+- 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: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 (/showthread.php?tid=98543)
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Catbert - 05-15-2013
(05-15-2013, 08:38 AM)AeternusDoleo Wrote: On intelligence IDs/cruisers:
The role suggested for them - border defense with warships - is that of the Navy, not that of a covert ops organisation. Ships of that nature are roleplaying as navy, and should take that ID instead.
I see your point here, I guess. I could ask "What makes Police factions different then?", but I won't (simply because having the Police IDs nerfed even more is the last thing I'd want to see). So, judging by your statement, the Navy's main role would be border defense and deploying caps against foreign military on the battlefield, and it's fine. The Police would deploy cruisers in house space to counter the pirate threat, which is also acceptable, since problems tend to arise quite often, at least in Liberty.
That leaves the intelligence factions, which (as Anne has pointed out) could deploy cruisers for operations in lawless systems (like the Omicrons or systems without jumpgates in general; like in the Order's case, but excluding Alpha and Gamma as well). Thus they'd have a different role, and quite a necessary one, since the opposition there may field everything up to battleships. Of course, it be up to the devs and admins to decide in the end, but it seems I'm not the only one who doesn't quite welcome the removal of cruisers from intel faction IDs (that includes a few members of my faction and some other people, as I've witnessed in this thread and on Skype).
Even if the decision is final, we'll try to live with that, but the bitter flavour will remain, despite the fact that the ID would become better in general. Anyway, I guess there's nothing more I can say on this matter now.
As far as other IDs are concerned, I'm not much of an expert. The Brigands seem to have lost access to New Tokyo, which is not necessarily a bad thing (especially if piracy won't be so hard in Gallia when 4.87 arrives; the Order ID line forbidding them to bring caps into systems without a jumpgate could still use some sort of tweak, in my opinion (but I think it'd be up to more active Order players to come up with suggestions concerning the nature of this tweak).
But overall the job is done nicely, and I mean it. The IDs seem to be more clear now, with fewer opportunities for vague interpretation.
That leaves the intelligence factions, which (as Anne has pointed out) could deploy cruisers for operations in lawless systems (like the Omicrons or systems without jumpgates in general; like in the Order's case, but excluding Alpha and Gamma as well). Thus they'd have a different role, and quite a necessary one, since the opposition there may field everything up to battleships. Of course, it be up to the devs and admins to decide in the end, but it seems I'm not the only one who doesn't quite welcome the removal of cruisers from intel faction IDs (that includes a few members of my faction and some other people, as I've witnessed in this thread and on Skype).
Even if the decision is final, we'll try to live with that, but the bitter flavour will remain, despite the fact that the ID would become better in general. Anyway, I guess there's nothing more I can say on this matter now.
As far as other IDs are concerned, I'm not much of an expert. The Brigands seem to have lost access to New Tokyo, which is not necessarily a bad thing (especially if piracy won't be so hard in Gallia when 4.87 arrives; the Order ID line forbidding them to bring caps into systems without a jumpgate could still use some sort of tweak, in my opinion (but I think it'd be up to more active Order players to come up with suggestions concerning the nature of this tweak).
But overall the job is done nicely, and I mean it. The IDs seem to be more clear now, with fewer opportunities for vague interpretation.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - West - 05-15-2013
Quote:On the Samura ID and Rishiri/Nagano:
Those systems physically move on the starmap, and become borderworlds - part of the Tau cluster, the border between Kusari and Gallia. So yes, they need to be included explicitly.
Then it raise question on KNF id again.
Quote:Kusari Naval Forces ID
Zone of Influence: Kusari and systems directly bordering Kusari
INRP Rishiri and Nagano considered Kusari territory and it would be silly for government to give up on systems that trully belong to them only because it's becoming border with Gallia. + Kusari already setuped there.
So can KNF consider them as Kusari or should as directly bordering?
