+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Saddened by the rule 5.6 (/showthread.php?tid=97690)
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - Sava - 04-26-2013
Why protecting escortless traders with rules huh?
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - Karst - 04-26-2013
What? Look, I spend most of my disco time pirating, and I generally tend to take the "pirate side" in pirate/trader discussions of various sorts, but I honestly don't see what your problem is.
If you can't stop a trader from reaching the next base, they were too tough for you.
In short.....
![[Image: dealwithit_zps4e15d37d.png]](http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y45/KeineKunst/dealwithit_zps4e15d37d.png)
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - SMGSterlin - 04-26-2013
It's also freaking difficult to just find an escort as a trader.
People need to stop assuming "oh, you can just hire an escort, durrr", because that's simply not the case.
It's difficult enough to survive a pirate encounter as a trader already, for most people. It doesn't need to be harder for traders.
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - Anaximander - 04-26-2013
I don't believe that. Look at all the escort firms that have risen and fallen over the years; mostly due to lack of business because traders are only really interested in paying for escorts AFTER they have been caught by pierats.
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - space.dust - 04-26-2013
A solo clever pirate would not bother with traders with escorts to begin with. If a lone trader manages to dock before getting gunned down that's a testament to the lack of pirating skills not to mention in some cases the proximity to a base/planet that brings into question (inRP) why you so close?
Just because NPC's can't really do anything in game to you, logically in RP there is meant to be enough to maintain order and we all should respect that and not just loiter about because the AI can't react to variables outside it's pre-scripted patrols.
So if we want to be sad, lets be sad for the total disregard to NPC's and how they -can- be outright ignored in places they should have the most strength. . . their bases!
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - SMGSterlin - 04-26-2013
(04-26-2013, 05:24 PM)Anaximander Wrote: I don't believe that. Look at all the escort firms that have risen and fallen over the years; mostly due to lack of business because traders are only really interested in paying for escorts AFTER they have been caught by pierats.
Over the last month of playing, I only remember seeing like... 5 or 6 Freelancers in decent ships, and this being in Liberty, I don't remember seeing any in the other houses.
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - Anaximander - 04-26-2013
They don't have to be in decent ships, as they aren't going to protect you from getting killed anyway - use them as scouts to give you a heads up on the situation ahead of you, so you can avoid contact with them pirates. A LF is perfect, an innocent looking CSV is good too.
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - Moberg - 04-26-2013
There's no point in attacking a transport that is very close to a station anyway. If you were not able to take the transport down before he is able to dock, then the problem lies within your firepower and strategy.
As jammi said, a transport docking is a clear win for the transport. Transports and freighters should not be punished for not fighting with a bomber, or something with similar or higher firepower against transports, but instead successfully escaping the grasp of death.
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - Sava - 04-26-2013
Piracy isn't the issue.
When some dude in transport is hanging around the station, there is no way someone can make him leave.
You can kill the snub or warship (rule-wise) but the transport is invincible. wtf?
Edit: that was my point from the start. The rule doesn't protect cargo haulers from being robbed by any type of ship, it's only protecting base hugging dudes in transports from being kicked from the system. And that's wrong.
RE: Saddened by the rule 5.6 - Moberg - 04-26-2013
Transports don't compare with snubs and warships. They lack the endurance and firepower of warships, and the agility of snubs. While your proposal not to exempt transports from the rule might look good on paper, I don't think it will in action.
For example, we have a transport who wants to roleplay and hangs around at a station. Rofldude1 shows up with a bomber/gunboat/cruiser/battleship, starts shooting, transports needs to dock. Congratulations, someones attempt to roleplay in a transport just got punished. Now let's move this to other ship classes to compare. Fighter/Bomber gets shot at by whatever, his options are to run, dock, or fight. Can a transport run? Rather not. Fight? Nope. Dock? Sounds good.
Capital Ship gets shot at. Run? Maybe. Fight? If it's not gunboat versus battleship, sure why not. Dock? Could be used as last resort, if the cap is losing, he can dock and accept his loss.
So, the only thing a transport can do either against snubs/battleships, while being without escort because the transport is not intending to trade with it, but talk with people, is to dock. Transports lack the agility to dodge the enemy shots, while at the same time lacking the firepower to fight the attacker off.
Because of this, I think the rule should be left as it is.