+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Role-Playing (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Forum: Unofficial Factions and Groups (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=67)
+--- Thread: [Infopage] Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback (/showthread.php?tid=135495)
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - Skorak - 08-22-2018
The bases are set to neutral and I was told that the Unioner actually fled there and circled the base.
But I'll move the platforms at the Freeport into the base. That hopefully stops them from shooting anything.
Sadly there's no command to store them or shut them down.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - Enkidu - 08-22-2018
(08-22-2018, 04:40 PM)Skorak Wrote: The bases are set to neutral and I was told that the Unioner actually fled there and circled the base.
But I'll move the platforms at the Freeport into the base. That hopefully stops them from shooting anything.
Sadly there's no command to store them or shut them down.
My guys said they were chasing your guys. No way to know without a recording.
Thanks, Skorak. Feel free to redeploy them for sieges.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - DarkTails - 08-22-2018
What essentially happened was, as I was there, the battled started and we chased after the ship 4k from the Freeport to fight away from the base. The bomber left then later returned to re-even the fight after leaving after it started. The focussed ship got all but dry and started hugging the freeport. After leaving that to fly over Bristol, one Gunda something shot at us and hit Bristol, making it shoot back.
Ignoring the purposeful shooting of Marshall to attract our attention, flying over Bristol seems ot me like an attempt to make our stray shots hit the base and kill one of us, the opposite of what happened. The guns have and always will only shoot in self defence, it's not like UN| Just rolled up and it fired away.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - Enkidu - 08-22-2018
the UN fired a cruise disruptor to diffuse a nuke mine. The pob that was shot registered as an indestructible minable object without a healthbar. It was also strafed because we thought the minable message was a bug.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - Thyrzul - 08-22-2018
(08-22-2018, 02:49 AM)DarkTails Wrote: If you're referencing the LN sieging Bristol, they simply can't. Bering is not space where Lib law can actually be enforced against neutral PoBs as it's not listed under Liberty territories.
If LN/5th could've sieged it, believe me, they would have long ago.
5th actually could. Their info page lists Liberty Separatists as At War, which appears to be a darker red than Hostile, so I guess they like those in that category even less. Both Bristol PoBs bear the Liberty Separatist IFF, so 5th is technically at war with them, they are not neutral stations, thus not protected by the server rule, referenced in the above quote.
All 5th needs for a casus belli is evidence that Bristol is (are) more useful to the separatists during a raid than to the navy, then a siege declaration can go off based on that. According to the current wording of the rules, Bristol is not protected from that, and according to the spirit of the rules, it shouldn't be protected either.
[LN] and =LSF= did not update their diplomacy sheets to list Liberty Separatists yet, but they likely treat seps the same way. LPI- has "Criminals" as hostile, it is unclear/unambiguous if it includes Liberty Separatists or not, though it does not list any Liberty Unlawfuls separately either.
The LiNavy restart does not seem to display either the Liberty Separatist or the Independent Pirate IFFs on the reputation sheet, not even after dodging fire from Freeport 2. I haven't checked the other restarts yet.
All 5th needs for a casus belli is evidence that Bristol is (are) more useful to the separatists during a raid than to the navy, then a siege declaration can go off based on that. According to the current wording of the rules, Bristol is not protected from that, and according to the spirit of the rules, it shouldn't be protected either.
[LN] and =LSF= did not update their diplomacy sheets to list Liberty Separatists yet, but they likely treat seps the same way. LPI- has "Criminals" as hostile, it is unclear/unambiguous if it includes Liberty Separatists or not, though it does not list any Liberty Unlawfuls separately either.
The LiNavy restart does not seem to display either the Liberty Separatist or the Independent Pirate IFFs on the reputation sheet, not even after dodging fire from Freeport 2. I haven't checked the other restarts yet.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - DarkTails - 08-22-2018
In theory yes it would work, however with the base being neutral it has to be proven the base is hostile to siege it in Bering. Proving such is essentially impossible, and since its not in a system where Liberty PoB laws can be applied, unless the base gets set red to them, they cant get grounds to host a siege.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - Wesker - 08-22-2018
(08-22-2018, 02:49 AM)DarkTails Wrote: If you're referencing the LN sieging Bristol, they simply can't. Bering is not space where Lib law can actually be enforced against neutral PoBs as it's not listed under Liberty territories.
A force rep’d sepratist pob(s) made to evade roleplay reprecussions. Nice.
No one in the liberty lawful realm is capable of organizing a siege of that magnitude, you’re essentially sitting on the rules for the benefit of something that ruins gameplay for your own benefit.
This is literally no different than reutlingen.
This doesn’t mean I have anything against the people in this faction but I’m forewarning you now that this is what is happening right now. I’d pack the pobs in another location in bering altogether, to be honest.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - Thyrzul - 08-22-2018
(08-22-2018, 08:32 PM)DarkTails Wrote: In theory yes it would work, however with the base being neutral it has to be proven the base is hostile to siege it in Bering. Proving such is essentially impossible, and since its not in a system where Liberty PoB laws can be applied, unless the base gets set red to them, they cant get grounds to host a siege.
There is nothing specifying that you have to inRPly prove you aren't breaking an ooRP regulation, ooRPly proving the bases both have Liberty Separatist IFF isn't that difficult though. There are no specifications regarding any quality standards for the roleplay supporting siege declarations either.
As I said, all 5th would need to do inRP is to prove the base does more harm than good. After all, bases fell for sieges with the same - if not less - amount of roleplay backing in the past.
As I said, all 5th would need to do inRP is to prove the base does more harm than good. After all, bases fell for sieges with the same - if not less - amount of roleplay backing in the past.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - SnakThree - 08-22-2018
(08-22-2018, 08:32 PM)DarkTails Wrote: In theory yes it would work, however with the base being neutral it has to be proven the base is hostile to siege it in Bering. Proving such is essentially impossible, and since its not in a system where Liberty PoB laws can be applied, unless the base gets set red to them, they cant get grounds to host a siege.
Quality rule lawyering from official faction in an attempt to dissuade the improbable siege as it is.
RE: Battlegroup Harmony - Information and Feedback - DarkTails - 08-22-2018
Im merely explaining its position. I didnt personally put it there and the only feasible way it can ruin gameplay is if LN wants to chase us back to our dock. Its no different from LIS' positioning at Manhattan orbit. The only difference is the weapons dont ahoot anything on sight while LIS does.
As for Thyrs reply, with the recent announcement, it has to be inRP proven that the base is hostile to attack. As Liberty law regarding PoBs doesnt apply as lib law doesnt apply in the independent system, the ID line to engage hostile forces doesnt apply as the bade itself is neutral. The line that unlawfuls using the base isnt applicable as lib law doesnt cover the base. I fully well intended to defend it from sieges until i was told why it cant be.
The base itself is neutral to 90% pf disco and serves as a trading hub. Harmony faction members have been warned not to use the base as a crutch. This entire issue arose solely because a unioner started hugging the freeport while dry and their friends stray shot hit the base.
Since then Skorak has moved the guns inside the base and it cant shoot anything even if it tried.