From This post onwards we can see a clear divide in the community with regards to "playing fair" with Player Operated Bases
Currently the rules provide preconditions for "preparing for an attack" and "attacking" a PoB. That timer is currently 8 hours. If you read over the thread (or pretend to at least) you'll notice that the majority of the upset members are more focused on the 8 hour time limit being 'unfair' rather than the Rogues RP towards that PoB.
I'd like to again suggest that the timer be raised from 8 hours to 48 hours for attacking a Core 2 PoB and above, notice that I still believe that 8 hours is more than enough time to respond to an attack for a Core 1 PoB, especially if its in a location that whatever overriding power believes is "not right".
If you read the Rules, it plainly states that Core 2 and above require at least 24 hours notice, not 8.
Core Two
- Players are required to post the name, IFF, system and purpose of their base in this subforum prior to becoming Core 2. These posts remain invisible and are only accessible by the server staff.
- Upon posting their existence, base owners will receive, from the admins, a set of 'blueprints' which is required for their upgrade. Blueprints are non transferable and will be absorbed in the upgrade of the base.
- Before a player/faction attacks a Core 2 base (or higher), they must role play either in game or on the forums and provide the link to this RP in the Attack Declaration thread. - Any attack declaration for a base Core 2 or above must be 24 hours in advance of the attack starting.
. - Bases located within 15k of mining fields will not be permitted to advance beyond Core 2.
'I would like to be half as clever as some people like to believe they are' Life is full of disappointments, it is how we handle them that helps to define us, as a person
What I don't understand is that people seem to send rp to an owner and at the same time declare an attack.
This is dumb because the attack thread asks for rp to be posted and the player has only barely started to rp when he posts that declaration.
It should be that after you rp with the owner you then declare it. Not at the same time. The 8 hours are there to give the owner time to prepare for an attack and not to give him time to respond to a damn message.
PS: work tends to be 8 hours or more of your time. What if someone has no time to reply to you because they are at work? This is different when it is not a reply timer but a countdown before attack.
(08-29-2016, 11:13 PM)Magnifique Wrote: Why does it even matter if its without warning, with 8 hour warning, 24 hours, or 1 week?
Players shouldn't get to totally mess up other players game, no matter the circumstances.
Only way how to provide that is to remove POBs from the game (and honestly I am not sure if that would be really bad thing to do after observing total impact on the community over the time). They are exempted from the RP environment enough already.
(08-29-2016, 11:13 PM)Magnifique Wrote: Why does it even matter if its without warning, with 8 hour warning, 24 hours, or 1 week?
Players shouldn't get to totally mess up other players game, no matter the circumstances.
Only way how to provide that is to remove POBs from the game (and honestly I am not sure if that would be really bad thing to do after observing total impact on the community over the time). They are exempted from the RP environment enough already.
That's not the only way.
You can make them immune to weapons, nerf their weapons platforms, make them buildable only in certain locations, increase their wear and tear damage, impose conditions for building them.
That would be a much better way to deal with them than leave it up to gangs of players to tolerate certain bases or not.
User was banned for: Karlotta alt
Time left: (Permanent)
It's a sad fact that POBs spawn the worst behaviour in Disco players. (before this is interpreted as a: "get rid of bases" argument, please realize that the guilt is with the players, not the bases)
(08-29-2016, 11:51 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: It's a sad fact that POBs spawn the worst behaviour in Disco players. (before this is interpreted as a: "get rid of bases" argument, please realize that the guilt is with the players, not the bases)
I don't think that they motivate people to want to harm others. There will always be people who enjoy harming others on multiplayer games, just like there are ways to deal with those kinds of people via rules or via game mechanics (theoretically, that is, if admins and devs address issues instead of ignoring them).
POBs are just balanced in a way that they can do major harm to both the people that "live" in the area of space they are built in, and to the people who invest in them just to see it all blown to smithereens.
User was banned for: Karlotta alt
Time left: (Permanent)
(08-29-2016, 11:39 PM)Magnifique Wrote: That's not the only way.
You can make them immune to weapons, nerf their weapons platforms, make them buildable only in certain locations, increase their wear and tear damage, impose conditions for building them.
That would be a much better way to deal with them than leave it up to gangs of players to tolerate certain bases or not.
immune to weapons - What is to prevent someone from building an unlawful base right in front of a lawful planet, fill it up with contraband, and undock and fly to the planet and sell the goods? Police/Navy then can't get rid of the base. Just as an example, and plenty more on why it would be a bad idea to make them immune to weapons like that.
nerf their weapons platforms - Sure, but then same as above. Why? At that point it's an NPC base that a player can build and exploit.
make them buildable only in certain locations - This would have to be done via the Dev's and would be absolute hell to code, given you'd more than likely need different lines of code for a lawful base versus an unlawful versus a quasi-unlawful. Already right now there are inRp consequences if you build a POB in specific areas. It would be hard/take way too long and resources for the Dev's to do this server-side, if it's even possible to do. That's just one of the headaches as well associated with something like that.
increase their wear and tear damage - Why? That would mean less RP/PVP/etc and more silent trading to supply a base, which already is a pain for many people. You increase that, you increase the amount of silent people not RP'ing, and just trying to bring materials to the base. That also then brings up the increase of pirates/people hunting down base suppliers, thus going against your goal.
impose conditions for building them - There is already a ton of conditions to build them. What house you're in, which unlawfuls might be in the area, etc. That's just inRP. ooRP you have to do provide RP for the base to receive an upgrade, as well as you have to wait a considerable amount of time after an upgrade for the next, and even then it's not a guarantee it'll be approved, depending on the level of RP provided.
Not trying to shoot you down, but while what we have isn't perfect, the points you suggested would bring more of a headache, instead of a relief for POB's.
Lowering the need to supply a bit would also work out. Making them consume less to do more, which would give players more time to enjoy the game instead of silent trading. Obviously not enough to cause an impact and make them invulnerable.
Currently unable to consistently be present in the Community due to life constraints.
![[Image: O2vt8So.png]](https://i.imgur.com/O2vt8So.png)
![[Image: zBEqQfl.jpg?1]](https://i.imgur.com/zBEqQfl.jpg?1)
![[Image: rherh3.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/Kj3ZvKXp/rherh3.png)