Fairness and Role Play

[Heartless]

So I came to realize this in a little fight today in Manhattan.

It was me in my libby gunboat (I'm the Washington for those of you who don't know), about 4 fighters/bombers up against one single xeno.

So when the battle started, I sat out saying something like "Washington standing down" and what-not, cause 4 on 1 is bad enough without a gunboat in the middle. So I just watched the fight play out.

Then I realized... wait, why didn't I engage? The Xeno after a while fled the system and I didn't fire a single shot. Yes, 4/5 v. 1 may be a big ratio, but realistically, that's sorta what would happen. The Liberty navy has hundreds the times of men as the xenos do, so why not use that ratio?

So, I think that 4 Navy fighters/bombers fighting 1 or 2 rogue or xeno ships is in Rp. Yet we willingly put that rp factor aside for the "fairness" of other players, mainly the pirates/terrorists. But it's something that they should know they're getting themselves involved in.

What I do not find fair nor in Rp, is 1 unlawful against, say 2 gunboats and 1 fighter. Why? Because of the ratio. I think there should always be more of the lesser class in the food chain than the higher ones. Having 4 fighters and 1 gunboat is in Rp. Why wouldn't it be? 4 fighters/bombers and 1 gunboat makes sence. 12 fighters/bombers, 4 gunboats, and 1 cruiser make sence. It's all a ratio. So having a squad of about 4 fighters/bombers and 1 gunboat (as in my scenario) seems to me to be in Rp. But having 2 gunboats and 1 fighter is neither in Rp nor fair as I'm sure you can all agree.

So basically, 1 or 2 unlawfull fighters/bombers up against 3 or 4 lawful fighters/bombers and 1 gunboat is reasonably in Rp in every perspective.
Yet, we put this all aside for the sake to be fair or something and not have "overkill". It's upsetting though, I never got to fire a shot that whole fight but oh well.

So is it worth it? Purposely not following Role Play for the sake to be fair to people who should know it won't be a fair fight against them anyways? Shouldn't factions who are less populated in Rp be out matched in a fight in Rp?

I know this can cause quite a stir, but I find it a bit ridiculous. I mean, I'm all for Rp, and if the ship ratio is there then I see no problem outnumbering the enemy if it makes sence in it's Rp.

Basically, this comes down to how many people actually populate a faction. The Liberty Navy has hundreds, maybe thousands the number of personnel than, say, the Lane Hackers do, right? This is also related to that Order cap spam going on. The Order is supposed to be small, secretive, yet very technologically advanced. Does it make sence for them to have that many caps and carriers? No, of course not, because there just aren't enough people in the Order to man all those ships and is another reason restrictions and limtiations should be enforced.

Tie that in with the ratio factor too. For any faction, you would have something like 1 battleship for every 5 cruisers for every 20 gunboats for every 40 fighters. And that is what player factions do with rank and ship restrictions which I always look for in a faction, is their limit in ship class numbers.

Anyways, that's my rant, I guess I'm bringing out the "how many people are realistically in a faction and how that should affect encounters" case.

-Swissy

---

SwissScorch --> Heartless

[masternerdguy]

So I came to realize this in a little fight today in Manhattan.

It was me in my libby gunboat (I'm the Washington for those of you who don't know), about 4 fighters/bombers up against one single xeno.

So when the battle started, I sat out saying something like "Washington standing down" and what-not, cause 4 on 1 is bad enough without a gunboat in the middle. So I just watched the fight play out.

Then I realized... wait, why didn't I engage? The Xeno after a while fled the system and I didn't fire a single shot. Yes, 4/5 v. 1 may be a big ratio, but realistically, that's sorta what would happen. The Liberty navy has hundreds the times of men as the xenos do, so why not use that ratio?

So, I think that 4 Navy fighters/bombers fighting 1 or 2 rogue or xeno ships is in Rp. Yet we willingly put that rp factor aside for the "fairness" of other players, mainly the pirates/terrorists. But it's something that they should know they're getting themselves involved in.

