+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: RP & Core (I) bases (/showthread.php?tid=136187)
RP & Core (I) bases - Malmsteen - 02-17-2016
Hello,
Discovery Developers,
Discovery Administrators,
The Community,
I would like to address you about a very important situation which is the Core (1) installations. As we all know, this is a pure RP server where actions are taken based on RP interactions, but we have a very big leak here. The installations which didn't reach core (2) yet can be attacked, destroyed without any prior RP. Just like that, Simple and easy, Take your battleship and go find a core (1) base, then wait till no one around and destroy it.
I would like to ask you all, Why is this rule applied on a RP server? The problem is that people use this leak and cause a lot of troubles to players who want to start some projects of building some base which might be a great advantage to role play and help increase some activity , but whats happening is the completely the opposite with this rule.
I will give you a small example, a player who joined my teamspeak server and got our trust, recruited to BMF and became a member of our corporation, Just betrayed all of us and leaked all information he hear on our teamspeak to other players and blow the identity of other chars we use here. So accordingly he was removed from the BMF. but thats not the problem actually.
The problem is that he is using every leak in the rules to bore some members of BMF to go off the server, so he switch to his CNS-Garruda Corsair battleship and target the BMF members specially then target the bases they build on other systems with different characters depending on metagaming and moving information from a character to another etc...
I can control the meta gaming part by telling the players not to post the location of their new bases on the RP posts because that player looks at forum posts and meta-game in the worst way and also i can ban him from my teamspeak so he dont be able to move information and betray us like this - BUT what i really can't do is to prevent him from picking the times when we are all offline and go destroy some core (1) bases because he depend on the LEAK of the rules which allow players to destroy core 1 bases.
I am really curious to know whats the point of this rule? Why it don't require RP ? arent we are on a RP server and this what it should be for all cases?
I am requesting and hoping that admins and devs would really seriously re consider this rule and turn it to RP for all cores. This will enhance more RP and will not bore players off the server also will not let some kids with grudge or personal hate to use the rules leaks and cause trouble to the population of the server.
That player @VaaMerc was BMF|Normandy and now using CNS-Garruda, Kristov and more nicknames just to use the leak of the rules,. and the result was a destruction of Core (1) base TWO times in a row during the past 5 days. No RP was involved, Not even us were online to defend, and he pick that time specially to do this because he DEPEND on that leakage of rules.
Please Re Consider
Please think about it more and more
Core 1 bases should require RP for attacking
Thank you for listening and forgive my bad english
Feedback is welcomed
regards,
Malmsteen
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - E X O D I T E - 02-17-2016
The logic behind this is that it's a selection process.
Yes, it is frustrating for people.
However, it shows people who want effort to go into their base can build it up to Core 2.
Why is Core 2 important? It gets you immunity to lolindies, leaving only officials to terrorize you.
Core 1 bases can be dropped by anyone who uses up an account slot to make a Hercules and take the half-hour to get the materials (possibly have a transport with FWO and Alloys nearby), and if this goes through, that base is now immune to me coming along, noting that it's repped hostile to me, and opening fire. I have to go on forums and drop a line 1/line 2 about attacking the place, which means that by then, they could have logged their entire fleet of 5kers (blatant metagaming) and have a massive fortress with 3 weapons platforms staring me in the face.
OoRP hate is metagaming, but the part where you call a specific person out as you did (maybe a mod changed it in the interim) is considered a Trial by Forum in these here parts. I understand your frustration, but for my part, a random, say, indie KSP can shoot down another indie KSP base no problem.
Now, if PoBs counted towards the "faction base" part of an ID in terms of ZoI (but still not docking as per Word of Green), you'd have a point, but a green has said that they don't, at least on skype, according to Lyth.
Otherwise, we'd get Core| making a base in Alpha making tons of money off Cardi fines.
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Malmsteen - 02-17-2016
(02-17-2016, 05:56 AM)Exodite Asmodai Wrote: The logic behind this is that it's a selection process.
Yes, it is frustrating for people.
However, it shows people who want effort to go into their base can build it up to Core 2.
The upgrade to Core 2 will take some time, it's not a small amount of commodities to shift for upgrading. It's huge and takes time, And i am not asking about protecting the base.... all i am asking is that people should do RP prior attacking, even in game, but finding a core 1 base and move their with full intentions to destroy that base waiting the time that no one is there, and then do it, is just against all kind of Multiplayer gaming styles... it's just like playing alone... not on a RP multiplayer server.
(02-17-2016, 05:56 AM)Exodite Asmodai Wrote: Why is Core 2 important? It gets you immunity to lolindies, leaving only officials to terrorize you.
