+- 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: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. (/showthread.php?tid=120394)
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Sabru - 09-10-2014
Why congress needs a cruiser when they have a battleship in the first place, is beyond me. but that's another topic.
i do wonder about the whole "i found it" style of RP when it comes to SRPs. seems a bit lazy to me to be honest.
now to the topic at hand: well, if it's a generic unlawful, then factions can do it like that. if it was actually proper faction owned tech, then the owner should at least be able to say "hey, we dont agree" which admins could then take in as part of the whole evidence for the SRP. (which if i read echo's posts correctly, that already happens a bit)
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - larzac - 09-10-2014
(09-10-2014, 08:51 AM)Snak3 Wrote: But, such SRP shouldn't be evn possible, as Congress cannot fly cruisers, meaning that ship will not be able to exist for a month before getting SRP.
Well, it's exaclty because our ID doesnt allow us to fly cruiser usually that we are doing a SRP...
I will post soon the recovery of the wreck (hadnt had time yet...) and you will see that we RP everything. Even the fixing for Crimson or the Building for congress.
because yes, we are doing 2 differents SRP (even if both are Hel cruiser).
and Zayne, i plan to contact you soon because we want your advice on this (inrp of course).
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Omicron - 09-10-2014
SRP's against will of the owners should simply be automatically rephacked red to said faction and perhaps even couple of their close allies. You know, consequences.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Papa Oomaumau - 09-10-2014
I can see the wisdom of the above post, but only in terms of the ships -proven- owners.
Generics or shared vessels should not be in this class.
Also, factional allies I don't think would throw out their own alliances with various factions over a single ship - that's on the owner faction only.
This is opinion, but makes sense to me.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Thyrzul - 09-10-2014
(09-10-2014, 10:29 AM)Omicron Wrote: SRP's against will of the owners should simply be automatically rephacked red to said faction and perhaps even couple of their close allies. You know, consequences.
I'd like to add the condition of losing the ship upon first claimed kill posted in the SRP thread (or in any appropriate platform). You know, if all those who could repair it for you are hostile to you, it is unlikely to fly again.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - SnakThree - 09-10-2014
So basically, it would make SRPing ships belonging to hostiles for combat completely useless unless flown by PVP ace or running each time things look bad.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Thyrzul - 09-10-2014
So basically it would make that kind of SRPing ships more logical than "I've stole foreign tech from our hostiles yet I have all the means to repair it completely even if it gets totally trashed".
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Teerin - 09-10-2014
"Gallic Generic Unlawful" is a misnomer.
Back near the end of 4.86, there was a technerf request thread available for official faction leaders to post in (which has since been invised or deleted, I dunno why). On the l'Ane infocard, it says that both the Gallic Brigands and the Unione Corse are its sole makers. So in that thread, I asked for the Corse to be able to get l'Anes at 100% core instead of the previous 90%
That's the only reason the tech cell exists. I think I even asked for it to be called the "Brigand/Corse Ship" cell, or something like that. Because it makes inRP sense, right? Calling it the "Gallic Generic Unlawful" and using that as an excuse to be able to get an SRP makes no inRP sense. Heck, it only makes ooRP sense if you know nothing about the lore.
"My GJ cousin gave it to me" is crap roleplay too. I don't mean to sound harsh, but that should not constitute sufficient roleplay for an SRP. Especially when you consider the following; (A) Gallic Junkers and Sirian Junkers really don't get along; (B) Given their hostile relations with one of the l'Ane's makes (Corse) and tense neutrality with the other (Brigands), the Gallic Junkers probably don't have too many l'Anes to spare, especially not for people they don't like. C) It's been so long since Gallic and Sirian Junkers split apart, that you'd be pretty lucky to have a third cousin among the other side
EDIT: As for the bit about two factions making the ship, I don't even think any official Gallic Brigand group would inRP support this either
As for the Alaska.Grey thing (which I didn't know about before this, and have since then researched), it was a wreck that got restored? A cool SRP would've had one of the Outcast factions (official preferably, but unofficial should be okay) roleplay the loss of the original ship. If you're going the extra mile to try to get a fully functioning ship that belongs to someone else, it should be well coordinated.
If we're going by wrecks or distant relations, does that mean a Kusari Naval Forces [KNF]* member could SRP a Legate, or maybe even a Typhoon? Sure! They don't even have to talk to [TBH] or SCRA| about that, just claim that for whatever reason their character is related to someone from over there or maybe that they found a wrecked ship in the Sigmas.
I know I'm not an Admin, but having spoken to a bunch of people, many (including some Admins) do believe that these SRPs have more holes than Swiss cheese. In addition to GrnRaptor pointing out Server Rule 1.7 being trampled on, it would seem that SRP Regulation 6 is also not being seriously considered.
I'd like to close this by ensuring you guys that there is no malice, jealousy, Richard Nixons, or whatever else here. We're just concerned that some of the roleplay - special roleplay, even - is really lacking. And this is a roleplay server. My apologies for the wall of text reply, but with luck more of you are understanding of our viewpoint now.
Regards,
Teerin
*No offense directed towards the [KNF]. That faction has done a lot of great roleplay, and this was just an example
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - SnakeLancerHaven - 09-10-2014
(09-10-2014, 08:21 AM)Drrobe Wrote: To second that and add onto Echo's comment, the person in question still has another check in post to do before the SRP is finalized. ALl SRP's have a one month and 4 month check in, with which to show that they have/are using their SRP as intended.
Funny thing though is that they're active in those 4 months but then for some reason never use their SRPed stuff after that XD I know ALOT of persons which use SRP ships VERY rarely.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Stoner_Steve - 09-10-2014
(09-10-2014, 03:30 PM)Teerin Wrote: "My GJ cousin gave it to me" is crap roleplay too. I don't mean to sound harsh, but that should not constitute sufficient roleplay for an SRP. Especially when you consider the following; (A) Gallic Junkers and Sirian Junkers really don't get along; (B) Given their hostile relations with one of the l'Ane's makes (Corse) and tense neutrality with the other (Brigands), the Gallic Junkers probably don't have too many l'Anes to spare, especially not for people they don't like. C) It's been so long since Gallic and Sirian Junkers split apart, that you'd be pretty lucky to have a third cousin among the other side
If you have a problem with the manner in which I Role Play please use the Feed Back page I created. Further more please take the time to read my role play before a. saying something that I haven't done, and b. calling my role play crap
I don't mind that my SRP is being used as the example in this thread. I will mind if you choose to bash my style of playing this game openly. This isn't the place to do that.