+- 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 - Moberg - 05-14-2013
Quote:Nomad IDAlpha is completely reasonable, but why Gamma?
- Can freely engage any ship in the Omicrons, except for Omicron Alpha and Omicron Gamma.
Second thing, this 'may treat as combat targets' line is really bad for roleplay. A good example for this can be seen when you look at DHC <--> indie hessian relations.
It is basically just "Daumann, die!" interaction and just promotes 'lolwuttism' even further. In my opinion, you should rather aim to get rid of this line in every ID.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Jack_Henderson - 05-14-2013
(05-14-2013, 06:59 PM)LordVipex Wrote: A good example for this can be seen when you look at DHC <--> indie hessian relations.
It is basically just "Daumann, die!" interaction and just promotes 'lolwuttism' even further. In my opinion, you should rather aim to get rid of this line in every ID.
Ye... we totally need this situation for every faction now because it is so damn cool. <sarcasm>
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Lonely Werewolf - 05-14-2013
Also GC can no longer dock on IC bases, that's shame.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Lobster - 05-14-2013
(05-14-2013, 04:57 PM)AeternusDoleo Wrote: I've been mulling over the current list of IDs and their allowances. After grouping them a bit by faction type, I've tried to harmonise what can be done on them and where - also adding in clearly defined Zones of Influence for most factions, and a brief description of what the faction is all about. Note that this is just a personal sideproject, and this is only a proposal so far, I've not even discussed this with other devs or admins. I'd like to get some player feedback first, just in case something was missed.
The below is my opinion.
I see them reasons of the proposal and a lot of them are good, but I think this is going about it the wrong way. ZoIs and further restrictions is going a bit overboard. Limiting ZoI in an official manor is, I think, only a bad thing. Problums should be delt with on a case by case basis, instead of blanket action. Bounty Hunter Core capital ships are a good example of how this can be done right.
Obviously, I dont agree with limiting intel factions to gunboats and below. We in the BDM have a lot of roleplay invested in cruisers exporting the omicrons . It would make no sense to do that in a snub who's range would be extremely defecent, unable to reach the omicrons. I am sure our friends BIS, LSF, and Kempeti would only be adversely affected by such restrictions as well.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Volksfront - 05-14-2013
(05-14-2013, 06:36 PM)TheJarl Wrote: I expected this response. I realize that the current Bundschuh playerbase has several different opinions on the matter. However, it does seem reasonable to me as it is actually official lore. Admitted it was controversial and I think I opposed it back then myself. Still it wasn't changed as far as I know and in the VWA it was simply decided that we could try and actually make use of it by trying to side with Liberty. However lore and ID currently don't match. I realize why, but at the very least I think the Bundies should have the option to go both ways since there is no official faction to make a decision on the official course of the faction.
As for the reasoning behind siding with them. The Rheinland media won't portray us as heroes anyway, after many generations of propaganda it just won't work so easily anymore. Liberty can therefore be seen either as genuinely having good intentions (whether the players see it that way doesn't matter, our chars might) or simply as a useful lil' thing. If Liberty wins they could very well decide to give power to the Bundschuh if they consider us as an ally. For them it would mean supporting a new more friendly government instead of grabbing power themselves which would cause a lot of unrest. For us, it would be a way to fight the government.
So I think it should either leave the decision to the player or state that we can side with Liberty.
(05-14-2013, 06:53 PM)SummerMcLovin Wrote: As for the Bundschuh ID, perhaps even leaving it as simply "cannot ally with any lawfuls". Both sides have a point about not being portrayed as supporting Liberty, but also not gaining anything (after several failed attempts) by supporting Rheinland. Just wade in and shoot both without grouping.
Or lets not mention the allying thing at all.
That would create some space for the Bundschuh and also allows some hardcore undercover wraith roleplay for some individuals who might seek something like that...
