The Empire has an image problem.

I would like to see QE2 go to NZ and tell them what to do. For that matter it'd be hilarious in the UK.
In 1975, the queen summarily dissolved the Australian Parliament. It is possible.

And just because the world has trended towards democracy , we shouldn't assume that this is inevitable. In point of fact, it may become increasingly impractical as populations continue to increase.

In fact, I could easily see a movement to restore the monarchy in the UK within our lifetime. On the one hand, you have a government that seems increasingly out of touch with its citizens; on the other, a royal family that is universally beloved, tied to a shining memory of a lost golden age. How long would the government need to disappoint its citizens before they give up on the concept entirely? When it doesn't seem to matter which side you vote for, you get screwed either way?

Then all they have to do is keep their word; govern well for a decade or two, and their power will be sealed.
 
Last edited:
My take has always been you work for one side the ther gets miffed there should not be a option to work for both sides, this way people would choose a side and stick with it. At present like most things in the game there are no consequences for picking either side which makes it pointless, for example:

Imagine this you want the imperial cutter but your a fed so you start grinding for imps to get it, this annoys the fed military who take away your access to their higher class ships and vice versa.

As it stands now I can grind to a cutter then use said cutter to grind for feds and get the corvette totally pointless as apart from cargo aside they are both exactly the same political parties. One favours slaves the other doesnt.

I think it's about time people were forced to pick a side and run with it.

Once again to see how it works well look at freelancer, be a pirate or hunter in there will chip away the rep for the rest of the others.
 
Hmm, but...

...lets say we would stumble over another living alien faction then the Thargoids, and both the Feds and the Empire would each send one of their capital class ships...

...whom do you think they would trust more after that first impression? The Feds and its rather dark and martial looking Farragut-class battlecruiser...



...or the Empire and its bright, elegant and majestic Majestic-class Interdictor? ;)

Erm the Thargoids with their flower power ships ;)
 
In 1975, the queen summarily dissolved the Australian Parliament. It is possible.

And just because the world has trended towards democracy , we shouldn't assume that this is inevitable. In point of fact, it may become increasingly impractical as populations continue to increase.

In fact, I could easily see a movement to restore the monarchy in the UK within our lifetime. On the one hand, you have a government that seems increasingly out of touch with its citizens; on the other, a royal family that is universally beloved, tied to a shining memory of a lost golden age. How long would the government need to disappoint its citizens before they give up on the concept entirely? When it doesn't seem to matter which side you vote for, you get screwed either way?

Then all they have to do is keep their word; govern well for a decade or two, and their power will be sealed.
You do realise that parliament is the only one that can dissolve our parliament, I can't see a PM giving up power for a ideology. Iirc it was at the time that parliament was created that it was written in to stop the monarchy taking control again.
 
You do realise that parliament is the only one that can dissolve our parliament, I can't see a PM giving up power for a ideology. Iirc it was at the time that parliament was created that it was written in to stop the monarchy taking control again.

Specifically "The events of the Dismissal led to only minor constitutional change. The Senate retained its power to block supply, and the Governor-General the power to dismiss government ministers. However, these powers have not since been used to force a government from office. Kerr was widely criticised by Labor supporters for his actions, resigned early as Governor-General, and lived much of his remaining life abroad."

So the representative of the Crown still has full authority to dismiss parliament.
 
It's understandable why; people see the Federation, and they imagine United Federation of planets, from Star Trek; a peaceful Coalition, rather than the capitalistic oligarchy it truly is. They see the Empire, and they envisioned Caesar's Legion from Fallout, rather than the much more complicated thing it truly is.
Both Federation and Empire are very capitalistic. The Federation doesn't have a truly free market, because it's more cronyism. The Empire has a worse image of being stratified, oppressive due to the use of slaves and an unelected monarchy as rulers.

They could bring more attention to the Alliance in the lore. The bubble should be enlarged.
 
