiction of the world or roleplaying within it, no matter how much they scream for story-related content.

    Neuts are there for people who weren't paying attention or who simply needed more time to make up their minds. Notice the applications a Neut conveniently starts off their career with, right in their inventory.

    FC has been baffled at every turn by human nature, and it's anybody's guess whether this says more bad things about FC or human nature. But it's not bad enough that FC has problems getting the game "ready" the way _they_ want it and, in this case, intended it _all along_, without people hammering them to try to add even more complexity to the system and throw what's left of their design into further disarray just because you don't want to play the game the way they made it.

    Woohoo. Give them even more to do to derail the game and its story. Maybe if people weren't always trying to twist this into something it's not and was not intended to be...

    blah live, you learn die, you learn faster

  10. #170
    Yes Listen to SilusGrim, It is just wrong that your team can tab you if your neut, makes no sense at all (how can your team be your enemy). Also i strongly believe since we do not have any Neutral only scanners/shops that only we can use, I strongly believe that being neutral should allow you to use any shop or scanner. Or if not both at least the scanners.

  11. #171
    Try again, Therion. =)

    Read the story. You will find that Omni is not "evil"--not really. Nor are the clans "good." Many of the clans have involved themselves in open acts of terrorism. Likewise, Omni had had their phlantropic moments.

    In fact, both the leaders of Omni and Clan have been able to meet face-to-face and talk peace on a few occasions. There is no reason for either to be portrayed as good OR bad.

    If it was Funcom's intention to go that route, they should have done a better job crafting the story to reflect that. As it stands now, I could give example after example in official Funcom story as to why that idea doesn't hold up.

    It's not just about the people who decided to play as what. The story portrarys good Omni, and bad Clansmen all the time. Period.

    There is no black and white here. Funcom would be stupid to try to enforce that, anyway. No side of a conflict (especially a mutual one) is ever 100% right. It certainly isn't the case in Rubi-Ka.

    Besides, it should be pretty obvious that Funcom really doesn't know what they intended to begin with--and if they do, they've changed thier mind about it on numerous occasions down the line. If Funcom wanted to enforce a certain story, maybe they should actually have a story at all. It's kind of hard to enforce a certain story when you leave 99% of the story in the hands of baffled RPers let down by Funcom's hollow promises to provide them with something.

    Of course, if neutrality was created so people could make thier mind up regarding opinions of sides, then Funcom left the door open for those neutrals to choose they they HATE both sides. It's not very hard to do. Clans pillage, Omni pillages, Clans want the best for thier people, Omni does too. Both sides are right, both sides are wrong. If you can't see that, then forfiet your neutral status and choose a side. =P

    If both sides have the right to consider me a target as a neutral, why exactly should I be obliged to get all buddy-buddy with one of them in particular? *L*

    Last edited by Jayde; Jul 12th, 2002 at 08:19:26.

  12. #172
    Therion, I have to completely agree with you there...

    It was stated from the beginning that Omni was the dark side and Clan the light side. Granted that this isn't an absolute 100%... Omni is not absolute black and clan is not untarnished white.

    Neutral was never intended to be a serious stance... you can't 'go neutral' once you pick a faction, and the neutral stance limits a player in many ways during the game. During character creation, you are pretty much told "don't expect to stay neutral for very long."

    The 'advantage' to being neutral, i.e., freedom to travel through both Omni and Clan areas, is lukewarm. When you factor in those aggroing sided mobs and sided guards everywhere, it more resembles the disadvantage that you can't really go anywhere safely. I think this is intentional. Rubi-Ka is meant to be an unsafe place unless you have a lot of backup or are quite powerful on your own. If you don't side with one of the two factions, you're sorta high and dry and nowhere can be very safe for you. If you want to be safe in Tir, become a clanner. If you want to walk to Baboons unmolested, go Omni.

    My point is that this is the way things were intended from the start. In order to get a story moving, FC gave the game a setting, and gave a certain modicom of meaning to the different factions. I agree with Therion that if players want to hijack the meaning that Funcom gave to the factions, they're really refusing to play the game they've been given and instead want to play their own game.

    According to the FC background:
    'MANY' of the clans have not involved themselves in open acts of terrorism, according to the info supplied. Only the Sentinels, who are supposed to be the most extreme by far, and who most clans supposedly disassociate themselves with.

