*Oh no , now we have to waste entire minute to post in attack tread , and another 30 seconds to make up some reason to blow someones hours or days hard work !
Thats no fair , Newbies have some rights now ! !
Mooooooom , they spoiling my fun ! ! ! *
(03-19-2016, 12:22 PM)Toris Wrote: Useful Zoners are left alone by factions because they are useful to them.
Fixed that for you.
(03-19-2016, 01:29 PM)Laura C. Wrote:
(03-19-2016, 12:04 PM)Snak3 Wrote: Reason to attack any non-allied base in ZoI?
"We cannot trust you to not place weapon platforms that will then be used against us"
Well, we will see if admins will consider this as making sense enough inRP. Because I personally would say it makes sense only for very little amount of factions, if any, in case that base is in open space, far from any objects, so not a threat to anything. Very little factions have reason to destroy such base after first encounter without talking to owners first and setting up conditions for survival in their territory (docking access, tax etc.).
"We cannot trust you not to allow our enemies to stage attacks on us from your base."
(03-19-2016, 12:04 PM)Snak3 Wrote: Reason to attack any non-allied base in ZoI?
"We cannot trust you to not place weapon platforms that will then be used against us"
Well, we will see if admins will consider this as making sense enough inRP. Because I personally would say it makes sense only for very little amount of factions, if any, in case that base is in open space, far from any objects, so not a threat to anything. Very little factions have reason to destroy such base after first encounter without talking to owners first and setting up conditions for survival in their territory (docking access, tax etc.).
"We cannot trust you not to allow our enemies to stage attacks on us from your base."
Can´t be used as universal reason either, it will depend on circumstances. For example if mentioned enemies already have NPC base in that system. Also imagine if this attitude would be kept by house lawfuls, ending in not allowing practially any POBs in their territory because "We cannot trust you not to allow our enemies to stage attacks on us from your base."
Anyway, this will be for admins to judge and possibly sanction. Main point is - players now know admins will keep closer eye on the sieges and should make sure they can justify their action properly. And best way to reach this point is having at least some talk with the base owners, what is the point here.
Good change.
Especially now the "LOL, CORE 1 BASE FOUND! KILL! LOG!" idiocy can be curbed a little, as a siege now has to make sense.
A non-sensical siege will have to be present on the forums (with a reason) and when this reason is bogus, it exposes the true motivation of the attacker.
It's a good middle-ground solution to force the attacker to use 1 moment to think before just killing it because it can be killed.
I. I agree with this standard and could also have minimal time for that if there is not a defense of the owner, be allowed to attack, as well as having good reason, such as the base be incurring error against the attacking faction, which can not It is why the base does not corroborate with social crimes committed by the attacking faction.
Question: Can the base owner still destroy the base with no roleplay? (as in, they set it up, but it's in a planet or otherwise undesirable, as has happened to me a few times)
In this example I see no reason why not...its that persons base , and they are the one attacking it/ letting it die.
Here is a possibility - set a self destruct code that is ONLY usable by the person that built the base....like the master password vs regular password. But , I can see that being abused also.