Message group size too small

[Glaumring the Fox]

Is there a way the Dev's could increase the membership list for message groups? Currently we in Fronen have a Senate and each region lord is added to a specific Senate message group but we can't fit them all and its screws with our ability to do senate specfic voting. Any work arounds?

The frustrating thing about BM is how difficult it makes it to actually run a republic properly, its a bit silly, but I like the idea of it in concept but its not really fleshed out at all.

[Antonine]

So, first of all, this thread is in the wrong place. It should be on the feature request board or the help board, not the Beluaterra board.

Second of all, could you explain exactly what your problem is here and what you're trying to do? Is this adding all lords to a group or just some of them?

Also, you are aware that you can create referendums, right? Those can be restricted to lord only voting.

[Chenier]

It'd be nice if the referendum system would allow public referendums, where the result shows who voted for what.

[Glaumring the Fox]

Message groups are too small.

[Zakky]

It'd be nice if the referendum system would allow public referendums, where the result shows who voted for what.

Don't think this thread talks about that Chenier.

[Zakky]

Message groups are too small.

I believe it depends on the size of your realm? If you have more people in your realm, you will be able to have more people in your message groups. If you want to bypass this restriction, you probably want to establish a guild. I wondered this problem when I was running Sandalak. Got the same answer.

[Chenier]

Don't think this thread talks about that Chenier.

Kinda sounds like it, to me. It's already easy to hold lord-only referendums. But in my experience of lord-centered politics, many people don't like those, because the votes are secret, while many favor the lords publicly stating their positions on issues being voted upon. A message group was therefore a handy tool for such semi-public votes.

Of course, and general chat, too.

[Anaris]

If you're trying to add more than a certain percentage of your realm to a message group, to the point that you're hitting the message group size limit, then you really need to be asking yourself, "Why does this need to be a message group? Why am I not just sending these messages to the entire realm? Why am I deliberately and repeatedly excluding a very small number of realmmates from these messages?"

If you can give me a very, very good reason, that is not due to a highly specific weird thing you're trying to do with your realm, but generalizable, I will consider adjusting the message group size limitations.

[Chenier]

If a realm of 10 nobles and 4 regions has a "house of lords", is it discriminatory? If not, if that realm takes 5 more regions, is it then?

Honestly, I don't know how I feel about it. I don't think the former is bad, but should territorial expansion justify scrapping a political system that might have been working good for the realm? Obviously, excluding one or very few people from discussions for no reason isn't really a good thing, either.

[Zakky]

If your house of lords needs that many people maybe you can just talk to the public instead.

[MTYL]

If you're trying to add more than a certain percentage of your realm to a message group, to the point that you're hitting the message group size limit, then you really need to be asking yourself, "Why does this need to be a message group? Why am I not just sending these messages to the entire realm? Why am I deliberately and repeatedly excluding a very small number of realmmates from these messages?"

If you can give me a very, very good reason, that is not due to a highly specific weird thing you're trying to do with your realm, but generalizable, I will consider adjusting the message group size limitations.

I have to agree with Anaris here. One of the realms I'm at has a message group that's like an expanded realm council of sorts. And it ended up being almost half of all nobles in the realm. At this point - why not just send it to the realm at wide?

[Wimpie]

I understand that it could be useful, but as Danaris says, we should really ask ourselves why not send the messages to the entire realm.

If you're a high ranking noble who is in all the message groups, guilds,.. it's hard to imagine how few messages the new players/nobles are getting.

[Glaumring the Fox]

I think it comes down to RP and using the proper communication channels so things aren't too confusing. etc.

[Antonine]

I think it comes down to RP and using the proper communication channels so things aren't too confusing. etc.

If you want a Lords only senate message group then create a guild called "Senate of Fronen" in the capital city and get the lords to join it. If you're talking roleplay considerations then surely having a dedicated senate "building" in your capital is even more appropriate than a message group anyway?

But again, in my experience, locking regular knights and nobles out of important realm discussions is a great way to bore them and make them apathetic to the realm.

You can also create lords only referendums if you want to vote on something, or have votes cast publicly within your guild.

[Chenier]

If you want a Lords only senate message group then create a guild called "Senate of Fronen" in the capital city and get the lords to join it. If you're talking roleplay considerations then surely having a dedicated senate "building" in your capital is even more appropriate than a message group anyway?

But again, in my experience, locking regular knights and nobles out of important realm discussions is a great way to bore them and make them apathetic to the realm.

You can also create lords only referendums if you want to vote on something, or have votes cast publicly within your guild.

I'm not in favor of excluding  nobles when it can be helped, but guilds are garbage and terrible solutions to just about anything.