    Omni has not done anything particularly nice unless it is profit-oriented. Or particularly evil unless it is profit motivated. Matter of fact is that everything Omni has done has been profit motivated with little concern for anything else except occasional public relations (which is indirectly profit-motivated anyway).

    Neutrals on Rubi-Ka were deliberately not given any central organization, stance or backup. The central conflict is over whether Omni will continue to control Rubi-Ka. Omni says yay, Clans say nay. If neutrals say that some third party should control Rubi-Ka, they're de-facto clanners (since clans aren't vying for control themselves necessarily, but rather insisting that Omni is not the party who should be in control). If a neutral vision involves Omni remaining in control, they're de-facto Omnis.

    Maybe neutrals just think that Omni and Clan should stop trying to look for a story or RPG aspects of the game and do missions together in Broken Shores instead?

    Neutrality only becomes a meaningful stance of its own when players refuse to play the game they've been supplied with, reject the descriptions and history of the Clans and Omni, and instead decide to write a story of their own.

    180+ Rockin' Adventurer
    Jester's Vengeance

    Soon to be in possession of majestic powers that no other profession will rival...

  13. #173
    Originally posted by Yehezkel

    Neutrality only becomes a meaningful stance of its own when players refuse to play the game they've been supplied with, reject the descriptions and history of the Clans and Omni, and instead decide to write a story of their own.
    The idea of both sides being good or evil is NOT supported by the story we have been supplied with. Have you read the story lately?

    Do you think this person in particular would join either Omni or Clan?

    Do these sound like the words of an "evil" leader?

    I extend a conciliatory hand, he thought, I get down on my knees and beg them for peace, for understanding, for a chance to negotiate an accord. And all they do is turn on me and stab me in the back.

    There were reports of new skirmishes outside the immediate jurisdiction of the city, between Omni-Tek’s pacifying troops and clan-affiliated rebels. People had died, tensions were strained, and both sides were now tugging at their leashes for a chance to go to war again. And while these unfortunate incidents weren’t entirely unexpected, it still angered and saddened him to think of the wastefulness of it all, for both sides involved.

    Ross knew that he’d made an error in judgement early on. He’d completely underestimated how the disgruntled few could affect the complex machinery of progress. That lesson had been taught a million times over, most effectively a good seventeen millennia past, when, like a latter-day Moses, David Marlin had risen up and brought his people out of slavery, destroying the Omega in the process. The ensuing era had given birth to Omni-Tek, and Ross guessed he owed the man a silent prayer of thanks. But the example he had set…

    To have imprinted on humanity the virtue of rising up against authority, against government, against corporate dominion, at any and all costs – and to have brazenly professed this to be a good thing, an honourable thing… (Ed: Referring to the so-called "good" Clans)

    No, the man had done more to damage mankind than to heal it. David Marlin ought to have laid down his sword after destroying the last of the Omega. The freed slaves, the Solitus, the inheritors of Earth, should have been allowed to decide their own fate.

    Now grand but meaningless words were being flaunted as truth in the face of reason; words like “freedom”, “liberty”, and “justice for all”. Justice for whom exactly? Freedom and liberty from what?
    There is quite a bit more in Prophet Without Honor that sheds Ross is a decent light, at least. (No, he's not an angel, but not an demon either.) It also shows that the Clans are not all that wonderful at times.

    Let's look at the timeline a bit...and see if it supports the notion that Clan = Good and Omni = Bad. Hmm?

    April 08 29212
    With new forces in place, Omni-Tek strikes back at the clans with maximum prejudice. They are, however, careful to avoid severe losses in the civilian population.

    Omni-Tek regains control over most of the mines, and reduces its military activity. The clans are scattered, but active.

    The first "neutrals" appear when Omni-Tek employees - as well as clan members - abandon their affiliations and settle in non-political zones. Fearing more ICC interventions, OT authorities turn a blind eye to these neutrals.

    Thirty-eight highly skilled nano-technicians and meta physicists break with Omni-Tek and establish a colony on an artificially constructed floating archipelago. They name the colony "Jobe". OT unofficially acknowledges the colony's autonomy in order to retain ties with the skilled colonists, and to prevent them from crossing over to the clan-side. [Ed: Note, Jobe is neutral.]