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - AeternusDoleo - 05-14-2013
Quote:1.) I didn't see a clause in the GRN ID that allowed us to attack anyone at war with us. Did I just misread something? I just wanna make sure it's clarified.Read the first line a bit closer
Quote:2..) Intel Factions losing cruisers. That doesn't really make sense? Or was the line just accidentally left out? Some Intel Factions (Like the =LSF=) Use one or two cruisers, and it would be a shame to lose such things that have been a part of the faction for a long time.There's no reason for those to have cruisers in my opinion. Not if their license to hit foreign shipping is Siriuswide. The wider your ZoI and things to do, the smaller your arsenal. That's how I tried to balance the attractiveness of each ID. Besides, how the hell are you covert in a warship when a foreign nation catches on. That's not something your government can explain away...
Quote:3.) The Order's caps still restricted to the Omicrons. Is there any reason for that to really continue? It's just useless at this point.
3b.) Also, adding cardimine and slaves to our contraband list? Hurting the Outcast Trade hurts the Outcasts, no? So like...please?
Order is anti-Nomad, not anti-Outcast. Stick to your role in the game. Plenty of other factions that are stomping on the Outcasts already... Cardi and Slaves aren't Nomad tech, and Order isn't the Omicron Police.
Quote:4.) Where's the SCRA ID :|Good question. I didn't find that ID in the infocard source file. It might be one of the overridden player faction IDs. Expect it to be similar to the Coalition one, but with a wider ZoI.
Quote:Speaking as leader of XA, we actually like freelancer shippers that are Libertonian moreso than the Liberty corporations with the exception of USI who we would gladly bear children with. Also, you forgot to add Bombers to the allowed ships, unless that was intentional.Bombers are considered Fighters, they're on none of the IDs. Just as Liners are considered Transports, and Battlecruisers/Destroyers are Cruisers. Keeps things somewhat simpler. As for who you like on XA - There's no way to tell by ID if a Freelancer is roleplaying a Liberty character or a foreign one. Figured this was the next best thing. If you can thing of a better wording, feel free to suggest it.
Quote:In 4.87 Kusari found itself having no wars with other Houses which rendered the opportunity to harass any other House useless. I believe this line needs a different wording to avoid such issues in the future. Let's say:Good idea on the line between quotes there. It is what I meant it to say, but your wording is a lot better. That can go on all lawful IDs with a similar line. As for the area of operations: Most factions get more allowances in their main area of operations (for the house intelligence organisations that means acting as Military inside their house space, and the ability to act as Privateers outside it).
"Houses and organizations considered hostile by Kusari."
Same for the other Houses.
That applies to all IDs. Dealing with players is more fun than dealing with rules limitations. Also, increase zones of operations, people don't love to be locked inbetween the walls.
Quote:Get rid of all the "May treat as combat target" lines in ALL IDs. Not give even more people that line!Get rid of it, and transports end up hiding behind the "must make a demand" rule ("You can't shoot me yet, you've not made a demand. I'mma go on full thruster to the nearest base while you type, k?"), which they often abuse to get away (don't deny it Jack, I've been in convoys with you
). Keep it and you end up with a "Ohai, nau dai." style of roleplay. It's just the side that abuses the mechanic that changes. Which makes me lean towards the "less rules" way. But, I'm open to other player opinions about this.Quote:I suggest dropping Kruger/Daumann from no-dock/piracy list, yes inRP Daumann and Krugers are competitors, what doesn't change fact factions may be interested in cooperation, especially against hessians or IMG, as even Disco history shows as I heard. Currently Kruger and Daumann IDs aren't rephacked to each other, and it allows flexible diplomacy in the gameplay.It was my understanding that in lore Kruger is leaning towards ALG in an attempt to form a stronger competition against Daumann. Dropping the nodock will cause Kruger diamond miners to start using Solarius for instance - is that what you want? The piracy line I'm indifferent about - but if it goes, it goes completely, for all mining factions - they can use mercenaries instead of doing the dirty themselves then.
