Destroying other player's month long work is never fair. It doesn't matter if you do it alone or together with 20 people.
Doesnt matter how many people, it should take some time. The building of the base takes a a lot more time, than destroying it. Something people are building for weeks and months, should not be gone in hours or days.
(10-06-2017, 04:33 PM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: Keep in mind any player building a station should be fully aware of the fact it is destructible. To problem is not the object itself but how it is currently handled, in a pretty unfair and not necessarily profiting way. People who think their PoB is untouchable are simply forgetting what a PoB is, matter of factly. Great sources of activity, sometimes even RP, but especially a very vulnerable target. All the current PoB system needs is a fair - and with that I mean fair - way of defending the PoB. Are defense platforms doing the job? Partially. As long as they keep bugging and as long as people are allowed to simply exploit the bugged platforms (as in not shooting them once they respawn), destroying a PoB will remain very easy. If not done within two hours with a mass of battleships, then by sieging it like in medival times, having it dry out.
Destroying other player's month long work is never fair. It doesn't matter if you do it alone or together with 20 people.
(10-06-2017, 04:37 PM)DannyD Wrote:
(10-06-2017, 04:29 PM)Karlotta Wrote:
(10-06-2017, 04:29 PM)DannyD Wrote: It's more complicated than that
Please explain.
People get attached to a system, the system changes. People invested in the old system may get upset and people may leave because of it. Considering Discovery is on life support those changes seem a bit too drastic for the community
And how many people left because of the current system?
Not changing a system that you know is bad because a change would be mildly upsetting is like never taking a shower because you don't like water.
Yeah people aren't swarming back because the base plugin system has changed. You have to accept most people have found other things to do, and the best option would be to appeal to new players, or appeal to the current people who are invested in the system and how it's working. Which makes updates a development minefield.
Destroying other player's month long work is never fair. It doesn't matter if you do it alone or together with 20 people.
Doesnt matter how many people, it should take some time. The building of the base takes a a lot more time, than destroying it. Something people are building for weeks and months, should not be gone in hours or days.
It doesnt matter how many people or how much time.
Permanently destroying someone else's month long hard work against their will is a dick move.
Always.
It's amazing how so man people here aren't able to understanding that.
I blame it on years and years of breeding a certain kind of community.
This is a reason why I believe that if the attacking faction does more RP which is required which will create some form of weapon or a titan ship. Which also requires the attackers to supply a base of there own (NPC Station) which will create said weapon or ship which lasts only for the siege period of time. From there they can then write in the attack declaration thread once either the weapon or ship has been fully supplied for and only then the admins can either approve or deny the PoB siege. If it is denied then there is no loss for anyone, but the attackers will know they did not provide enough roleplay, or responsibility for the wealthfare of fellow community members. Not only that but it gives a chance to the pob owners to supply the base enough to prepare for a siege, this also gives them enough time if they have a busy schedule working/university/college etc to get a defense team ready as well as the base. Making things slightly more fair. Then from there the attackers have so many attempts before the attack declaration timer runs out. For example currently any amount of ships can shoot a PoB and it can be destroyed, the more BS's the more DPS you are doing obviously. But with the said weapon/ship they should be the only one to do DPS to the PoB and therefore the attackers need to defend the ship with the weapon/ship while the defending side has to defend the pob that is being sieged.
(10-06-2017, 04:38 PM)Karlotta Wrote: It's also possible to make the new system an additional option, and it's also possible to move existing bases into an NPC base of the owners' choice.
(10-06-2017, 04:59 PM)Karlotta Wrote: A simple way to make base sieges more "fair" would be to delete attacking ships if they die.
But it doesnt change the fact that permanently removing players hard work will never ever be fair.
It will just spread the misery.
There wouldn't be a market for such games as DayZ, EVE, Escape from Tarkov, and SC if it wasn't for this style of mechanic
Not every development is a good development, and not every market is a good market.
Thinking of Heroine, Crack, and the Japanese guy who IRL murdered his best friend because he sold his virtual sword.
Probably not a mod though, Discovery faces the problem of catering to a low player base in an old game, with a very specific set of standards, I agree with you adding similar POB features could benefit people who don't want to face risk but I think the risk factor is ultimately what's supposed to drive POBs
Yeah, i have 2 pobs atm, both are stocking ores, and i would fully agree with moving its"functionality" to npc's base close of their locations.
Just saying, at least is a change, what Karlotta suggested, making ships ded on siege indeed ded (erased) is (again, as karlotta said) just spreading the misery, not cool at all, unless all prices would be changed.
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Signature:
