On Celia'nor's Dissolution

[PrimnyaQuorum 4003]

3 minutes ago, Haseroth said:

It's not even about that specifically. The problem is that not even the victim were communicated with and spoken to in order to figure out what they wanted the solution to me. Xoxominnie has quit the server as i am being told. None of the covenant leaders were made aware any kind of investigations was ongoing. If any of you are reading this and were, please feel free to correct me.

In shorts the act of voiding itself wasnt the issue. But rather the fact it was assumed to be the only viable and DESIRED solution for the victims.

 

3 minutes ago, Hearth__ said:

The fact that it effects the roleplay of all players tied to the concept of Celian'or's dissolution is a huge blunder. Now there's going to be mixed interpretations on exactly what is and isn't voided across a diverse set of personalities. Some will cling to emotional pivots from the dissolution and claim it's 'legal' under the vague terms given for what's not voided. Others will say this, another group that. It might be a form of justice to void all of the attached roleplay but it isn't what's healthiest for the server, imo.

 

In fairness, yea - how this affects people could be a lot more clear. At the same time, I would much rather this ham-fisted overkill thats underexplained and accomplishes the anti-metaplay goal then a more nuanced solution that doesn't actually bear consequences. If the metaplayer alone gets banned and nothing changes, its basically a green light to anyone who wants to give it a try - get caught long enough after, and your work stays. If people considering metaplay see that Staff would rather blunder through something like this just to stop it rather then undersell it, maybe people won't do it.

 

Or they'll get better at hiding it. 

[hearth_ 1023]

42 minutes ago, PrimnyaQuorum said:

If the metaplayer alone gets banned and nothing changes, its basically a green light to anyone who wants to give it a try - get caught long enough after, and your work stays. If people considering metaplay see that Staff would rather blunder through something like this just to stop it rather then undersell it, maybe people won't do it.

 

Ultimately, it shouldn't have gotten to the point that a messy solution was necessary. From what I'm seeing in Discords I'm a part of, it appears there was ample concern from other members of the community that should have triggered staff action before the dissolution, if not less than 48 hours after. This feels like a slow moving attempt at looking like they have control over something they very clearly don't.

[PrinceJose270 1211]

War brings out the worst in people. almost every one this map will have underhanded ppl.

Rant aside, Whilst communication could of gone better. 5 irp months to tear down someones doomer progress to metaplay make a new nation/control is a W regardless of. Whilst yes the communication wasnt desirable. sadly there can likely not be a good method where there is "Oh, x did 2 weeks of metaplay stuff. how can we change it to benifit us!. heck no, nip that stuff at its roots. If you want a IRP reason, Then Admins should work with st to world even a quick SCP style Amnestic to retcon that stuff. (just an example.). Metaplay is being delt with, and its a lot better then leaving the seeds of what they left to grow into more metaplay. I hope it keeps improving in methods.

 

[Tav 4337]

insert think piece here

[STBNL 250]

make sure to join caurost for peak elven rp

[Smmer 2441]

scrap Celianor, rebuild Elysium. 

[FlemishSupremacy 6115]

Legitimate question;

Why was RP voided here and not in the Vinovia case?
It probably is the right call to void rp if you're going to be banning people for metaplay, but I am just curious as to why things are handled differently.

Additionally, think there ought to be a bit more transparency if you're asking people to pretend RP they did didn't happen.

[PrimnyaQuorum 4003]

20 minutes ago, FlemishSupremacy said:

Legitimate question;

Why was RP voided here and not in the Vinovia case?
It probably is the right call to void rp if you're going to be banning people for metaplay, but I am just curious as to why things are handled differently.

Additionally, think there ought to be a bit more transparency if you're asking people to pretend RP they did didn't happen.

Tbf this is EXACTLY the point I'm making.

 

This entire war, in essence, is spawned BECAUSE of metaplay. 

Vinovia exists against church -> Karl 4 Metaplays -> Gets caught and banned alongside most of vinovia -> The upcoming Haense/Horenic + Vinovia v Church can't happen bc Vinovia and Haense NL gone -> Church blames the new king for the old [now metaplay ban + retired kings] actions, new king obv doesnt take total subjugaiton, war.

 

This entirely reinforces the idea that if you metaplay, just make a fall guy - you can get people banned and still get the benefit of your actions. It also encourages people not involved in the original ban to OOCly capitalize on it - in almost every other context and RP I can recall rn, people do not get blamed for what their predecessors did - only in THIS context the person before the one getting blamed got Metaplay banned. I feel like we can cope all we want about how nothing would be different but everyone kinda knows WCs generally have the minimal amount of overarching RP to justify the "RP" for weekly PvP. individual RP is still cool during WCs i have learned from my prior misspeaks.

 

IDK maybe there is a lot of RP im not around to see but its hard to ignore the fact both situations are similar and only differ by the fact mods didnt force void any RP spawned of the metaplay

[megavoltar 1634]

 

DINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDING

 

BIIIIIIIINGOOOOOOO

[Baccaaa 490]

Just let it happen, even if nothing ever happens

[PrinceJose270 1211]

1 hour ago, PrimnyaQuorum said:

Tbf this is EXACTLY the point I'm making.

 

This entire war, in essence, is spawned BECAUSE of metaplay. 

Vinovia exists against church -> Karl 4 Metaplays -> Gets caught and banned alongside most of vinovia -> The upcoming Haense/Horenic + Vinovia v Church can't happen bc Vinovia and Haense NL gone -> Church blames the new king for the old [now metaplay ban + retired kings] actions, new king obv doesnt take total subjugaiton, war.

 

This entirely reinforces the idea that if you metaplay, just make a fall guy - you can get people banned and still get the benefit of your actions. It also encourages people not involved in the original ban to OOCly capitalize on it - in almost every other context and RP I can recall rn, people do not get blamed for what their predecessors did - only in THIS context the person before the one getting blamed got Metaplay banned. I feel like we can cope all we want about how nothing would be different but everyone kinda knows WCs generally have the minimal amount of overarching RP to justify the "RP" for weekly PvP. individual RP is still cool during WCs i have learned from my prior misspeaks.

 

IDK maybe there is a lot of RP im not around to see but its hard to ignore the fact both situations are similar and only differ by the fact mods didnt force void any RP spawned of the metaplay

Aint gonna lie man. If this stuff runs as deep as it does. It comes into question how much roleplay was made on the overall wars on this server has been. West or east or. South?  Send it all the way. Void the entire war if its foundation is based on metaplay. 

 

So many leaders already got the boot but if you really want to nip it in the bud. Void it and actually put decent war rules with credibility for justified wars.

 

[Cheese 8891]

57 minutes ago, megavoltar said:

 

DINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDING

 

BIIIIIIIINGOOOOOOO

cross off public crucifixion and admin resignation too

[Borin 7646]

lol

[Morigung-oog 5697]

Double futhermucking bingo!!!

 

Correction, almost a triple

 

[Cozy_Tea 276]

Edited April 8, 2025 by Cozy_Tea