What is the amount of RP needed to destroy a base?

[Garrett Jax]

However, you could provide a little more time for the base owner to respond.

Define "little more time".

There are no hard and fast rules, but in this case, the goal was to get docking rights, not destroy the base. Did the guy respond at all? Have you seen him in game?Could you have poked him on skype or sent him a PM to let him know there was a communication? If those steps are unreasonable or impractical for you, and your primary goal is not base destruction, what's wrong with giving him 4 or 5 days?

---

[Zed26]

If we're going to make threats, we have to carry them though.

Bretonia's Base Registration thread seems to have Ilfracombe listed as a registered base, though a search on the forums only seems to bring up past BPA/BIS reports and attempted sieges, so perhaps some agreement was made via other channels to have it properly registered.

Two days until destruction (which was not clearly threatened in the initial post) for something as minor as what may be passed off as a "outdated access codes" or a "registry wipe" inRP does sound heavy-handed, especially since it was previously registered, is pretty unassuming and has no weapon platforms - unlike the obviously unlawful CGS|HQ - which Liberty may actually have a vested interest in sieging too.

Perhaps a fine first, and then destruction after an extended period of time - a week? With such a quick and brutal response, it's quite possible the owner will now keep it silently stocked out of spite and waste hours of your lives, but hopefully they are willing to forgive. Is it possible that everyone was caught up in a feeding/sieging frenzy, forgetting that they were decrying Hone's actions just a week prior after having a taste of an easy Core 1 siege on his Leeds-blocking base? Is Hone actually the Joker?

---

[Sath]

As I said, what does it bring to you? Happiness? You are interested in blowing the hardwork of someone, for absolutely nothing, with the cover of Laws and regulations, bullcrap, feces, RP my foot. Sadist bunch of morons.

There is a limit to everything. Trying to be the good obedient schoolboy who follows rules and regulations to his heart? Even inRP, this is way too messed up. 2 days for a base which seems to be registered already. 2 days is just an excuse and everyone brings in their big toys and their grandmas to take a dump on someones work, probably for more than a year or so.

This is a game afterall, not a job/obsession where you have to do unwilling things just because the rules/manifesto states so. Shooting at the thing for hours is not fun, and the base being seiged is not fun for the base owner either. So, why do you attempt it even, that too, with such an enthusiasm, that even unrelated/unmentioned factions bring in their caps and penetrate it. Its not fun for either party involved, and probably just leads to frustration of the owner/people supplying it. And you might well have lead to a guy quit Hone was worse, doesnt mean that you are good either. You are relatively less moronic than him, just that.

Value some others work, and give that guy a chance. You wouldnt be a smartass here, commenting about your RP greatness, if that base was yours.

[Thyrzul]

Did the guy respond at all? Have you seen him in game?Could you have poked him on skype or sent him a PM to let him know there was a communication? If those steps are unreasonable or impractical for you, and your primary goal is not base destruction, what's wrong with giving him 4 or 5 days?

If you want to give the middle finger to the authorities, what would you do? Respond with denial risking retribution arriving sooner than you'd want or start silently preparing for them, shipping a ton of commodities to have it well supplied when the assault comes?

It is mandatory for authorities to think about everything in order to be prepared for everything, most importantly everything unwanted. And the above is one of the many things they need to consider. Two days are quite plenty to give in situations like this.

And if the owner (whom we still don't know the person of, do we?) is a new guy with barely any contacts, who's to look for in-game, who's to poke on skype or send a PM to? The only guy responding to the comms thread admitted not to be the owner of the PoB. The only thing anybody could have connect to his person is the ownership of Ilfracombe, by which he has been adressed on a pretty much public platform. It's not about unreasonability, or impracticality, but (im)possibility.

All the Breton authorities had there was a thread no response came to, for whatever unknown reason. Now, try to make a decision as a responsible police/military officer/leader based on that.

---

[Garrett Jax]

Did the guy respond at all? Have you seen him in game?Could you have poked him on skype or sent him a PM to let him know there was a communication? If those steps are unreasonable or impractical for you, and your primary goal is not base destruction, what's wrong with giving him 4 or 5 days?

If you want to give the middle finger to the authorities, what would you do? Respond with denial risking retribution arriving sooner than you'd want or start silently preparing for them, shipping a ton of commodities to have it well supplied when the assault comes?

It is mandatory for authorities to think about everything in order to be prepared for everything, most importantly everything unwanted. And the above is one of the many things they need to consider. Two days are quite plenty to give in situations like this.

And if the owner (whom we still don't know the person of, do we?) is a new guy with barely any contacts, who's to look for in-game, who's to poke on skype or send a PM to? The only guy responding to the comms thread admitted not to be the owner of the PoB. The only thing anybody could have connect to his person is the ownership of Ilfracombe, by which he has been adressed on a pretty much public platform. It's not about unreasonability, or impracticality, but (im)possibility.

All the Breton authorities had there was a thread no response came to, for whatever unknown reason. Now, try to make a decision as a responsible police/military officer/leader based on that.

I'll take it your goal was base destruction then. After all, you didn't even post on the Declaration thread until your attack was well under way.

