Docking ring weaponry

[Lythrilux]

More or less most of the people here campaigning that 'core worlds are inRP defended' and need these defences that are bad for gameplay actually complained about the Capital ship battle groups that stood at the jump holes in Omicron Rho. In principle, it stood for the same thing that these docking rings do: they were deterrents against hostile players, yet were passive and didn't 100% block people out. Still, they were eventually removed from the holes because some of the same people in this thread complained (I quote Vipex - they were a "huge problem" supposedly although they weren't really).

Whilst Rho's current design is a poor and needs to be redone to assert The Core's actual position in Omicron Rho because right now as a whole it undermines it, simply taking away the capitals from the holes and making things easier for raiders seriously isn't a bad thing (before anyone tries to call me on hypocrisy I had never had a problem with moving the caps away from the holes). That alone doesn't destroy any of "MUH IMMERSIVE RP" (although outright deleting one of the other cap groups and refusing to put them back is pretty poor Vipex, but that can hopefully be remedied by someone else) and neither would removing or toning down the defences of docking rings.

Hell at the least non-house groups currently don't have any of their docking rings explained, why would they even have such advanced defences too?

All changing these defences does is make things better for gameplay and server interactions. If you want to be reminded of the control of the system check the patrol paths, political influence or just read a damn infocard. The justification of "it makes inRP sense!" to justify poor gameplay is a bit piss poor. Personally I wouldn't have a gripe with these defences at all if players were at least competently aware of the other players enjoyment and honorable enough to keep their distance away from Planets rather than shield running to them at the first chance.

---

[Epo]

Well, trying to save your life inRPly is a good behaviour. Noone wants to die. Otherwise if is desperated and commits an suicide. The problem is that some people think that fun doesn't exist withno a blue on screen.

If you were a soldier shooting on a battlefield and enemy would have an adventage, what would you do? Sit in open space or fall back to place with better strategic defence value?

[Lythrilux]

We should refrain from making real life comparisons. This is a game. People play to have fun.

And as long as the infocards, patrol paths and RP etc. still exist inRP space is never 'open'. Only from a gameplay perspective is it open (or should be).

---

[SeaFalcon]

..., but do remove the missiles because those make certain cells to reproduce and give a life-threatening disease.

How original...

[Findarato Veneanar]

Haven't we all agreed by now not to bring character death or ship destruction into rp because it has no place in the game?

---

Signatures may not be bigger than 700x250, 1MB. ~Skorak

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EddX9hnhDS4 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6623...%20Sig.png http://i.imgur.com/BpOtRCf.jpg -My stance on all the censorship in this community.
|:~ TBS ~:|:~ LMP ~:|:~ BMF ~:|:~ SW ~:|

[Laura C.]

Sounds like we are going to sacrifice yet another piece of RP sense, because making lanes completely safe for hostiles was not enough to "promote interaction". But lets put this decision into some perspective, shall we?

If I, as a RFP, will pursue a hostile which decides to run to Vogtland or any other unlawful base and hug it, the weaponry will shoot at me and give me hard times. And this situation is not rare actually. Do you see me complaining here about how Vogtland should be stripped of weaponry because it is "ruining my interaction"? No, you don´t, I take it as natural and it makes sense inRP that this base is shooting at me, I really should not have easy life there. Not to mention Omega-54, Hessian guard system. Do I complain that everything there is shooting at me? No, I don´t even go there to "find interaction", because it does not make sense inRP. Maybe I should, because it seems some people promoted interaction above everything.

Now imagine the amount of qqing if I would go to camp Vogtland and sit there, preferably with some capship. Or into Omega-54 and park my RM cruiser right at Wolfsburg Shipyard to have "interaction" with undocking Hessians. Omega-54 is heavily guarded Hessian heart, so it does not make even tiny sense. But so is also planet New Berlin. Hostiles should not be able to have picnics there, they actually should not be able to even get there and survive for longer than five minutes. And same applies for LN and Outpost Hesperia/Vespucci system and other similar situations.

Do you see the problem now, when we reversed the situation?

If you want to "promote interaction" at capital planets the way you propose, then promote it both ways. I want my fair share of camping at enemy´s holy ground too. Until then, you will definitely get a no from me.

---

On a ragebreak. Or ragequit. Time will tell.

[Durandal]

Now that I've calmed down a bit following all the HF bias accusations, let me clarify the situation.

Well, trying to save your life inRPly is a good behaviour.

No, it isn't, because this isn't actually roleplay. To roleplay requires interaction between two or more persons. These defenses effectively exclude certain parties from interaction. That's not roleplaying, it's more akin to playing a single player game than anything else.

