Discovery Gaming Community
Attacking Player Owned Bases - Printable Version

+- 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: Attacking Player Owned Bases (/showthread.php?tid=110047)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

RE: Attacking Player Owned Bases - Johnnie-Lapierre - 01-15-2014

@Mímir launching a cd or shooting at it will change the base to become hostile to you. If the base is heavily defended the trader can just stay there close to the base.

But usually if a shield goes up, it will stay up somewhere between 5 and 10 minutes I think, so if the PoB doesn`t have weapons or not to many go for it, otherwise, the trader will just sit there protected by the PoB.

RE: Attacking Player Owned Bases - SummerMcLovin - 01-16-2014

This could well have been posted along with the declaration thread but ah well. Baseslayer expert opinion and admin statement on doing it properly.

Quote:
Before you post:
  1. You must have RP reasoning to attack a base. This would usually be because you have some stake to the system it is located in and has not met your demands, or it belongs to a character/faction your character/faction doesn't like.
  2. The base must be within your ZoI to attack it.
For your RP:
  1. It must obviously be an inRP post, either in the RP section of the forums or the relevant faction section.
  2. Which character you are posting as and who you represent should be clearly stated.
  3. Any other factions you are contacting and/or involving must be clearly stated.
  4. The name of the base(s) you are attacking should be clearly stated.
  5. A base must exist before the RP happens: a declaration within house laws of all unregistered bases past and future would cover the RP reasoning but it does not cover you for 3.5
For the Declaration Thread post:
  1. Use the template.
  2. All intended attacking factions (IDs you represent, or specific faction tags if not) or individuals should be listed.
You are then free to begin the attack.

As Mimir said (although he only knows because I told him) raising the shields on a base to prevent transports docking does not count as a serious attack on that base. Think of it like CDing a ship.
It is usually fairly obvious to us when an attack is serious.

For who you can post as to join in your side of the siege, another good analogy for what we currently have are grouping rules: if you can group with them, they can be on your side in your declaration post. They must also satisfy the above conditions.
An example: someone plonked down a pirate base in New London. Bretonian lawfuls obviously want it gone, while it could also be used to work against GRN and competes with Molly and Corsair piracy in the area. Bretonia could ask Liberty to help out and sign themselves up along with LN. While the GRN, Mollys and Corsairs also want to take it out, they are not allowed to work directly with each other, Bretonia nor with LN so would have to post separately.

RP reasoning must be present: if a lawful base is lawfully registered within that house then you cannot use that house's lawfuls to destroy it, for example. Find another option or leave the base be.

I think that is everything. More specific questions can still be posted here.

RE: Attacking Player Owned Bases - GrnRaptor - 01-16-2014

(01-16-2014, 03:10 AM)SummerMcLovin Wrote: Before you post:
  1. You must have RP reasoning to attack a base. This would usually be because you have some stake to the system it is located in and has not met your demands, or it belongs to a character/faction your character/faction doesn't like.

So going, "I saw your base and I don't like it, so expect us to kill it with fire!" style of comms/declarations are the equivalent of "Engaging!" in game?

RE: Attacking Player Owned Bases - GrnRaptor - 01-16-2014

(01-12-2014, 02:48 AM)Echo 7-7 Wrote: Hmm. Perhaps this could be balanced by the forum RP only being required for bases which themselves have their own post in the POB thread. While the existence of the base would therefore be exposed to a degree (particularly if POB info posts had certain oorp information mandatory to be displayed), it would then be protected from random acts of aggression.

I approve of this idea.