Quote:EDIT: Right, we would also like to have our own ID description written and submitted by us.I'm open to suggestions, but keep in mind that ALL corporate IDs follow largely the same lines, and Daumann will be no exception. That's how things are kept fair between the corporate factions. Feel free to post a rewritten suggestion.
Quote:LSF ID Wrote:- Can hunt Military pilots of houses Liberty is at war with within and outside their Zone of Influence.That is the intent. But I admit the wording isn't very good. Maybe "Can hunt Police and Military ships of houses and organisations considered hostile..." is a better way to put this. It also fixes:
Do Police and Intelligence faction pilots of hostile Houses fall under this as well? Because I think it would make sense.
Quote:Order ID Wrote:- Can hunt Wild, Nomad, Outcasts, BHG, Core, LSF, MND, Kempeitai and BIS.
It would make sense if the intelligence factions could retaliate and hunt the Order everywhere, I guess.
Quote:Any Intelligence Faction ID Wrote:Allowed ships: Fighters, Freighters, Transports, GunboatsReason for this is the freedom put on the ID, in conjunction with groups of MULTIPLE cruisers doing cargo piracy WAY outside their primary ZoI that has been observed in game. The intelligence ID isn't a siriuswide license to take a capital fleet anywhere. Of course, it's possible to SRP specific ships to serve specific functions - I could very well see the occasional cruiser or carrier serving as a launchpoint for specific missions. Just not for muscle - intelligence services don't generally rely on muscle, but surgical strikes (or hired muscle).
It seems that the cruisers were excluded from the list. I can see the intent here (the IDs have become a bit more flexible and clear; plus, it'd prevent House Intelligence cruisers roaming around hostile space and cargo-pirating hostile corporations). Of course, it'd be sad to lose access to the ships we've had for a while (like =LSF=Mount.Iliamna, which has existed for as long as I can remember).
Hmm... maybe waiving the "cannot ally with any unlawfuls..." might be a good idea on those. Allows them to go down and dirty with hired unlawful muscle.
Quote:"Can hunt pirates and terrorists within their Zone of Influence."Yes, corporations (primarily convoy escorts) should be able to preemptively attack unlawfuls at will within their own houses. Lawfuls allowed to shoot unlawfuls on their own turf, and vice-versa. DSE, Ageira and Interspace have a bone to pick with the Lane Hackers, so they should be able to go after those anywhere.
So what this is saying is that the corporation fighters can hunt any pirates in their zoi, rather like the navy and police can? This sure does make defending our convoys, mining groups and space easier. But was this definately intentional? Also I see prexisting lines for killing fighters is now slightly changed. For example the DSE ID has the above line, which it didn't before and still has the
"Can hunt Lane Hackers outside their Zone of Influence."
I suppose this is too clarify that we can hunt these enemies anywhere as before?
Quote:Rogue Zone of Influence: Liberty and independent systems directly bordering Liberty, ShikokuHonestly? I don't think so. It was a nice experiment for a while, but it really doesn't make much sense for LIBERTY rogues to go park their Barghest in New Tokyo. None of the natives are particulary friendly to them there... not even the GC.
Shouldn't New Tokyo be in the zoi (without cruisers)
EDIT: Also the Rogue ID misses out Humbolt (and Kansas?) which it currently does anyways.
Good call on Kansas and Humboldt. Will fix that.
Quote:Brigand Zone of Influence: Gallia, Gallic Borderworlds, TausKyushu, yes. New Tokyo, not so much. Again, not that many friendly natives, so no way to base yourself out of anywhere in New Tokyo. KNF is in peacetime, and rebuilding, so Kusari military strength is on the rise.
shouldn't they have Kyushu and New Tokyo? Due to this.