Right now Kusari consider their own systems:
New Tokyo, Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku, Hokkaido, Rishiri, Oita (more like border, but not anymore in .87), Nagano, Tottori(since it's loosing Guard status) Chugoku(Contested) and Tohoku(Contested)
And borderworlds: Taus, Sigmas, Kepler, Galileo and Omicron 92.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Knjaz - 05-15-2013
huh, small question - what happened between Order and Bretonian/Rheinland intelligence services, that Order is now considered as terrorist organisation, by them?
Quote:500565
INFOCARD
Rheinland Military
The Rheinland Military are the military of Rheinland. They maintain Rheinland rule in systems claimed by Rheinland and assist in law enforcement. They also patrol the systems bordering Rheinland. Rheinland is at war with Liberty.
<...>
Zone of Influence: Rheinland and systems directly bordering Rheinland
Allowed ships: Fighters, Freighters, Transports, Gunboats, Cruisers, Battleships
Same goes for the Liberty Navy.
So no more Texas/Hamburg raids, according to IDs? (Which are "small skirmishes", inRP)
No, nobody expects Liberty players to defend New Hampshire, or Rheinland players to defend Bremen. Even Bering/Hudson are often ignored.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - AeternusDoleo - 05-15-2013
Yea, the Hamburg/Texas (and Minnesota/Bremen) raids were omitted. Fixing that.
Quote:Right now Kusari consider their own systems:4.87 as far as the rules go:
New Tokyo, Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku, Hokkaido, Rishiri, Oita (more like border, but not anymore in .87), Nagano, Tottori(since it's loosing Guard status) Chugoku(Contested) and Tohoku(Contested)
And borderworlds: Taus, Sigmas, Kepler, Galileo and Omicron 92.
Kusari House: New Tokyo, Shikoku, Kyuyshu, Honshu, Hokkaido, Chukogu, Tohoku, Hiroshima, Oita, Fukuoka
Kusari bordering: Tau-23, Tau-29, Tau-63, Tau-65, Tottori, Rishiri, Nagano, Omicron-92, Okinawa, Sigma-19, Sigma-13, Galileo, Kepler
[Edit] Oh, and on the intelligence faction cruisers for recon purposes - you have the house armored transport under your cargo allowance. You can also use liners as light carriers. Use that one, instead? The fact that multiple cruisers being used for fullblown military invasions or cruiser piracy is the reason why they -can't- be on the intelligence IDs by default. Cruisers plus a practically unlimited ZoI is a bad thing.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - AshHill07 - 05-15-2013
(05-15-2013, 11:53 AM)Knjaz Wrote: huh, small question - what happened between Order and Bretonian/Rheinland intelligence services, that Order is now considered as terrorist organisation, by them?
Quote:500565
INFOCARD
Rheinland Military
The Rheinland Military are the military of Rheinland. They maintain Rheinland rule in systems claimed by Rheinland and assist in law enforcement. They also patrol the systems bordering Rheinland. Rheinland is at war with Liberty.
<...>
Zone of Influence: Rheinland and systems directly bordering Rheinland
Allowed ships: Fighters, Freighters, Transports, Gunboats, Cruisers, Battleships
Same goes for the Liberty Navy.
So no more Texas/Hamburg raids, according to IDs? (Which are "small skirmishes", inRP)
No, nobody expects Liberty players to defend New Hampshire, or Rheinland players to defend Bremen. Even Bering/Hudson are often ignored.
