/lockdown

[ProwlerPC]

Interesting idea and I kind of like it. I read a good fair chunk into the thread but I admit that a little over halfway through I zipped to the end here. I'll toss in my opinion on the use of such a command and by whom. Sorry if any pieces or all of it was already mentione, if so, please consider this a bloated /signed post

If such a command were to be implemented I would prefer it to be only used as /lockdown #t (or whichever was the one for "target") which only effects the single ship that the player using the command has selected for targeting. The reason is that it will prevent disruption of innocent bystanders (including unlawfuls that are still unnoticed) which would annoy many players just passing through. I can just imagine NY being in perpetual lockdown. This can be RPd that the technology requires the pilot to actively use it which means needing to be close enough for the ship to targeted (which is 10k). This is the distance when we all can first see the IFF and this is what I am getting at. It can be written that this tech has the ability to manipulate the target's IFF emitter so that it's signal from then on prevents docking with the lanes, gates and such from happening for that ship.

For the most I was strongly feeling that it should be a feature only for the local police/paramilitary in charge of the space and that it should effect the lanes, gates and planets that bear the Police name. This is because there are many companies whom may have unlawfuls who manage to slip out of the lawful radar then go hide out at one of their stations. I can think of several companies whom have that kind of RP with unlawfuls. Of course this got me into thinking that even though this is a strong push for police activity it's a concept that could and should be applicable to all IDs and their associated bases that bear the same name on mouse over box in-game. How this would break down to is Police getting the largest share by effecting the lanes, planets (most but not all planets are under Police authority even if a corporation has major interests but there are a few exceptions noticed when mousing over in-game) and stations that bear their name (in some cases, like the Sigmas, the lanes are owned and under control of a private organization as are the gates), the gates bear the local military's name and it makes sense since they are the ones heavily concerned with inter system travel that goes beyond and comes from beyond so co-operative effort is needed withing the houses for full lockdowns (this may result in, as an example, LPI initiating a lockdown on a target who must now only cruise around with LPI patrols chasing and LN blocking Gates ready to initiate their lockdown the target gets close). And then there are the many stations that are privately owned which should be able to be on lockdown from the target by their respective owners.

Now onto who are the ones to be on the receiving end of such a feature and who would wield such a feature. My opinion inexorable lead to an "if-then" situation when considering who would be one and thus who would be the other because by definition this is concept of one player actively effecting another player so it's the part that is sensitive and tricky to deal with. Ideally I am one in favour that would allow such a feature to implemented by anyone carrying the ID be they official or not so that way anyone can partake in what is being featured as a tool to enhance RP (and I don't doubt for sec of it's potential as such). Why deprive them of enhancing RP eh? But if we take moment and ponder for a bit we will see that while it can be a great tool as featured by RP'rs it can also be a great weapon for those who "feed" off other people's grief.

The problem is, we may find ourselves inundated with issues of illogical lockdowns of allies and fellow officers etc... going rampant on the server. To control this I have put into some thought of it being IFF based. Meaning with so and so ID you can effect someone with so and so IFF with a lockdown and with all other IFFs the command will fail. At first it may seem easy and simple as each faction has clear set hostiles. But then we get into thoughts of what about unfriendlies?, then what about neutrals? and who would these be? etc... Believe me there can be some interesting debates concerning dispositions of factions toowards each other. Being IFF based adds more to the thought process for those who use Generic IDs on which IFF they chose and whom they align with. I believe this is possible but it is a lot of work just on the surface of the idea.

Now here is the If-Then part. If it is too much work and the idea was to be implemented in which it can lockdown any player without discrimination then I would suggest it be placed in the hands of official factions for a trial period. Heck if someone were willing to work an IFF filter to the command, I even actually suggest doing a trial period with official faction while it's being worked on in order to see what needs to be considered when choosing what IFFs a particular ID can effect with a lockdown. Later on we may even get into things like IFF requests to official factions by generic ID users and such (ie: independant employment contracts or freelancing if you like) which turns into your charming free pass privilege that can be revoked. I would suggest that factions maintain an in RP list (after all one is asking to be friendly and "sponsored" by the other) and such a list oughta be quite accessible concerning whom the sponsoring faction does business with, works with, and space they travel to since we assume that the sponsored independant freelancer is doing work for the sponsor. This way, in case Freelancer made a major transgression in the space of someone whom the sponsoring faction does business with, the local authorites (who are rightfully mad if they couldn't lockdown the transgressor) can contact the sponsoring faction and demand/request the removal of the IFF privelege (keep in mind that IFF's are RP mechanisms unlike the IDs). I hope you kind of get the idea.

On a final note, I would like to add that I believe that Hackers, LSF, and the other special SS IDs of the other houses get a command /hacklock #t that removes this lockdown (as well as do it to themselves). The Hackers, this is obvious. For the SS type IDs I feel it should be put in as nod that they would have made such attempts early in each war in order to not get caught in their respective enemies space and incapable a breaking a lockdown. A show of teamwork needed if a group was to invade, for example, Texas. It would be a good idea to bring at least one SS to help make it back in the event of a lockdown. To those who want to invade a house solo in a BS, well, good luck with that.

Maybe more thought will come later but that's my 2 cents for now

---