Quote:On behalf of the VWA, which presently represents (to my knowledge) the largest unofficial contingent of Bundschuh players, I would like to bring up the portion of the Bundschuh ID that states:Good call. Will do this. Incidentally, the Bundies distinguish themselves by being allowed RheinMil equipment as I recall...
"- Cannot ally with any lawfuls except with Rheinland lawfuls against Liberty lawfuls."
And ask it to be changed, to:
"- Cannot ally with any lawfuls except with Liberty lawfuls against Rheinland lawfuls."
My reasons for that request involve the pre-4.86 backstory written by Igiss; for the Bundschuh...
Quote:I am curious about the BHG going after lawful and unlawful targets now, but I am guessing that is just them being able to go after Gallia or something.If they abuse this, the Houses themselves will kick them out. But they are mercenaries, they follow the money. Agmen indicated they were intending to go after Gallia, so yea, that's the primary reason the "can shoot lawfuls if bountied" is on there. How the BHG official faction intends to keep their indies in check on this, is their perogative (one that I suppose will involve Buckshot negotiations).
Quote:Couldn't help but notice the cargo limitations on Naval ID's are back, is this a hint of things to come or just an oversight?All Naval IDs allow their house's armed transport, but not the 5K Supertrain. Those remain the perogative of the house haulers. Naval IDs are not trader IDs.
Quote:how about a list of allies under ZOI or allowed ships. I realize that the allies section might change over time but for some factions (corsairs for example) it is kind of a big deal, as there are certain factions they should not pirate. obviously official factions dont really need it but the indies do and im sure it will stop a lot of headaches besides any allies list changes can always be modified through server commands right? Or is that only for minor changes?IDs can be updated at runtime, yes, but we prefer not to do that. Given the rapid changes in diplomacy on many factions, posting a list of Allies and Enemies on the ID isn't really viable. I've tried to put the main ones in the description, but that's about it.
Quote:Why was the cargo limit put down? That won't make it easier for us, but also "AI's are fully selfaware and autonomous, and not under the control of any other faction.", that is not right. There are many factionless AIs, but also factions. Like the Consensus.AIs are not a trader faction. They are therefor on par with Freelancers when it comes to trading, which means 3600 cargo limitation. The Consensus I believe is an AI faction. I can clarify this to "of any human faction." It is meant to prevent the "Bleep. Bounty Hunter Automated Unit 443, now receiving Corsair target. Firing." style of roleplay. Which is not AI behaviour since there's no intelligence behind that, just automation. AIs are fully sentient and unshackled, and should be roleplayed as such.
Nothing prevents players from playing a shackled automated unit on another ID. SCRA had one for quite a while, CERES or something I believe.
Quote:- Can attack pirates, terrorists and lawfuls in self-defense, to protect an allied or neutral ship, or in defense of Zoner bases.Good point - the Zoners having caps and being neutral to virtually anyone proves to be a bloody nightmare yet again. To prevent abuse it'll have to be tuned down to "... to protect another Zoner ship..."
I wonder myself what allies? (only Order and GMG if i am not mistaken.) also the neutral ships. Like? all other non rephacked? I would change it back that like you could do in the past only defend your own. As i see how it goes already in the omicrons this only provokes 1 order and a huge zoner cap fleet. the order attacks BHG or nomad and a whole group shoots. If thats the case then well. Zoners are indeed a militairy force from the next version.
But that doesn't even give them the ability to cover supply ships heading for their freeports, other then their own.
Quote:Sorry to bother, but may I ask why the Core cannot hunt Nomads, Wilde and Order everywhere in Sirius like Order does? Core also fight the Nomad threat, even if their goals are not so noble.Good point. That proposed ID needs some tuning, Core and Order need the same playing field where hunting Nommies is concerned.
Order is understandable, but Wilde and Nomads? Though, now that I think, Order is free to hunt Core, why are we not allowed to do the same?
