Fwurg

[Mercury]

Working on the Faction Builder and considering the position of a new player, especially if they only want to play a Jedi or Minor World, I consider some things about the Faction data model.

First off, there are some issues with the character listing in the model:

• The entry currently requires a Senator - however protectorates do not have a senator. This entry should not be mandatory if the faction is a protectorate (that way we don't have to ask either).
• The entry allows you to list one and only one Jedi. While a world can have only one Senator, there is no reason there couldn't be two or more Jedi from the same faction.
• The entry for Leader is not applicable for worlds that are led by councils, pure democracies or very modest people.

My proposal is to resolve these issues by removing these entries from the Faction model entirely - with the new data model, they have become superfluous -> we can easily create a list of all characters linked to the faction on the faction page without corrupting the faction data with their names. This also resolves the problem between different member types (Protectorate / Minor World / Inner World).

I also found an issue with the system link, which seems to stem from the time before Minor Worlds as requirement for a base system creates an issue for players of protectorates and minor worlds who will not want to build a system - asking them to choose a name for a system which will then remain a red link seems superfluous and asking them to make an entry which doesn't list anything seems useless.

Instead, we could ask for a base sector instead, allowing people to claim a sector without having to construct a system - this follows more naturally from the concept of a faction. Using the new data plugin, we can easily backlink planets / systems / colonies of that faction on the faction page without having to enter this data.

Finally, there is likely to be some confusion between faction images and faction logo's. It is difficult to explain the need for two logo's. Furthermore, though the Blazonry Tool is very cool, and the interface is extremely powerful (as proven by the many amazing icons), the current interface is too complicated for new players.

My proposal is to have the Faction Builder not include an entry for a faction logo - instead, players create a logo-less faction with a faction image they can create or download as they please - this is easy to do and understand. Then, once they are settled in the game, a storyteller can help the new player create a logo. At a later time, we might consider making a more user-friendly interface for the Blazonry Tool, but with a storyteller to help, this shouldn't be necessary for now.

Thoughts?

[Chriz]

I agree that simply listing the characters should work. Maybe portraits just like the ic:characters page.

I agree that a full system is too much to ask but still a homeworld should be doable.

Faction images are important to identify the factions but i agree that the blazonry is too complicated for starting players. We will need an advanced guide for this as well.

[Brend]

First off, there are some issues with the character listing in the model:

• The entry currently requires a Senator - however protectorates do not have a senator. This entry should not be mandatory if the faction is a protectorate (that way we don't have to ask either).
• The entry allows you to list one and only one Jedi. While a world can have only one Senator, there is no reason there couldn't be two or more Jedi from the same faction.
• The entry for Leader is not applicable for worlds that are led by councils, pure democracies or very modest people.

My proposal is to resolve these issues by removing these entries from the Faction model entirely - with the new data model, they have become superfluous -> we can easily create a list of all characters linked to the faction on the faction page without corrupting the faction data with their names. This also resolves the problem between different member types (Protectorate / Minor World / Inner World).

How is linking a senator to a faction 'corruption'? I think this is mainly an issue of mandatory versus optional; removing the whole relation from a faction to its senator seems a bit overkill to me. I agree that new players don't have to fill it in, but it seems to me that just listing the characters associated with a faction removes interesting relations.

I find it very useful to know the relation of a character to a faction. Maybe this is something that can be done in another way without adding to much information to the faction... I'll have to think on that.

Is this an issue of data modelling, or of display? Because the new template plugin I hope to demo this evening (fingers crossed) allows the use of conditional pieces of template, so we could make a template that leaves out the senator entry if no senator is defined.

I also found an issue with the system link, which seems to stem from the time before Minor Worlds as requirement for a base system creates an issue for players of protectorates and minor worlds who will not want to build a system - asking them to choose a name for a system which will then remain a red link seems superfluous and asking them to make an entry which doesn't list anything seems useless.

Instead, we could ask for a base sector instead, allowing people to claim a sector without having to construct a system - this follows more naturally from the concept of a faction. Using the new data plugin, we can easily backlink planets / systems / colonies of that faction on the faction page without having to enter this data.

Agreed. I think a faction should just have a 'Territory' (i.e. a list of zones). Thought the 'base zone' is relevant, I don't think that every faction has one (same arguments as with leaders -- a faction might deem every zone its base zone.)

Finally, there is likely to be some confusion between faction images and faction logo's. It is difficult to explain the need for two logo's. Furthermore, though the Blazonry Tool is very cool, and the interface is extremely powerful (as proven by the many amazing icons), the current interface is too complicated for new players.

My proposal is to have the Faction Builder not include an entry for a faction logo - instead, players create a logo-less faction with a faction image they can create or download as they please - this is easy to do and understand. Then, once they are settled in the game, a storyteller can help the new player create a logo. At a later time, we might consider making a more user-friendly interface for the Blazonry Tool, but with a storyteller to help, this shouldn't be necessary for now.

