+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: POBs near mining fields (/showthread.php?tid=144389)
RE: POBs near mining fields - Jack_Henderson - 10-20-2016
@WildBill: Don't worry. That was everything I was going to say. Perhaps you can think about moving that base. It would be - in my opinion - the right thing to do and it would send a positive signal in general. We could do with some positivity at the moment.
RE: POBs near mining fields - Jack_Henderson - 10-20-2016
(10-20-2016, 07:57 AM)Xenon Wrote: How about a fix for the kruger base, once and for all - and you can apply that to the rest of the bases that have similar problems.
You cannot move the base without the base owner approval, i understand that specially when the rule is implemented after the base construction
Of course they can. And they should.
There is no entitlement by pointing to some old rulesets.
An example: I cannot say today "you are pvp dead, you left 10k of the fight" because that was a rule in like 2012.
The rules changed.
They should be enforced.
It is correct to give the former owners the choice to suggest new positions.
But if they are unwilling to play by the new set of rules, the staff should in my opinion just force them.
If I broke the rules, I would also get to feel the repercussions.
If I harmed gameplay as actively and as long as some POBs, I would likely have to expect a harsh sanction.
(10-20-2016, 08:16 AM)MÃmir Wrote: I don't get it... Why don't staff just move the base when everyone in their right mind know what the problem with that base is.
So what if a group of players feel entitled to have their stuff anywhere, staff is in a position to complete ignore that, and so they should. It's these ridiculous prolonged discussions/situations that makes people salty and makes playing this game such a drag.
When the rule was fixed, you should just have done a sweep and made sure all bases complied with the new ruleset and work with the base owners to ensure that their bases would comply, rather than allow exceptions. Because exceptions make people feel super special and entitled, which in turn makes them very upset when that entitlement is challenged.[...]
[...] It's truly mind-boggling that this discussion is on, when there is a clear ruleset posted on the forum. Just enforce it.
I fully agree, Mimir.
And:
It's not too late to correct the "exception" mistake.
It's just a handful bases, likely less than 5. I know of 3 PoBs that could be classified as problematic for gameplay.
There is even hardly any controversy as > 70 % of the community have understood the problem (and many of the remaining < 30 % are those directly affected by the potential relocation and therefore are understandably against it)
If it happened quickly, we could likely save everybody the mess that is most definitely going to appear this weekend when the sieges go into "real mode".
RE: POBs near mining fields - DragonLancer - 10-20-2016
I would like to throw in it already happened that system stuff had been moved instead of a PoB.
RE: POBs near mining fields - Jack_Henderson - 10-20-2016
(10-20-2016, 03:48 PM)DragonLancer Wrote: I would like to throw in it already happened that system stuff had been moved instead of a PoB.
Has happened before, indeed.
However, I have my doubts whether it would in the Rheinland case.
Edit: Okay, a change to the field already happened.
I love to be wrong on this one. I am convinced that this is fundamentally not a dev-matter, so in my opinion we should not primarily look for a solution there.
Nevertheless, if a relocation of the fields were already in the making, some problems would go away by itself.
Jack
RE: POBs near mining fields - WildBill - 10-20-2016
(10-20-2016, 09:25 AM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: @WildBill: Don't worry. That was everything I was going to say. Perhaps you can think about moving that base. It would be - in my opinion - the right thing to do and it would send a positive signal in general. We could do with some positivity at the moment.
Absolutely, just as soon as the system is completely disconnected from Liberty like we were promised it would be. iRP this is the only defense we have against LSF and their foul tactics of bringing in Liberty fleets to eradicate us from our homes.
RE: POBs near mining fields - Redeemer - 10-23-2016
(10-20-2016, 05:50 PM)WildBill Wrote:(10-20-2016, 09:25 AM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: @WildBill: Don't worry. That was everything I was going to say. Perhaps you can think about moving that base. It would be - in my opinion - the right thing to do and it would send a positive signal in general. We could do with some positivity at the moment.
Absolutely, just as soon as the system is completely disconnected from Liberty like we were promised it would be. iRP this is the only defense we have against LSF and their foul tactics of bringing in Liberty fleets to eradicate us from our homes.
As long as the scrap fields stay in house space where they should be, and dont mysteriously migrate to some remote corner of space where no man has gone before.
RE: POBs near mining fields - Piombo65 - 10-25-2016
Curiosity:
But If I want to settle a POB within asteroid fields or right adjacent? If I want to hide a POB?
RE: POBs near mining fields - Hina Nakamura - 10-25-2016
(10-25-2016, 02:47 PM)Piombo65 Wrote: Curiosity:
But If I want to settle a POB within asteroid fields or right adjacent? If I want to hide a POB?
You can, because not all asteroid fields contain mining fields
RE: POBs near mining fields - Piombo65 - 10-25-2016
(10-25-2016, 03:49 PM)Nebula Complex Wrote:(10-25-2016, 02:47 PM)Piombo65 Wrote: Curiosity:
But If I want to settle a POB within asteroid fields or right adjacent? If I want to hide a POB?
You can, because not all asteroid fields contain mining fields
Ah... is there a difference on rule point? Why?
RE: POBs near mining fields - Hina Nakamura - 10-25-2016
@Piombo65
It's simple, lets just agree on a simple fact, that most of the mining fields are inside asteroid fields.
If you build a POB inside an asteroid field that doesn't contain a mining field, then you are free to build defense arrays, and also will get blue prints for upgrades once you deliver the requested RP and fill the form created by the moderators/admins here, BUT, if you create a POB inside an asteroid field with a mining field inside, AND the POB is less than 15k away from the mining field, then from my point of view, it should not be allowed for that POB to build defense arrays and the rules stats that this POB cannot be upgraded more than Core 2. I hope that i made it clearer now.