STATISTICS

Start Year: 1995
Current Year: 1997

Month: August

2 Weeks is 1 Month
Next Month: 06/12/2020

ECONOMY

OUR STAFF

Administration Team
Administrators are in-charge of the forums overall, ensuring it remains updated, fresh and constantly growing.

Administrator: Jamie
Administrator: Hollie

Community Support
Moderators support the Administration Team, assisting with a variety of tasks whilst remaining a liason, a link between Roleplayers and the Staff Team.

Head Moderator: Vacant Moderator: Odinson
Moderator: Connor
Trial Moderator: Strix

Need Help?
Submit a Support Ticket

AFFILIATIONS

RPG-D
RPGfix

Arming Non-State Actors

Owen

Republic of South Africa
GA Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2018
Messages
1,580
Yeah so there should be a little bit more effort going into arming non-state groups. With this whole Zimbabwe thing we've seen people simply just be like "Weapons would be sent to xyz group." but the fact is that this should be done with some logistical planning behind it and you should be required by the rules only to be able to transport those weapons to those groups using your own equipment and not some magical third party company or commercial shipping vessels.

Rule suggestion:

"Countries providing non-state groups with military equipment must roleplay moving the military equipment using their own equipment through their own operations, and cannot use third parties or magic teleportation to send them."
 
Last edited:

JJSmithJr

Senior
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
925
My main concern for this rule is that a balance be struck between smuggling arms on the high seas via the new rule and smuggling arms via NPC nations, as this could negatively impact our landlocked Roleplayers
 

Alex

Rattanakosin Kingdom
GA Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Messages
2,612
I don't see why it should only be for non-state groups.

If we're going to have to use our own equipment and role-play transporting equipment to non-state groups then we should have to do the same with state groups, it shouldn't matter which is which. We have always had the equipment be immediately transported to nations who purchase them for simplicity sake. The amount of micromanaging that would have to occur to role-play transporting each and every piece of equipment purchased from your own nation to the nation of the purchaser is ridiculous, especially if they are landlocked and we are not allowed to interact with NPC nations when it comes to military stuff.

This would result in mass amounts of very, very interesting role-play to be ignored and unwanted simply because of the amount of micro-managing. Which has already happened on MN before since I've joined. Thankfully, these micromanaging rules have been quelled and I don't believe we should start adding them again. To be honest, to me it sounds like you just posted this because you're unhappy with what I'm doing in Zimbabwe, which all I have to say to that is: too bad, get involved IC.
 

Owen

Republic of South Africa
GA Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2018
Messages
1,580
You say we should do it for state groups and then go on to give the exact reasons why we shouldn’t do it for state groups... Rarely does arming non state actors happen, so it’s not something that would be tedious.
 

Alex

Rattanakosin Kingdom
GA Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Messages
2,612
The fact that you want arming non-state groups to be so tedious would make it tedious.

If we're implementing this micro-managing suggestion then it should be for both state and non-state. There's no reason why it should only be for non-state groups.
 

Owen

Republic of South Africa
GA Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2018
Messages
1,580
Besides the fact having to do it every time you sell equipment to another country would in fact be tedious.
 

Alex

Rattanakosin Kingdom
GA Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Messages
2,612
If sending equipment to a specific target is to be tedious then it should be for all or for none. Aside from ruining role-play already role-played, this suggestion adds nothing to the website and only adds micromanaging to the role-play.
 

Logan

Senior
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
996
To be honest, to me it sounds like you just posted this because you're unhappy with what I'm doing in Zimbabwe, which all I have to say to that is: too bad, get involved IC.
It's hard to get involved IC when you rape the rules so that 200 tanks magically teleport from Canada to a landlocked country.

I think your entire opposition to this is because it would make your bullshit harder.
 

Logan

Senior
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
996
If sending equipment to a specific target is to be tedious then it should be for all or for none. Aside from ruining role-play already role-played, this suggestion adds nothing to the website and only adds micromanaging to the role-play.
It makes RP make more sense than "stuff magically teleports to this place."

I'm all for making this something that applies to Every transfer of equipment, it would make things interesting and incentivize things like domestic license agreements and the like
 

Logan

Senior
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
996
It would be good for Roleplay, too:

Someone puts an arms embargo on someone, but instead of just slapping that there and not doing anything, now you have a way of blocking their ships as they enter the harbor. You have third party smugglers and less-than-reputable defense contractors trying to smuggle weapons into this state. Now Odin has a way to enforce that arms embargo by blockading a nation. It makes things harder than snapping your fingers and teleporting everything there.
 

Alex

Rattanakosin Kingdom
GA Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Messages
2,612
I don't see how this is bullshit at all, this has been like this on MN since before I've joined. The only reason you're in favor of this suggestion is because I'm making it look like it's France and you hate having any type of opposition. I'm surprised you haven't transferred to be honest.

Regardless, this suggestion adds nothing but micro-managing and shouldn't be implemented. All role-play and events have been going on more than fine without this.
 

Owen

Republic of South Africa
GA Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2018
Messages
1,580
The act itself is not tedious it’s the amount of times you have to do it. Arming non state actors is not a regular occurrence like sending equipment to another state.
 

Owen

Republic of South Africa
GA Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2018
Messages
1,580
“ All role-play and events have been going on more than fine without this.” Well they clearly haven’t otherwise this wouldn’t have been brought up.
 

Alex

Rattanakosin Kingdom
GA Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Messages
2,612
The only reason you brought it up Owen is because you're not happy having an actual opposition in Zimbabwe. Which is ironic because you often complain that no interesting role-play is going on and then you transfer.
 

Owen

Republic of South Africa
GA Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2018
Messages
1,580
That’s not it. I’m bringing this up because I realised there was no way I could stop your weapons because you’ve done absolutely nothing to roleplay them getting to Zimbabwe. Intercepting them would be you know.... roleplay.
 

Owen

Republic of South Africa
GA Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2018
Messages
1,580
If they’re coming through South Africa, yeah I would. But I wouldn’t know because you didn’t state it so should I just go ahead and assume that?
 
Top