+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: News and Announcements (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: [High Priority] Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change (/showthread.php?tid=152221)
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - Toris (Old Account) - 07-30-2017
Quote:Practically, APM is based on AI amd nomad technology. And thus, you want to give the civilians Nomad tech? Really?
APM ships and tech created for Bounty Hunters are not based on AI and Nomad tech. The APM stuff created for The Core is. Don't mix up these two. I clearly pointed out I would love to see APM-BHG equipment open for all Sirian corporations, mirroring the fact that APM also supplies them with stuff not designed for The Core.
It's like with military full-auto M4A1 and civilian non-automatic AR-15.
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - Durandal - 07-31-2017
Let me make this absolutely crystal clear, since apparently the nuances of this post were lost on you. The core cannot manufacture and sell Bounty Hunter's Guild vessels.
APM, frankly, is not something anyone should even be roleplaying.
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - Toris (Old Account) - 07-31-2017
APM creates stuff both for BHG and The Core. It is APM selling the equipment, not BHG or The Core. End of the subject.
Ask Lyth if you are in doubt. You can reach him.
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - Durandal - 07-31-2017
(07-31-2017, 10:53 PM)Toris Wrote: APM creates stuff both for BHG and The Core. It is APM selling the equipment, not BHG or The Core. End of the subject.
Ask Lyth is you are in doubt. You can reach him.
Yes Toris, that is quite clear to everyone involved. The issue is that /one/ of those factions is trying to roleplay APM. That cannot be allowed to happen any longer now that the BHG and Core are two distinct entities.
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - WesternPeregrine - 07-31-2017
(07-31-2017, 10:54 PM)Durandal Wrote:(07-31-2017, 10:53 PM)Toris Wrote: APM creates stuff both for BHG and The Core. It is APM selling the equipment, not BHG or The Core. End of the subject.
Ask Lyth is you are in doubt. You can reach him.
Yes Toris, that is quite clear to everyone involved. The issue is that /one/ of those factions is trying to roleplay APM. That cannot be allowed to happen any longer now that the BHG and Core are two distinct entities.
Why is that though? Why suddenly someone cannot be allowed to continue the play they have been doing for months? Is not like APM is a bounty Hunter trademark.
Also, APM in my view is a post-vanilla addition to the bhg lore, and can be easily be shaped by the players, Core or BHG. If only one of them can claim the name, the other part can easily do a AP Heavy Manufacturing, or a Guardian Defense Systems (or whatever) shipbuilding company, and keep producing their side of similar but differently named ships...
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - Durandal - 07-31-2017
(07-31-2017, 10:59 PM)WPeregrine Wrote:(07-31-2017, 10:54 PM)Durandal Wrote:(07-31-2017, 10:53 PM)Toris Wrote: APM creates stuff both for BHG and The Core. It is APM selling the equipment, not BHG or The Core. End of the subject.
Ask Lyth is you are in doubt. You can reach him.
Yes Toris, that is quite clear to everyone involved. The issue is that /one/ of those factions is trying to roleplay APM. That cannot be allowed to happen any longer now that the BHG and Core are two distinct entities.
Why is that though? Why suddenly someone cannot be allowed to continue the play they have been doing for months? Is not like APM is a bounty Hunter trademark.
Also, APM in my view is a post-vanilla addition to the bhg lore, and can be easily be shaped by the players, Core or BHG. If only one of them can claim the name, the other part can easily do a AP Heavy Manufacturing, or a Guardian Defense Systems (or whatever) shipbuilding company, and keep producing their side of similar but differently named ships...
Because it has somehow been accepted into Discovery canon as the producer of ships for two factions, that's why it cannot be played by members of one of those two factions, trying to sell ships which are not their own.
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - WesternPeregrine - 07-31-2017
(07-31-2017, 11:15 PM)Durandal Wrote:(07-31-2017, 10:59 PM)WPeregrine Wrote: Why is that though? Why suddenly someone cannot be allowed to continue the play they have been doing for months? Is not like APM is a bounty Hunter trademark.
