' Wrote:There should be some restriction to what can a faction ask in return from you. Perhaps you would have to wear a tag, LH-i (lane hacker indy), some kind of roleplaying test, one should not be allowed to demand money from indies to buy it. Perhaps requiring indies to bring in resources hull panells and such to construct it, might be required. One can get very creative with that and I think it is in our best intrest to limit cap ships.
Nothing is more tiresome than a destroyer cruising up to your behind and start blasting, one could be out all day reporting the mute engagements and play very little,... and after all would be sorted, capwhores would come in with "Engaging Santa" and after that they would even be void of sanctions, without a noticable increase in roleplay quality.
There should be a test, wich factions would then enforce, to possible future owners of capital ships.
The fact is, factions have demanded money from independents to fly their ships, which highlights the abuse that can occur as a result of your proposed system. Even if the rule of not demanding credits was put in, cronyism and personal attitudes can come into it (And most probably, they will.)
As for the Destroyer you mention, there is a sanction forum. Hit the SS button, upload the SS and post a thread. If no sanction is delivered, the person was not breaking the rules. (As it has already been said, "engaging santa" is not enough and will get the offending person sanctioned.)
Quote:The fact is, factions have demanded money from independents to fly their ships, which highlights the abuse that can occur as a result of your proposed system. Even if the rule of not demanding credits was put in, cronyism and personal attitudes can come into it (And most probably, they will.)
Hence the concept of regulating cap regulation? Allow its use within a specific set of operating parameters.
When we began charging for Dreadnoughts and Battleships (which we never actually saw a cent of-sales for the two craft have been kept very low, and thank god) the idea was that (A) we were the unilateral faction, and therefore in charge of the production of both the Outcast Battleship and Dreadnought (A position we will still be holding on the latter, I believe, even with the construction of Valetta and the Reaper station in 4.85), and (B) we were very broke and needed large quantities of Supernovas that, as always I ended up paying for. It was a misadvised venture-unnecessary and slightly narcissistic-but it was technically a viable RP situation, and while I wouldn't do it again knocking the concept of cap registration over for that doesn't fly. Again. Regulate it. JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE has been regulated, we could give the factions something to differentiate themselves with again without stepping on anybody's toes but the bleeding hearts and anarchists (of which there are a very vocal minority).
I'd like my balls back, plox.
Quote:Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen
' Wrote:Again. Regulate it. JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE has been regulated, we could give the factions something to differentiate themselves with again without stepping on anybody's toes but the bleeding hearts and anarchists (of which there are a very vocal minority).
I'd like my balls back, plox.
The fact that you label all that do not agree with you as bleeding hearts and anarchists says a lot, as previously you used to label them trolls.
The biggest problem that occurs when given the power is factions go beyond insuring common sense is used and enter into prohibiting any role play they don't prefer. In effect, they tell players how they must play or short-sheet them so they can't.
No flame responses please--have seen it happen first hand on multiple occasions here.
Quote:The biggest problem that occurs when given the power is factions go beyond insuring common sense is used and enter into prohibiting any role play they don't prefer. In effect, they tell players how they must play or short-sheet them so they can't.
No flame responses please--have seen it happen first hand on multiple occasions here.
Uhm...no?
Quote:The fact that you label all that do not agree with you as bleeding hearts and anarchists says a lot, as previously you used to label them trolls.
No, dear, I just labeled you and Akuma trolls. He's been banned (and retains his troll status); you've been upgraded to your own special category as an idealist who can't be convinced he's wrong. Everybody else who disagrees with me can generally be divided into Logical Argument Which Comes Down to a Difference of Ideals, People Who Had Some Trauma Somewhere Down the Line And Thence Can't Be Convinced Out of Their Position, and Poltroons.
Admissions by anybody-including Administrators-that the rules and rules alone are the best solution are incorrect. NO system is perfect. It has to be seriously augmented (and, in our case, rebuilt from the ground up). I simply think a regulated Faction control is the simplest solution to the cap RP problem.
EDIT: Statement above rephrased for better clarity.
Quote:Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen
' Wrote:No, dear, I just labeled you and Akuma trolls. He's been banned (and retains his troll status); you've been upgraded to your own special category as an idealist who can't be convinced he's wrong. Everybody else who disagrees with me can generally be divided into Logical Argument Which Comes Down to a Difference of Ideals, People Who Had Some Trauma Somewhere Down the Line And Thence Can't Be Convinced Out of Their Position, and Poltroons.
Admissions by anybody-including Administrators-that the rules are perfect are incorrect. NO system is perfect. It has to be seriously augmented (and, in our case, rebuilt from the ground up). I simply think a regulated Faction control is the simplest solution to the cap RP problem.
I doubt anyone will say that the system is perfect.
You cannot convince me that I am wrong or cannot convince others? As for your analysis of me, the fact that you think you can classify someone so absolutely, in your mind, highlights your ignorance.
Oh, no, there is no doubt in my mind that my classification of you is polarized and simplified. I'm simply sick and tired of dealing with your crap, which, as far as I can understand it, is so far to whichever end of the political spectrum you may be that you're a hopeless case, and I'm not going to bother trying to please one person with absolutely no bearing on this game world excepting a Buckley-esque vocabulary used to coerce people.
Quote:Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen
' Wrote:Oh, no, there is no doubt in my mind that my classification of you is polarized and simplified. I'm simply sick and tired of dealing with your crap, which, as far as I can understand it, is so far to whichever end of the political spectrum you may be that you're a hopeless case, and I'm not going to bother trying to please one person with absolutely no bearing on this game world excepting a Buckley-esque vocabulary used to coerce people.
As far as I', concerned, in RP anyone should be able to fly a properly set up ship of a faction that is gunboat or lower.
Factions given a limited right to restrict cruiser class vessel. (Basically the right to make them change the name if it makes no sense, like naming a military cruiser "Banana-spit", or try to "Re-posses" the ship if it shows poor RP)
And Fully fledged battleship need faction approval.
I'd even go for cruiser to be stuck into the same restriction class as gunboat, but I rally thing Battleships should have faction control.
![[Image: hG0lGaj.png]](https://i.imgur.com/hG0lGaj.png)
![[Image: MercGuild_Banner.png]](http://junkers.tinked.info/screens/MercGuild_Banner.png)
![[Image: Cg7QQEd.png]](http://i.imgur.com/Cg7QQEd.png)
![[Image: 14jn684.jpg]](http://i44.tinypic.com/14jn684.jpg)