Quote:I assume it was the result of copypasta that the name of the Kusari Exiles appeared on the Council ID too. However I do not really understand why the Council weren't listed as possible unlawful allies on the Colonial ID.Double whoopsie. I'll fix those.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Scumbag - 05-14-2013
I understand that this need work and will be the subject of debate and clarification but i really want to praise AeternusDoleo for this. The game needs this so much, this will make thinks much easier for new players and old players alike.
A big thumbs up from me!
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - Eduard - 05-14-2013
Quote:Good point - the Zoners having caps and being neutral to virtually anyone proves to be a bloody nightmare yet again. To prevent abuse it'll have to be tuned down to "... to protect another Zoner ship..."
But that doesn't even give them the ability to cover supply ships heading for their freeports, other then their own.
Can this be circumvented kinda like the bounty thingie for freelancers and mercenaries or Bounty Hunters as well?
A trading proposition will be made ingame or on forums (screens would have to be made if made ingame), and the zoner faction could use that business proposition to recognize the other party as supplying their bases and protecting them
Thank you for clarifying my doubts on your Core ID proposal regarding the nomads by the way
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - GrnRaptor - 05-14-2013
(05-14-2013, 04:57 PM)AeternusDoleo Wrote: ; dsy_license_li_n_grp
500552
NAME
Liberty Navy ID
500553
INFOCARD
Liberty Navy
The Liberty Navy are the military of Liberty. They maintain Liberty rule in systems claimed by Liberty and assist in law enforcement. They also patrol the systems bordering Liberty. Liberty is at war with Rheinland.
Pilot carrying this ID is a member of the Liberty Navy who:
- Can engage and destroy any ships within the Alaska system that do not belong to either the LSF or Liberty Navy.
- Can demand contraband, levy fines, and destroy ships if they refuse to comply with contraband demands, refuse to cooperate, or are belonging to a house or organisation at war with Liberty within their Zone of Influence.
- Can escort traders within their Zone of Influence.
- Can hunt pirates, terrorists and military enemies within their Zone of Influence.
- Can defend allied or neutral lawful ships and bases within Zone of Influence
- Cannot participate in unlawful actions except as described above.
- Cannot use any transports with more than 4,300 cargo.
Zone of Influence: Liberty and independent systems directly bordering Liberty
Allowed ships: Fighters, Freighters, Transports, Gunboats, Cruisers, Battleships
Okay, what I like:
Killing all the things in Alaska that don't belong. This has been in RP law for a long time, though there's been some issue about whether or not Alaska fell under the "Guard System" rules or not. This makes it clear that if they're not welcome they die. Can we add being within the Zone 21 minefield explicitly as well?
Things I don't like:
That last line about transports. That kind of kills at least one shared LLS Mastodon, and I know the SFC| have some Tankers as well they use for supplying Melbourne. Can we either drop this line or switch it up to support using Liberty Civilian Transports if it's over that limit?
Things I'd add:
With things going as they go in .87, I'm not certain the Rheinland portion will be as entirely relevant anymore, but it'll be good to still have that option. Still, it's pretty much ingame RP at this point that Liberty is at war with Gallia in aid of Bretonia. Can we have that included in the infocard and perhaps expand the ZoI to portions of Bretonia relevant to the war?
General note:
I just realized that the "Can hunt pirates, terrorists and military enemies within their Zone of Influence." line seems to restrict attacking military enemies to border systems only. I.E. Lib ships can't enter Hamburg to shoot RM ships and vice versa for them into Texas. Should military targets be a separate line entirely given the nature of war? I suggest this as a matter of military IDs in general.
RE: Proposal: ID changes for 4.87 - belarusich - 05-14-2013
Quote:Pilot carrying this ID is a member of the Council who:
- Can demand contraband, levy fines, and destroy ships if they refuse to comply with contraband demands, refuse to cooperate or are belonging to a house or organisation at war with the Kusari Exiles within their Zone of Influence.
HMMMMM.
Also, no raids in New Berlin with my LNS- ?
(((