But the asteroid bases are small...the only thing that sticks out most people moore to them, where usually transprots do. Letting the ship flo...allright. Whatever.
This was all a large mistake and will be dealt with.
Can i go now ingame and RP? it has been 2 hours now of pointless arguing of both sides not wishing to accept defeat. Bai, i can has nom nom sammich and so on.
Quote:We are not allowed, that is the point, nor we ever will be. This is only an in RP restriction regarding those who would wish to RP with us. Check out the watering holes for more information.
I suspect you have a point there, however the general opinion is that if a player chooses to ignore this RP they will be frowned upon. So either RP our way or you are a bad RPer is how it seems.
The way I took it from the order debacle, is that a faction may create rules which govern its own members but can't create rules for non-members that may go against RP/cannon.
Iâll carry this flag
To the grave if I must
Because itâs flag that I love
And a flag that I trust
Quote:The way I took it from the order debacle, is that a faction may create rules which govern its own members but can't create rules for non-members that may go against RP/cannon.
That's what I'm wondering about. I thought the general idea of that notice was that official factions can only make restrictions of any sort on their own members.
kindred & del: you fail to see the bigger picture.
Both sides are right, hence why i wont be able to add anything constructive to this discussion.
Both sides have presented valid points which cannot be ignored, my personal problem is that
I agree with both.
What i wanted to review here are your distasteful comments in the meantime. Calling Sindroms
"not bright enough" and calling mb52 an "arse" is uncalled for. If i were a moderator i'd certainly
make some adjustments or post a warning.
Let's keep it civil. I read the whole thread, every single post. I've seen some of you throw flames
at each other for mere misunderstandings.
I'm not a liberty rogue. I'm not an outcast nor a lane hacker. So i can't play wiseguy here or in any
way help this discussion find a happy ending, but i can tell you this:
Instead of insulting each other take some time to think before you post. Maybe even re-read some
posts to be able to offer more constructive criticism.
the measures are in RP and OK from what i read in this in dht original RP thread - like every other faction representing the core of the npc faction, certain rules can be included to add to the canon RP - upon consensus with the community ( or at least those parts of the community that matter - as tells the experience )
the navy can declare certain goods to be illegal and henceforth attack "smugglers" - which led to increased pvp, based on "laws" that are by no means "canon" RP but invented for the pure purpose to either disrupt certain profitable routes or to increase the variety of action for the enforcing faction.
a faction can also prohibit the use of so called "rogue" ships - which has been enforced and accepted ( again by many ) - and was put upon capital ships. - guidelines for such a behaviour were easier back then, but have been put into rules lately. - some of them were against the rules about treating every player the same, others are still in place.
prohibiting choices ( ships, roleplay style, docking etc. ) is part of the roleplay indeed - and usually applied on players that are considered to have done "something wrong".
so a zoner would consider a freeport ban for someone that is known to act hostile to zoners, a battleship is denied to someone that is known to take it to an ill fitting use and commodities are considered "illegal" based on either RP of the faction or some other reasons.
now - the difference between those previously enforced restrictions and this one is - that they are not really "blanket" restrictions. - they approach the other one neutrally and reconsider him based on what he is doing. - so the zoners do not install a blanket docking ban, the navy does not install a blanked ban on all generic traders - not even smugglers, but only when they are caught wrongdoing, and "rogue" ships are only engaged ( verbally mostly or physicly in rare occasions ) when they are proven to have hurt the parent factions reputation.
the rule i consider the most important here is the "Disruption of gameplay" - speaking of a blanket ban of a kind of ships for all, regardless of if they did something right or wrong.... is a disruption of gameplay for those.
no one knows if the RP of those ppl now "forced" to adjust their roleplay doesn t possibly include one of the bases as a cornerstone element of their roleplay. - so they are now forced to revise their roleplay ... even if they did nothing "wrong".
of course - without such "progress" in faction politics, progress as a whole is almost impossible. - progress needs ppl to adjust their roleplay accordingly. - and its upon the playerfactions to push the progress. - there must be a compromise - so that progress is not done recklessly. ( like it was hinted to be in the case of the order )
without such decisions and RP elements, factions would never change ( to the worse or the better ) - we d be in a very static enviroment.
so - i think that such a blanket ban - while basicly at the edge, if not slightly over the edge of the rules - is not the best example to push through thoughtlessly ( and that means - continous thoughts, not just an initial concept ) - i agree that it adds to a factions progression.
a fair and slow developement of a factions perception, step by step is what keeps disco most alive.
