after reading the whole thread so far... i do wonder
what is it you all actually WANT? - everyone ( well, almost ) has made statements and justifications - skimming around the actual point.
people try to explain how they want capital warships only to rest in responsible hands. ( responsible = funny thing, responsibility usually rests upon their own point of view of responsibility )
furthermore, people try to paint things black and white. there are "lolcaps" and there are "good ones" - which side of those has a greater impact on the balance of the server varies greatly from argument to argument.
now the point is - you only get what you ask for in a single player world, where every encounter is scripted and balanced towards the current playerlevel and skill.
what is inRP and what is out of RP? - what is fair and what is unfair? - why does it matter?
a pirate wolfhound exits a jumphole - totally unaware of the situation he is thrown into. it just happens that on this side, a cruiser hangs out - NOT cause he wants to shoot down unfortunate little pirates... but cause he is roleplaying a patrol to his best skills.
they are enemies to one another. - should the cruiser open fire? - should he have a chitchat with the pirate? - should he ignore the fighter? should he inform allied fighterpilots to deal with it?
who is to say whats good and bad, whats responsible for a capital ship player and what not.
inRP might be to silently open fire with all available batteries. the cruiser doesn t use up ammo and energy replenishes ( so no resources are lost ) - chatting to the pirate is irrelevant - whats there to say anyway? letting the pirate go? - why, when he is so readily presenting himself on a silver platter... .
fair? no, - but very bad luck on the pirates side.... - thats life in a multiverse.
against the rules? - yes. ... but aside from the rules. - the fighterpilot would call the cruiserplayer a "lolcap" - cause he died to him, cause he is unaware of what RP the cruiser has applied before he was in the system - and cause its kind of "expected of a light fighter pilot that just died to a cruiser".
objectivity means - trying to look onto such an encounter from both sides - and from a neutral position. - and suddenly it might turn out....
- the encounter was nither ooRP, nor anyones fault at all.. just a series of bad luck.
prejudice however is:
- swap the capital ship for a patriot. - suddenly we have a patriot on a patrol vs. a wolfhound. you ll hardly get a fairer encounter when it comes to lawful vs. unlawful in liberty. - the patriot opens fire on the pirate - they fight, the patriot wins.
no one will call the patriot a "pvp-whore" or "lol-figther" - in RP however, the encounter was exactly the same, the player was as responsible as the cruiser player.
the question is:
do we punish the player for his bahaviour? or his ship....
both act according to their roles they ought to play ( roleplaying game ) - one encounter is fairer - the other is unfairer. ( but whats that gotto do with roleplay? ) ... in the cruiser encounter. many a community members will state that the cruiser player made a mistake by attacking the pirate, the pirate however being innocent - yet unlucky.
but if we seek "responsible" players only to be allowed to fly capital ships. - we just found them in both encounters. - both knew their roles, both acted according to their roles.
i would consider a cruiser player a bad RPer if he tried to find excuse after excuse not to fight a fighter that comes into weaponsrange and clearly shows as hostile.
only if warships used ammunition ( = every shot costing money ) - not engaging might be inRP. - but as long as they use unlimited resources of energy to power their weapons - i see no reason not to open fire.
so the question is still... "what do you want capital ships and players to be like?" clearly stated - no justification ... just how do you wish them to be like. - but be aware that you might get what you want and you might still not like it.
' Wrote:Ahoj,i got BS,im afreid im a reason that my way of flyin it make som player angry.Im indy ,wery indy,my english bad,my RP bad. I weit in systems for BC,bs,cruiser .I like pvp. When bomber nier,yes i exploude wery fast,but when they make mistake i kill them too.I thake it as it is.I hope for caps,sometimes they ask vhf,bomber not to interfer(navy).Well in my way even i try to reduce the number of caps.It was long way to get money for bs in my smuggler.Then rule changet,my LH spyglass was not OK.I did copy.Another monts of triin to get alive whit cargo till sellin point and agein i got BS.I love it!Im bad pilot,moustly cant hit .I need big ship to be able to stay alive inaf time to fight(of course thous bomber nasty)i try to hawe funn. Jarek_70
Your English may be bad, but your attitude is one the vast majority can learn from.
' Wrote:You forgot one difference between the two encounters. A Wolfhound has a chance of killing a Patriot.
So, if Jinx used a Greyhound or Werewolf, versing a Liberator, and then a cruiser, your point would be moot?
Not that it matters much anyway, since Jinx is highlighting the hypocrisy of the RP utopia you want, or more appropriately the highly selective utopia you want, since you pick and choose what parts of RP you will follow and what you will not.
the wolfhound has no chance vs. a cruiser - now .. whats that gotto do with roleplay?
i do not have a chance vs. a voidrunner when i m flying a roc - does that turn the voidrunner into a lol-fighter? - and ... yea.. i do NOT have a chance, unless the voidrunner decides to make a coffeebreak. ( maybe another player has a chance - so yes.. no matter the skill, no player in a wolfhound has a chance vs. a cruiser.... but the point is, who is to judge? - ONE VHF has a chance vs. a gunboat ( inferno + 7 krakens ) - yet, we d never call the VHF a bad player for attacking a gunboat - the contrary happens, we applaud him.
but if it means "as long as i have a chance - everything is a fair game - and roleplay / responsibility is of a secondary or at least equal matter" - i say that 1 bomber vs. 1 cruiser is a very fair game indeed )
roleplay creates situations where there is no balance... unfair situations. - when we re on the stronger side, we feel good - and not rarely justified for being there. when we re on the weaker side, we search for excuses. ( searching for excuses is not meant in a negative way here - players first search for game-mechanic excuses - so no player is to blame, only afterwards, they start to blame other players )
a wolfhound has no chance defeating the cruiser - that is correct. - but he has an extremely high chance getting away - one ship is invulnerable to the fighter, the other ship is invulnerable due to agility and size.
roleplay gives both ships an equal chance to get away alive - however... the rules ( which are generally ooRP itself ) favour the cruiser as "not fleeing" - while the community favours the fighter.
