+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Developers Forum (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=183)
+---- Forum: Discovery Unofficial Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=389)
+----- Forum: Discovery Mod FLHook Projects (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=266)
+----- Thread: Suggestion: Inverse /nodock; /yesdock (/showthread.php?tid=164721)
Suggestion: Inverse /nodock; /yesdock - Lythrilux - 09-24-2018
So the recent Core-Gallia rephack wasn't processed entirely, and the Staff gave their reasons for it. Debates aside, it got me thinking. In a lot of cases, it's actually very urgent for factions to be able to use your facilities for a plethora of reasons. This can be roleplay for the sake of constructing the first bridges of diplomacy or needing a local safe haven in case they come under attack. Or even in the case of making exceptions to certain characters, with a strong roleplay backing behind it.
So police factions have the power to /nodock smugglers from bases whilst they are RPing with them, which prevents them from docking and saves having to make an FR5/sanction request. But what if there was a command that could dynamically achieve the opposite when needed? Enter /yesdock - an ability for official factions to temporarily allow docking for a usually hostile/unfriendly ship on their bases. Self-explanatory more or less.
RE: Suggestion: Inverse /nodock; /yesdock - Laura C. - 09-24-2018
If I remember correctly, it was stated in the discussions about giving /nodock to more official factions than just police that there are technical issues with so much lists of bases. So I guess this limitation is related to possible /yesdock too. Not to mention that introducing feature which would be used even less than /nodock, very rarely actually, sounds like a lot of work and problem solving for very little gain. I think that most factions would agree they would prefer to get /nodock first, and then there can be thoughts about introducing /yesdock.
RE: Suggestion: Inverse /nodock; /yesdock - Laz - 09-24-2018
(09-24-2018, 11:23 PM)Laura C. Wrote: If I remember correctly, it was stated in the discussions about giving /nodock to more official factions than just police that there are technical issues with so much lists of bases. So I guess this limitation is related to possible /yesdock too.
I submitted a rewrite of of the nodock plugin, that would give the ability to all factions allowing them to /nodock their own IFF, a few months ago.