+- 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: Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome (/showthread.php?tid=132774)
Pages:
1
2
Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Jack_Henderson - 08-20-2015
Edit: this is not the request to Admins to relocate, but the discussion before writing the move request.
Heyhey!
Tau 39 got deleted, so the T39 PoB Fort Siloso (Core 4, Ore storage/sale base open to all that are friendly with IMG) has to be repositioned in the near future.
As PoBs can create a lot of problems, I've already talked to the two leaders of the Outcast official factions today about possible spots, taking into account mostly gameplay-features.
This is what the IMG does not want:
> disrupt OC smuggling route from Alpha-T37-T23
> be a blocking/area denial base
What the IMG wants:
> keep the service of "ore storage and ore reselling" viable, so it has to be somewhere not too far from T23
> have it at an aesthetic place (T37 is a beautiful system)
We came up with this position (see screenshot):
![[Image: 9Srr4Cq.png]](http://i.imgur.com/9Srr4Cq.png)
> 17,0 k from T23 hole (therefore invisible for scanners of passing through players)
> 13 k from Falkland
> at the scenic edge of the cloud
Consequences:
Far enough out of the way in order not to harm/even be visible from any Outcast-related routes (T23-T37-O90-Alpha) and also far enough from any new Gallia-Tau routes via T44.
At the same time, hopefully still interesting enough for ore storage and indies.
It might even increase trader/unlawful activity in T37 as traders/miners have to enter T37 now (instead of earlier just going to safety in T39 Guard System).
So...
Is that a good spot?
Any problems with it? If yes, explain it please.
Any negative implications that we overlooked?
Any irp aspects we have overlooked?
Thank you for your feedback.
~ Jack for IMG|
RE: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Sciamach - 08-20-2015
(08-20-2015, 02:01 AM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: > have it at an aesthetic place (T37 is a beautiful system)
My eyes burn every time I fly through that system
anyway: Jack and I discussed this and came to agree that the location chosen is passable. It's far enough away so as to not hinder piracy while also keeping cardi runs viable, while also not making the trek /too/ far for anyone wanting to haul ore.
<insert Scourge seal of approval here>
RE: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Kauket - 08-20-2015
getting the /pos of the location you want may help the admins a lot
RE: Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Jack_Henderson - 08-20-2015
(08-20-2015, 02:41 AM)Nyx Wrote: getting the /pos of the location you want may help the admins a lot
Sure. But this is the discussion prior to a move request.
Clarified it in the OP.
Tnx for the feedback that it is not clear what I mean.
Jack
RE: Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Starflier - 08-20-2015
As I have said in private, it ticks me to see an IMG base in Tau-37 outside of an asteroid field. Falkland inRPly survives because it is well-hidden (based on a number of rumours), it would be suicide for IMG to build one in an exposed location.
RE: Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Doria - 08-20-2015
Ya... less exposed I suppose is better... perhaps one block upwards, at B/C-6...
RE: Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Sylvie557 - 08-20-2015
Yeah that would still be pretty far from JH/Falkland as well.
RE: Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Jack_Henderson - 08-20-2015
Being "hidden" is purely cosmetic. Being behind the cloud (when viewed from everybody who comes from the normal northern directions) is exactly what the base should be irply: hidden. As the Malvasia nebula does not reduce scanner range at all, "hidden" is not really possible anyway. Furthermore, the base looks very appealing (visually) when it is on the edge of the nebula.
RE: Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - aakopa - 08-20-2015
I think it should be closer to the jump hole, in the cloud.
RE: Discussion: Relocation of IMG Player Base (Fort Siloso) - Position Feedback Welcome - Sylvie557 - 08-20-2015
Being closer to the Jump Hole is something henderson wants to avoid.