Really @Jayce and @sindroms ??? Your idea of a rule is how to go around it??? You don't even think on maybe it would be better to follow it?
IMHO even as unfair a rule is in any game if I agree to play it i agree to follow the rules and not think out to go around it.
@sindroms you as a moderator should be giving the example of how not to proceed, agreeing or not with it.
With this I'm not saying you shouldn't have your personal opinion on things but remember the position you are. For someone new the image you pass is hey look even the moderators agree with ideas of how to bend the rules in place.
This said and after reading all the opinions here, all are valid, even @Jayce as a valid point, not a good one coming from a official faction leader, but still valid because there would be people thinking like that.
Still I think idea number 2 could be worked, I ask many times, what's the gain on belonging to a official faction for an indie?
I think they are saying that adding more rules for rules sake is useless. People will skirt the rules they don't like. Especially if the rules make the game more restrictive. There's enough problems enforcing the current rules.
Good bye my friends. Good luck in space. Fly safe.
Posts: 3,369
Threads: 294
Joined: Dec 2009
Staff roles: Server Administrator
(09-09-2016, 08:56 PM)pulha Wrote: For someone new the image you pass is hey look even the moderators agree with ideas of how to bend the rules in place.
But these rules aren't in place yet. Xenon asked for feedback on his ideas, so people are saying why they think the idea is bad. You seem to want people to not try and discuss worst-case scenarios, which is kind of silly; predicting consequences is a critical aspect of intelligent decision-making. It's especially important in a situation like this, where a proposed rule change affects all of us.
On-topic, I actually would be fine with restricting indies from participating in sieges that are part of official faction roleplay if they can't prove the prior involvement in that roleplay with the character they want to participate in the siege with, but only if we stop being so carebear about bases. Get rid of mandatory attack declarations, waiting periods, and even the requirement to RP with the base owner at all -- and also end the practice of certain PoBs not needing to be supplied.
When PoBs become an actual challenge to maintain and defend, rather than just something tedious, then we can see about restricting participation in sieges, so that it's a real challenge for both sides. As things are, you can either siege a base with 30+ people and be guaranteed of its death, or you can have fewer people and have no chance of doing more than denting it before people get bored and log off or an even bigger defense fleet shows up. It's not fun for anyone.
I think they are saying that adding more rules for rules sake is useless. People will skirt the rules they don't like. Especially if the rules make the game more restrictive. There's enough problems enforcing the current rules.
Right and I'm Santa
But maybe a bit restriction is needed. I personally think disco is way to "liberal". There are way to much grey areas, sometimes reminds me of the deregulation of the financial sector in the US, brought a global financial crisis.
In the end the problem is the players, always looking for loopholes and ways to "cheat"
(09-09-2016, 09:09 PM)Petitioner Wrote: On-topic, I actually would be fine with restricting indies from participating in sieges that are part of official faction roleplay if they can't prove the prior involvement in that roleplay with the character they want to participate in the siege with, but only if we stop being so carebear about bases. Get rid of mandatory attack declarations, waiting periods, and even the requirement to RP with the base owner at all -- and also end the practice of certain PoBs not needing to be supplied.
When PoBs become an actual challenge to maintain and defend, rather than just something tedious, then we can see about restricting participation in sieges, so that it's a real challenge for both sides. As things are, you can either siege a base with 30+ people and be guaranteed of its death, or you can have fewer people and have no chance of doing more than denting it before people get bored and log off or an even bigger defense fleet shows up. It's not fun for anyone.
Perhaps a rule to dictate such things would be unnecessary is a single faction were capable of taking down a POB on their own, as you suggested. In development we work backwards when bugfixing. Take off excess stuff until you find where the problem went wrong, don't tack on more in the process of backtracking.
(09-09-2016, 08:56 PM)pulha Wrote: Really @Jayce and @sindroms ??? Your idea of a rule is how to go around it??? You don't even think on maybe it would be better to follow it?
IMHO even as unfair a rule is in any game if I agree to play it i agree to follow the rules and not think out to go around it.
@sindroms you as a moderator should be giving the example of how not to proceed, agreeing or not with it.
