POB Grieving and the Rule-Abiding Grievers

[Skyelius]

-"Reading the OP got me the feeling this is more like about nerfing siege options in general, not really anti-grief, but anti-siege..."

-"So how about we stick to the good old but sadly still unimplemented idea of nerfing repair rate big time and buffing hull points big time... ...and finally have things like week(s)-long sieges where both sides can prepare and coordinate appropriately?"

What you're trying to say is obvious, but your criticism of my approach is illogical and improper, but mainly, quite illogical.

An "anti-siege" suggestion would affect the siege mechanic itself, which is ironically exactly what you suggested (sounds like you simply want your alternate solution implemented and I guess it's a valid alternative? I mean, you could have simply suggested your unimplemented idea in my thread without questioning my motives with such... arguments and... logic?

Mine is precisely anti-grief because I suggest affecting the frequency of said attacks; so that if base owners/benefactors are OORPly hated, they do not have to survive an onslaught by many factions very frequently, but rather, give the attackers a fair but not ridiculously huge window of opportunity to strike.

Alternate solution noted - affect the siege mechanic. Thanks anyway.

---

"It is a cold universe until you know God as your Father, and then it becomes a home. Even the next life simply becomes the Father's house, home."
—David Pawson

[Xenon]

Dear everyone,

It is no secret that POB grieving and OORP hate are the primary cause of people leaving our community.

Many, when frustrated with the decisions of Administrators and Developers, resort to hurting others, which slowly destroys the server.

This is a call to all players: active, inactive, banned, and forumlancers - to protect the feelings, time, and work of your fellow players.

Discovery, for many players, remains an "unfinished chapter" in their lives, but damaging people is not the way.

If you're invited by your friends/buddies to raid a base "for the lulz" or after hearing a lame or barely convincing bad thing about the POB owner(s), you can say no, and true friends will remain your friends!

There are many ways to enjoy the game. Everyone knows that having a ship blown up doesn't cost as much as losing a base.

Admins, please hear me out:
-Perhaps, it could be a good idea to inflict a penalty for losing your ship during a base siege, of several million credits, proportional to the risk to the base.
-I no longer find the part where it says that "POB Attack Declarations last 2 weeks". Was that removed? Why? Still, If it wasn't removed, I think POB attack declarations SHOULD ONLY LAST 3 FATEFUL DAYS, and 2 different cooldowns should be implemented:
---1) Cooldown for the Faction(s) participating in a POB Attack. 2 months seems fair to me.
---2) Cooldown for the base being attacked. 1 month seems fair to me.

Reduce these windows, reduce the chances of people hurting others.

Grievers, please hear me out:
-Watch the movie or read the plot of: "Law-Abiding Citizen" so you can understand why Admins must sometimes act the way they do.
---The main antagonist in the movie is a man that feels he was wronged and decides to unjustly dish out pain and suffering.
---Essentially, this man studied law well and his actions were impossible to concretely accuse in court; people knew the damage he was doing, but the legal system did not provide a means of catching him.
---This translates to "Rule-Abiding Griever" in our community. Sure, nobody can catch you because you do the damage you do cleverly, but remember: this is a private server, and justice will ultimately crush you, in this community or your next; in this existence or the next: you will pay for the damage you've done.
-Knowing this, you shouldn't be proud of the fact that the reason for sanctioning you is obscure or nonexistent, but instead ashamed of the fact that you do not have the courage to openly declare what you will do before you do it; that you hide and sometimes even dare to blame others in order to not get caught.

I am committed to fighting this behavior. I don't know who you are, but if you're doing this, I don't hate you, but I will fight you, until you change. I believe in second and third chances. I believe that there is healing for broken hearts and people who consider themselves victims IRL and pass that damage on to others in games.

