NS Tech Change: Regional Officers

Post by **sedge** » 12 Oct 2015, 11:15

News Article: http://www.nationstates.net/page=news/2 ... index.html

Forum thread: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... 5&t=356700

Original NS Summit discussion thread: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... 2&t=258994

I see our WFE says:

TRR stands against Regional Officers. Go away, [violet]!

I'm guessing Guy doesn't want TRR to be one of the regions to test this out before it rolls out across the game?

(EDIT: I ask because the initial implementation is likely to be quite buggy. I'm half-expecting Regional Officers with "border control" in TRR to be able to eject/ban/password >_>

Post by **Libetarian Republics** » 12 Oct 2015, 12:19

Dyr Nasad 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.

Pretty much how I feel about this. The 8-9 pages of frustration from many prominent defenders (including Guy) just reiterates this, which is kind of a shame too. The update is exciting in many different ways while at the same time utterly destroys liberations across the board. I can never be a defender general when being demanded to do the impossible, which is basically what these guys do on a daily basis.

TRR with a ban/eject would be interesting though.

Terraria 101 · Post by **Terraria 101** » 12 Oct 2015, 12:45

In all honesty, it's going to be buggy at first. And that would mean we would probably have to host more elections which means more chaos. So I don't think guy will probably choose to do this if at all!

Post by **sedge** » 12 Oct 2015, 13:07

It's a PITA trying to balance giving regions extra tools to defend themselves with the fact that invaders can then make use of those same tools to hold regions. I get that this doesn't have that balance yet. There are ways to balance it, and I'd fully expect one to be implemented in the near future - but we don't know which one would work best. Give the changes a chance, and have a think about how you'd modify them.

Post by **Guy** » 12 Oct 2015, 14:18

Of course, I recognise that this change might prove beneficial to many regions, especially those that are not under threat of invasion. Notwithstanding its impact on the R/D game, there was some level of anticipation towards it. TRR identifies as a Defender region, and that of course means expressing positions that are in those interests.

Sedge, with regards to the 'have a go' argument, there is a complete breakdown of trust on this side in the Admin team. We feel like whenever we identify issues, they're either placed somewhere in the never-to-be-completed to-do list, or just waved off as 'too difficult'.

sedge wrote:
12 Oct 2015, 09:15
I'm guessing Guy doesn't want TRR to be one of the regions to test this out before it rolls out across the game?

(EDIT: I ask because the initial implementation is likely to be quite buggy. I'm half-expecting Regional Officers with "border control" in TRR to be able to eject/ban/password >_>

That'd be hilarious. Relocated from TRR to TRR?

Post by **sedge** » 12 Oct 2015, 15:13

I understand the lack of trust and being disillusioned - libs were hard already, and they've just got a whole lot harder. At the very least, we've already acknowledged that's going to be the case and that we want to fix it after we've had a chance to work out what fix will work best. It may be painful in the short-term, but I'd suggest gathering the evidence on why something needs fixing re. liberations, thinking about what change would be best to sort that, and also exploring the opportunities that ROs represent.

Re. testing, ROs are going live tomorrow (Aus time) for a few select regions for testing. If you want TRR to be one of those, let me know.

Terraria 101 · Post by **Terraria 101** » 12 Oct 2015, 18:19

Remember that they got harder, but it still requires influence to spend and it costs even more with these officers.

Post by **Libetarian Republics** » 12 Oct 2015, 20:05

sedge wrote:
12 Oct 2015, 13:13
Re. testing, ROs are going live tomorrow (Aus time) for a few select regions for testing. If you want TRR to be one of those, let me know.

I'll let Guy decide since it's his timezone though it'll be odd to test the feature when the WFE openly opposes it

Terraria 101 · Post by **Terraria 101** » 12 Oct 2015, 22:44

I think we should see it in action, if we can. I mean that it would be a good feature except for some bad things

The following are the cons of RO for TRR:
-It might allow the TRR to Ban/Eject. (this would ruin the purpose of the region)
-It would require more elections/the constitution. (this could cause more chaos and server lag for zeta boards)
-It could be very buggy. (it has just launched and it is barely tested)
-It could cause server crashes and server lags, which are very rare. (this could obviously slow TRR progress as there is already a missing officer)

The following are the pros of RO for TTR:
-It could widespread time and ease of access. (there are basically multiple mini delegates)
-And that's about it. (because it's new)

Post by **frattastan** » 12 Oct 2015, 23:20

Terraria 101 wrote:
12 Oct 2015, 20:44
-It might allow the TRR to Ban/Eject. (this would ruin the purpose of the region)

It's pretty much certain that it would either not work, or 'send' nations ... here

Post by **Dyr Nasad** » 12 Oct 2015, 23:23

I have probably made my view on this whole idea rather clear by now

I do look forward to the non-BC parts though.