- so the question is ... is it really necessary to do it?
- are those affected by it really affected in their roleplay? or are they just making a fuss about it.
if it is really necessary for the factions roleplay ( and that is ROLEPLAY not enforcing a vision of what "others" might behave like ) ... then other ppl will have to adjust their roleplay. - in order to allow them to do so, cooperation is needed. - those that have their roleplay disrupted by such a new law need to be assisted and offered alternatives, real ones. - such progress must only be as fast as the slowest player is able to adjust his roleplay.
and always think of what you d say if other factions did it. - like - suddenly zoners decided not to allow anyone but their allies on their bases. - it would upset disco greatly. - and the argument "they wouldn t do so" is invalid, cause it is a change of canon roleplay, like any RP law is.
As far as i'm concerned about this, i'll be docking both my Dessie and GB on all Rogue bases, if the LR- decide they are above the rest of us mortals and can fire at their own ships, theres always the Rules Violation Report thread on forums.
It's not often that i refuse to RP player introduced RP rules, but this is just idiocy, and i won't waste my time docking 2 or 3 systems away from the only system i can RP with few good folks.
As far as I can see, this is just another Admin Perks Conspiracy/whinefest. People trying to attack the Admins and say what they're doing is wrong. I'd bet a rather large amount that if Del were not an admin, people would have just put up with it as RP.
There really is no issue. Few Rogue indies use Alcatraz. Most of them use Rochester or Buffalo, because it's right in the middle of the pewpewzone. OC Dessies are already pretty much forbidden from being in New York, so that shouldn't be an issue anyway. Fighters and bombers are still allowed to use Buffalo, so there goes that. And the Junkers have graciously given y'all permission to dock your gunboats with Beaumont. That's... What... An extra 20K max from Buffalo? I see no issues.
Add to that that it is only if you get caught, that I'm fairly sure nobody has taken into consideration the OC Dessie base, and that you -can- dock to space, even if it's frowned upon. I fail to see how this resembles the Order issues in any way, shape or form, and in my view it's helping to preserve fair play by slowing the lawlfleet rampages, while at the same time being perfectly inRP.
Such a trivial thing to argue over. So pointless too. Stop trying to e-bash people simply because you think they've somehow wronged you, or your distant eight cousin. It causes unnecessary trouble.
The amount of hypocrisy here is near unbelievable.
Hmm, just to say something, somewhat unrelated to this business, but somehow also related.
I feel that capital ships, especially above gunboat, -should- be considered in-RP to "dock to space".
First of all, only planets and shipyards can support a larger than gunboat capital ship to land on them.
All others, in RP, should never be able to dock on any station, but supplied by heavy lifters or maintenance ships from those stations.
Of course, we couldn't make it so in real gameplay, cause there's <strike>not always</strike> never people that fly heavy lifters, or repair ships and supply caps.
It'd be good if we had some sort of game mechanic that allowed a player to purchase things from bases via supply ships from them. That will 98% not happen, but the point is, it is in RP for caps to stay in orbit, not dock at stations.
A bit of a digression, but who cares.
<span style="font-familyalatino Linotype">
<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.
First an apology. mb52, my apologies to you for flagrant flaming. As an Admin I should know better.
Secondly this is going to be amended somewhat, Gunboats will be permitted access to both Buffalo and Alcatraz. Larger ships will be asked to move on elsewhere.
You will still be asked not to base your operatons out of Alcatraz, but that will be in RP. As this whole notice was. There are still ways around this, Eddie Cassidy is an Independent Gunboat that has docking rights on Alcatraz and permission to base operations out of there, how? Because he RP'd it out, without paying me any cash. It is entirely your choice to ignore this RP, or you can RP with us a way around it. Whether it be supplies, or aid, or cash, there are a number of ways to avoid us getting sniffy with you.
Saint Del is considered a holy healer of diseases of children, but also as a protector of cattle.