Agreed. Though I'm currently unsure how these system-less logo-less factions should be displayed on the map.

Thoughts?

I'm hoping to demo the new data plugin this evening. Maybe some of the issues we encounter can be solved in a more elegant way when we switch...

[Mercury]

I don't think linking a senator to a faction is corruption -> I think linking a faction to a senator is. It is a data modelling issue, not a display issue.

With the new data plugin, we should still list the senator on the faction page, but we no longer need the faction data entry to list the senator - instead, we can list the character who's faction is the relevant faction and who's role is that of senator. That way the faction data doesn't need to list the senator, but the faction page still displays the senator. The same holds for leaders and jedi.

This also resolves the issue for the faction builder and you won't have to update the faction page if you add a new character (such as a leader or senator) to your faction!

A territory works for me, though we should make it clear this is the actual territory in which the faction has de-facto control, not the territory they claim - this to avoid confusion when multiple sides claim the same territory as with the Slave Rebellion and the Hutt.

As for logo's, I think we only have to add them on the map when their logo is finished, but being displayed on the map is not a requirement to start playing, it is a maintenance issue that we should solve for the player, rather than the other way around. It also shows some tangible benefit to making the logo (you get displayed on the map).

[Brend]

I don't think linking a senator to a faction is corruption -> I think linking a faction to a senator is. It is a data modelling issue, not a display issue.

With the new data plugin, we should still list the senator on the faction page, but we no longer need the faction data entry to list the senator - instead, we can list the character who's faction is the relevant faction and who's role is that of senator. That way the faction data doesn't need to list the senator, but the faction page still displays the senator. The same holds for leaders and jedi.

This also resolves the issue for the faction builder and you won't have to update the faction page if you add a new character (such as a leader or senator) to your faction!

However, a characters has multiple roles associated with multiple different affiliations. I.e., Nehket Aeka is a Senator to the Veolian Commonwealth, but a Minister to the Union.

So unless we add an extra level of indirection, having a (faction, senator, character) link is useful. If we do not have this, we won't know who is what to which faction...

A territory works for me, though we should make it clear this is the actual territory in which the faction has de-facto control, not the territory they claim - this to avoid confusion when multiple sides claim the same territory as with the Slave Rebellion and the Hutt.

Maybe territory is not the correct term here -- I agree that we do not want politics to get dragged into the data model.

As for logo's, I think we only have to add them on the map when their logo is finished, but being displayed on the map is not a requirement to start playing, it is a maintenance issue that we should solve for the player, rather than the other way around. It also shows some tangible benefit to making the logo (you get displayed on the map).

I never said it was necessary to start playing. I just wondered how in hell's name I'm going to visualize a faction without a system. There is a finite set of uniform colours that I can work with (as seen in the superpowers overlay).

[Mercury]

However, a characters has multiple roles associated with multiple different affiliations. I.e., Nehket Aeka is a Senator to the Veolian Commonwealth, but a Minister to the Union.

So unless we add an extra level of indirection, having a (faction, senator, character) link is useful. If we do not have this, we won't know who is what to which faction...

I'm not sure I understand - isn't it possible to, when listing the senator on the faction page, simply select the character which has the role of senator amongst its roles and the affiliation of the current faction amongst its affiliations? Presumably a character won't be a senator for multiple factions.

For Leaders and Jedi, if the character is a leader or jedi for multiple factions, it seems to me that it is fine they are listed as such for each of those factions. Am I missing something?

I never said it was necessary to start playing. I just wondered how in hell's name I'm going to visualize a faction without a system. There is a finite set of uniform colours that I can work with (as seen in the superpowers overlay).

Agreed to this problem - however, the new faction will get an entry with a logo just like all worlds - they just won't get it when first creating their faction. I envision the process as follows:

1) New player wants to make a faction
2) New player uses the faction builder, which includes selecting a starting sector
3) New player gets approval from the storytellers so they can start playing - their sector is now reserved (but not marked on the map)
4) Storyteller contacts new player to work on a logo together
5) Logo gets listed on the wiki and an entry is made on the map using the new logo

Advanced players may skip step 4 and include their logo in the approval request, in which case we can jump straight to step 5.

Does that make sense?

[Mercury]

The faction builder is now usable at: http://fwurg.xs4all.nl/tools/faction-bu ... action.php

[Stuiter]

But still not perfect.

Hint, put the wiki tekst button down, so you new that your finisched.
It is not so clear on what to do.

Did some additional editting on my page. Could you check it?

[Mercury]

Your faction looks good!

In the future, we want to add a button that will add your faction / character / race directly to the wiki without having to copy and paste.

[Stuiter]

I just find it strange that the image is suggesting a planet.
(It looks like one and it is in the name, I first put on an image of their homeworld.)

If you have the wiki text leave entries for jedi/senators and standard information .
You can leave some open spots which they can will in later as in <insert short summary of your faction here>