With all sincerity and good will,
Skyelius

@Skyelius I agree with you 100%
The cool-down idea is not bad but need more enhancement
The problem is not that we need a cool down for bases or raiding factions, but we need some control over official factions actions and we need some common sense.
As far as i know, RHA is a revolutionary army, which suppose to work as a revolutionist ...
Revolutionists help people get rid of the current dictatorship or oppression regime but they don't attack, threaten and terrorize their own nation civilians !!
Don't start telling me that Kruger and Daumann are sworn enemies, I know they are, but for example RHA do that with civilian and corporation's POBs
Listen, i am not having a go or a rant against you RHA because i know you will probably have your blood pressure rise to the max just because i am mentioning you - BUT when i see that revolutionists that suppose to help the civilians get a better life and end the current regime BECOMING a terrorists organization that threaten everyone within it's space, even their own people just to fulfill a kill spree or POB destruction spree, then truly someone should stop you there.

It's not your fault alone actually, but it's the ADMINS fault too and i am sorry to say so.
The admins fault is that they are seeing all this hassle of destroying bases and an official group (RHA) go completely and totally astray from their role play and yet still didn't interfere.
I urge you to interfere and find a cure to this disaster, OR by time, people will flee the zone of influence where the groups like (RHA) act, and then you will have an empty space, followed by an empty server.... Think about it.

@Wesker I am NOT having a go at you, I DO NOT hate you, I DO NOT dislike you, but truly, your group actions are crossing every red line regarding RP.
Take it easy and find a cure for this so we all play nice and have fun instead of bursting at me and start typing a sniping, hateful reply.
Good luck with this topic and i hope that this deviation from factions main lore ENDS soon.

---

NEBULA INFORMATION BOT ☆ NEBULA DISCORD SERVER
XENON WEAPONS MARKET ☆ NEBULA GRAND PLAZA ☆ NEBULA TECHNOLOGIES
THE DISCOVERY POBCAST ☆ DISCOVERY SERVER RULES

[Thyrzul]

@Skyelius
Your proposal, if implemented, would decrease the frequency of sieges, mine would not, instead elongate them to provide more ground for fairness and balance. I don't see how my proposal would be more anti-siege in general than yours. I don't see how my observations and conclusions drawn from your tone are illogical either. On the other hand you still seem to put more emphasis on sieges out of supposed/alleged ooRP hate than any other case of sieges, which still makes me question your impartiality in this matter.

---

[Jack_Henderson]

Skyelius, while I can see the "cooldown" times as a potential way of changing the system (even though you lean a lot too much to the POB owner side there), you make one big mistake.

You ignore the damage that the placement of this base has been causing for years.

It is one out of 2 remaining bases that are doing area denial. Today's placement ist against existing rules and it is hurting gameplay.

So if you talk about "grief" and "loss", you should look at both sides.

I somewhat agree with your gloomy prospect of how this will play out.
No shot has yet been fired, but tensions are already running high - days before anything might happen.

The solution is easy, and I have suggested it many many times over the last years - because this problem is old:

> Kruger| could request a relocation of the base to a position that is inside the current rules. Put it - like all the other POBs except one - somewhere where it does not cause gameplay-wise damage. I bet this would end the siege, keep all the connected madness from happening and save us a lot of negativity. No one would care about a Kruger POB on top of the NPC base, for example.

> Optionally - in case Kruger does not request the repositioning (which they likely won't) - the Admins could step in and just move it. This step has already been requested on Sunday when it became clear that the siege would become reality.

> Last option is to just try to destroy it to finally make Omega 7 a system again in which gameplay is not severely restricted by egoistic and detrimental choices by players. And we will can anticipate how badly this will end when the fault lines are already gaping wide open before anything happened.

So, Skyelius, you are placing the blame too one-sidedly onto the future attacker.

It is a fact that players cannot be trusted with decisions that affect gameplay massively. POB placement has given players exactly this power and veteran players know the amount of damage this has caused (e.g. King's Cross for Sair raids, Puerto to Hessian raids, Falster to the piracy spot in O3, etc etc). It has taken years for almost all owners of badly placed POBs to realize that area denial and gate/hole blocking bases are detrimental and step by step they were relocated. The new rules were made, and just two bases defy them. That's where the root of the problem is. That's where you should also look for "hurt and damage caused".