    April 28 29374
    Clan-affiliated terrorists blow up four notum operations in a coordinated strike, killing both security forces and miners. Notum shipments are reduced by 13%, costing Omni-Tek hundreds of billions of credits.

    May 01 29374
    Omni-Tek officials order the leaders of the clans to surrender all suspected terrorists to Omni-Tek security forces. They're given a one week deadline.

    May 08 29374
    Clan leaders fail to meet demands, citing a lack of evidence and the difficulty of curtailing independent clan activity. Omni-Tek begins to move into clan-held territories.

    October 07 29466
    One thousand, four hundred and sixty-six Omni-Tek soldiers are massacred in six separate assaults across OT-held territory. Witnesses at four of the sites report seeing commandos wearing crimson uniforms, hoods, and environmental masks. At the same time, insurance-pattern databases in Omni-1 are sabotaged. There is no hope for any of the murdered soldiers.

    October 25 29475
    On behalf of the Omni-Tek Corporation, Philip Ross announces an unconditional amnesty for all clan-affiliated citizens. This is intended to be a first step towards a lasting peace on Rubi-Ka.
    I could keep going, but it's late and I'm getting tired. Plenty of examples to the contrary of the Black & White, Good & Bad setup.

    Fact is, the ICC supports the Clans and the Counsel of Truth. It's NOT Omni vs. Clan any more. Clans are a valid, legal institution now.

    Take, for instance:
    May 19 29418
    Sol Banking Corporation lands mechanised troops and war-machines on Rubi-Ka. Their objective is to seize control of Omni-Tek's notum operations. Omni-Tek receives unexpected help from the clans in the ensuing and drawn-out ground war.

    June 12 29420
    The last of Sol Banking Corporation's troops on Rubi-Ka are crushed in a coordinated strike by both Omni-Tek and clan forces.

    January 22 29476
    Henry Radiman publicly states the Council's support for the Omni-Pol operation in Sabulum, and asks clan-members to avoid further violence.
    Obviously, Clan and Omni forces aren't as opposed as you'd like to think. Really, it isn't until the end that things get hairy...

    The long and short of the story is this:
    1) Clans (official) want peace
    2) Omni wants peace
    3) Omni and Clans negotiate peace
    4) Sentinals and Dust Bridage (along with other redicals) destroy peace
    5) "War" resumes

    Sorry, but after all the pace negotiations, that's pretty shaky ground to base a conflict on. Why should neutrals joina side "in the conflict", if any sane person can see that there is no reason for conflict.

    My neutral RP org, Shattered Dreams, has the mission to work with Omni and Clan moderates to quell the disparate extremists. This is TOTALLY supported by the story, and would be a perfectly resonable viewpoint for neutrals to have.

    Also, you are incorrect in saying that not supporting Omni = support for the Clans. That's not true at all. Neutrality is neutrality. Plain and simple. Omni itself has already strived for a peaceful joint resolution with Clans, so compromise is not against the will of Omni completely. Seeking compromise, therefore, is not inherantly "anti-Omni", nor is it "anti-Clan."

    Try reading the official story before going on about how neutrals are going against the story. It's not that hard to figure out that most neutral RP orgs pay a great deal of attention to the official story, and really don't violate it int he slightest bit.

    The people who say it's as simple as Clan vs. Omni, Good vs. Bad obviously haven't spent much time reading the actual story. =P


  14. #174
    K, don't think I quite have the patience to go point for point all the way, but here's some of it...

    Eleena Oak in that interview seems to be someone being harassed by a cop... it's unclear from that little bit whether she's falsely or truly accused of something. It's more of a character profiling story than factual anything, because it's totally unclear what's actually going on.

    Ummm... those don't sound like the words of a caring leader. Those sound like the words of someone who cares about the progress and profit of the whole without concern for the interests of individuals.... ignoring the interests of "the disgruntled few" is not an injustice for him, but merely an error in judgment because it could affect progress.

    He also believes that rising up against "authority, against government, against corporate dominion" is a bad thing? What's your point? You mean rising up against oppressors at any and all costs is a bad thing? The Jews in Egypt, the American Revolution, The labor movements resulting in workers' unions.. these are all bad things?

    Sounds more like the guy believes in order, profit, and progress above all other goals. Injustices for individuals is acceptable, and he seems to think that the people in charge can do no wrong, and that all the little unwashed worker ants should know their places and shut up.

