+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear (/showthread.php?tid=160683)
Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Jack_Henderson - 05-01-2018
Quote:3.4 Attacking POBs (Player-owned Bases) without Roleplay/declaration (Attack Declaration Thread)
Note time considerations in This Thread.
Sounds as if I had to post roleplay.
Quote:Core One
- Players are not required to role play prior to building a Core 1 base, but any building or any attack must make inRP sense.
- Players are required to post a notice in the Attack Declaration thread, 8 hours prior to attacking a Core 1 base.
- Name, location and IFF of bases are permanent
Sounds as if no rp was required.
So, what is it?
I do not want to make a mistake and get sanctioned the 1st day of my coming back
Plus: Can we have rules for POB Placement finally?
I come back and a Core 1 is sitting right inside a mining field.
It sucks and can we please fix it?
Jack
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Laura C. - 05-01-2018
The rule is definitely worded weirdly, but yes, you must post some roleplay before attacking. At least sanctions for attacking POBs without roleplay/attack declaration which appear from time to time suggests so. Simply put, you must post attack declaration, and mandatory part of attack declaration is link to roleplay.
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Alex. - 05-01-2018
(05-01-2018, 10:24 PM)Laura C. Wrote: The rule is definitely worded weirdly, but yes, you must post some roleplay before attacking. At least sanctions for attacking POBs without roleplay/attack declaration which appear from time to time suggests so.
are they for core 1 attacks? if this is the intended interpretation, why does the rules thread say
Quote:Core Onefollowed by
- Players are not required to role play prior to building a Core 1 base, but any building or any attack must make inRP sense.
Quote:Core Two
- Before a player/faction attacks a Core 2 base (or higher), they must role play either in game or on the forums and provide the link to this RP in the Attack Declaration thread.
because that makes it looks like the intention was for the RP requirement to only apply when the base gets to core 2
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - St.Denis - 05-01-2018
3.4 points you to this:
https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=110046
3.4 was the old 3.5 and was obviously overlooked when the Rules were updated.
[quote]3.5 Roleplay is required before attacking or destroying a player owned base. The roleplay regarding this must be properly documented on forums, with the link(s) posted in this thread and should match the roleplay and conduct of the characters involved based on the faction they belong to.[/quote}
Please Note I will change the 3.5 to 3.4 to fall in line with the Rule numbering change (by the time you look, it will have been done).
I would suggest that RP is required to attack any level of POB (stay with that guideline for now, until we get around to clarifying the Rule and modifying the POB Rules).
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Jack_Henderson - 05-01-2018
Tnx. I'll quickly whip up some rp for this "in the field POB".
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Karlotta - 05-01-2018
Would be cool if you could tell me if the version in post nr 6 of this thread is clearer, or if you have any suggestions on how to improve any of it. https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=158145
(and hi and welcome back)
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Geneva Shipping Platform - 05-02-2018
Hi all, sorry to barge in but,
If its possible, could you add to the rules:
Dont place PoB´s in stupid bad places like mining fields ,
do not block normal space trafic/docking locations.
(Just so peapole dont say it wasnt clear.
Best regards
(and welcome back)
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Jack_Henderson - 05-02-2018
(05-02-2018, 12:23 AM)Geneva Shipping Platform Wrote: Hi all, sorry to barge in but,
If its possible, could you add to the rules:
Dont place PoB´s in stupid bad places like mining fields ,
do not block normal space trafic/docking locations.
(Just so peapole dont say it wasnt clear.
Best regards
(and welcome back)
We have been campaigning for such a rule change for... literally years.
Currently, there are 3 POBs in mining fields, I am told.
Making players the "fixers" is just wrong.
It's a no-fun, no-winner activity that sucks energy and is deeply unfair in so many ways (offense vs defense bias, factions without BS, etc)
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Greylock - 05-02-2018
(05-02-2018, 02:12 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote:(05-02-2018, 12:23 AM)Geneva Shipping Platform Wrote: Hi all, sorry to barge in but,
If its possible, could you add to the rules:
Dont place PoB´s in stupid bad places like mining fields ,
do not block normal space trafic/docking locations.
(Just so peapole dont say it wasnt clear.
Best regards
(and welcome back)
We have been campaigning for such a rule change for... literally years.
Currently, there are 3 POBs in mining fields, I am told.
Making players the "fixers" is just wrong.
It's a no-fun, no-winner activity that sucks energy and is deeply unfair in so many ways (offense vs defense bias, factions without BS, etc)
If removing the POBs is not an option, my suggestion would be to at least make them a lot less trigger happy, as they get pissed when you hit them with a mining laser. Heck, I almost want to tear one of them down, but it's the only base in the area that I can dock on.
RE: Do I need rp for attacking a Core 1 POB or not? Rules are not clear - Sciamach - 05-02-2018
(05-02-2018, 02:12 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote:(05-02-2018, 12:23 AM)Geneva Shipping Platform Wrote: Hi all, sorry to barge in but,
If its possible, could you add to the rules:
Dont place PoB´s in stupid bad places like mining fields ,
do not block normal space trafic/docking locations.
(Just so peapole dont say it wasnt clear.
Best regards
(and welcome back)
We have been campaigning for such a rule change for... literally years.
Currently, there are 3 POBs in mining fields, I am told.
Making players the "fixers" is just wrong.
It's a no-fun, no-winner activity that sucks energy and is deeply unfair in so many ways (offense vs defense bias, factions without BS, etc)
What is this world coming to when I'm forced to agree with you, Henderson?
I've been back in Disco roughly 1-2 months now. In that time, I've had to siege 4 Core1 POBs because of their asininely stupid locations, 3 of which were in mining fields.
This is a constant problem given just how easy it is to establish a POB.
In an ideal world, setting up a POB would require most if not all of the following:
A staff screening process
A large upfront credit payment
Distance-requirements from dockable solars/mining fields,
And a change to the siege rules to not require declarations for core-1 bases
A large upfront credit payment
Distance-requirements from dockable solars/mining fields,
And a change to the siege rules to not require declarations for core-1 bases
The thing of it is: most of these bases are made by newbies just learning the POB system with absolutely 0 community contact or regard for how their bases effect the gameplay/roleplay environment - hell, one of the first ones I sieged was owned by a guy supposedly from china who tried to tell me to go to conn if I wanted to PVP him. Why are the besiegers being forced under the current rules to put in 10x more effort into destroying these nonsensical bases than the people that built them put into the construction?
This POB system as it is now just is not working. Plain and simple.