Doing the right thing is what matters.
Kruger needs to do the right thing. Request a relocation to a point of your choice.
And if they can't, Admins should in my opinion step up and protect the intended gameplay.
And if nothing is done... it's going to be bad and I am glad I will not even be phyiscally around for that weekend.

Jack

---

+ IMG| DISCORD: https://discord.gg/TWrGWjp
+ IMG| IS RECRUITING: Click to find out more!

[Mímir]

It is no secret that POB grieving and OORP hate are the primary cause of people leaving our community.

I find that hard to believe... I think most people have left because it's a decade old game with 50 players online, where half are supplying POB's or powertrading, adding less atmosphere than the NPC's around. Just sayin'.

Stuff like POB's have driven off a good chunk of players too. Evidently, people can't cope with owning a virtual base that might suffer a virtual death, and to be entirely frank, some of these POB whine threads are pretty unsettling. Should I feel like some sort of molester when I shoot up your dinky base, and why??? It's a game, stuff can die, you shouldn't care, because it's a GAME.

Anyhow have fun, maybe re-evaluate priorities a little?


EDIT: If this is about that Kruger base inside the Omega minefield that has ruined gameplay for a host of players for several years, then I'm going to donate all my Disco belongings to whoever burns it.

---

[Durandal]

I think it might be prudent to instead address why there is such a strong dislike of POBs amongst certain parties to begin with. Treat the disease, not the symptom.

[Skorak]

Still it's ridiculous how you can destroy a pob with tons of work behind it forever so easily and without any risk or loss for the attackers. That also make you paranoid for two weeks.
Whereas ships exploding means nothing.

[eigos]

I can suggest a good idea to alleviate POB grieving.

The problem, as I understand it, is people have invested A LOT of time, money and RP into their POBs. Having it be wiped out in a matter of hours is indeed frustrating.

The solution: make POBs a little easier to maintain, a little easier to construct and have some sort of 30% money refund upon destruction - some sort of "insurance-type thing", with the cash being higher depending on the actual age of the POB! Like, if its a month old, give the guy 250 mills to compensate upon destruction. If its a year old, give him 1,5 billion.

What results are we aiming for here:
1.) Pob owners get a little compensation for their efforts, with this "insurance payback" when base gets trashed;
2.) Easier construction and maintenance means more POBs to shoot at, less grieving upon destruction;
3.) We can make a "Hall of fame" for longest lasting POBs, so they wont be completely forgotten;
4.) No additional rules, no additional regulations needed, because those can kill the playerbase faster than anything else here.

Think about it. I have been reasonable with this.

---

Special promotion on cloaks. Made In Donesia.

*We claim no responsibility for any kind of damage or sudden explosion that might occur from proper use of this product.

[Jack_Henderson]

EDIT: If this is about that Kruger base inside the Omega minefield that has ruined gameplay for a host of players for several years, then I'm going to donate all my Disco belongings to whoever burns it.

It is about that base.
Happy donating.

_____

And on a more general note: in this little part you see where the real problem is: players making bad decisions that - in extreme cases - kill off whole systems. This logically pisses people off. And angry players might resort to means that create a taste of the mess we will see when things kick off.

[Clavius]

It is no secret that POB grieving and OORP hate are the primary cause of people leaving our community.

I find that hard to believe... I think most people have left because it's a decade old game with 50 players online, where half are supplying POB's or powertrading, adding less atmosphere than the NPC's around. Just sayin'.

I think he was referring to those that are still playing.

Regarding the topic, POB sieges are part of RP (atleast they should be) and I have no objection about it, however, we can see in this example that the post was made with the intention of harassing other players nice job
He taxed them 200 mil because he expects them to refuse (and even if they don't, he will get 200mil per month winwin situation basicly) other pobs have been taxed for 50mil per month, while this one four times more. It's clear as day what this is.

Sky wrote it pretty well, attackers need to get some sort of a penalty (that might make people think twice about POB sieges), because only the pob owners lose (so much RP, time and money invested) and that doesn't really seem fair and it's pretty one sided.