[DISCUSSION] Player Owned Bases - Rules

[Thyrzul]

Perhaps the current set of rules is also designed with the purpose to keep PoB numbers in check and their existent sensible and reasonable. Something your "Core 1 PoBs should be unsiegable" suggestion would ruin beyond repair.

---

[Banned player t202085]

. Something your "Core 1 PoBs should be unsiegable" suggestion would ruin beyond repair.

This would result in a million core 1 pobs everywhere

---

User was banned for: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=202085
Time left: (Permanent)

[Shaggy]

Okay maybe not unsiegable PoB's because that is silly, but the fact the admins have to approve PoB owners Core Upgrades and the amount of roleplay is done, just for attackers to write a MD saying they found a PoB, then a comm to the PoB owner demanding a large sum or destruction of their PoB and then making a attack declaration that does NOT require admin approval is silly. The attackers and minimal RP attack a PoB while the PoB owner has to work hard and provide alot of RP and ingame activity before they can have their Core upgrade, yes their are advantages to PoBs such as Cloaks, Cloak Dis, Jump Drives, Hyperspace Matrix and so on, but they require alot of time and effort to build as well as alot of RP also. or a large sum of people to make deliveries while again the attackers need next to no RP to attack, not only that but the attackers can also attack traders while they are preparing their base for the siege during the 24 hours of the attack declaration which is silly. Their should be a grace period to allow the defending side enough time to prepare the PoB to be sieged. To balance it out as the defending side is unable to dock during the Siege for regens and repairs while the attackers can leave 1 by 1 to restock, rearm, repair while keeping the pressure on the defending guys. The attackers win no matter what the situation. There has only been 1 siege i've been apart of where there was an attack declaration and the attackers did not siege it because they could not win.

[Wesker]

I didnt attack Regensburg suppliers, I let them throw up weapon platforms and all. Even ignored them during the siege battle.

Its been done in other scenarios though, just make siege specific weaponry. Or siege specific torpedos so its bomber spamand not battleship spam. That way peoples "gameplay=rp" boners are solved, and pobs arent mobbed by capitalship fleets which are insanelly difficult to coordinate.

[Shaggy]

I didnt attack Regensburg suppliers, I let them throw up weapon platforms and all. Even ignored them during the siege battle.

Its been done in other scenarios though, just make siege specific weaponry. Or siege specific torpedos so its bomber spamand not battleship spam. That way peoples "gameplay=rp" boners are solved, and pobs arent mobbed by capitalship fleets which are insanelly difficult to coordinate.

I know that Regensburg suppliers where not hit by RHA or SCRA, I know that but there were others who did attack them on the other hand which is fine. But if i'm not mistaken things were said before with Minerva Research Station when that was attacked and suppliers where hit during the 24 hours before it could be sieged.

But I do agree with you some siege specific weapon should be created, something like the NEMP Launcher but for PoB's only. that costs alot of money which requires admins approval to get, similar to when a player wants to upgrade Core 2 to Core 3 they have to provide so many roleplay links as well as show responsibility and so on before they get the blueprint, the attackers should also be given the same treatment, have to provide so many links to be given access to the siege specific torpedo which lasts only for the attack declaration time which should not be 2 weeks, that is along time, it should be 2 Weeks but within that time only 1 attempt at sieging if the siege failed the first time more RP should be required after a certain time period.

Because yesterday there were too many RHA/SCRA caps that logged in for the defending force to even claim 2 kills, I think defending side got 1 kill and that was it. Also i've noticed over the many sieges that i've been on the defending side, attackers have the advantaged of being able to cruise out restock, repair and so on leaving only a fighter or bomber at the fight making sure no one cruises off from the defending side to restock or repair making this a huge disadvantage on the defending side also.

Sieges should be made into some form of "Event" that has to have admin approval before hand, yes it's all nice and good making an attack declaration but what does that actually do? Admins don't have to approve that the siege has sufficent RP behind it or anything it's just notifiying them it's happening.