Terraria 101 · Post by **Terraria 101** » 13 Oct 2015, 01:33

In all honest, I made my point, I think. This looks like an interesting mechanic, but I think we should hold off a while until we know the glitches of it, or until we at least get this incoming officer election.

Post by **frattastan** » 13 Oct 2015, 10:30

But the glitches are the best thing.

Post by **Dyr Nasad** » 13 Oct 2015, 11:07

Yeah, all those non-execs should have lasted longer o_o

Post by **Guy** » 13 Oct 2015, 11:23

That was interesting, haha. There was some genuine concern that it may last all the way till update.

I have to say that overall I'm pleased with the user interface, which shows how, if you take the Border Control issue out, this seems like an innovative development. The effect this will have on R/D is as of yet still unacceptable, so we'll continue opposing the current implementation.

Some smaller issues:

1) I'm not sure I'm a fan of how big it is on the WFE. It really elongates it, and takes up lots of room.

2) What's where on the happenings / activity page needs to be fixed.

3) I'll try to remember my third point, I'm having a brain fart.

Post by **Tim** » 13 Oct 2015, 19:40

I'm interested to see the non-BC parts. Fuck the Border Control part, though, only way it can be implemented well is to not be implemented at all in my opinion.

Post by **sedge** » 13 Oct 2015, 20:44

Tim wrote:
13 Oct 2015, 17:40
Fuck the Border Control part, though, only way it can be implemented well is to not be implemented at all in my opinion.

Not even with an ejection rate limit for regions?

Post by **thechurchofsatan** » 13 Oct 2015, 22:52

I gotta say, I'm rather fond of the balance in place for it. Doubling the cost of influence for Regional Officers seems like a fine way to keep it under control.

Terraria 101 · Post by **Terraria 101** » 13 Oct 2015, 23:02

thechurchofsatan wrote:
13 Oct 2015, 20:52
I gotta say, I'm rather fond of the balance in place for it. Doubling the cost of influence for Regional Officers seems like a fine way to keep it under control.

Yeah, totally agree. And considering that r/ders don't just move in to a region and wait a few weeks, that could give the delegate time to kick them out. So spending will rely up to the main invader, specifically the delegate.

Post by **Guy** » 14 Oct 2015, 02:05

No, the balance is totally out of whack. Influence has nothing to do with it, as incoming defenders are unlikely to even update in the region before being kicked.

Gradea · Post by **Gradea** » 14 Oct 2015, 04:08

Foreign Affairs Officer: Diplomacy Officer
Culture Officer: Appearance Officer, Research Officer
Human Respurces Officer: Communications Officer, Research Officer
WA Affairs Officer: Communications Officer, Research Officer

Is this how we are going to assign officer positions?

Terraria 101 · Post by **Terraria 101** » 14 Oct 2015, 04:26

Gradea wrote:
14 Oct 2015, 02:08
Foreign Affairs Officer: Diplomacy Officer
Culture Officer: Appearance Officer, Research Officer
Human (fix me)Respurces Officer: Communications Officer, Research Officer
WA Affairs Officer: Communications Officer, Research Officer

Is this how we are going to assign officer positions?

I have no idea, they already assigned a few.

Gradea · Post by **Gradea** » 14 Oct 2015, 06:21

Terraria 101 wrote:
14 Oct 2015, 02:26
Gradea wrote:
14 Oct 2015, 02:08
Foreign Affairs Officer: Diplomacy Officer
Culture Officer: Appearance Officer, Research Officer
Human (fix me)Respurces Officer: Communications Officer, Research Officer
WA Affairs Officer: Communications Officer, Research Officer

Is this how we are going to assign officer positions?
I have no idea, they already assigned a few.

LR has been given Diplomacy Officer powers at least. I am unsure pf any further appointments by Guy as NS is blocked on the school iPad I am using.

Christian Democrats · Post by **Christian Democrats** » 15 Oct 2015, 22:05

sedge wrote:
13 Oct 2015, 18:44
Tim wrote:
13 Oct 2015, 17:40
Fuck the Border Control part, though, only way it can be implemented well is to not be implemented at all in my opinion.
Not even with an ejection rate limit for regions?

A hard limit encoded into the game certainly would be interesting: e.g., it's impossible to eject more than 5% of nations between any two updates (so a region with 100 nations could eject only five nations every 12 hours).

Post by **Tim** » 17 Oct 2015, 15:20

sedge wrote:
13 Oct 2015, 18:44
Tim wrote:
13 Oct 2015, 17:40
Fuck the Border Control part, though, only way it can be implemented well is to not be implemented at all in my opinion.
Not even with an ejection rate limit for regions?

Sorry for taking so long to reply. Yeah, not even with an ejection rate. I think just the existence of it is a tool that is going to be far more widely used by raiders than any sort of thing from natives, even if limits are added it just adds more imbalance into an R/D dynamic that is already incredibly unbalanced due to the fact that invaders these days are coming as close as they can to automating everything they do without fully breaking the rules.

The Rejected Realms

The Rejected Realms