The thing is though, the fights in Texas and Hambug became so frequent over the last 3 - 4 months that the outcomes have become far too predictable, so much so that even in Texas and Hamburg many people won't even bother to log for them. We need the fights to be in new places to get some of the routine out of the fights and some of the unpredictability and stratergy put back in. But frankly I think its starting to get to the stage where people are just getting fed up with this war in general, I mean this wars been going on for about as long, if not longer, than the actual first world war.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - West - 05-15-2013
(05-15-2013, 12:50 PM)AeternusDoleo Wrote: 4.87 as far as the rules go:
Kusari House: New Tokyo, Shikoku, Kyuyshu, Honshu, Hokkaido, Chukogu, Tohoku, Hiroshima, Oita, Fukuoka
Kusari bordering: Tau-23, Tau-29, Tau-63, Tau-65, Tottori, Rishiri, Nagano, Omicron-92, Okinawa, Sigma-19, Sigma-13, Galileo, Kepler
And Sigma 17 for KNF id or as Kusari Bordering since we already discussed why.
Samura planet.. small knf garrison... just a reminder since it might go unnoticed in between other things.
And thanks for answers.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - AeternusDoleo - 05-15-2013
Sig17 isn't Kusari bordering, so it'll be listed explicitly. It is a bit of a stretch though... Sig-17 is GMG sovereign space. But if they don't want you there, I'm sure they'll Kaishoo you away.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - West - 05-15-2013
Well, sigma-17 is neutral so far. And it will be another war between GMG and Samura if they decide to move there seriously.
and ye.. might work as listed explicitly in KNF id.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Karst - 05-15-2013
I like this a lot; more variety for all IDs? Yes please.
There are many things I noticed, most of which I can't remember, but let's see.....
About ZOI: The whole concept is a bit confusing, if you ask me. What exactly does ZOI actually mean?
Does it mean the faction ID can't leave those systems? In some cases, it obviously does (house police), while in other cases it clearly doesn't (corporate IDs).
I don't know if this should be explained on the IDs themselves, but it needs to be clarified somewhere.
- Freelancers can fly Pilgrim Liner / Ptrain, and Pirates can fly Pilgrim Liners? YES; YES, OH GOD YES.
- Junker ID: It mentions that they "Cannot participate in unlawful actions within house space, except in Kusari and Gallia."
However, it no longer has the line "May engage in piracy". So the way it's worded now, it doesn't allow piracy.
So which unlawful actions exactly are permitted? Or is this an oversight?
- DSE and IC ID: Why can they hunt Lane Hackers, but not Rogues or Xenos?
Ageira are the Lane Hackers' arch enemy, so it makes sense for them to be able to hunt each other.
But as far as I know, Lane Hackers are no more hostile towards DSE and IC than Rogues or Xenos are, and vice versa.
- All corporate IDs: They can defend a base "of the same affiliation", but not an allied base. Would make sense in my opinion if, say, a Bowex ship could defend a BMM base.
- Gaian ID: I suggest changing "Cannot attack Gallic Royal Navy." to "May only attack Gallic Royal Navy in self-defense."
- To Jack: You make it sound as if 6.6 is being removed entirely and pirates can generally treat transports as combat targets.
But it's only in very specific cases, cases in which it simply doesn't make sense to issue a demand.
It makes no sense whatsoever for a Blood Dragon to make a demand of a Samura vessel instead of blowing it up.
- Regarding rephacking the Pirate ID to undockable on unlawful bases:
This is problematic for a number of reasons.
Firstly, some unlawful factions (such as Rogues) are known to be very unfriendly toward independent pirates, but others are not and often accept their help.
This would also prevent Pirate ID'd ships from displaying an unlawful IFF - as in, an independent pirate that works primarily for / with unlawful faction x.
And lastly, gameplay reasons. Preventing independent pirates from docking on unlawful bases (as well as lawful ones) basically leaves them with Junker and Zoner bases.
This would mean in most places, they'd have to travel incredibly far between pirating spots and safe bases - not really a good thing for gameplay.
Official factions can already request nodock rephack for Pirate ID; there is no need to implement a blanket no dock for all unlawfuls.
Is that all? I think so.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Thyrzul - 05-15-2013
As far as I know, you are permitted to leave your ZoI, but then it becomes pretty restrictive outside (combat reduced to self defense), unless specified otherwise in the ID (like intel factions).