Overhaul Sieging Rules.

[Karlotta]

No matter how you tune the hitpoints, the repair rate, the declaration times, and the amount of RP required.

Mob rule will remain mob rule for as long as you let the mob rule.

The only way to stop or at least reduce the drama about bases is to make rules to stop both base spam and the destruction of positive-impact bases. It's not that hard.

Mob rule is mob rule regardless of bases, neither rebalance nor selective PoB rules will change that.

The idea is to leave it up to rules which base is "bad" enough to be removed or "good" enough to not be removed, not the mob. And there are some pretty straightforward criteria like location, name, affiliation, and purpose to classify bases as good, bad, or "no opinion let the mob decide". Some are already in place via rules and irp laws, and it would require 1 rule change and 1 additional line to avoid most of the drama.

The introduction of a special commodity costing 100 million credits required for base deployment can reduce the chances of base spam greatly without any rules required.

And it will result in even more drama when the base gets nuked. Making it more expensive does not fill the builder's head with wisdom.

On the other hand I do not intend to address subjective terms, such as "positive-impact" bases. Increased chance to defend any base, regardless of personal opinions regarding its impact, however, is included in the proposal (even if you don't believe in math).

I know enough about math and human nature to know that two kids kicking in each other's sand castles won't result in less drama if you change the number of hours needed to build or destroy the sand castles into another number. And since you "believe in math" unlike nomath-me, why don't you give some concrete numbers that will deliver the miracle you promise, and don't leave us hanging like you did with 3D Sirius.

---

User was banned for: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=200950
Time left: (Permanent)