[SnakThree]

I didnt attack Regensburg suppliers, I let them throw up weapon platforms and all. Even ignored them during the siege battle.

Its been done in other scenarios though, just make siege specific weaponry. Or siege specific torpedos so its bomber spamand not battleship spam. That way peoples "gameplay=rp" boners are solved, and pobs arent mobbed by capitalship fleets which are insanelly difficult to coordinate.

There could be special missile based weapons that require some monetary investment for ammunition, balanced across different ship classes and put on heavy and torp slot and be the only weapons capable of damaging POBs.

---

[j0e]

I suggest you to keep apart the "Core-1" case from the bigger ones, just 'cause -anyone can notice that- it's an easy startup, which doesn't require the Admins approval, nor an advertisement of its existence.

Said that, my chars are touched from this thread and the one by Sombra Hookier.
For a "Core-1" PoB, could be refined the chance of an encounter between its defencers and the attackers?
Something like a planned destruction attemp (or more than one?), together with the already regulated grace time in the attack declaration.
As is now, the PoB keepers will stay pressed for 2 weeks (or whatever time is), exposed to any kind of aggressors tactic, at any moment.

Considered the ingame traffic, we should favour the player interactions, over the random meetings and such unbalanced needed logins.

PS: If Shaggy allowed, I could post the link to the ongoing situation on which you could discuss in practical.

[Wildkins]

Its been done in other scenarios though, just make siege specific weaponry. Or siege specific torpedos so its bomber spamand not battleship spam. That way peoples "gameplay=rp" boners are solved, and pobs arent mobbed by capitalship fleets which are insanelly difficult to coordinate.

Here you go. The thread's done, great moves team. Keep it up, proud of you.

No, but actually this is sensible. Making them invulnerable is moronic at best, making some contrived system with a hundred variables will never happen, and instituting events which contribute more to admin/dev workload will never happen either. Make it a dedicated weapon of some kind, maybe even a weapon type so you can see it on snubs AND caps, and there we go. I don't actually know the feasibility of this and I'm sure a dev will walk in any moment and tell us that it's impossible to get working for x legacy code reason, but, I can dream.

The fine rule is a bit clumsily worded and dumb, and that's mainly because people got mad at me and others cracking down on PoBs in '15. Wish it would see a revert or something, but I also want the entire rules page to get reverted to early '15, so, there's that.

Frankly though, I'm of the opinion that if you're putting a base illegally or in hostile areas, and you can't reasonably defend it against whoever will come to kill it, you should probably try to hide it a bit better, or reconsider your location. Shouldn't be up to the Admins and the Rules to protect your snowflake base in New York or whatever. I'm vaguely sympathetic to the Core 1 case but otherwise, the solution to PoBs imo isn't to make them harder to kill. (Making them not take weeks of effort would be a start, but, hey.)

[Felipe]

But the Wesker and Shaggy ideas combined could work: to siege a pob, need a specific weapon, NEMP-like, that to be get need make an admin request (same needed to build such base) and similar level of RP and workload. And make amount needed equivalent to base core level.

Maybe instead, make a Titan feature? Just those can siege pobs, and can only be get trough event, like: i want siege x pob, make an event, supply it, grab ur Titan, kill pob, Titan poofs. Want siege another? Work again. That even would help activity.

That way, isnt anymore pob owner working a year to make a core 3, involving a faction to it, spending billions, countless hours of trading/rp, to be destroied in 2hs, if the "cool" attack fail during day, at 3am when no one around.

---

User was banned for: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2329969
Time left: (Permanent)

[Thyrzul]

[16:49:18] Thyrzul - [C]: We don't need any specific equipment, random superduper anti-base torp or whatever (wouldn't work anyways), just buff hull massively and nerf repair rate. That would stretch sieges longer while requiring less Skype friends battleships to overcome DPS.

---