Also, APM in my view is a post-vanilla addition to the bhg lore, and can be easily be shaped by the players, Core or BHG. If only one of them can claim the name, the other part can easily do a AP Heavy Manufacturing, or a Guardian Defense Systems (or whatever) shipbuilding company, and keep producing their side of similar but differently named ships...
Because it has somehow been accepted into Discovery canon as the producer of ships for two factions, that's why it cannot be played by members of one of those two factions, trying to sell ships which are not their own.
I understand the first part of your reasoning, that one of the sides cannot claim sole ownership of the whole endeavour. However, that does not make the ships "not their own". They are also "theirs", but not solely theirs. Since APM currently produces for both BHG and Core, it means that there is one source and two providers of the ships.
I understand it could be seen as a conflict of interpretation of Faction Right 6, as it is the same ships, but overseen by two different IDs. Approval by one of the sides would nullify the refusal of the second party regarding the third party usage, which is odd if they're separate entities and not two sides of the same ID.
----
If the split will benefit the roleplay of both BHG and Core regarding their technology and third party usage, then by all means, help them work better in their lore.
Back to a previous question: why would the split suddenly create a 90% incompatibility between BHG and Core series of ships?
Question 2: what would prevent Core from issuing a bounty on deviant Core assets, and BHG picking it up? (assuming that is the main issue behind this change)
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - Durandal - 07-31-2017
(07-31-2017, 10:59 PM)WPeregrine Wrote: I understand the first part of your reasoning, that one of the sides cannot claim sole ownership of the whole endeavour. However, that does not make the ships "not their own". They are also "theirs", but not solely theirs. Since APM currently produces for both BHG and Core, it means that there is one source and two providers of the ships.
Yes, and that source needs to be treated as a third party rather than being roleplayed by one of the factions. It would be like the Outcasts claiming the Borderworlds line as their own because they were the only ones (maybe the Hessians did too, my memory is hazy here), who used the Sabre in vanilla.
(07-31-2017, 10:59 PM)WPeregrine Wrote: I understand it could be seen as a conflict of interpretation of Faction Right 6, as it is the same ships, but overseen by two different IDs. Approval by one of the sides would nullify the refusal of the second party regarding the third party usage, which is odd if they're separate entities and not two sides of the same ID.
If the split will benefit the roleplay of both BHG and Core regarding their technology and third party usage, then by all means, help them work better in their lore.
We'd be happy to help them integrate it into their lore better if they would come talk to us.
(07-31-2017, 10:59 PM)WPeregrine Wrote: Back to a previous question: why would the split suddenly create a 90% incompatibility between BHG and Core series of ships?
It probably wouldn't, but that's up to the admin team to decide. I honestly just wanted to give the Core incentive to provide us with that tech list, which we've of course yet to receive.
(07-31-2017, 10:59 PM)WPeregrine Wrote: Question 2: what would prevent Core from issuing a bounty on deviant Core assets, and BHG picking it up? (assuming that is the main issue behind this change)
No, the main issue is the Core's distribution of BHG technology. They do not have the right to do so.
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - Toris (Old Account) - 08-01-2017
I think WP tries to point out at the different issue in here. Namely, this: I would pretty much understand if The Core would attack a Freelancer for possession of the ships designed by APM for The Core - cause these ships contain parts of the reverse-engineed AI and Nomad tech. However, the issues arises with the ships designed by APM for Bounty Hunters - which are created 'traditionally' for, like, past 100 years? Bounty Hunters are recepient of the vessels and guns, but not their manufacturer.
Whan it case of the situation in which a player claims that Orca was sold to him or his company/faction/mercenary group by APM without inclusion of the Bounty Hunters Guild? Remember my analogy with M4A1 and AR-15? It is like paramilitary group supplied by Colt's Manufacturing Company harassed a guy who just legally bought AR-15 in the shop.
RE: Official Notice: Core ID/Tech cell change - Goliath - 08-01-2017
Toris. With all respect dude. Are you at least AWARE that APM technolgies can not be role played by civilians? Hrmmmm? Are you aware of that? The Core will never give their ships so easy.