---

[Bretonia Police Authority]

The BPA is already doing its best to give the Owner a chance to come forward with the following threads

http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=115907

http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread...pid1531993

Once the rounds are done and the reports are in, likely in the next 24 hours, the BPA will then send Communications to any Base that doesn't comply to Bretonian Law. That will probably come out sometime over the weekend. We will wait a few days for a response.

To give you an idea the Junker Bases have still not fully complied to the Laws and that was started over 2 months ago. It was interesting to see the outcry after we 'sieged it' with mostly Bombers.

As for the owner of the Base, nobody seems to know. It has been around for nearly 2 years and the only posts about it are one dating back to the beginning stating it was an illegal Base and the rest are recent (week or so).

---

[AceofSpades]

this entire thread has continued with the most prevalent point being touched on twice:

POBs are the largest investment possible, being made on a server with a decaying population, in a community of <200 or so in a day and age where even old balls game like EVE Online dwarfs the population and involved persons of Discovery.

That means RP is important, as is having fun, even though the first is not quite as strictly adhered to as it once was. However both of these have to be sometimes set aside for the MOST important thing here -- and that is taking care of the community that we have. Whether its noobs or old guys, we cant afford to lose many of them, and since POBs are the grand daddy of time/money/investment and even sometimes RP for those who utilize them properly, care has to be taken regarding such large investments that might on occasion force you to deviate slightly from a 100% RP-based or 100% fun-based decision.


In my opinion you need a slightly ooRP rule to secure a "time lapse" before attacks can happen, until that sort of behavior starts to become the trend. By leaving the door wide open we let people set their own standards and as always the lowest common demoninator won out until it was stomped out... or we could perhaps go back to a trend of more strictly enforcing rules regarding RP overall -- considering that half of these POB attack declarations are made with a ***tty link to some bogus RP (therefore beginning an attack without competent RP which is already sanctionable), or done halfway through an already-started attack (ever been silently insta-snac'ed lol?), and frankly these sort of behaviours deserve sanctions.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edit: Regarding the post right above me that i hadn't seen previously, as this is the hundredth jab silently absorbed in unrelated forums:

For the hundredth time in as many places, it is our organization the Sigma Junkers, affiliated with the Junker Congress, that run the stations. Both stations were moved to the system, not even constructed there (and therefore not the "2 year illegal base" you speak of), requiring all sorts of paperwork and RP (from well over 2 months ago) that must have been repeatedly "overlooked" when handling these attacks. These intel failings could be more easily overlooked if it were not also the case that in recent weeks, dialogue on multiple channels has gone on between the Congress and BAF regarding all stations in Inverness. In fact, the BAF has been cleared to dock at both stations for a time now . During that time however it has been an interesting mix of frustration and entertainment to hear from the many Pilots who have participated in the numerous and i will repeat numerous (and not just bombers) sieges/engagements that have taken place out there, as almost every Officer I speak to has a different story regarding how he thinks the bases got there and who owns them. However these underinformed Pilots are hardly to blame for the seemingly lack of communication, as for a lengthy time there was a new organization (BIS with FL ID's being the most interesting) out there 'representing the crown' or antagonizing Junkers weekly. In fact, the most notorious of these antagonists led to recent discussion regarding clearance of forces in Inverness into "being limited to the BAF until the integrity of other organizations could be determined". Hence another reason why current docking rights are still limited.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So there's that, IMO it is interesting to see the lack of outcry regarding the tendency of "lawful forces" to act in an unlawful manner, regarding policy only as a tool for action. To complain about a lack of communication between POB Owners and their aggressors seems pretty damned silly when it plays the same role in reverse, except that it doesn't take years of work to organize a siege.

---

-

[5:57:11 PM] InfernalTater (Lewis) [Formerly TLI-Inferno]:meanwhile, Aces 'I don't always miss my destinations, but when I do, I'm on the other side of house space.'

Seriously nerf Junkers.

Shoot to Thrill

[Lord.MacRae]

Well, that post and a sentence "I bet that attack have already started before this message reach you".

I interprete from his own words that this player did that post after starting the attack (as the shield is already up after 20 seconds after the post)? He gave the defenders less then zero time to take measures to defend their station afther the post in the attack declaration thread, or at least to respond to his demand?

That is really sad and questionable .... good luck Poena Outpost.

---

[Fluffyball]

We should apply a rule that bases are indestructable (bases that were laid down without approval of factions could be removed or just moved by in-game admin).

Indestructable, because there will be always idiots who will pew at the base with their cruiser or bomber, not taking part in ANY roleplay or being in any faction, just for fun or trolling. Also, indestructable, until both sides, e.g. attacker and owner of the base, agrees on inRP event that will decide on the fate of the base - then admin lifts off the immortality of the base.

There is also another way. Instead of destructable bases we should have capturable bases. When amount of HP turns to, let's say, 5%, base is captured by the faction who assaulted it, but cannot be re-assaulted again in 3 to 7 days. You know, bases could have tags like ships. I don't know how much coding would it take, but I think it is possible to have such feature in Discovery (one of the mods I've came across the internet had the feature of capturing bases on fly).

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=138636
Time left: (Permanent)

[Lord.MacRae]

Hm, indestructible? No.
His "start" of a roleplayed attack was ok and should be developed until the attack, with some days delay.
But a quick post possibly already shooting at a base ...... come on, really?

---