    Yes, to me he sounds like the leader of something that I wouldn't want to be part of. He sounds closer to Mao Tse-Tung than Abraham Lincoln, more like Stalin than like Roosevelt... I'm not sure what this was supposed to prove. He doesn't come off like Genghis Khan or Saddam Hussein either, but he's much more a company man than a civil leader.

    29212: Omni avoided "severe losses" to the civilian population.... it was totally in their interests to avoid civilian losses, hence it doesn't prove anything about their moral position.

    29214 Reducing military activity when it is no longer necessary means that they are thrifty... Remember that no one said that Omni is a black-hearted evil, rather just that efficiency and profit is the only true concern on the agenda.

    29250 The first neutrals were people who didn't want to have anything to do with fighting and who were trying to escape from it. Omni ignores them because doing anything about them would result in negative repercussions more severe than any gain.

    29374 Definitely some ugly actions by clan extremists; can't deny that one. Not supported by the clans overall, but Omni responds with military action against clans in general.. fairly in this case, since if the clans won't police themselves than someone really should move in and police them.

    As for the Clan and Omni cooperation against Sol Banking, etc... Both sides were coordinating due to mutual need and because of independent goals. Just because they are working together in the short term doesn't mean that they are participating for the same reasons or because they share any sort of long-term vision.

    Last bit... your long and short of the story neglects to mention why there was a conflict in the first place, and doesn't suggest any answer to it. The conflict begins when Omni employees are faced with oppressive and unfair working conditions and treatment, deciding to rebel and to defect from the company because they feel that they were misled, treated unfairly, and grossly taken advantage of. Clans (officially) want peace, but they also want their original goals of reforming the huge profit-and-nothing-else enterprise of Omni.

    From the clan side, there are definitely arguments as to why there should still be a conflict. The omni answer is "Ok, we'll leave you alone.. what the hell else do you want? Go away!"

    A neutral stance in face of this is reasonable... I'll give you that. It doesn't give you any moral high ground, IMO, but it's a reasonable path to take.

    Omni - profit above justice and peace
    Neutral - peace above profit and justice
    Clan - justice above peace and profit

    180+ Rockin' Adventurer
    Jester's Vengeance

    Soon to be in possession of majestic powers that no other profession will rival...

  15. #175
    I think you missed the point of my reply.

    1) Eleena Oak

    She is listed as an "important character" on the site. She is also in the animated series. She is a neutral. Thus--tada--Funcom has already created a "prominent" neutral character. Not only that, an official neutral character that DOES NOT DISPLAY any of the tendancies you seem to think should be ascribed to neutrals.

    Eleena Oak is not neutral for the sake of "choosing a side", yet she is the official character representantive of neutrals in all the story segments available. (Animated series, "Important Characters" listing, A Prophet Without Honor)

    Now, if Funcom wanted to reinforce the idea that neutrality was temporary, why would they create the "official" neutral character representation that does not reflect this in the slightest bit?

    2) Phillip Ross

    I never said he was caring. Nor did I say that profit is not one of his goals--he is the CEO of a COMPANY after all.

    What I said was HE IS NOT EVIL.

    There is no reason to believe that Phillip Ross is evil. Therefore there is no reason to believe that Omni-Tek on Rubi-Ka is evil.

    Again, read this quote:
    "... it still angered and saddened him to think of the wastefulness of it all, for both sides involved."

    If he was so evil, why would he be saddened by the loss of life on the clan sides? Obviously, by your explination, he would be sad regarding his losses, since it affects Omni's profit. However, the loss of Clanners increases his profit by eliminating part of the threat.

    3) 29250 and neutrals

    This point was made to show the official formation of the neutral faction in the Anarchy Online timeline. Note, that these people BROKE AWAY, and were not people who were just "deciding which side to be on."

    Yet another example of your "ideal" neutral position not being reinforced by Funcom in the slightest bit.

    29374 Definitely some ugly actions by clan extremists; can't deny that one. Not supported by the clans overall, but Omni responds with military action against clans in general.. fairly in this case, since if the clans won't police themselves than someone really should move in and police them.
    So, if this is the case (along with other examples in the timeline, and in Prophet Without Honor) why should anyone believe that the clans are "good."

