PVP rules vs. RP

[Markus.Schiller]

Perma death would affect everyone, that's for sure. Capital ships more than anyone, considering their high purchase and equipment costs.

About the rules though, things like the cruise rule and the reengagement rules exist for fairness. Yes, it might seem lame on a roleplaying server, but again, it's about appeasing the playerbase who has to deal with the oorp sides of the game. If the cruise rule was removed, would you really like to fight anyone? If two fighters are dog-fighting, with no cds, the fight could literally last forever. Same thing for capital ships (do they have cds?). Imagine fighting a battleship with a superb bomber ambush, then they cruise away to regen shields. Imagine an Outcast destroyer captain stumbling on a lone corsair fighter in Eta, only to find he shield runs when his generators fail.

People have been complaining about the length of fights already (at least fighter combats). Reducing/removing rules like the cruise and reengagement rules would probably do more harm than good.

[ScornStar]

This game has evolved beyond SP and real life is a model to which RP is based off of. To do other wise is as rediculous as saying in Surius bankers are poor.

I am not attacking all rules I am attacking the bad rules. This is my opinion but I cannot convince anyone or get a satisfying answer by saying nothing.

So it is not correct or just to try and derail one arguement by attacking another issue and applying it to the one you disagree with.

For example I complain about caps you compair to perma death and draw the conclusion I'm flawed. This is wrong its called dodgeing the issue.

Now Im not trying to attack you as a person but, I am trying to get you to address the issue being spoken about or to get you to stop.

Yes, you would be correct if, you said I am complaining about only some of the rules and not all.

Perma death would affect everyone, that's for sure. Capital ships more than anyone, considering their high purchase and equipment costs.

About the rules though, things like the cruise rule and the reengagement rules exist for fairness. Yes, it might seem lame on a roleplaying server, but again, it's about appeasing the playerbase who has to deal with the oorp sides of the game. If the cruise rule was removed, would you really like to fight anyone? If two fighters are dog-fighting, with no cds, the fight could literally last forever. Same thing for capital ships (do they have cds?). Imagine fighting a battleship with a superb bomber ambush, then they cruise away to regen shields. Imagine an Outcast destroyer captain stumbling on a lone corsair fighter in Eta, only to find he shield runs when his generators fail.

People have been complaining about the length of fights already (at least fighter combats). Reducing/removing rules like the cruise and reengagement rules would probably do more harm than good.

Capital ship fights are very short, its only fighters that take years to kill no matter what you fly. Now if your lucky in a cap or shoot first ask question later then you can insta kill a fighter from a cap.

---

Eat Babies!!!!!!!!!!

Join our cause for a baby free world.

Harvester diplomacy

[n00bl3t]

Not to be a Jerk, because I'm not trying to be but watch this and fast forward to 1:38 for the first example then watch as many cop videos as you like. Getting gang raped by the cops is normal.

Here buddy

Overkill ensures success. This is the law enforcement way.

Well I hope that players take off their faction tags afterwards, because in-RP they would be fired. (Unless it is Rheinland and players powergame by controlling the courts, everything, etc.)

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[Laowai]

I have no issue with the underlevel rules - i think, while its not "RP" it is fair.

The cruise rule? the only part of that i dont like is the blanket application of it - If you use them at all, you're fleeing.... where it makes sense to cruise into a fight, but then again, the counter argument to that is a good one and making it black and white helps the admins make a call here and makes it unambiguous.


Like Scorn - I talking about the cap ship pirating issue as it applies to RP.

---

http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/3289/...047770.png

[Markus.Schiller]

I've never piloted a capital ship, nor have I really piloted a fighter here on the server (unless you count a starflier as something which packs heat). I'd like to one day, as it's definately one of the perks of discovery. However, while this is a roleplaying server, it's obvious that capital ships are in such a state due to people not-roleplaying their large vessels in the previous versions. Unfortunate, yeah. That's probably why so many of the rules appear strict or harsh - oorp/abusive players.