Last edited:
Both Federation and Empire are very capitalistic. The Federation doesn't have a truly free market, because it's more cronyism. The Empire has a worse image of being stratified, oppressive due to the use of slaves and an unelected monarchy.
The Alliance puts it best; they sympathize more with the Feds, because of their theoretical ideals, but they'd rather deal with the Empire, because they don't pretend to be something they're not.
 

Specifically "The events of the Dismissal led to only minor constitutional change. The Senate retained its power to block supply, and the Governor-General the power to dismiss government ministers. However, these powers have not since been used to force a government from office. Kerr was widely criticised by Labor supporters for his actions, resigned early as Governor-General, and lived much of his remaining life abroad."

So the representative of the Crown still has full authority to dismiss parliament.
Erm I was talking about the UK parliament I wasn't clear 🙂
 
Erm I was talking about the UK parliament I wasn't clear 🙂
Actually, the queen still has the power to dissolve the UK parliament too, as well as the ability to appoint the new prime minister if the old one were for some reason to step down.


These powers haven't been used recently, but they still technically exist, and in such an event as the 1975 constitutional crisis, could still be used. If used carelessly they could be taken away, but that has not yet come to happen as the Royal Family takes its powers and rights very seriously.
 
The Alliance puts it best; they sympathize more with the Feds, because of their theoretical ideals, but they'd rather deal with the Empire, because they don't pretend to be something they're not.
Where you getting this from, where do the Alliance 'put it' in words exactly? I may need to rethink my loyalties if true.

The Empire doesnt have an 'image problem'. The Empire is the problem. Only those who assume they will be on the top of the pyramid or think they are better than other people want to be in the Empire. Anybody who thinks everyone should have a say is virtually automatically anti-Imp....then its a choice of 2 Democracies. Still find it strange the Marlinists went to Feds and not Alliance but thats a side issue, maybe they thought it offered better protection from the secret police.
 
Where you getting this from, where do the Alliance 'put it' in words exactly? I may need to rethink my loyalties if true.

The Empire doesnt have an 'image problem'. The Empire is the problem. Only those who assume they will be on the top of the pyramid or think they are better than other people want to be in the Empire. Anybody who thinks everyone should have a say is virtually automatically anti-Imp....then its a choice of 2 Democracies. Still find it strange the Marlinists went to Feds and not Alliance but thats a side issue, maybe they thought it offered better protection from the secret police.
And those who think society should provide for those less fortunate should be pro-Empire. There are no homeless and hungry people clothed in rags in the Empire.
 
And those who think society should provide for those less fortunate should be pro-Empire. There are no homeless and hungry people clothed in rags in the Empire.
No youre right, instead they are chained and in the mines for years until their 'debt' is paid. Not sure that forcing people into debt just so you can own and sell them is 'providing' for them though.
 
No youre right, instead they are chained and in the mines for years until their 'debt' is paid. Not sure that forcing people into debt just so you can own and sell them is 'providing' for them though.
Being serious for a moment, Imp slavery has a whole potential spectrum though. Its like bundling workhouse labour in with butlers, both fit the description but are not really the same.

If anything its a hole in the lore that could do with filling up.
 
No youre right, instead they are chained and in the mines for years until their 'debt' is paid. Not sure that forcing people into debt just so you can own and sell them is 'providing' for them though.
sigh

Those who treat their slaves badly should receive the same. After all, how can they work properly if they are not cared for correctly?
— Senator Zemina Torval
 
I cant do screenshots but check out the System descriptions...Slave Mines are mentioned as are the barbaric conditions...Nice headlines of 'I care' for the Emperor means nothing to the people on the ground....or 2 miles below it....dont believe everything you read in a Press Release....when was the last Audit to actually check that the words were being followed seeing as how bad it was the last time an Audit happened, every week to keep on top of it, after all we are talking about human life here, not a commodity?

I see the comparison with Workhouse / Servant - but one is an 'employed' servant with a Contract that works both ways including time off and money / the ability to build a separate life for yourself, the other signed a Contract giving up all rights for shelter and food alone, no money and no ability to build a life outside from your work.
 
Top Bottom