[Infopage] Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback

[Thyrzul]

As a clarification for those going about this.

The logic by which I'm applying to this, is the same logic that was given to me during my time in an official faction, and haven't before now seen anything to challenge that logic. I'm using the examples and reasoning given to me by others on their interpretation of this type of situation and applying it to this situation. If any faction truly wants to find a way to siege it that is seen as acceptable by the requirements and isn't ruled against, feel free. I'll redeploy the guns and stand ready to shoot back.

As such, this one is a rather important reminder.

If you think something about my interpretation is wrong, This is what I've been given to understand for little over a year. Paired with past experience on the opposite end, this is what I have been told to understand for the future regarding similar situations. The explanation given to you is what was given to me to understand. If you wish to talk with me personally about it, reach to me on Discord. This has drawn on far too long and clear it's becoming too heated to continue here.

Color to draw attention to the important bit.

Instead of addressing things in order I'll address this first, then get to the other points. I have feedback towards the misinterpretation of rules by a Battlegroup Harmony High Command member in defense of Battlegroup Harmony assets so I use the Battlegroup Harmony Feedback thread to voice my concerns. If I'll have general concerns towards your person specifically, DarkTails, you can be sure I will voice them through personal messages or other private channels. Your admission of these thoughts not originating from you personally further justifies that this feedback belongs to this thread. Keep in mind, however, that this information doesn't make this train of logic any more or less correct than before.

The entire reasoning for ooRPly proving it makes the entirething useless, as ooRP information should not and in most times will not be used without recourse in the inRP environment.

The purpose of a screenshot of the base(s) having Liberty Separatists IFF at the time of a siege declaration - whether acquired through inRP or completely ooRP means - is primarily to prove the attackers (who are supposedly hostile to the Liberty Separatists) are not breaking any rules with the siege, as - due to the IFF - the base is a hostile base, is not protected by the second point of the Outer Regional Space regulations, which regulations are to be taken into account when considering Bering. It is not meant to have any inRP effect in the first place, whether it has any or not, is optional.

I will not comment much on the habits of the Liberty Navy, a more knowledgable player in that regard has already done that. McNeo also pointed out well, that - according to the server rules themselves - the IDs' content override the server rules in the case of conflict, and that the Liberty Navy IDs provide ZoI, and thus law enforcement permissions within Bering. Implying that server rules then override roleplay laws in the case of a conflict wouldn't change much either, as the lack of such conflict is actually pointed out and explained in the previous paragraph.

It then revolves back into the issue of proving the base is hostile to Liberty which cannot be done inRP except by very specific circumstances.

however the issue is proving the base isn't truly neutral and just a Separatist base abusing neutrality.

The issue with this is, it falls under the same thing of 'boarding PoBs and discovery they sell contraband, thus being sieged down' issue that was present back in my time in 5th, was told that's a giant no no.

I've already pointed out that

There is nothing specifying that you have to inRPly prove you aren't breaking an ooRP regulation

, therefor the lack of an inRP evidence that the base belongs to the Liberty Separatists (as strong as a screenshot of the IFF) is not necessarily an obstacle for the attackers. I reckon less can be already enough for a declaration, screenshots of hostile ships nearby, "close up scans indicating ownership", you know, things like that.

After all, bases fell for sieges with the same - if not less - amount of roleplay backing in the past.

The rule clarification was made to ensure ID's that have no direct attack rules, such as Freelancers, cannot simply bounty a base themselves then attack it. Attacking a base must make sense as if you were attacking a ship. This does not become tantamount to "well, they can shoot x, so they can shoot the base" as it comes back to proving the base belongs to x.

Whether it applies in this case or not is irrelevant. If we treat the PoB as a player, Outer Region Space regulations first point permits the Liberty Navy to act. If we treat the PoB as a base, Outer Region Space regulations second point doesn't prohibit the Liberty Navy to act.

The result is the same either way: even with a relatively weak inRP justification, the Liberty Navy (but at least the 5th) can declare sieges on both Bristol PoBs as per the current version of the server rules.

---