' Wrote:You forgot one difference between the two encounters. A Wolfhound has a chance of killing a Patriot.
Meh... irrelevant... Not to be rude, but you can't seriously be thinking of that fact alone that you ignored the awesome point Jinx made in his post, can you? Unless it's a joke, then I guess it would be decently funny.:laugh:
But kidding aside, you're right, Jinx. In all my time playing Disco, it has been rare when a discussion has a base-line to base all of its talk.
You, my friend, went a HUGE step towards that base-line.
I for one, think that the details are kinda right. Both sides, the Cruiser and the Wolfhound, don't seem to be at total fault.
I for one think that if we compared the incident to RL, the Cruiser MAY hold back a little in fighting the pirate to save on resources, but the outcome is still trying to destroy said pirate. No bad logic to think you shouldn't RP it that you'd want the pirate to be turned to scrap rather than just let the pirate go the other way. I know in other MMORPG games like EVE, compared to our "balanced" system of justice we are very "lax" in our enforcement. Instead, other games would simply dispose of the enemy like how an NPC Cruiser would treat the same said pirate.
For the pirates side, think of it like the time in Star Wars when the Millenium Falcon met the Star Destroyer-class vessel, and had to be smart in trying to FLEE away... It wouldn't be realistic if the LIGHT FIGHTER could destroy said cruiser, even with AI-like dog-fighting skills. If the Wolfhound couldn't escape, no harm should be done: you can always start to rebuild when you hit that "respawn" button, and you can still RP that your escape pod totally escaped.
That said, in that scenario there isn't any problem RP-or-PVP-wise about the pirate being destroyed or needing to flee... He could still decide to come back with a Bomber on his next encounter.
' Wrote:Meh... irrelevant... Not to be rude, but you can't seriously be thinking of that fact alone that you ignored the awesome point Jinx made in his post, can you? Unless it's a joke, then I guess it would be decently funny.:laugh:
No, if it was a joke I'd be using BBcode. Like this, [color=red]olol.
But in all seriousness.
Doesn't matter how you justify it, killing a fighter in a cruiser is just lame.
Very wrong.
Seriously, the fighter can piss off the cruiser and be more of a pain than the cruiser could ever be.
More importantly, if it was a single Gunboat on the other side and it wiped that poor werewolf away, before blasting another 5 or 6 fighters to pieces, it would be just fine.
However if a cruiser blasted maybe that one werewolf, eventually and found it couldn't blast the other 5 or 6 that appear, he would be called a 'lolcap'.
Just because you can't blow something up doesn't mean you should be able to. Cruisers etc are not meant to be blown up by fighters Fighters etc are not meant to be blown up by bombers
I say we restrict all fighters, they must be 'lolfighters' as they blew up my bomber and I had no chance.
That's the damn point.
You don't approach a cruiser, accidently or not, in a fighter and expect to not have to run/die.
You wouldn't approach a pack of fighters in a bomber and expect to live would you?
' Wrote:Ahoj,i got BS,im afreid im a reason that my way of flyin it make som player angry.Im indy ,wery indy,my english bad,my RP bad. I weit in systems for BC,bs,cruiser .I like pvp. When bomber nier,yes i exploude wery fast,but when they make mistake i kill them too.I thake it as it is.I hope for caps,sometimes they ask vhf,bomber not to interfer(navy).Well in my way even i try to reduce the number of caps.It was long way to get money for bs in my smuggler.Then rule changet,my LH spyglass was not OK.I did copy.Another monts of triin to get alive whit cargo till sellin point and agein i got BS.I love it!Im bad pilot,moustly cant hit .I need big ship to be able to stay alive inaf time to fight(of course thous bomber nasty)i try to hawe funn. Jarek_70
We are trying to restrict lolcaps here. Why do you even want to restrict fighters?
And why do you even want to rescrit capital ship, everyone's trying to have fun 'round here. The only reason you people are mad is because you cannot kill a Capital Ship in your fighter. Obviously.
![[Image: just_a_signature_by_sjrarj-d63yjsx.png]](https://img00.deviantart.net/ca73/i/2013/123/e/a/just_a_signature_by_sjrarj-d63yjsx.png)
![[Image: SLRU.png]](http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv46/Nighthawkashes/SLRU.png)
![[Image: hG0lGaj.png]](https://i.imgur.com/hG0lGaj.png)
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Factions Involved In![[Image: Golden%20Oaks%20Tours_zpspoqc1yoj.png]](http://i914.photobucket.com/albums/ac347/Leonardo619Tigre/Golden%20Oaks%20Tours_zpspoqc1yoj.png)
![[Image: avatar_30918.png?dateline=1449208332]](http://discoverygc.com/forums/uploads/avatars/avatar_30918.png?dateline=1449208332){kind=avatar}
![[Image: mgasxy7.png]](http://i.imgur.com/mgasxy7.png)
![[Image: bM9dE4l.png]](https://i.imgur.com/bM9dE4l.png)
![[Image: eject%20thread.jpg]](http://www.spaceg.com/multimedia/collection/YTMND%20dot%20com/eject%20thread.jpg)
