Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011
Results 201 to 212 of 212

Thread: The Role of the Neutrals

  1. #201
    I agree with Fabouille, being a neutral is a courageous choice, as it makes the game much harder to play. Neutrals should get respect for this choice.

    With Notum Wars is see both sides ignoring this facts (no token board, no few xp bonuses, narrow guilds) and attacking neutral bases simply "because they are on our way"...

    Guys just keep on acting with such a short term view of neutrals role and you will end up making neutrals with no official representation which means they wont have any other choice than terrorism...

    What does terrorism means in terms of Notum means spoiling the balance of the game by for example :

    - Repeatedly desabling both sides bases shields on regular basis (once per hour) just to desorganise their defense so that players get bored to check who rang the bell and wont go and defend their base any more

    - Squatting all towers shops so that controlers ql dont refresh and we cant find the right ql for our base if it is destroyed or we cant improve the ql of our base

    These are the two first examples of what i can think of ....but i m sure they will find lots of other ideas to spoil the game and protest about the disrespect some few "black sheeps" on both sides show to the "weakest".

    Neutrals should be protected for the courage of their opinion, not harassed because they are "weaker" in terms of damage capacity.

    I m omni and i dont want them to spoil the game, so i m asking for more consideration for them...the attack on sfh by omni pol (Meister is the leader) is in my opinion a short term view that will lead neutrals to clandestinity, the path of terrorism. This was an irresponsible move from omni pol leader.

  2. #202
    The neutrals that we attacked and will attack in the future, are already terrorists and our action was totally justified.
    Director "Meister"
    President, Omni-Pol
    Level 207 Omni-Tek Dictator
    Meister's Reinforced Suit - Bureaucrats may be gimps, but at least we know how to look good.
    Account Created: 2001-06-27 23:07:32

  3. #203
    Greed never justified any agression and never will. You lacked a ql 150 base, you thought it was easier to take it from neutral hands than clans hands. The whole omni community will have to pay the bill of your irresponsability.

  4. #204
    Not just easier, the base is also closer to Omni-1, making it much easier for Omni-Tek to hold that base and ship notum off the mining facility. See the photograph posted on the Story forum, showing how the Independant Rubi-Kans destroyed an Omni-Tek base in (as it looks) that same spot before.
    Director "Meister"
    President, Omni-Pol
    Level 207 Omni-Tek Dictator
    Meister's Reinforced Suit - Bureaucrats may be gimps, but at least we know how to look good.
    Account Created: 2001-06-27 23:07:32

  5. #205
    Why couldnt neutrals have bases in omni territories while omnis have lots of bases in neutral are trying to justify the unjustifyable. Neutrals had only two ql 150 bases, no ql 200 ones, you took half of their higher level bases off, even tho there are lots of higher level neutrals. They were not a threat to omni security as in no way they would have attacked the numerous omni bases around. Your action will lead them to marginality, and you will bear the responsability for the development of uncontrolable neutral terrorist acts on the planet.

  6. #206
    This is the same Meister who when questioned in Borealis about Omni employess attacking the Neutral guards before the ICC representatives had replaced them...claimed that the Guards had attacked first and hence the violence was justified.


  7. #207
    Flood1 i am not aware of ever being questioned in Borealis about Omni-Tek employees attacking neutral guards. Not that i would be responsible for all the OT players, of which a lot of are not roleplayers.
    Director "Meister"
    President, Omni-Pol
    Level 207 Omni-Tek Dictator
    Meister's Reinforced Suit - Bureaucrats may be gimps, but at least we know how to look good.
    Account Created: 2001-06-27 23:07:32

  8. #208 you mention it, it was in the Rompa Bar in fact, although the question was also posed to you in Bor.


  9. #209

    Thumbs up Diversity!


    too much stuff in this thread to go through all of it. I'll just add that in my opinion, there are (at least) three kind of neutrals:

    1) The undecided. The "buffer", as someone said. Typically new arrivals who haven't chosen yet.

    2) The force of balance. This includes those who think war is wrong and those who think both sides of the conflict are wrong, but war to convince them about the fact might be cool... In any case, those who actively seek a solution to the conflict other than either side winning.

    3) The profiteers. Those, who don't give a damn about politics, and which side is right or wrong, but only care about who pays them for which job.

    I think all these three groups are necessary and good in the game, and should be taken into account. None is more "real" neutrals than the other.

    The first group doesn't so much come up into the storyline as such, but I really like to see many arrivals to Rubi-Ka be undecided. Recruiting them to either side gives lots of roleplaying opportunities.

    Conflict inside the neutral faction between groups 2 and 3 could happen, also, I suppose...

    What I don't want to see is neutrals as "just another faction", that is, if it can be avoided, don't make us just the third side in the conflict!

    (And yes, ICC should be neutral.)

  10. #210
    i would like to present a new light on neutrals.

    the pivot if you will of notum wars.

    with the neutrals, you have a side that many have sympathies, and many have disdane. some see them as weak and others use them in their quest for power. ive seen espionage, deceit money, lies, honor, courage, anger and confusion about and around neutrals and those who deal with them. both as a whole and as indivisual groups.

    where as if an omni/clan org attacks one of the oppisate side, it seems self justified and no one really asks questions. but with neuts, many are reserved to fight so small a group if/when they keep to them selves. and while others see this as an easy oppertunity to get a site with litte resistance yet others see this as reason to retaliate on them that do. some condone attacking militant neut orgs only, while some say that all neuts are already too far gone to defend any of them. it causes both guilds and sides to think an ounce more prior to an attack.
    something that immerses the player into the planet a bit more, and raises the battle over serious questions. it makes us explore who's side were relly on. and it exposes the true charecter of people and guilds that once held a very differnt image in our eyes (*cough* omni-pol*cough*)

    to put it plainly a 2 sided war is boring. one side vs. the other, with only the occasional inter side fight would have been...... blah. with little dynamic to it IMO.neutrals add a dynamic to rubi-ka that forces a policital aspect that wouldent be there if it was simply a fight between omni and clan.

    long life neutrality. long live RP-ing.

  11. #211
    (couldnt resist lol)

  12. #212

    On Neutrality.

    I chose neutrality for a reason, and that is simply because I do not wish to be involved in the war. I am not a faction and will not support any faction, and I do not wish for neutrals to become a faction. Such a 'neutral' faction would not have my backing either. Should Clan or Omni win the war for Rubi-ka, I will obey the laws of that faction, but I will not support it. I want to get on with my life.

    If people want to sell their souls to the Omni or the Clan, let them. They are not my concern.

    Anyway, I would have thought that a neutral's money is as good as any other, and traders in the faction controlled cities would be quite happy to sell stuff to neutrals (clothing, burgers etc.) that did not have a military purpose.

    Should neutrality have any bonuses similar to the factions? I don't think so. I chose neutrality with my eyes open and with sound reasons. It would make more sense to place some form of constraints on faction affiliated people, to represent the fact that they have superiors and a chain of command above them.

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011

Posting Permissions

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