+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: Restrictions on capital ship use (/showthread.php?tid=6537)
Restrictions on capital ship use - Panzer - 02-27-2008
Whew...
Out of all options Methinx:
Put those ships in guard systems and require both a guard ID that would require you to be tagged respectively and the Battleship ID.
Let PC factions decide who buys "their" equipment. Heeeeeey, how about paying FACTIONS for the purchases?
And finally - please... upgrade the battleships to be what they should be - the uber-nasty, pwnzoring machines of doom (At least against other capships). Possibly even lower their price.
Restrictions on capital ship use - pchwang - 02-27-2008
' Wrote:My preferred option, making anything larger than a gunboat require permission from admins, much like the Terrorist ID, isn't there.
I abstain.
I second this.
Restrictions on capital ship use - chopper - 02-27-2008
Actually, Cruisers suck more then Battleships.
Only things that are good, it seems, are BC's and Gunboats.
So, instead of improving both Cruisers and Battleships, why not nerf a bit BC's and Gunboats?
Gunboat spamage is far greater then Battleship spammage.
Same for BC's.
And yes, blunt, that is a good comparison. Because someone mentioned elitism.
What happens when people ask why can't they shoot anyone on sight?
Like other Terrorists can.
Or if one faction can get it's own ID but another one can't?
Both of these examples are examples for elitism as well. So, it is already present, this Cap ship problem wouldn't bring it, it would make it stronger.
Anyway, as I already stated, my personal opinion is that it should be dealt it in game.
It will never be perfect, we all know that, but at least we can try.
More rules would be just too much.
Restrictions on capital ship use - tfmachad - 02-27-2008
' Wrote:And finally - please... upgrade the battleships to be what they should be - the uber-nasty, pwnzoring machines of doom (At least against other capships). Possibly even lower their price.Bejesus! If so, put their prices over 15 billion and make them big enough not to fit the tradelanes. (EDITED)
Restrictions on capital ship use - Zapp - 02-27-2008
Of the options up there, I think the two best is to put them in guard systems and get faction approval. Putting them in guard systems is enough, as the missions required to get the guard rep practically fixes your rep to match whoever you're doing it for perfectly.
Restrictions on capital ship use - Othman - 02-27-2008
' Wrote:Military faction players should refuse interference from any uninvited parties in any engagement they're undertaking. Non-affiliated military characters aren't an exception, if they refuse to submit to a clear chain of command, there's nothing militaristic about their roles anyway. If such parties refuse to stand down and not engage, they should be charged for disobeying military/police orders. If they were supposed to be aligned with those organizations in the first place, they should be subject to court martial and marked as traitors.Well said here, I think both LSF and SA should not let individuals in their groups if the situation does not require to do so or unless a special case emerges.
You don't like them. Don't play with them.
Seriously, if I was in an even fight as an unlawful and some 5 random capital ships show up to aid the lawful side I'd just contact the original players and have them sort that out before continuing. There's no use playing in a silly environment.
As a mercenary I do not aid in fight unless invited and paid for. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't understand bounty hunters/mercenaries jumping to a fight with nothing to gain from it, it's a waste of good H-Fuel. Military characters should obey orders and respect the chain of command. Tell them to stand down.
Restrictions on capital ship use - Jwnantze - 02-27-2008
Yah know what? I think Bs's should be EXTREMELY powerful, cost 500 billion, require admin approval, be sold in guard systems, and require 3 months of good rp in gunboats and lower. Make um pay in 2 billion credit payment.
But since thats unresonable I am going to stick with my faction's plan to require RP to fly one or else kick um out of alpha.
Restrictions on capital ship use - Unseelie - 02-27-2008
Do something.
Anything but allow little pockets of void to thrive in disco.
Restrictions on capital ship use - chopper - 02-27-2008
' Wrote:Well said here, I think both LSF and SA should not let individuals in their groups if the situation does not require to do so or unless a special case emerges.
And I agree. And you should implement it in the SA rules.
Because few days ago, me and Zapp fought against 6 LSF/SA guys, when they accepted 2 indies to join the fight on their side.
One of which was a gunboat. We were both Slipstreams. A bit of overkill.
Luckily for them, server crashed:P
Restrictions on capital ship use - cmfalconer - 02-27-2008
Problem is, and I know Igiss mentioned this somewhere, with putting them in guard systems is that you don't have to be "full green" to buy them...just not hostile. You can be 4bars the wrong way, but as long as you're not hostile to the faction, you can land on their base and buy that ship.
WEAPONS work this way, where you have to be some semblance of friendly to the faction for the good stuff, but ships do not, and I believe they're not going to either.
My vote was for the best option that I saw up there, require PC faction approval. Reasoning is because if the PC faction gives approval, there's going to be some RP on the forums for why the ship was purchased...or should be. Just like the faction proposals should be published on the forums, so should these little blurbs about your ship.