+- 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: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID (/showthread.php?tid=208528)
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - LuckyOne - 07-13-2025
Also, shouldn't IC technically try to tax non-Corporate ships (i.e. Freelancers and Zoners) since those are the ones probably not paying for the insurance, and running quasi-legal deals?
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - R.P.Curator - 07-13-2025
Quote:There is no need to change this wording, because pretty much everyone understands that ID lines referring to "ships" of a certain classification means "ships flown by player characters" of a certain classification. If you have a line targeting Rogues, that obviously means a Liberty Rogue flying a ship, not the Bloodhound itself. That's just metal.
I don't know if you're just being obtuse, but this is a common sense thing that's pretty much universally been understood perfectly fine.
I think all the posts related to this topic have proven that "pretty much everyone" is not an accurate statement. I'm not being obtuse, I just pointed out something that is misleading and can be interpreted wrongly. Its my fault for hitting my head on the wall and expecting the wall to change.
Cheers and thanks.
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - Kauket - 07-13-2025
you should let IC ID fly the renzu liner actually
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - Karst - 07-13-2025
(07-13-2025, 10:12 AM)LuckyOne Wrote: Also, shouldn't IC technically try to tax non-Corporate ships (i.e. Freelancers and Zoners) since those are the ones probably not paying for the insurance, and running quasi-legal deals?
I mean, I guess you could argue that you can extort the Corporates you have leverage over, and the non-Corporates because you don't have leverage over them and you want it, but at that point it's just open banditry, and that really isn't the intention for the ID.
For a full-on unrestricted pirate, see Junker ID.
(07-13-2025, 10:32 AM)R.P.Curator Wrote: I think all the posts related to this topic have proven that "pretty much everyone" is not an accurate statement. I'm not being obtuse, I just pointed out something that is misleading and can be interpreted wrongly. Its my fault for hitting my head on the wall and expecting the wall to change.
Cheers and thanks.
Yeah no, you're the only one who misunderstands this specific aspect (which also has nothing to do with the IC ID in particular). I've only seen one other person misunderstand the "ships" terminology in IDs, and they were kind of a troll.
So no, the definition works fine.
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - R.P.Curator - 07-13-2025
(07-13-2025, 11:32 AM)Karst Wrote:(07-13-2025, 10:12 AM)LuckyOne Wrote: Also, shouldn't IC technically try to tax non-Corporate ships (i.e. Freelancers and Zoners) since those are the ones probably not paying for the insurance, and running quasi-legal deals?
I mean, I guess you could argue that you can extort the Corporates you have leverage over, and the non-Corporates because you don't have leverage over them and you want it, but at that point it's just open banditry, and that really isn't the intention for the ID.
For a full-on unrestricted pirate, see Junker ID.
(07-13-2025, 10:32 AM)R.P.Curator Wrote: I think all the posts related to this topic have proven that "pretty much everyone" is not an accurate statement. I'm not being obtuse, I just pointed out something that is misleading and can be interpreted wrongly. Its my fault for hitting my head on the wall and expecting the wall to change.
Cheers and thanks.
Yeah no, you're the only one who misunderstands this specific aspect (which also has nothing to do with the IC ID in particular). I've only seen one other person misunderstand the "ships" terminology in IDs, and they were kind of a troll.
So no, the definition works fine.
Yeah. Personal jabs and associations with "kind of a troll" characters.
The posts in this topic, by you and another staff member on staff position in the debate ship vs ID are clear. You've contradicted each other.
(07-12-2025, 10:56 AM)Karst Wrote: "Ship" is the standard wording for IDs in lines like that, see "ships considered hostile by [faction]" etc.
That means "ships with IDs that are considered hostile".
(07-12-2025, 04:17 PM)Petitioner Wrote:(07-12-2025, 11:03 AM)R.P.Curator Wrote: For me Ship is Ship, ID is ID.
I've been shot at for flying the wrong ship with the right ID.
If thats the staff position - ship = ID; then this changes things.
Thank you for the clarification on this.
Ship does not equal ID. If the two were the same thing then there wouldn't be two different words.
In the rules and in ID lines, "ship" is more like "player character". For example, "can engage any ship carrying Nomad materials" = "If you target someone flying around and scan them and they have Nomad materials, then you can engage them". This has very little to do with what vessel the player's flying.
All I've done is take the wording for what It is.
Anything else has been raised as an issue that should be fixed.
Thanks.
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - firesilver - 07-13-2025
(07-12-2025, 07:08 PM)Sand-Viper Wrote: It does feel like a slight oversight that the Renzu Liner (4k cargo space) won't be able to be flown by Interspace, unless its added as an exception. Other than that, I'm excited to see some Bounty Hunter tech being used to try and "sell" corporate transports "accident protection" lol.
(07-13-2025, 11:20 AM)Kauket Wrote: you should let IC ID fly the renzu liner actually
We've been discussing this and we feel like this is a valid point, so we're going to be adding an exception for the Renzu Liner to allow them to fly this despite being over the cargo limit. I'll update the proposed ID in the OP to reflect this change.
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - The_Godslayer - 07-13-2025
(07-13-2025, 09:36 AM)Karst Wrote: Yes, "outside of House Space" is technically the same as "in the Independent Worlds", but we've used the former in all IDs so far.Honestly I think the "Independent Worlds" wording should be used in all cases, because that is a specific definition in the rules, whereas "outside of House Space" is a definition formed by excluding a bunch of (5) different definitions in the rules. One positive definition instead of five negative definitions seems more efficient.
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - firesilver - 07-19-2025
These changes are now live on the server. Please ensure any ships you have using this ID are compliant with the new ID limits.
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - Khmer Anderson - 07-19-2025
What a f up. I've over a dozen IC Storks parked across various POBs and I can't get anywhere to get a US ID tag.
Supposedly each IC ship over 3600 cargo hold was meant to be issued with a Universal Shipping ID - that didn't work out, did it?
And thanks for the community consultation. There's a reason that I don't interact on the forum so much, over twenty years of incompetence had told me to shut my mouth. Why mess around with the IC ID? Have your arms growth too short to avail yourself of other amusements?
It's pretty clear to see that the "Toxic Trio" are still embedded within the superstructure of this game.
You know how to f yourselves up, don't you?
-----
Anyway, I didn't say anything, there's nothing written above, except what you might read between the lines.
RE: Announcement: Interspace Commerce ID - Culbrelai - 07-19-2025
Its a boneheaded nerf for certain, but what else is new. IC 5ks are oorp but Interspace hegemons pirating in the middle of New York is perfectly fine and inrp. They'll reap what they sow
