My point was rather that destruction of base, if killed by pirates, should follow the same style as actual piracy: fulfill demands or be destroyed - for ALL CORE BASES. It should be within line of the roleplay. And no, I don't have a base. I just pointed out some people just want a small base, without upgrading it (in roleplay, it have logical reasons like small unkeep).
It fact it feels more like: "Oh, sure, new base, Core 1. Hmmmmm, roleplay is going on... it is registered... I'll troll this guy and f**k up his base, because I'm bored." How this is not breaking Community Rules 1.2 and 1.7?
Not all factions are wealthy enough and only wealthy factions should have bigger and more advanced bases, just saying. SWD isn't Ageira or Interspace, so it is kind of logical they want to keep small unkeep - and Core 1 base is perfect for group of three players for example, because it makes sense inRP world.
Why to set up Shipyard on the orbit, while you can have a SkyLab?
Back to the topic.
Quote:Core One - Players are not required to role play prior to building a Core 1 base
- Players are not required to role play prior to destroying a Core 1 base
- Name, location and IFF of bases are permanent
We should change this rule into Core Two ruleset, because Core One ruleset is now open to crapload of exploits from the not only from the "settler" side, but also only from the "attacker" side. TL;DR - Core One ruleset not only can lead but also encourage players into breaking Community Rule 1.2 but also 1.6.
