Overhaul Sieging Rules.

[Thyrzul]

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.

Ye, so I guess it's subjective set of rules and categories vs objective mechanics then. I'd rather consider a change in mechanics before turning to rules enforced by the admins, so I'm not saying I disagree, but my priorities lie elsewhere.

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.

Core upgrades already cost significantly more than 100 million credits while a Core 1 base can be deployed and built up to 8 million HP from just a few million credits, an extra Shield Module would cost about 20-30 millions more. Drama happens when a base gets nuked either way, drama happens all the time someone feels wronged, justifiedly or not, but this change would affect serious builders relatively less than those who just lolspam Core1 bases with little to no effort invested into them.

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.

I already explained my proposal isn't to regulate the kids' behavior, but to give each chance to defend their own sand castles. And I already told Laura C. that I can give an exact answer if I receive an exact question.

On the other hand I'm now considering the refusal of doing so, leaving this matter to balance devs even regarding sharing exact information. The misinterpretations and misunderstandings greatly concern me, making me believe providing exact numbers of possible scenarios before any dev decision is made about these numbers would just end up in more speculation and drama than necessary. Those, who understood what effects hull buffs and repair nerfs can have can already draw their conclusions without exact numbers either way, those, who didn't, could easily just receive drama fuel by those numbers. And I kinda start feeling the same about that idea of the 3D Sirius.

---