Cloaks in Battles - Printable Version

Cloaks in Battles - Printable Version

+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: The Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Real Life Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Thread: Cloaks in Battles (/showthread.php?tid=139455)

Pages: 1 2

Cloaks in Battles - JohnyWalker - 05-16-2016

One more time... Uncloak in the ass and direct engage is not fair.

Long time ago this was already posted in forums, was something like "Cloaked ships must say the target name in chat prior the attack and give some time"... and most of players agreed with this, but nobody following it.

I think it must be a WRITEN RULE about this... for some reasons:

- Drop a line like "Weapons ready, Engaging!" and uncloak and engage from 100m behind of target is totally against rule 3.1

Code:
3.1 An attack is any hostile action that drains shields to less than 50%. Saying "Engaging" is not sufficient and aggressors are not allowed to destroy a ship before allowing sufficient time to respond. If a player is attacked he has the right to defend himself regardless of who is attacking. Trading nanobots, shieldbatteries or other ammo and equipment during a fight is also considered taking an active role in the engagement.

- Doing it with a Battleship is even worst! due their heavy weapons and huge base armor that give no chances for a good combat (balanced). Those Battleships (most of them) can keep continuous fire saving energy... keep that in mind.

The rule would be something like this:

Code:
3.6 Cloaked vessels joining in combat MUST say the target name in local or system chat prior the attack. The egagement must be at least 1k or higher distance for keep the battle balanced and the possible response

Damnit... we are in a RolePlay server! not in a FreeShootingServer!!!

RE: Cloaks in Battles - Linmei.Fa - 05-16-2016

I think when the combat high starts and the adrenaline gets pumping, people just tend to not go through with the usual formalities like they normally would in a non-stressful situation.

They want them kiiiiills.

RE: Cloaks in Battles - Omi - 05-16-2016

[Image: AQMDgml.png]

There isn't even a cloak on the Valor you failed to notice coming up behind you. It's not my fault you park ~5k away from the tradelane.

RE: Cloaks in Battles - Linmei.Fa - 05-16-2016

That's pretty hot.

RE: Cloaks in Battles - Thunderer - 05-16-2016

I think that there actually is a rule like that, but you can always use a cloak disruptor if you think it's badly upheld. I've heard they are not too expensive in Liberty. They aren't on Canary Wharf, Bowex' POB in front of Planet New London. Cheaper than cloaks of that size at least. Plus, only one per fleet is enough if you aren't fighting the Nomads.

RE: Cloaks in Battles - JohnyWalker - 05-17-2016

(05-16-2016, 09:21 PM)Omicega Wrote: There isn't even a cloak on the Valor you failed to notice coming up behind you. It's not my fault you park ~5k away from the tradelane.

Relax.... is not your case, its because many others use that uncloak/engage and there are plenty of them!!!!

I posted this for many others situations, and finished with my patient hehehehe

Anyway... the point is not to buy a Cloak Disruptor (cannot mount it if you have a cloak device I remember), the point is not to park far away from a tradelane/base...

I agree with those stress situations players just want to kill others, for that are the battles hahahaha, but that is not an excuse for act against rules (3.1 in this case)...

Keeping battles a bit more balanced will be more fun for sure...

RE: Cloaks in Battles - Vendetta - 05-17-2016

(05-16-2016, 09:21 PM)Omicega Wrote:

There isn't even a cloak on the Valor you failed to notice coming up behind you. It's not my fault you park ~5k away from the tradelane.

GRN BS turrets
Obviously a Valor
Countermeasure made by Ageira

triggered)))

Anyways, Johny this isn't the first time I've seen you complain about cloaks, especially when you PM'd me about it after dying to an Arbiter, which again didn't have a cloak. The ROEs are valid with enough time and words between shooting. Decloaking and engaging with enough prior RP and notice? Perfectly within the rules. Typing /1 and then hitting the cloak key and spamming right click? Not okay.

RE: Cloaks in Battles - JohnyWalker - 05-17-2016

(05-17-2016, 02:50 AM)Vendetta Wrote: Decloaking and engaging with enough prior RP and notice? Perfectly within the rules. Typing /1 and then hitting the cloak key and spamming right click? Not okay.

First, im not refering exclusively for today! its because toooooooo many others situations, and today finished with me.

And that you said is EXACTLY what i mean... those situations when some one drop "ENGAGIN!" or "ATTACKING!" (whatever...) and directly uncloak and spamming right click as you said hahaha.

As you said, with enough prior RP and time its totally perfect!!!! Im refering those moments when literally 2 seconds after the "ENGAGING!" word they are already spamming right click at 100 m (or less!) from your ass) and you have no idea from where they are punching you till is too late hehehehe.

This is why im refering to rule 3.1, exactly for those parts about "allowing sufficient time to respond" and "Saying "Engaging" is not sufficient"

RE: Cloaks in Battles - Lythrilux - 05-17-2016

(05-17-2016, 02:50 AM)Vendetta Wrote: GRN BS turrets
Obviously a Valor
Countermeasure made by Ageira

I never noticed that before.

Technologically superior to all the 4 houses. Still uses Ageira made CMs.

RE: Cloaks in Battles - Vendetta - 05-17-2016

(05-17-2016, 03:08 AM)Lythrilux Wrote:
(05-17-2016, 02:50 AM)Vendetta Wrote: GRN BS turrets
Obviously a Valor
Countermeasure made by Ageira

I never noticed that before.

Technologically superior to all the 4 houses. Still uses Ageira made CMs.

It bothered me for a second, but I don't think anyone is going to take the time to clone a CM entry for Gallia and write a separate infocard.