• Home
  • Index
  • Search
  • Download
  • Server Rules
  • House Roleplay Laws
  • Player Utilities
  • Player Help
  • Forum Utilities
  • Returning Player?
  • Toggle Sidebar
Interactive Nav-Map
Tutorials
New Wiki
ID reference
Restart reference
Players Online
Player Activity
Faction Activity
Player Base Status
Discord Help Channel
DarkStat
Server public configs
POB Administration
Missing Powerplant
Stuck in Connecticut
Account Banned
Lost Ship/Account
POB Restoration
Disconnected
Member List
Forum Stats
Show Team
View New Posts
View Today's Posts
Calendar
Help
Archive Mode




Hi there Guest,  
Existing user?   Sign in    Create account
Login
Username:
Password: Lost Password?
 
  Discovery Gaming Community Discovery Development Discovery Mod General Discussion
« Previous 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 … 547 Next »
Rule change proposition

Server Time (24h)

Players Online

Active Events - Scoreboard

Latest activity

Poll: Should the rule me modified?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes
2.17%
1 2.17%
No
97.83%
45 97.83%
Total 46 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Rule change proposition
Offline Goliath
10-06-2020, 10:46 PM,
#12
Acestacker Supreme™
Posts: 1,870
Threads: 121
Joined: Sep 2016

(10-06-2020, 10:34 PM)Ivan Norovich Wrote:
(10-06-2020, 10:29 PM)Goliath Wrote: so why change the rule at all, then. If people are already engaging with little actual RP, this rule change is obsolete. Besides, it's kind of cringe to sneak behind transports and shoot. At least have the dignity to attack upfront a transport that is 6/10 times lightly armed or not at all. Its not like that one Mastodon's turret can inflict damage on you. It's not like you can one-tap with a SNAC literally any unarmored transport, and in other cases, 2-3 tap an armored transport. This change brings nothing to piracy RP. It brings nothing to attacking your mortal enemies either besides salt gathering up.

All I'm recommending is what should've been added a long time ago: A specific minimal time requirement or some sort of estimation. 10 seconds, 10 to 15...etc.

Can't you read? Let me help you.

Quote:A pirate ID must make a demand, and the target must fail to meet that demand in order to validate the pirate's attack. <- In this scenario, nothing changes gameplay-wise.

-However-

Maquis ID reads:

-Can attack any Gallic Lawful ships within their Zone of Influence. Can treat transports as combat targets.

What the rule change does here is that it would allow a Maquis ID player to sneak up on Gallic Lawful ships and open fire without the obligation to accord the targeted player time to respond.

Engagement lines will still need to be dropped first, but the proposed change would allow for more flexibility in regards to tactics.

EDIT: But I can get behind the minimal time requirement, make an adjustment to the rule that states clearly how long one must wait prior to attack, would solve a lot of drama.

so from /1 /2 to a simple /1.

[Image: 9Joq1q5.png]
Reply  


Messages In This Thread
Rule change proposition - by Username removed - 10-06-2020, 08:21 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by WizardLizard - 10-06-2020, 08:28 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by darkwind - 10-06-2020, 08:31 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Username removed - 10-06-2020, 08:36 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by MasterL410 - 10-06-2020, 08:40 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Lemon - 10-06-2020, 08:47 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Binski - 10-06-2020, 09:21 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by WizardLizard - 10-06-2020, 09:31 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Username removed - 10-06-2020, 09:55 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Goliath - 10-06-2020, 10:29 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Username removed - 10-06-2020, 10:34 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Goliath - 10-06-2020, 10:46 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Username removed - 10-06-2020, 10:53 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Goliath - 10-06-2020, 11:01 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by WizardLizard - 10-06-2020, 11:29 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by WizardLizard - 10-06-2020, 11:31 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Username removed - 10-07-2020, 12:39 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by WizardLizard - 10-07-2020, 12:51 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Username removed - 10-07-2020, 01:12 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by SnakThree - 10-07-2020, 04:26 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Nika - 10-07-2020, 05:34 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Binski - 10-07-2020, 05:53 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Nika - 10-07-2020, 06:48 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Binski - 10-07-2020, 07:18 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Nika - 10-07-2020, 07:32 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by darkwind - 10-07-2020, 07:19 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Binski - 10-07-2020, 07:37 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Gardarik - 10-07-2020, 07:42 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Goliath - 10-07-2020, 10:49 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Lumik - 10-07-2020, 11:09 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Binski - 10-07-2020, 08:34 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Thexare - 10-07-2020, 11:51 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by SnakThree - 10-07-2020, 03:55 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Dark.Star - 10-07-2020, 07:24 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Dark.Star - 10-07-2020, 07:45 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by ONIKS - 10-07-2020, 09:52 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Groshyr - 10-07-2020, 11:22 AM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Username removed - 10-07-2020, 12:47 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Toaster - 10-07-2020, 01:59 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by Goliath - 10-07-2020, 03:12 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by WizardLizard - 10-07-2020, 03:38 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by darkwind - 10-07-2020, 07:24 PM
RE: Rule change proposition - by JCPC - 10-07-2020, 07:54 PM

  • View a Printable Version
  • Subscribe to this thread


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)



Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2025 MyBB Group. Theme © 2014 iAndrew & DiscoveryGC
  • Contact Us
  •  Lite mode
Linear Mode
Threaded Mode