Docking ring weaponry

[Arbs]

I'm something between A and C.

Generally speaking I like the idea of Manhattan orbit being the "safe heaven" from hostiles, so I am against removing the guns.

But I'm not sure whether the missiles are the best choice or not either. Sometimes they're just plain overpowered. Perhaps we can still keep missiles yet reduce their capabilities. Another option would be putting actual working station guns.

In other words my stance here is that we shouldn't be having enemy ships roam freely in Manhattan Orbit.

---

"If your heart is filled with faith, then you can't fear."

Fleet Admiral Alan Jones

---

Liberty Navy [LN]
Information | Liberty forces message dump | Recruitment | Feedback

[sindroms]

Right, so I think a small thing needs to be considered.
If you start a battle where the opponents can basehug, it is a mistake on your part. If you remove base defenses to reduce or remove base hugging, you invite people to use the bigger group wins attitude that dominated most of the raids and pvp interactions in early 2010s.

Which basically was a group of 15 people sitting outside of Malta/Crete/Manhattan and killing everything that undocks. For hours. Their reasoning - ''well if they can't defend themselves, that is their problem.''
2009 was basically a year where larger playerbase groups would roflstomp others. Over and over again.

Yes, you can replace things with pulses, but snubs do not give a toss about pulses or mortars or any other anti-cap weaponry. They can keep hammering on any target without problems.

I do not believe for a moment that the change that was proposed has any intention of roleplay behind it. Instead it is the need to kill every single participant of a fight so that you can kudos them later. Otherwise the fact that the enemy needs to resort to hug their own bases is sufficient to call a win, but it is rather obvious that nobody will accept that.


Stop kidding yourself. Any sort of pvp changes have no roleplay desires behind them. If you want to propose changes, at least be blunt and honest as to the intentions. You want fights to ''end'' instead of having to leave that one guy who flies around the base and taunts you for 30 minutes, while you cannot get close. It is as simple as that. Because they could. Since it is the other sides fault for not being able to compete.

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------

[Durandal]

Posting on behalf of Phantom' that he votes D as well.

[Durandal]

There's a thing called a topic, please stay on it.

[sindroms]

Durandal, the subject of group activity and how it influences moments of planet/base camping is directly tied to your proposal to change defenses.
The fact that you do not see the connection is sort of the reason why this is being talked about right now.

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------

[Teerin]

Let's lay off on the personal attacks. Thank you for your support.

[Sciamach]

Missiles act as an all-purpose deterrent from people being places they shouldn't be. I could understand the issue if the missile turrets were on every planet in the game with a docking ring, but these are just homeworlds that have them mounted; one of the places where there shouldn't be anything hostile to the owners of said location.

Changing them to pulses doesn't do much
Mortars are only for capitals and even then with a very limited firing arc
Flaks would be way too easy to abuse
Cerbs have the same problem (worse, actually) than Mortars would
and complete removal would leave only undependable cap patrols that only spawn when the planets align, someone's standing on a brick in the desert and holding a finger on their nose.

Again, these aren't planets in the middle of nowhere; these are the homeworlds of their respective owner factions. If a member of an enemy faction gets even within 20k of the planet itself, something has gone horribly wrong.

Having enemies that close to a homeworld doesn't even make sense from a RP perspective to begin with. I can't really see a logical reason why we would remove them from their current state, if not go full 180 and buff the missile turrets to be more effective.

I suppose that the case could be made that it interferes with activity but there's nothing stopping people from drawing ships away from said worlds-- and if people are just hugging the defenses then all you have to do is go somewhere else and pirate the lanes or start shooting CDs at PoBs to draw attention.

If the only reason we're forsaking them or wanting planetary defenses changed is for the ability for mindless pews to continue to be a thing defiantly opposed to the RP at hand (homeworlds, remember) then maybe I misread the community name because last I checked: "RP" is in the name, not "bluesbluesbluesbluesbluesblues". That's really not a behavior we should be encouraging.

---

[ sci·am·ach ]
/sīˈamək/

A simple, angry man casually working his way through life on a personal quest to acquire copious amounts of street cred.

[Zephyranthes]

I say add more weaponry on top of the existing missiles. Make it so planets aren't so defenseless, as they should be really fortified inRP due to their importance. Add flaks and mortars on top of existing weaponry.

[Char Aznable]

Pirates etc should not be around planetary docking rings anyway without getting shot at and expect to die immediately once moving into the defense perimeter. There's no reason to change it. If unlawfuls want to interact with lawfuls, go to the tradelanes. Go pirate. Do what unlawfuls are supposed to do.

---

#notmyfrankfurt

[Vendetta]

Pirates etc should not be around planetary docking rings anyway without getting shot at and expect to die immediately once moving into the defense perimeter. There's no reason to change it. If unlawfuls want to interact with lawfuls, go to the tradelanes. Go pirate. Do what unlawfuls are supposed to do.

The problem with this statement is that not all unlawfuls are pirates. Theres still terrorists that suffer from this. Not to mention Gallia invading New London. Its just not fun for these people, and sweeping those concerns under the rug with the "lol pirates go pirate" argument just seems one-sided to me.

---

Currently unable to consistently be present in the Community due to life constraints.

Youtube

------