The issue here is not that we want to actively encourage the raiding of capital planets. It's that we want to remove the proverbial hugboxes that people can hide in to avoid interaction. It isn't about blue messages, it isn't about legitimizing raids on capital worlds. That's a concept which I think is ridiculous myself, but it is often times what unlawfuls are forces to resort to in order to interact with lawful players.

Let's talk about the implications of removing these weapons for a minute in a clear and unbiased light. Does it mean unlawfuls are now capable of camping a planet, and that lawfuls will have to respond in order to oust them? Yes. Is that good or bad? Depends on who you ask. Personally I see all interaction as being good for gameplay even if it doesn't make the most roleplay sense. This is the main issue which people are focusing on.

However, let us take a look at the other side of the coin. Lawfuls lose their safe haven and pirates/terrorists/revolutionaries/aliens/whatever are present in the system. This lack of an impenetrable fortress encourages them to actually seek out and engage the threat. There's going to be a fight one way or another; the lack of missiles at docking rings suddenly makes the prospect of fighting at the planet no more or less appealing than fighting anywhere else. Indeed, many locations may be more fortified, for example a stationary battleship in the system, or a tactically significant chokepoint. This generates more interaction and makes more sense from a roleplay perspective, which is something I hope we all want here. If not, you should probably be playing single player.

I understand the desire to say "it doesn't make sense", but unfortunately it's an issue of human nature. You can't expect everyone to act their roles and actually go out hunting their enemies or patrolling their system when they're under more of a threat away from their home base.

Anyone who thinks this is about anything other than encouraging interaction across the server is deluding themselves, and I hope this post has shed some more light on our stance and just maybe cut down on the bias accusations.

As for your concerns, Laura...

If I, as a RFP, will pursue a hostile which decides to run to Vogtland or any other unlawful base and hug it, the weaponry will shoot at me and give me hard times.

Yep, it'll do exactly that. Give you a hard time. What it won't do is instakill you and ensure the enemy victory. No other bases in the game are armed the way capital planets are; it's still possible to pursue an unlawful back to base and win. As for guard systems, well, they're getting deguarded. The defenses in them are almost always less potent than a capital planet's with a few exceptions, but those exceptions will be toned down to make interaction in those systems feasible as well.

[Lythrilux]

Sounds like we are going to sacrifice yet another piece of RP sense, because making lanes completely safe for hostiles was not enough to "promote interaction". But lets put this decision into some perspective, shall we?

If I, as a RFP, will pursue a hostile which decides to run to Vogtland or any other unlawful base and hug it, the weaponry will shoot at me and give me hard times. And this situation is not rare actually. Do you see me complaining here about how Vogtland should be stripped of weaponry because it is "ruining my interaction"? No, you don´t, I take it as natural and it makes sense inRP that this base is shooting at me, I really should not have easy life there. Not to mention Omega-54, Hessian guard system. Do I complain that everything there is shooting at me? No, I don´t even go there to "find interaction", because it does not make sense inRP. Maybe I should, because it seems some people promoted interaction above everything.

Now imagine the amount of qqing if I would go to camp Vogtland and sit there, preferably with some capship. Or into Omega-54 and park my RM cruiser right at Wolfsburg Shipyard to have "interaction" with undocking Hessians. Omega-54 is heavily guarded Hessian heart, so it does not make even tiny sense. But so is also planet New Berlin. Hostiles should not be able to have picnics there, they actually should not be able to even get there and survive for longer than five minutes. And same applies for LN and Outpost Hesperia/Vespucci system and other similar situations.

Do you see the problem now, when we reversed the situation?

If you want to "promote interaction" at capital planets the way you propose, then promote it both ways. I want my fair share of camping at enemy´s holy ground too. Until then, you will definitely get a no from me.

Every Docking Ring planet has at least one station that'll be armed with station weaponry. So everyone will be on the same page in terms of defences. Right now docking rings are overkill though.

---

[Laura C.]

Also another note - this will solve nothing if there will be POBs which serve as planetary defence. As far as I remember, currently this applies to Manhattan (Long Island), New Tokyo (Itabashi) and there are even two POBs on the orbit of New London (not sure how armed they are though). So this will solve nothing if there will be POB weapon platforms shooting at hostiles anyway.

---

On a ragebreak. Or ragequit. Time will tell.

[Lythrilux]

It at least solves the problem for planets that don't have POBs in their orbit, and it still contributes to toning down the defences as a whole.

---