Adding a political system

[Preypacer]

I am merely throwing out ideas of possibilities of what you can and cannot do as leader. Instead of being a bitch, why don't you come up with ideas on what you will do if you are ruler of Uldah?

Ah, so now we're resorting to ad hominems.

Maybe you haven't been paying attention to my posts - especially the first one where I, in detail, explain why it wouldn't be a good idea in the first place, but I have no ideas of what I would do as ruler of Ul'dah, because I have no desire to be ruler of Ul'dah, because I think the idea is horrible, ill-conceived, whimsical at best, not thought out at all and should never be implemented.

You put forth the idea in your original post, others, and myself have given feedback on why we think it's a bad idea and wouldn't work. You seem to be ignoring those posts and instead are focusing on new ways to spin the idea as different objections and concerns are voiced about it.

[Atoli]

I like the idea of having something like that, but not for the 3 starting cities.
They already HAVE leaders, if I may make you remember that..
I don't want something like that anytime soon anyway.
Maybe one day we'll beat the Garleans and have to occupy their towns with our own (player-)leaders?

[Dyne]

No, it makes it clear that you have no clear idea of exactly what the system is, what kind of experience it's aimed at or how it would actually fit into the game's setting.

It makes it clear that you are willing to change your perspective, and how you pitch the idea, to suit who ever you happen to be responding to. For one person it's a BLT on Rye, for another it's a Ham Sandwich, for yet another it's a Hot Dog. Reading through all your posts in support of it for the last 7 pages or so, there is no consistency in how you're explaining the system. It changes almost from one post to the next.

It makes it clear that you have put no thought into the system, how it would play out or how players would affect or be affected by it.

It makes it clear that your thought process goes only so far as "I want to be able to rule a city and control stuff" and everything after that is "fluff that someone else can figure out.

Perhaps if you took more time to think the idea through, think of the ramifications, how it would fit into the gameworld, what abuses might be opened up by such a system, how it would affect how people experience the rest of the game... not to mention elements of the game that aren't even in the game yet or things SE has planned that we don't even know about yet... Perhaps if you set out a defined and consistent set of rules, restrictions and benefits that didn't change depending on who you were talking to and what their objection was... perhaps then your pet idea could be taken a bit more seriously and warrant serious discussion.

Instead of just calling me "Lazy" why don't you come up with your own ideas instead on crapping on everyone elses.

[Dyne]

Ah, so now we're resorting to ad hominems.

Maybe you haven't been paying attention to my posts - especially the first one where I, in detail, explain why it wouldn't be a good idea in the first place, but I have no ideas of what I would do as ruler of Ul'dah, because I have no desire to be ruler of Ul'dah, because I think the idea is horrible, ill-conceived, whimsical at best, not thought out at all and should never be implemented.

You put forth the idea in your original post, others, and myself have given feedback on why we think it's a bad idea and wouldn't work. You seem to be ignoring those posts and instead are focusing on new ways to spin the idea as different objections and concerns are voiced about it.

Ok then, so you can't even imagine yourself in a leadership position. So what good are you?

[Dyne]

I like the idea of having something like that, but not for the 3 starting cities.
They already HAVE leaders, if I may make you remember that..
I don't want something like that anytime soon anyway.
Maybe one day we'll beat the Garleans and have to occupy their towns with our own (player-)leaders?

Yeah, that could work too and it would fit nicely with the lore.

[Amineri]

Instead of just calling me "Lazy" why don't you come up with your own ideas instead on crapping on everyone elses.

I know I'm not the person you were replying to, but I did post an elaboration here.

Perhaps instead of slinging mud at each we could actually discuss the topic at hand?

[Preypacer]

Perhaps a more limited form of political system could work. Elections and voting .... well, that hardly works in the real world; it seems unlikely in a gameworld.

The first step to having a political system is creating a resource system ... and not just any resources, but resources needed on a larger-than-individual scale. The Grand Companies are being founded on just that principle. The efficient collection and distribution of resources in order to combat a significant threat. Clearly, Garlemald is technologically superior, and has a superior military. Thus the limited resources of the city-states have to be carefully marshaled to try and combat the threat.

