Admin Notice: ZOI changes for RM, BDM, BAF and BIS. (Feedback Time)

[RmJ]

Well instead of bickering on the forums about it...let's go and fight about it wait...

ok.....

Can we implement capture the flag mentalities for systems yet?

---

[sindroms]

Trial period is over.
We welcome feedback on the overall change of gameplay in the region during this time.


EDIT: Players wishing for the Wild West approach should be getting a nice gift in the upcoming weeks.

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------

[Gagadug.]

For the BAF| as faction it did not change much in the modus operandi, as far as I know we had no fight in Omega 7 still and I cant remember seeing any HMS- tagged ships in the system either. It is nice that we can possibly chase pirates now though and that we could fulfill our treaties if necessary.
I think the change was a good one with little to no problems caused by it, neither [RM] nor BAF| were regularly patrolling each others systems or deliberately looking for people with (arguable) contraband, what seemed to be one of the main concerns regarding this change.

[Jack_Henderson]

Trial period is over.
We welcome feedback on the overall change of gameplay in the region during this time.


EDIT: Players wishing for the Wild West approach should be getting a nice gift in the upcoming weeks.

It is a bad idea because of situations like these:

---

> RM sees a Hessian dock at FP1. As the RM has ZoI in the whole of O3, he can force rp consequences, which he could not do before.

> An RM indie sees an IMG indie transporting Blood Diamonds in O3. In Bretonia, this is legal. In Rheinland illegal. The RM indie could report it to Rheinland, and there would be rp repercussions possible for an interaction that took place outside of the law's reach.

> LN player in Leeds sees a Junker hauling Cardamine. He reports it to Liberty and Liberty fines and FR5s the Junker for breaking Liberty laws, even though the action took place deep in Bretonia.

---

All the questions that were discussed in this thread "Clarification needed: foreign navies with enhanced ZOI enforcing rp consequences" are still waiting for a clarifying statement. This thread also opens much wider problems, e.g. when LN IDs can FR5 Junkers for something they see e.g. in New London - which makes things totally ridiculous.

I am convinced, that the Admins did not think about the finer consequences of allowing Navies more freedom in foreign space via the ZoI change.

---

Offered Solution:

The RFP leader, who agrees there is a problem, offered this solution here:

RM ID: "Can enforce Bretonian laws and assist Bretonian lawfuls in Omega-3"

BAF ID: "Can enforce Rheinland laws and assist Rheinland lawfuls in Omega-7"

source: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread...pid1851219 Post #11

Going by the same thought, LN ID should not have ZoI in Bretonia, but should also get this line:

LN ID: "Can enforce Bretonian laws and assist Bretonian lawfuls in [systems]"

I can only repeat myself: Do not make the wish to assist cross border possible via ZoI. This opens a can of worms. The "+1 line" approach clarifies it a lot better and makes the wording a lot clearer against abuse.

[Alley]

I have serious doubts about letting a house enforce another house's laws, or even down to faction level for that matter. That sounds ten times worse than the current change and a serious headache for those in a situation that requires it.

---

Alley was right.

[Foxglove]

[...]

Offered Solution:

The RFP leader, who agrees there is a problem, offered this solution here:

RM ID: "Can enforce Bretonian laws and assist Bretonian lawfuls in Omega-3"

BAF ID: "Can enforce Rheinland laws and assist Rheinland lawfuls in Omega-7"

source: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread...pid1851219 Post #11

Going by the same thought, LN ID should not have ZoI in Bretonia, but should also get this line:

BAF ID: "Can enforce Bretonian laws and assist Bretonian lawfuls in [systems]"

I can only repeat myself: Do not make the wish to assist cross border possible via ZoI. This opens a can of worms. The "+1 line" approach clarifies it a lot better and makes the wording a lot clearer against abuse.

I agree with Jack, actually. If anything, the foreign militaries should be held to the laws of the house they are, by way of exception (!), allowed to intrude into. It wouldn't really make that much sense to suddenly punish people for deeds that are perfectly legal in other jurisdictions as well, except if it was a Rheinlander or Rheinland corporation that smuggled the Blood Diamonds in Bretonia, to stay with your example, since as a citizen or legal entity with main seat in Rheinland, you are bound to its laws regardless of where you currently are in addition to the Bretonian laws.

---

[Jack_Henderson]

I have serious doubts about letting a house enforce another house's laws, or even down to faction level for that matter. That sounds ten times worse than the current change and a serious headache for those in a situation that requires it.

Then the preferred solution should be:

RM ID: "Can enforce Bretonian laws and assist Bretonian lawfuls in Omega-3"
BAF ID: "Can enforce Rheinland laws and assist Rheinland lawfuls in Omega-7"
LN ID: "Can enforce Bretonian laws and assist Bretonian lawfuls in [systems]"

And actually, this is exactly what the players wanted to do.
Their aim was never to be able to enforce laws, but to be allowed to do cross border assistance.

[Jack_Henderson]

You cannot trust player factions. This is a rule issue.

---

+ IMG| DISCORD: https://discord.gg/TWrGWjp
+ IMG| IS RECRUITING: Click to find out more!

[Divine]

Since when and why?

Roughly since the Contari Lance (used as example referencing the time).

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=151485
Time left: (Permanent)

[Divine]

This example is still sounding a bit personal and biased.

Really just used them as a time-reference as I'm better judging Discos timeline by what happened in OC-space.
But around their time was when we reached the climax of the transition from the previous members to the newer ones and with that, the overall attitude-change.

//Edit: Rather add to that around half a year dating back and we should be quite precisely at the correct date of the shift.

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=151485
Time left: (Permanent)