View Single Post
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,687
# 47
04-26-2013, 01:26 PM
Fleets are a group activity. I get that few people solo a fleet holding and that everyone who contributes has invested in those facilities. I even respect fleets that want to operate as a democracy.

But democracies have checks and balances. Neither the President nor the majority are able to do whatever they please.

STO doesn't have any mechanism whereby those checks and balances can be quantified as a game mechanic.

There is such a thing as the tyranny of the majority and it can be just as destructive as the jerk who tries to own everything and everyone in the fleet. In some cases, the Commander in Chief model is simply better, depending on who the CiC is.

I try very hard to be the very model of a benevolent dictatorial, despite my limitations which are simply quite lamentable.

I want our fleet to be successful, and I want to do what's best for the members of the fleet that I lead.

At the same time, I have a vision for our fleet. There are principles that I expect our fleet to live up to. If there ever came a time when the majority conflicted with that vision, I would have two choices... leave or command. Some people would probably say that I should be the one to leave. Well... maybe. I have my own investment in the fleet too.

Fortunately for me, I don't think I'd ever be put in that position. But I can see a case for the "My Way" highway.

I think that Cryptic will eventually try to put in some of the checks and balances that would make things more fair for everybody, and I'm okay with that in theory. Depends on what they cook up.
Volunteer Community Moderator for the Star Trek Online forums -- My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a "forums and website" support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs regarding moderation inquiries.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek