• Home
  • Index
  • Search
  • Download
  • Server Rules
  • House Roleplay Laws
  • Player Utilities
  • Player Help
  • Forum Utilities
  • Returning Player?
  • Toggle Sidebar
Interactive Nav-Map
Tutorials
New Wiki
ID reference
Restart reference
Players Online
Player Activity
Faction Activity
Player Base Status
Discord Help Channel
DarkStat
Server public configs
POB Administration
Missing Powerplant
Stuck in Connecticut
Account Banned
Lost Ship/Account
POB Restoration
Disconnected
Member List
Forum Stats
Show Team
View New Posts
View Today's Posts
Calendar
Help
Archive Mode




Hi there Guest,  
Existing user?   Sign in    Create account
Login
Username:
Password: Lost Password?
 
  Discovery Gaming Community Discovery Development Discovery Developers Forum Discovery Unofficial Development Discovery Mod FLHook Projects
1 2 Next »
Suggestion: Inverse /nodock; /yesdock

Server Time (24h)

Players Online

Active Events - Scoreboard

Latest activity

Suggestion: Inverse /nodock; /yesdock
Offline Lythrilux
09-24-2018, 10:33 PM,
#1
Edgy Worlds
Posts: 10,361
Threads: 737
Joined: Jan 2013

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.

[Image: Lythrilux.gif]
Reply  
Offline Laura C.
09-24-2018, 11:23 PM,
#2
Member
Posts: 1,445
Threads: 51
Joined: Dec 2011

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.

On a ragebreak. Or ragequit. Time will tell.
Reply  
Offline Laz
09-24-2018, 11:26 PM,
#3
(Sorta) Retired Code Monkey
Posts: 1,904
Threads: 106
Joined: Jan 2014

(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.

Reply  


  • View a Printable Version
  • Subscribe to this thread


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)



Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2025 MyBB Group. Theme © 2014 iAndrew & DiscoveryGC
  • Contact Us
  •  Lite mode
Linear Mode
Threaded Mode