Core 1 bases can be dropped by anyone who uses up an account slot to make a Hercules and take the half-hour to get the materials (possibly have a transport with FWO and Alloys nearby), and if this goes through, that base is now immune to me coming along, noting that it's repped hostile to me, and opening fire. I have to go on forums and drop a line 1/line 2 about attacking the place, which means that by then, they could have logged their entire fleet of 5kers (blatant metagaming) and have a massive fortress with 3 weapons platforms staring me in the face.
RP for attacking bases can be done via game RP , i mean IN-GAME RP and not on the forums, so it won't give chance to people to meta-game and bring their fleets to defend. Also attacking a base without any RP is just not right, because we are on an RP server and everything should go with RP. I agree with you that anyone can create a base anywhere, but then they will face the consequences according to RP so whats the problem ? i don't get it.
(02-17-2016, 05:56 AM)Exodite Asmodai Wrote: OoRP hate is metagaming, but the part where you call a specific person out as you did (maybe a mod changed it in the interim) is considered a Trial by Forum in these here parts. I understand your frustration, but for my part, a random, say, indie KSP can shoot down another indie KSP base no problem.
Trust me, i have no intention to do trial by forum and i am complete against it. I just posted the example to reach my point so everybody can understand the gravity of the situation. The weakness of this part of the rules is cause damage and i was just trying to make everybody understand that depending on this weakness of that part of the rules will bore players off the server, NOT BECAUSE they lost their bases... but because they came here to play RP and someone shoot their bases once deployed or on the next day without even a single line of RP, Intentionally and on purpose, BENDING this part of the rules.... I see that it's not good.
I have no problem if KSP indie attack a KSP indie base, why not ? i am not against that, i am just against no RP...!!!! so if the KSP guy wait till no one around and go there with cap ship then destroy the base and leave without interaction, without RP, without meeting anyone on the server then why playing multiplayer? why not playing single player? do you think this can grow a RP-healthy gaming community?
PS: i would rather look at your signature mate, i mean no offense at all, but just a notice.
![[Image: WlTNQJl.png]](http://i.imgur.com/WlTNQJl.png)
That is a trial by forum maybe ... even you shade the nickname and keep the clan name to be trialed.
(02-17-2016, 05:56 AM)Exodite Asmodai Wrote: Now, if PoBs counted towards the "faction base" part of an ID in terms of ZoI (but still not docking as per Word of Green), you'd have a point, but a green has said that they don't, at least on skype, according to Lyth.
Otherwise, we'd get Core| making a base in Alpha making tons of money off Cardi fines.
Again, I think you didn't get my point good sir, The idea is not about shooting the bases or creating them, the is idea is about creating RP and interaction before killing a core 1 base. So the core| can create as many bases as they want in alpha and the outcasts should have the enough reasons to destroy them but with using RP !! , is that hard to use RP ? we are on an RP server .....
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - E X O D I T E - 02-17-2016
Buddy, the only people who don't RP before destroying Core 1s are either
a. Lolindies with low forum presence
or
b. OoRPly hate you
or
c. Both
Why? Money. It's often easier to tax PoBs than blow them up, unless they are an enemy military fortification, in which case, unless the base has RP up and running first, it's open season.
The way I see it, if I get a base thread, I'm golden, because then people will know that I will communicate with them, and they can hopefully attempt to extract sums of money from me so my base doesn't get blown up (by them).
Core 1s are also the most expendable of bases, because, as stated earlier, it's a half-hour of effort to build one, tops.
I was referring to the KSP blowing up that other KSP base in his KSP ship (suspend your disbelief).
So, to recap, interaction does happen, provided you give them an avenue to roleplay on. If I were to make a base with a communication thread, I would be more likely to get a comm about said base and come to an agreement with those than me simply dropping a base and giving it a brief infocard. The community is nice enough to not immediately blow you out of the sky if they see that you are willing to roleplay.
About that guy, my advice to you is to go to his faction leader(s) and tell them about it. No need to complain to the community about him.
And about the forum sig, the quote was generously given to me by an Order| Orca (Order|[REDACTED]) to a Core| Spatial (Core|Byron.Hall) who had just told him in OoRP chat that if it came down to a pew, he'd return the Azurite the Gunboat had in its hold.
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Malmsteen - 02-17-2016
(02-17-2016, 06:31 AM)Exodite Asmodai Wrote: Buddy, the only people who don't RP before destroying Core 1s are either
a. Lolindies with low forum presence
or
b. OoRPly hate you
or
c. Both
Why? Money. It's often easier to tax PoBs than blow them up, unless they are an enemy military fortification, in which case, unless the base has RP up and running first, it's open season.
