Dumb stuff harms the game

[Monsieur Baguette]

POBs are means to gameplay. If the Enclave plays a big bad baddy that almost nobody wants to ally with, then their gameplay with POB destruction fits well their RP agenda. You do not need much RP to destroy something that belongs and/or benefits your direct enemy if not nemesis. If the owners can't defend the base either by themselves or rally the support diplomatically, then it is not so important to the players after all.

Profits are always linked to high risk. If you want to play a tamagochi-style peaceful POB - go to some remote corner where nobody would care. Having a POB in a centre of mining activity where a few major parties clash is certainly not a place for pacifist approach.

On a side note, I would also like to point out that RP viewed by you as "dumb" is not viewed as such by others. Likewise, the RP contribution of Goldgeist and attempts to peacefully reason it not to be destroyed without actually making efforts to propose anything of value to the attackers can equally be labelled no less "dumb".

Code:

- Lawful registered bases within house space sovereign and controlled territory should be sieged only by lawfuls from that territory.

Code:

- Unlawful player bases can be sieged only by other unlawful if they are placed within 15k distance from unlawful NPC base and aren't blocking any trade route

These two rules will make POB-tamagochi even more cancerous then they are now. If there is an opportunity to build POB, there must be an opportunity to remove it. Limiting the destruction of a POB to local lawfuls will eliminate the possibility of a siege by, say, other House military, making wars even more bland than they are already as the NPC assets are static and it takes time for the devs to write a story and implement it in game for an NPC base siege.