Things like the 4 hour rule should be hardened for realism, yep. Rules such as pirate capitals not being able to police should also be changed. I don't know whether a loosening of cruise rules and other pvp rules would be effective, but I'm open to test it out. However, in the end, it is up to Igiss (and the rest of the admins?) to deal with the rules, and ammend certain ones. If they get the vibe that the community believes capitals deserve a chance, it's more likely than not that they'll try and appease it.

Edit: from the looks of it, capital vs capital would also be long if they were able to cruise away (how effective are Train CDs on capitals?). I agree that fighter combats are long, especially since npcs take me ages already - imagine a player.

[ScornStar]

I think the punishment capitalship players now is akin to forceing women to stay in doors to avoid rape.

Because after all if women never left the house they could not be victimized nearly as much. However this would be punishing to the women and not the rapist. We have admins and we know how to report, there is nothing in this game we could lose that would be to terrible to wait for an admin to fix it.

So locking down caps is only punishing those who follow rules. Those who break rules are doing anyway still.

The criuse rule, I can see it being there for clearity for admin. how ever the retreat thing, nope dont buy it.

It can still be done by fighters in thrust and, sometimes retreat is really a trap or a buyer of time while reenforcements approach. Someone who ran now might be eager for payback now that his good buddies just showed up.

however I can buy the whole if they get off screen you can't prove wether they docked or not. But maybe retreat at less than 14k or as long as scanner contact is maintained.

Oh and one more thing unchain the cap ships!!!!! Give them as much regen ability as a fighter at least.

Theres no reason not to. The fights would still be shorter than a fighter on fighter fight and it would even up the Super Nova. with out boosting stats through the moon.

---

Eat Babies!!!!!!!!!!

Join our cause for a baby free world.

Harvester diplomacy

[mjolnir]

Well Sconrstar, star the changes capships will most probably get will make them better against other capships.

But just as "bad" against fighters, they might survive longer yes, but that's about it.

---

Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.

[Markus.Schiller]

The cruise rule would be hard to police if it was allowed in certain situations, unless the reporters have fraps or something running in every fight. It might be realistic or whatever, but it'd be too hard to prove if a person is really breaking the rules or doing it according to the rules. That's why it is currently a "do it and you're out" type of rule.

Didn't one of the admins say that retreating, by any means, is still retreating? So fighters thrusting "through the loophole" can still be punished for the fleeing rules?

Fighters have around, three regens or so (correct if wrong). That'd be pretty interesting to see, a wide-spread increase of bats/bots capacity across the transport and capital ship ranges (hopefully my Armoured Transport gets a boost).

[Reverend Del]

So we're down to cap rules, okay let me put this to you. If we totally unnerf Capships and allow them to do as they please, i.e. pirate., what would be the net effect of this? I put it to you that we'll see an increase in the number of capital class vessels, more so than at the moment, to the point where we were before capships were nerfed to make fighters seem more shiny. Yes capital ships need an un-nerf, at the moment they are large lumps of lumpishness, but I'd rather not see them allowed to pirate on the grounds that these ships would get overused once again. Hopefully the proposed changes to capital class vessels will render them more capable against bombers, but still fighter escort is your best friend against bombers. As it should be.

---

Saint Del is considered a holy healer of diseases of children, but also as a protector of cattle.

[Spear]

The no cruising in combat is to stop capital ships from cruising away and regening there sheilds then returning, also it is to promote greater tatics i.e the fighters are engaged and the enemy attempt to pull the battle away from the caps, the cap shouldnt then engage cruise engines and jump straight back into the fight, they should lumber towards the battle at impulse and the caps fighter escorts should be working to pull the battle back towards there Cap cover.

Caps cruise in combat on a daily basis and it is a hard thing to prove, I wouldnt be in favour of abolishing this rule even though it is not enforced very well because it will lead to cap sheild running and every player in a dreadnought trying to take down a fighter because it makes them feel uber.

---

=LSF=