What I do not find fair nor in Rp, is 1 unlawful against, say 2 gunboats and 1 fighter. Why? Because of the ratio. I think there should always be more of the lesser class in the food chain than the higher ones. Having 4 fighters and 1 gunboat is in Rp. Why wouldn't it be? 4 fighters/bombers and 1 gunboat makes sence. 12 fighters/bombers, 4 gunboats, and 1 cruiser make sence. It's all a ratio. So having a squad of about 4 fighters/bombers and 1 gunboat (as in my scenario) seems to me to be in Rp. But having 2 gunboats and 1 fighter is neither in Rp nor fair as I'm sure you can all agree.

So basically, 1 or 2 unlawfull fighters/bombers up against 3 or 4 lawful fighters/bombers and 1 gunboat is reasonably in Rp in every perspective.
Yet, we put this all aside for the sake to be fair or something and not have "overkill". It's upsetting though, I never got to fire a shot that whole fight but oh well.

So is it worth it? Purposely not following Role Play for the sake to be fair to people who should know it won't be a fair fight against them anyways? Shouldn't factions who are less populated in Rp be out matched in a fight in Rp?

I know this can cause quite a stir, but I find it a bit ridiculous. I mean, I'm all for Rp, and if the ship ratio is there then I see no problem outnumbering the enemy if it makes sence in it's Rp.

Basically, this comes down to how many people actually populate a faction. The Liberty Navy has hundreds, maybe thousands the number of personnel that , say the Lane Hackers do, right? This is also related to that Order cap spam going on. The Order is supposed to be small, secretive, yet very technologically advanced. Does it make sence for them to have that many caps and carriers? No, of course not, because there just aren't enough people in the Order to man all those ships and is another reason restrictions and limtiations should be enforced.

Tie that in with the ratio factor too. For any faction, you would have something like 1 battleship for every 5 cruisers for every 20 gunboats for every 40 fighters. And that is what player factions do with rank and ship restrictions which I always look for in a faction, is their limit in ship class numbers.

Anyways, that's my rant, I guess I'm bringing out the "how many people are realistically in a faction and how that should affect encounters" case.

-Swissy

personally, i think rp > fairness.

---

Send the fat kid in to see if its a trap

[Sprolf]

If you're in a capital ship, it's easy to make an excuse in RP to balance the fight:

"Gunners, hold fire - the fighters are too close in, we'll never get a safe shot."
"Hold your fire, you'll hit our fighters!"

Or something to that effect.
Because there are real dangers with shooting into a dogfight.

---

[Cellulanus]

If you're in a capitol ship, or any ship really, its easy to engage and still be fair.


Just shoot, but don't actually hit anything, fight like an NPC would.

[CCI45-px/Probe149]

If you're in a capitol ship, or any ship really, its easy to engage and still be fair.
Just shoot, but don't actually hit anything, fight like an NPC would .

No. Because they hit. You can however shoot with just 1 turret. Or/and aim in another direction and then yell something at your gunners.
Or, if you're in a Gunboat with Forward gun/Siege Cruiser try to snipe the target with your FW gun.

---

In a brilliant tactical movement, i charged backwards.

[Cellulanus]

No. Because they hit. You can however shoot with just 1 turret. Or/and aim in another direction and then yell something at your gunners.
Or, if you're in a Gunboat with Forward gun/Siege Cruiser try to snipe the target with your FW gun.

You know what I meant.

[Nightmouse]

Let's just say I'm glad you didn't open fire on me, RP or not, because it would just have ruined my fun, I wasn't even looking for a fight, until I noticed it went quite well:D
Besides, been a while since I last flew my Eagle, got a bit rusty.

I'm still here to have fun and play a game, with RP to top it. What I'm not here for is to be shot to shreds by some overkilling "Die-hard RP'ers".

[Zapp]

It makes sense to bring more force than your opponent has. Even when it comes down to the wire and there's only one hostile left, I'll challenge him to a duel and (all ego aside) I am still bringing more force against him than he likely has. However, all within reason: swarming a gunboat with ten bombers or swarming a bomber with ten missileboats isn't good.

---

[Magoo!]

Quite the debacle.

Anywho, I agree with Sprolf that if it was a hot, fighter-on-fighter battle, you could easily RP in the name of fairness. As per his given examples. But me, myself, am of the opinion that fairness takes priority over RP. Mostly because its like handcuffing somebody to a radiator and then playing hide and seek.

[the predatore]

I think your right i love my caps and cruisers but i feal that ther are to manny to. But here coms the problem who will decide who get caps ?