With this I'm not saying you shouldn't have your personal opinion on things but remember the position you are. For someone new the image you pass is hey look even the moderators agree with ideas of how to bend the rules in place.
This said and after reading all the opinions here, all are valid, even @Jayce as a valid point, not a good one coming from a official faction leader, but still valid because there would be people thinking like that.
Still I think idea number 2 could be worked, I ask many times, what's the gain on belonging to a official faction for an indie?
If you re-read what I wrote, you will find that I commented on what would realistically happen. Not what should happen or what I think should happen. There is a bit of a difference here.
Also, bringing up the topic of indies vs factions is always a slippery slope into disaster, so I advise against going down that road.
Anyway, if you want an in detailed reason why .2 will not work, here is the line:
"Official factions must depend on their members and their allied official members only in a siege against POBs"
Now look at the official factions we have now and their activity. Now consider which ones have active allies. If you want to apply this rule and look at Liberty - it all seems fine enough. But that is because Liberty is a very active house with all of the NPC faction slots complete with official factions.
But what about the other parts of the game world? What if your ID has no capital ships to siege a base and your only official IDed ally has a no-cap policy? Implementing this rule has severe balance concerns in terms of what factions can even utilize this rule.
Not to mention, again, as Jayce already put it, factions which do not have the manpower otherwise will simply reach out via oorp manners to temporarily recruit people into their faction, give them the ID and tag and siege the base regardless of this rule.
And unless you want the administration team to also start dabbling into the recruitment policies of factions, with all of the -big brother is watching- vibes that come out of it, I, again, have to say that it is not a well thought-out idea to implement.
(09-09-2016, 08:56 PM)pulha Wrote: For someone new the image you pass is hey look even the moderators agree with ideas of how to bend the rules in place.
But these rules aren't in place yet. Xenon asked for feedback on his ideas, so people are saying why they think the idea is bad. You seem to want people to not try and discuss worst-case scenarios, which is kind of silly; predicting consequences is a critical aspect of intelligent decision-making.
It's the principle, I would have accepted something like there would be people who would do that. Not I would do that.
Posts: 3,369
Threads: 294
Joined: Dec 2009
Staff roles: Server Administrator
(09-09-2016, 09:25 PM)pulha Wrote: I would have accepted something like there would be people who would do that. Not I would do that.
Get the difference?
(09-09-2016, 09:15 PM)sindroms Wrote: If you re-read what I wrote, you will find that I commented on what would realistically happen. Not what should happen or what I think should happen. There is a bit of a difference here.
Also, I do not think we currently have a single faction that has the minimum amount of tagged battleships to siege a normal base. So they WILL need to oorp-recruit to make it work. Highlitghting the fact that matters, just in case.
--------------
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
----------
(09-09-2016, 09:15 PM)sindroms Wrote: If you re-read what I wrote, you will find that I commented on what would realistically happen. Not what should happen or what I think should happen. There is a bit of a difference here.
Also, bringing up the topic of indies vs factions is always a slippery slope into disaster, so I advise against going down that road.
Anyway, if you want an in detailed reason why .2 will not work, here is the line:
"Official factions must depend on their members and their allied official members only in a siege against POBs"
Now look at the official factions we have now and their activity. Now consider which ones have active allies. If you want to apply this rule and look at Liberty - it all seems fine enough. But that is because Liberty is a very active house with all of the NPC faction slots complete with official factions.
But what about the other parts of the game world? What if your ID has no capital ships to siege a base and your only official IDed ally has a no-cap policy? Implementing this rule has severe balance concerns in terms of what factions can even utilize this rule.
Not to mention, again, as Jayce already put it, factions which do not have the manpower otherwise will simply reach out via oorp manners to temporarily recruit people into their faction, give them the ID and tag and siege the base regardless of this rule.
And unless you want the administration team to also start dabbling into the recruitment policies of factions, with all of the -big brother is watching- vibes that come out of it, I, again, have to say that it is not a well thought-out idea to implement.
As read it correctly, you agreed on "I know for a fact I would." also so whatever.
On topic
Now we getting somewhere
I think this could be interesting not like the way Xenon phrased it. Maybe in another way with the changed on official factions to be more appellative for Indies to join.
