Siege Ship Idea...[well the [Resurrection of the idea]

[Echelon]

the problem with the curent system is that it takes very long to decontruct a base - the solution is to make it faster.

but if you make it faster - it unbalances the time spent to build it vs. the time needed to destroy it. - making a big cannon that can do the job easier gives the ppl who can use it a lot of responsibility.

a counter to that is to force teamwork and coordination. - but even if we did the ammo-feeding mechanic - it would take only few ppl to effectivly make it work. - and we might get small bands of players who claim to be responsible, but act on ooc motives more than RP .. and destroy others ppls works "cause they can"

so the main reason it was rejected is cause so far - players have not shown the level of respect and responsibility towards other players pobs - which includes all the time up to now ... ( the rejection of a siege weapon had been - i think late last year )

- I would suggest ammo takes up a massive amount of cargo space so you can't just fill the ship easily, and it will still have a giant refire anyway to counter the method of constant supply, think of how the enormous amount of energy it takes to charge a railgun shot for it.

- on the second one im quite sure thats grounds for a sanction for lack of sufficent roleplay for engagement, the ship would get deleted

-the transports giving ammo will be targets too of the siege I would imagine the defense would be Shoot the weapons supply lines, then attack the siege ship.
while the people on the assualt defend from the bombers shooting their transports and the capital ships going after the siege ship.

- Bases should be able to hold out for a sufficent amount of time, Core 4's should take multiple siege ships i.e 3-4 to start bringing the hurt.
So sieges are costly to preform and can fail too

Sorry for the triple-post

---