+- 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: Base related sanction discussion and rules. (/showthread.php?tid=80517)
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Govedo13 - 05-18-2012
http://discoverygc.com/forums/index.php?sh...125977&st=0
' Wrote:I've been staying in that point for like 4-5 minutes in cloaked Liner, with docking points being under the fire of 4-6 jorms, until we figured out the proper timing between /base shieldmod off and F3.
' Wrote:yeah , so stop shooting at the base so they can undock and another 2-3 cloaked transports can dock, they shouldn't have docked cloaked on the base in the first place
' Wrote:That is within the rules, what you did was not.Ok here we go- docking on a base with shield under siege in order to supply it- Cannon intentionally added plug-in stopping this.
Because if the base owners can dock and supply the base without killing the attackers then all attacks are useless making bases unkillable.
And we have:
1st Cloaking ships supplying the base using shieldmod off and camping the base quick dock- abusing of the system made by Cannon- as admitted in the first quote.
2st Undocking transports from same quickdock trying to die in order to fill sanction report or waiting for the attacking party to stop shooting and distracting them on the quickdock in order to resupply the base again with cloaked ships. Before the resupply the base was on 39% and was loosing 1% health each 2 minutes and it would be killed without resupply.
3st Is this not a rude 0.0 violation and abusing the game mechanics combined with malicious reporting?
So in this situation if the attackers stopped the attack they would make the defenders abusing even more easy.
Proposal - make the shield off command to be useful for the attackers as well- if the defenders use it in that way let the shield to stay off for 2 minutes so it could not be abused.
I am not sayin that the attackers did good after some thinking about it- however my personal option is that defenders must be punished as well, attackers shouldn't kill the undocking transports but it was chain reaction made by the abusing of the game mechanics- the only way to prevent such resupply is to concentrate all fire-power on the docking point.
I know that the bases are in trail period so such mistakes are clearly easy to make- it is also clear that the motivation of attackers and defenders to destroy/protect the base. However the real in-game test of bases shows the bugs and allows them to be fixed so it is good thing in general.
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - McNeo - 05-18-2012
Actually, there's a much simpler solution.
Turn off manual shield control.
Cannon actually said that now they activate automatically, the feature is basically redundant.
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Govedo13 - 05-18-2012
This is also good option however since it could be useful by missfire - CD hits the base by mistake etc- the base owners could benefit from such command- however it should not be abusable like in this situation.
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Talesin - 05-18-2012
Greetings.
I ought 2 minutes too much, since that would effectively kill any base that is under heavy capship fire (2 mins unshielded equals an over 3 hour long shielded siege).
Few seconds though, like 10-15 seconds would be adequate in my opinion.
In any case something has to be done imo.
Regards,
Talesin
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Govedo13 - 05-18-2012
Talestin- I done the maths first- thats the point- so if the shield is on and base is under siege the base should not be supply-able- that is in the Cannon maths too, that's why shield absorbs so good the dps as well.
In few seconds gap 3 cloaked ships can dock and resupply the base to stand a couple of hours more without the option of the attackers to do the adequate DPS.
So the command wont be abusable and it still would be useful- for instance our siege lasted 2-3 hours with many caps and 6 more hours with less ships in order to bring down the repair commodities- so more then 8 hours work and around 20 people involved and as reward - we had the abusers base alive and us sanctioned.
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Snak6 - 05-18-2012
I'd say make shields go on for 5 minutes counting from last damage received and no command to turn it off.
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Zelot - 05-18-2012
This would have been a good thread before the sanction, but I want to be very clear here, just because you disagree with a rule does not mean you will not get sanctioned for violated it. What was done by the players in that sanction was a violation of the rules, clear and without any type of excuse for the behavior. Blowing up ships 10, 15 times this way was and is absolutely unacceptable on this server. Second, reporting someone for violating the rules is not malicious reporting, and suggesting that someone who is following the rules should be ashamed of filing a report against someone violating the rules, in a very egregious manner non-the-less, is to be perfectly honest, a form of harassment toward those players who follow the rules.
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Syrus - 05-18-2012
One of the base suppliers tried blocking my firing by going right in front of me with his big trader...I guess some people tried to get sanction material in that moment...
Some other people have good reasons to be sanctioned.
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Zelot - 05-18-2012
' Wrote:One of the base suppliers tried blocking my firing by going right in front of me with his big trader...I guess some people tried to get sanction material in that moment...
Some other people have good reasons to be sanctioned.
OH NO, THAT TRANSPORT BLOCKED MY FIRE AT THE BASE 15 TIMES, sorry I had to kill him before he even had control of his ship that many times.
Base related sanction discussion and rules. - Govedo13 - 05-18-2012
Zelot- read my post again- after some thinking I figured out that attacking side was also not entirely right, you was not there to see the people trying to die in their transports going into the line of fire in order to give time for the next cloaked supplier to dock in order to get angry like the attackers did.
Since you locked the sanction topic without giving the option to say why the whole docking thing happened and caused the mess,I wrote it here in the 3 points in my first post- I do not expect the sanction to be revered any more, I expect the loophole to be closed at least and the people abused it sanctioned as well- but the second is optional. The first one is vital because with this loophole bases are not killable.
The purpose of this topic is not to revert the sanction but to fix the loophole, second thing I didn't knew that they done it manually removing the shield I thought it was shield going down for a second then the cloaked transp quick dock in this second like I stated in the sanction topic- I am not abuse expert you can ask CCCR/2te/Knjaz etc about it they should know better since it is their base.
I am not so good with abusing in order to come up with such plan to use loophole in base mechanics, undocking transports to shield clocked base suppliers AND then sanction the people that shoot at the docking point trying to prevent the cloaked suppliers docking.
I haven't made this topic just after the attack because I think that if people have common sense and abuse the system wont be stupid enough to file such reports after that- well I was wrong. Common sense and Discovery have nothing to do with each other.