+- 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: Altering the 10k fleeing rule (/showthread.php?tid=50490)
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - Stargoose - 11-26-2010
Right now, a capital ship can approach a fighter, shout "engaging", and then the fighter can only die, flee abnd leave the system for 4 hours, or call for backup (which will result in a prolonged "who-ganks-better-wins" fight).
The 10k is fleeing rule gives an even larger advantage to a capital ship over a fighter, although the fighter is suposed to be faster, because fleeing becomes useless for the fighter since he will have to leave the system in 4 hours anyway.
This in return causes:
-Something that is often refered to as "cap abuse", and has lead to countles discussions, demands that caps be restricted, rants, unfruitful pleas for reason, more arguing, "no U"-fests
-An excessive amount of navy capital ships doing police work, which is often refered to as "cap spam"
-Stupid situations where neither fighter nor capital ship can kill each other, and both refuse to back down, and shout "no U" at each other.
-Rule lawyering
-A very OORP feeling
So I would like to suggest that a fighter should no longer be forced to leave the system if he runs from a capital ship. In all other situations, it wont change.
The ony drawback that I see here is this:
A "good" player in a cap can no longer shout engaging at a "bad" player who is in a fighter to create the above described situation.
Please give your opinion about whether or not you think fighters should be allowed to flee from capital ships by moving away more than 10k, without having to leave the system for 4 hours.
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - Slainte - 11-26-2010
Anyone in a "cap" should not be going up against someone in a fighter in the first place. If a Navy "cap" is flying around and spots pirates in fighters they " should " call up fighter support to deal with them, if not then swap out to their fighter to sort the problem.
If the said " cap " pilot doesn't do this then any problems accuring thereafter is their own problem.
These situations happen all the time and no matter how many rules you apply, its still going to happen.
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - Enoch - 11-26-2010
That makes sense. Needless to say, the rule should no longer apply if the fighter gets too close or start shooting the cap.
And make the rule only apply to Cruisers and larger.
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - SeaFalcon - 11-26-2010
Reminds me of an little brawl in NY...
- 1 LN fighter
- 1 LN gunboat
- 1 LN Cruiser
- 2 Pirates A and B both fighters.
- Pirate A and the LN fighter are enagaged.
- The LN fighter is losing.
- The cruiser engages because he doesn't want the LN fighter to die.
- Pirate B engages because he found it a bit to much.
- LN Gunboat arrives and of course engages.
- The Cruiser stops firing because he though it was balanced.
- LN Fighter dies.
- LN Gunboat dies.
- Cruiser engages again.
- Pirate A had to leave.
- Pirate B is now alone against a cruiser.
- After some fire exchange and both parties doing no damage to each others hull Pirate B PM'ed the cruiser to call it a draw and both go on their way.
- Cruiser accapted and both parties flew away with a smile.
So show the cap that he can't hit fighters.
Then pm him it's a waste of time and to call it a draw.
And let both parties move away with a smile.
rule 0.0 fits nicely.
Also,
Bombers are also counted as Fighters within the rules.
And a bomber can take out a cruiser when done right.
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - aerelm - 11-26-2010
First, about "Ganking": There is simply No way that anything larger than a Gunship can kill a fighter, if the fighter decides to run. So I don't really see how is this a gank. If the fighter is stupid enough to turn around and joust a Cruiser, then he deserves an LM in the face.
And then, about fleeing rule: I really don't understand the reason behind this suggestion except for the fairplay part... And fairplay is not something we should enforce, it's just something we should encourage. So, I don't really think adding yet another rule to the already-complicated rules section would be a good idea.
Therefor, I'll have to vote 'No' for this one unless someone brings up an argument that changes my view point.
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - Alley - 11-26-2010
Capital ships doesn't have thrusters. (cruisers are slower)
Fighters do.
Just flee, your cruise engines load faster too.
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - Fins - 11-26-2010
' Wrote:Right now, a capital ship can approach a fighter, shout "engaging", and then the fighter can only die, leave, call for backup (which will result in a prolonged "who-ganks-better-wins" fight).
...
crap. Made a poll but it didnt show up, and now I cant add it with edit. Oh well, just say what you think then.
I think capital ship cruise speed should be reduced. I have no idea if it can be done, but if by any chance it can be done, then that's it, perfect solution. Why? Very easy, fighters then have all chances in the world to avoid the encounter in the 1st place before attack by capship can be made. If i am in a starflea and huge battleship is approaching at 350 with intention to kill me, then even if i react in time and engage my own cruise before battleship enters disruptor range, i can only keep the distance by flying without turning (or doing extremely huge arc, like 300k radius one). But if he's approaching at, say, 180 cruise speed, i have twice the time to react and engage my own cruise, and then quickly disappear before PvP event could even start, thus avoiding triggering 4-hours rule for fleeing. Rules says fleeing *from* PvP counts as death, therefore no PvP action means no 4-hours rule triggered, right?
Cruisers could be something like 300 (they are supposed to be fast caps alright), and gunboats at full 350, perhaps.
What you guys think?
