(08-30-2016, 12:02 AM)Arioch Wrote: immune to weapons - What is to prevent someone from building an unlawful base right in front of a lawful planet, fill it up with contraband, and undock and fly to the planet and sell the goods? Police/Navy then can't get rid of the base. Just as an example, and plenty more on why it would be a bad idea to make them immune to weapons like that.
Automated game mechanics (for example, make the base builder not deploy if its near a hostile solar) and rules (forbid it), or game mechanics and rules (make base deployment a SRP).
(08-30-2016, 12:02 AM)Arioch Wrote: nerf their weapons platforms - Sure, but then same as above. Why? At that point it's an NPC base that a player can build and exploit.
So they don't change the game environment for other players that much.
(08-30-2016, 12:02 AM)Arioch Wrote: make them buildable only in certain locations - This would have to be done via the Dev's and would be absolute hell to code, given you'd more than likely need different lines of code for a lawful base versus an unlawful versus a quasi-unlawful. Already right now there are inRp consequences if you build a POB in specific areas. It would be hard/take way too long and resources for the Dev's to do this server-side, if it's even possible to do. That's just one of the headaches as well associated with something like that.
See answer to first point
(08-30-2016, 12:02 AM)Arioch Wrote: increase their wear and tear damage - Why? That would mean less RP/PVP/etc and more silent trading to supply a base, which already is a pain for many people. You increase that, you increase the amount of silent people not RP'ing, and just trying to bring materials to the base. That also then brings up the increase of pirates/people hunting down base suppliers, thus going against your goal.
So not everyone and their dog have a base that just sits there without much work to maintain it. Base suppliers aren't more silent than other traders. Blaming "silent trading" (which are still target opportunities for pirates, even if they don't talk, btw) on bases more than on any other type of trading is just... meh.
(08-30-2016, 12:02 AM)Arioch Wrote: impose conditions for building them - There is already a ton of conditions to build them. What house you're in, which unlawfuls might be in the area, etc. That's just inRP. ooRP you have to do provide RP for the base to receive an upgrade, as well as you have to wait a considerable amount of time after an upgrade for the next, and even then it's not a guarantee it'll be approved, depending on the level of RP provided.
See answer to first point. You could ask for RP before even letting the first core to be built. Asking for RP that takes place in a state where the base is still vulnerable to make it less vulnerable doesn't seem the best way to make bases sustained by RP. Neither does still making them destroyable by large enough fleets even if its RP is deemed and enrichment. Neither does allowing bases which should be mining depots to build all kinds of high tech superweapon gizmos that miners don't need. You could also impose a condition that supplying it needs to take long enough to provide some pirating opportunities, at least of one of the needed components.
(08-30-2016, 12:02 AM)Arioch Wrote: Not trying to shoot you down, but while what we have isn't perfect, the points you suggested would bring more of a headache, instead of a relief for POB's.
More of a headache for admins maybe, but less of a headache for players. Which group do we need more of at the moment?
EDIT: Sorry if tone might seem hostile. Also, I had bases on low pop servers but not on the big one, so possibly I don't know what Im talking about. Gonna make an experimental base now.
User was banned for: Karlotta alt
Time left: (Permanent)