I could see fortifications, siege engines, etc being made available. There are two ways to accomplish this: first, allow guilds (private companies) to create them -- second, have Grand Companies make them. Both options are viable and could co-exist (although likely the more game-effecting effects would have to reserved for the Grand Companies). Players can contribute materials and time to the Grand Companies to create these fortifications and siege engines, but how would they be deployed?

NOW we have a need for a political system. Distribution of scarce resources in service of the city-state. One idea occurs to me: Have two sets of members in a Grand Council (for each city-state). One set of members is drawn from the leadership of the private companies that have demonstrated service to the city-state. Another could be selected from the population in general (perhaps a lottery system, with ability to vote people out, or something similar).

The function of the Grand Council is to vote upon placement of fortifications and siege equipment to resist the Garlemald Empire's military advances. The devs would establish viable alternatives, they would be presented to the Council, discussion would take place, followed by a vote.

The result would then effect players' ability to fight in campaign-style battles against the Empire.

P.S. After I wrote this, it occurred to me that the beast tribes are another possible threat. Same concept could be applied there.

Now *that* is how you conceive and present an initial idea.

Give it a context that fits within the established setting of the game, give it a meaning and purpose within that context (ultimately fighting against a common enemy), define specific details and limitations of it, and present it in a well structured manner.

That idea actually sounds really interesting to me.

Dyne... Take notes.

[Dyne]

Perhaps a more limited form of political system could work. Elections and voting .... well, that hardly works in the real world; it seems unlikely in a gameworld.

The first step to having a political system is creating a resource system ... and not just any resources, but resources needed on a larger-than-individual scale. The Grand Companies are being founded on just that principle. The efficient collection and distribution of resources in order to combat a significant threat. Clearly, Garlemald is technologically superior, and has a superior military. Thus the limited resources of the city-states have to be carefully marshaled to try and combat the threat.

I could see fortifications, siege engines, etc being made available. There are two ways to accomplish this: first, allow guilds (private companies) to create them -- second, have Grand Companies make them. Both options are viable and could co-exist (although likely the more game-effecting effects would have to reserved for the Grand Companies). Players can contribute materials and time to the Grand Companies to create these fortifications and siege engines, but how would they be deployed?

NOW we have a need for a political system. Distribution of scarce resources in service of the city-state. One idea occurs to me: Have two sets of members in a Grand Council (for each city-state). One set of members is drawn from the leadership of the private companies that have demonstrated service to the city-state. Another could be selected from the population in general (perhaps a lottery system, with ability to vote people out, or something similar).

The function of the Grand Council is to vote upon placement of fortifications and siege equipment to resist the Garlemald Empire's military advances. The devs would establish viable alternatives, they would be presented to the Council, discussion would take place, followed by a vote.

The result would then effect players' ability to fight in campaign-style battles against the Empire.

P.S. After I wrote this, it occurred to me that the beast tribes are another possible threat. Same concept could be applied there.

Thank you, those are very nice ideas btw. I hate it when people just say "That's just not gonna work, kill it". I am glad there is someone out there that knows how to be constructive.

[Preypacer]

Ok then, so you can't even imagine yourself in a leadership position. So what good are you?

And another ad-hominem!

As much "good" as you are. You presented an idea. I pointed out the flaws and potential issues in that idea.

I realize you think "being useful" is basically "agreeing with your idea". However, that's not the way it works.

My criticisms have been very specific and consistent... Your idea is whimsical, not well thought out, not well planned, and you keep changing the way you're pitching it.

Perhaps if you were to take that away from the discussion, better think out the idea. Put it in a better and more clearly thought out format, even if only as an initial "pitch", like Amineri did... You'd have received a better reaction from it.

Instead, you get offended, get your panties in a wad, go into spin mode and start lashing out about it.

[Dyne]

Now *that* is how you conceive and present an initial idea.

Give it a context that fits within the established setting of the game, give it a meaning and purpose within that context (ultimately fighting against a common enemy), define specific details and limitations of it, and present it in a well structured manner.

That idea actually sounds really interesting to me.

Dyne... Take notes.

But that's not your ideas isn't it? Exactly. All I had was the basic idea, and left it to someone else in the forums to add to it and make it deeper. That is called brainstorming. You were out of line for calling me "lazy" and expecting me to present the whole entire thing by myself. Even her ideas can still be expanded on by someone else, but it cannot be done with a bunch of negative nancies who all they do is say "no" all day.