    The clans are disorginized, consistantly having factions thwart the peace process, fraught with inner turmoil, and in general indecision and disarray. In fact, it seems to me that the Clans are the only Anarchy in Anarchy Online. And, sorry, I don't attribute Anarchy as being a "good" trait.

    Honestly, given all the information in the official timeline, Rubi-Ka would be as bad, if not worse off, without Omni-Tek around. The division among the Clans would only cause civil war and chaos.

    Really, the chief differenciation in terms of the official story is NOT Clan = Good, Omni = Bad. No. Not at all. What it is, though: Omni = Order, Clan = Chaos. There is no basis for a "Good/Evil" comparison here. Both sides have good and bad moment in the story. There is no reason to single one out as better or worse than the other--PERIOD.

    And THAT is where neutrality fits into the picture. And THAT is why the neutral broke off in 29250, and why Jobe was formed, and why Eleena Oak is in the story--among other things.

    Last bit... your long and short of the story neglects to mention why there was a conflict in the first place, and doesn't suggest any answer to it. The conflict begins when Omni employees are faced with oppressive and unfair working conditions and treatment, deciding to rebel and to defect from the company because they feel that they were misled, treated unfairly, and grossly taken advantage of. Clans (officially) want peace, but they also want their original goals of reforming the huge profit-and-nothing-else enterprise of Omni.
    The problem was caused due to mining-related incidents and brutal treatment of employees. It doesn't seem to me that, at the time of Anarchy Online, these are serious issues any more. The ICC regulations and involvement, as well as the widespread use of cell scanning technology seem to have removed this aspect from the story.

    Post-Tir Accords, the only force driving the conflict is the terrorism by the Dust Brigade, Sentinals, and others in disturbing peace efforts. "Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust"

    Now, if Anarchy Online was set back in the timeline a bit, it would be a different picture. However, that problem seems moot at the time of the game, leaving the "conflict--in terms of a game atmosphere--very, very weak.

    Omni - profit above justice and peace
    Neutral - peace above profit and justice
    Clan - justice above peace and profit
    Honestly, I don't see this as all that unresonable. My only point is that neutrals do have a story-supported reason to exist. And most neutral RP orgs operate well within story-supported roles.

    Neutrals don't want their own government, unless it was something created by them that ended up being a collaboration of Clan and Omni leadership--more of a peacekeeping union than an actual government. But I don't think neutrals need a government to have a place and role in the story that doesn't only mean "neutrality is a temporary situation while you choose Omni or Clan."

    The idea of break-away neutrals is very much supported by the official story.


  16. #176
    Still don't agree with you 100% on everything, but enough to respect your point of view... I think we're probably about to reach the point of diminishing returns in the discussion, so I'll stop arguing with you and leave it at that. I think we've gotten on the same page in terms of RP anyway and we sound like our characters discussing the situation from the inside at this point, in contrast to OOC player discussion.

    Your character perspective is distinctly different from mine in terms of goals and ideal situations. My man Yehezkel is not in favor of peace at all costs. Rather, he looks at a world with a profit-motivated corporation running the show instead of a civil government and sees something nauseatingly wrong with the picture.

    Kinda like how some people look at modern western nations such as the USA and complain that big business and corporations have too much power... RK is a world without a civil government at all. It's a planet that's run by a corporation. The laws, the regulations, everything... it's all in the employee handbook. All decisions are corporate decisions made by some group of OT leaders that doesn't have to answer to anyone except itself, and somewhat more recently, to ICC.

    So my character doesn't see any sort of just resolution until the situation on RK changes drastically, as in the development of a civil government that exists by and for the people. Not a clan government, because he sees the clans as temporary organizations founded simply to oppose the absolute rule of Omni on RK. And not merely the current level of ICC intervention, the existence of which on RK is not even close to filling the void left open by the total lack of a civil government.

    In my guild, the only resolution to the situation that is spoken of is the establishment of a fair and just government on RK. Not any sort of power split between OT and the Clans, not another corporate interest sharing power, etc. And of course, I'd guess that the very last thing Omni would want is a strongly supported liberal, electoral government regulating and ruling RK.

    I'd guess your neutral brigade wouldn't oppose the sort of situation on RK that us clanners want, but you wouldn't want to fight or make waves to achieve it either. We're well armed and totally willing to fight if that would help us wrest power away from OT and put it in the hands of some kind of leadership that we could trust. Right now there's nothing happening at all, and nothing particularly to fight for, so we spend most of our time doing stupid missions in BS.....