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - Diomedes - 11-26-2010
Overall, this rule seems to make sense (for Cruisers and larger). It may add a layer of complexity to the rules, but a layer that may also be more intuitive (yes, you can run away from that huge ship without penalty or yes, you don't have to finish off that puny annoyance before moving on).
And this is why I like the idea of this rule change: it makes complete sense RP wise.
From the snubcraft's perspective, a cap ship should be a large and imposing target. Engaging it a making one mistake could spell death. But, the cap ship is also large and not near as agile, so ducking away into a nearby asteroid field or fleeing quickly through lanes is entirely plausible.
On the other hand, if a handful of snubcraft actually wanted to take on a cap ship as it moved through a system, it kind of lends itself to guerilla tactics where the fighters might hit, run, disappearing off scope (except perhaps a scout?) to strike again at another point. May not work really well in game, but the RP makes sense.
From the cap ships perspective, if there is an actual engagement (shields to half or some such) between two forces and it ends with say a battleship and a fighter. Battleship gets a call for something urgent in a different spot in the system. The battleship should completely be able to say "forget it with the lone fighter, it's not a risk to anything" and respond to the call where it's force is more necessary.
With the current rules, any of the above scenarios would count someone as fleeing and force them to leave the system, where there is really no justification to it.
The fleeing rule is there to avoid shieldrunning and general idiotic behaviour between gunboats and snubcraft where the relative power levels and craft size favour a stand up fight. That is, there is not the sense of overwhelming presence that a cruiser and larger should inspire, RP wise. That, and snubcraft/gunboats should be much more capable of pursuing each other.
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - Stargoose - 11-26-2010
Since a few people that answered apparently didnt understand the point I was trying to make at all, I changed the wording in the orriginal post a bit and hope it is clearer now.
Alley Wrote:Capital ships doesn't have thrusters. (cruisers are slower)
Fighters do.
Just flee, your cruise engines load faster too.
Yes, I know.
My point is that actually your ability to flee from a cap is totally useless, because if you flee you will have to leave the system for 4 hours anyway.
aerelm Wrote:First, about "Ganking": There is simply No way that anything larger than a Gunship can kill a fighter, if the fighter decides to run. So I don't really see how is this a gank. If the fighter is stupid enough to turn around and joust a Cruiser, then he deserves an LM in the face.
The problem is that the fighter can not flee from the capital ship without having to leave the system for 4 hours, which is more or less same as being killed by the cap ship.
aerelm Wrote:And then, about fleeing rule: I really don't understand the reason behind this suggestion except for the fairplay part... And fairplay is not something we should enforce, it's just something we should encourage. So, I don't really think adding yet another rule to the already-complicated rules section would be a good idea.
Therefor, I'll have to vote 'No' for this one unless someone brings up an argument that changes my view point.
My suggestion would be ab exception to a rule, but it would still be a liberalization, which means less sanctionable offenses, less reports, and less rule lawyering ingame.
Slainte Wrote:Anyone in a "cap" should not be going up against someone in a fighter in the first place. If a Navy "cap" is flying around and spots pirates in fighters they " should " call up fighter support to deal with them, if not then swap out to their fighter to sort the problem.
If the said " cap " pilot doesn't do this then any problems accuring thereafter is their own problem.
These situations happen all the time and no matter how many rules you apply, its still going to happen.
Yes, the cap ship will still be able to jump the fighter, but if the rules is changed, the fighter can just run from the cap ship without suffering any loss.
The situation:
capship: hello pirate. I engage
fighter: *runs*
capship: // now leave system for 4 hours
pirate: *leaves system, logs off, and makes hate thread about capwhores*
and the situation:
capship: hello pirate. I engage
fighter: moves away to 9k and stays at 9 k
capship: // you fled.. leave system for 4 hours
fighter: // no I didnt
capship: // yes you did
fighter: // no I didnt
capship:// I got screens I report u if oyu dont leave
fighter: // no you dont
capship: // this is stupid. I go now.
fighter: // you moved away more than 10 k. Leave system for 4 hours
caphsip: // no U
fighter: // no U. I got screens
capship: // U stupid prick
fighter: // U stupid ganker
Will become the situation:
capship: hello pirate. I engage
fighter: *runs*
capship: *thinks: damn... I really gotta get a fighter*
SeaFalcon Wrote:So show the cap that he can't hit fighters.
Then pm him it's a waste of time and to call it a draw.
And let both parties move away with a smile.
rule 0.0 fits nicely.
If everyone played nicely, no rules at all would be necessary.
Fact is many people dont play nicely and that will never change.
Fins Wrote:Cruisers could be something like 300 (they are supposed to be fast caps alright), and gunboats at full 350, perhaps.Personally I would agree, but I think many people wouldnt, and I think more people would agree with droping the 10k rule in a cap vs fighter situation.
What you guys think?
So lets keep this thread about the 10k thing to not deviate and come to an agreement more easily.
Only changing the cruise speeds would not help a fighter escape... because once he did he would have to stay out of hte system for 4 hours anyway.
Altering the 10k fleeing rule - lw'nafh - 11-26-2010
Know what? I like this idea, it may help people learn to fly fighters.