+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: RP & Core (I) bases (/showthread.php?tid=136187)
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Malmsteen - 02-24-2016
(02-24-2016, 02:00 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: I think that if a Core 1 base offers roleplay, it deserves roleplay.
A base that pops up secretly at 3 in the morning, deserves none.
+1
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Jansen - 02-24-2016
(02-24-2016, 02:00 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: I think that if a Core 1 base offers roleplay, it deserves roleplay.
A base that pops up secretly at 3 in the morning, deserves none.
And how would you include that differentiation into the rules?
PoBs do not require RP to be constructed, so they do not require RP to be destroyed in their initial stage. Once Roleplay has been done to increase the base core levels, roleplay is required to destroy them. I dont really why something should change about this.
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Findarato Veneanar - 02-24-2016
(02-24-2016, 06:49 PM)Jansen Wrote: And how would you include that differentiation into the rules?
Do we need to have the talk about why we don't use an autoban system and instead have admins again?
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Jansen - 02-24-2016
(02-24-2016, 06:51 PM)Findarato Veneanar Wrote: Do we need to have the talk about why we don't use an autoban system and instead have admins again?
If you further elaborate how that is concerning the problem of Core 1 bases and RP, maybe?
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Kauket - 02-24-2016
(02-24-2016, 02:00 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: I think that if a Core 1 base offers roleplay, it deserves roleplay.yeah watch as some circlejerk squad blows it up 5 minutes after you make it because the server is populated
A base that pops up secretly at 3 in the morning, deserves none.
ajajajaja
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Laura C. - 02-24-2016
(02-24-2016, 06:51 PM)Findarato Veneanar Wrote:Maybe once our sometimes trigger-happy autoban system will ban you for no real reason and you will will need unban (what happens quite often), you will find out one of the reasons yourself...(02-24-2016, 06:49 PM)Jansen Wrote: And how would you include that differentiation into the rules?
Do we need to have the talk about why we don't use an autoban system and instead have admins again?
Though, there might be a way how to implement that, Jansen. First idea which comes to my mind - rules will state that all POBs which has infopage and at least one communication thread in comm channel requires attacking declaration/RP even when they are core 1. The link to this communication thread might be mandatory ooRP part of POB infopage (and infopage can be easily found from link which is automatically created in the POB status page). This way attacker can quite easily check if the base he plan to attack has required RP or not and thus if he is obliged to RP about attack or not as well.
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Sabru - 02-24-2016
(02-24-2016, 06:49 PM)Jansen Wrote:(02-24-2016, 02:00 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: I think that if a Core 1 base offers roleplay, it deserves roleplay.And how would you include that differentiation into the rules?
A base that pops up secretly at 3 in the morning, deserves none.
I've already submitted a player request detailing how a system like that could be done and managed..