The way I see it, if I get a base thread, I'm golden, because then people will know that I will communicate with them, and they can hopefully attempt to extract sums of money from me so my base doesn't get blown up (by them).
Core 1s are also the most expendable of bases, because, as stated earlier, it's a half-hour of effort to build one, tops.
I was referring to the KSP blowing up that other KSP base in his KSP ship (suspend your disbelief).
So, to recap, interaction does happen, provided you give them an avenue to roleplay on. If I were to make a base with a communication thread, I would be more likely to get a comm about said base and come to an agreement with those than me simply dropping a base and giving it a brief infocard. The community is nice enough to not immediately blow you out of the sky if they see that you are willing to roleplay.
About that guy, my advice to you is to go to his faction leader(s) and tell them about it. No need to complain to the community about him.
1st, I am not complaining here, I am posting in the Discovery Mod General Discussion to discuss and hopefully the discussion might end in a change in the rules which aim for a better and healthier gaming community.
2nd, I don't think you get any of what i am saying up there, also i am not a fan of arguments so i suggest for you to re-read my replies
3rd and last, Thank you for your feedback, have a nice day.
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - E X O D I T E - 02-17-2016
(02-17-2016, 06:38 AM)Malmsteen Wrote:
1st, I am not complaining here, I am posting in the Discovery Mod General Discussion to discuss and hopefully the discussion might end in a change in the rules which aim for a better and healthier gaming community.
2nd, I don't think you get any of what i am saying up there, also i am not a fan of arguments so i suggest for you to re-read my replies
3rd and last, Thank you for your feedback, have a nice day.
What I saw was an invitation for me to bring in my capfleet, line 1, line 2, and blow up that base anyway, with nobody able to defend.
About Core 2: At least with the attack declaration, someone can call for backup because their investment is a bit pricey at that point for a random indie to Schrodin-RP attack at that point.
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Findarato Veneanar - 02-17-2016
Going off of memory, core 1 pob's have 3 module slots, literal days of time spent in game hauling could be lost, not just a few minutes.
On a similar but fairly unrelated topic, the current pob attack system is horrible, all that is required is a single rp post and then a post in the attack declaration thread, then they get to bring as many Players as they want whenever they want and destroy the base, and if they somehow get pushed back once, which is incredibly unlikely due to there being no limits on how many Players the attacker can bring(sure the defender can also bring as many defenders as they want, but if you've actually played the game you'll prob know that it just doesn't work out to be equal), they can just go back a few hours or days later.
If you have a pob and someone is determined to destroy it, you've already lost it.
So basically #RemovePOBs
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - E X O D I T E - 02-17-2016
(02-17-2016, 06:56 AM)Findarato Veneanar Wrote: Going off of memory, core 1 pob's have 3 module slots, literal days of time spent in game hauling could be lost, not just a few minutes.
On a similar but fairly unrelated topic, the current pob attack system is horrible, all that is required is a single rp post and then a post in the attack declaration thread, then they get to bring as many Players as they want whenever they want and destroy the base, and if they somehow get pushed back once, which is incredibly unlikely due to there being no limits on how many Players the attacker can bring(sure the defender can also bring as many defenders as they want, but if you've actually played the game you'll prob know that it just doesn't work out to be equal), they can just go back a few hours or days later.
If you have a pob and someone is determined to destroy it, you've already lost it.
So basically #RemovePOBs
This went from a guy complaining about OoRP hate to a discussion on "groups of players is OP"
Also, Core and Gallia have to go first.
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - St.Denis - 02-17-2016
It was decided, when the newest Rules on building Bases were introduced, that Building a POB did not require RP to building and therefore did not require any RP to destroy until it reached Core 2.
There have been many arguments back and forth, over the intervening years, and nothing has been changed.
I can suggest that you put in a Player Request for the Rule to be changed. The Admins may curse, as this is something else to process, but it is something that you can do.
The Admins will, eventually, vote on it and a decision will be given.
Note:
As pointed out by someone in this Thread, the Attackers can just put a quick post in the Attack Thread and achieve the same effect. All this change, if implemented, would do is give the Base Owner some visibility of who has attacked their Base. The outcome would still be the same as they could do this when the Base Owner(s) were not on the Server.
RE: RP & Core (I) bases - Findarato Veneanar - 02-17-2016
(02-17-2016, 10:13 AM)St.Denis Wrote: The Admins will, eventually, vote on it and a decision will be given.Beyond putting in a request, is there any way to influence how the vote will go?