    I do respect that someone out there is attempting to RP... it's almost like roleplaying in a vacuum these days since it's been so long since anything at all has happened.

    180+ Rockin' Adventurer
    Jester's Vengeance

    Soon to be in possession of majestic powers that no other profession will rival...

  17. #177
    I think you missed the point of my reply.

    Omni - profit above justice and peace
    Neutral - peace above profit and justice
    Clan - justice above peace and profit
    That's funny- I remember before AO came out, and my assumption was that:

    Omni= authoritarian, strict, ordered
    Clan= individualistic, democratic
    Neutrals= profiteers

    That's how it often works out in real life. Sometimes, when two parties engage in a war, the only real winner is the one selling the guns. I sort of pictured Neutrals having a great edge in trade, but no direct role in any conflict.

  18. #178
    Originally posted by Blue Cat
    I sort of pictured Neutrals having a great edge in trade, but no direct role in any conflict.
    That would be nice, but things have kinda been changed over time Would be great to be able to go to Omni-Trade, buy some items and smuggle them over to the Clans, but heck, the mechanics don't allow it We can RP it ok thanks to some nice OT folk who "smuggle" it to us, for us to run over to Tir with the "merchandise" and sell it on...but realistically its not something we are really for now.

    In the grand universal scheme of things it seems we hold much of a mixed bag now. We can be the profiteers yes, we can be mercenaries (urmm well to a degree but no tokens means we aint too good at it), and so we get back to being either a criminal element (which some neut groups have become), terrorists (some others I could mention), and alot who have gone for political organisations who pride themselves in getting alliances with both OT and the Clans. But deep down the whole neutral population is a mixed bag, we have just as much diversity amongst our as the Clans or Omni.

    We're an odd bunch, so many thoughts yet I think the one thing we all want is to live the way we want to, and how we want to. If we can and will be able to is another matter though - one which only time will tell.
    Major "Nyadach" Prabel
    Neutral and proud of it!

  19. #179


    Omni's are the slaves of their corporation.
    Clanners are the slaves of their ideals.

    Neutrals, why, we're free of all that. Free to be kicked around and beaten by both sides, but nevertheless free.

  20. #180

    Post Neutrals are a solution not a Problem!!!

    I would like to play as a neutral in the game..........if only I would know that some sort of reward was there for me, I ma not talking about uber weapons or armor, but something else.........
    I think the plan to get things going by polarazing the 2 side conflict its a good idea, but not by far the best one...........look at DAOC, Starcraft and WarIII, the number of factions are 3 or more!
    Let me say that 2 factions is like potatoes and meat, sure the most important thing in a meal, but the 3rd faction is the ****e!!! I think we would have a much more enjoyable game if we have an alternative to the conflict! Let the 2 sides worry about the war, kill each other and take the loot! Hey we talking about a fraction of the planet here.................the uncharted territories should be the realm of the neutrals! Let them discover new areas, maybe some relevant secrets! Lets say a place of huge underground caves, with water and some new race to fight / aid them (local only availble to high lvl neutrals who founded a secret community)! Shadowlands should be the crowning of the neutrals. The Clans and Omini have the tech and resources and are too damm worried about each other........fine let the neutrals get the lore and guerilla to defend them......
    Another point...............I just CANT buy in recent articles in the AO homepage that some clanners simply wish to be loyal Omini employees because they got disappointed with the rule of the concil......its not beliavble!!!!
    Let ppl become neutrals!!! If one guy dont trust Omini anymore or the leadership of the clans.........well its LOGICAL that first he became NEUTRAL and MAYBE after (some lvls or time or both) he can choose again! But most likely he will be neutral for the rest of his char life........this makes for much more interesting RP oportunnities, let the neutrals be the alternative for exploration, more RP and such.......if the clan and Omini guys want to smash each other head in PVP so be it!!!!
    Besides another suggestion in the warfare is:

    OMINI - Regular Warfare
    CLAN - Regular Warfare (Hello Sol BAnking!!!) and Terrorism
    NEUTRALS - Guerrilla to defend themselves

    I know I am dreaming that someday neutrals would have a function in AO but I am new to the game! Bare with me!

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts