They do suffer consequences. Being shot by their own technology. Accepting or not is another thing. You aren't suffering consequences because players and not characters are mostly hiring you. Yes yes. Paying those who just yesterday might have killed few people of same group isn't well roleplayed. Simply nobody wants to be shot by Reavers. They aren't accepting consequences too. And by hiring you, they (and probably you) are breaking Bounty Board rules. Tsk tsk tsk.
They do suffer consequences. Being shot by their own technology. Accepting or not is another thing. You aren't suffering consequences because players and not characters are mostly hiring you. Yes yes. Paying those who just yesterday might have killed few people of same group isn't well roleplayed. Simply nobody wants to be shot by Reavers. They aren't accepting consequences too. And by hiring you are breaking Bounty Board rules. Tsk tsk tsk.
I can't dock on Corsair bases and Corsair NPCs tend to shoot me on sight now. That is a consequence of shooting at Corsairs. Regardless of what you think.
As for claiming that hiring a mercenary that killed you yesterday isn't good role play, that is your opinion. Funny thing is, the Microsoft Freelancer development team thought it was a very logical thing to have happen. In fact it was so logical in their mind that it is vanilla lore that two parties hire the same mercenary to work for them against the other. Perhaps you should read some rumor cards from Rheinland corporation bases in the Omegas.
Do tell how people are breaking bounty board rules by hiring us? By tell me, I mean post proof as your claim is nothing but a claim without proof.
Reavers pay people to either fix or remake. Problem solved.
Im playing Freelsnver, not Realismlancer guys. If it was realismlancer, then everyone would be poor, no,caps at all, and we would be 563595 Starfliers shooting eachother, not to mention iconic characters such as McDowell or Salazar Kithe would not be around for as long as they were/are.
Lets quote our scapegoat.
Go play the game and have fun dammit.
Natsumi Hideyoshi (The Order) | Alexis Hunter (Liberty Navy) |
Having self destruct mechanisms in handed tech might seem good roleplay to others. So why should they be punished by sudden change of rules where that kind of roleplay is null and void?
Let me ask another question: have you ever programmed anything?
How can a gun tell the difference between a target? A target is a target. You pull the trigger and the gun shoots. Now, if programming this kind of system is difficult in a world where everything is easily defined by a magical administration system which clearly identifies every ship by an ID, what would ever make you think it's simple in real life?
I would love to say that it's easy to program an Apache to never shoot at American vehicles transmitting X signal. Unfortunately, that's not possible. Or at least my robotics mentors who work at the airforce base calibrating aircraft landing mechanisms tell me (not the wheels, the pilot mechanisms).
And again, you're offering only an option which has no consequences for the party giving up the guns nor any positives for the Mercenaries. What happens when the RM suddenly offers [FL]Thexter no more jobs, but tells him he can't work for anyone else because they have spies everywhere and they'll make his guns all explode if he does that. Where will he play? How is that fair to him? He has to abandon all that character development to have any fun in the game. It's an entirely selfish system.
If you give guns to someone, you have made a fair RP decision. Both you and the Mercenary are given choices. You can treat him well. You can treat him poorly. He can keep his guns and stay. He can keep his guns and leave. This is fair to everyone in RP. If you give guns to someone and tell him he cannot make a certain RP decision, this is unfair to both sides. I believe unfair RP like that is called powergaming, isn't it?
PS: Thexter, if you don't like me talking about you like this, I can stop and I apologize, but you're such a good example of a Mercenary treated generously, you scallywag (no hard feelings, just business:))! :rtfm:
[8:32:45 PM] Dusty Lens: Oh no, let me get that. Hello? Oh it's my grandma. She says to be roleplay.
[12:49:19 AM] Elgatodiablo: You know its nice that you have all that proof and all, Bacon... but I just don't believe you.
As mentioned before, fixing guns is the not the hardest thing to do, rather ships are.
More over, I saw people "QQ" over factions that were given UNLIMITED amount of some weapon. You know, in theory they could simply buy tons and tons over what they have before the betray they did, now really, for god's sake stop the whining, other factions still hand out technology, hence Gaians gave me a -Gunboat- after the regulations, not just some guns.
' Wrote:It's simply pointless discussions since you wouldn't like to have chance of losing guns by old rules and the other side would like it.
I won't be discussing this anymore. Take care.
I doubt any member of the Reavers with the exception of the guys who did the leg work for the insane demands the Elders made to get the guns would have an issue with taking them off. As I said, if Virus or an admin said:
Daedric, take the Corsair guns off Malachite.
I'll take 'em off. I have plenty of other options so it isn't like it is a big deal.
I think the point you are missing is this:
There needs to be consequences for factions that hand out their technology. Having it so that the factions can revoke tech permissions makes it so there are no consequences for their actions.
Seriously, it'd be much better just to make FR5 to cancel all previous technology transfers (unless stated otherwise in contract).
Problem solved (you can't just FR5 a random person, can you?)
' Wrote:Losing guns would be consequence too. But it seems you don't want that happening for your own actions. =D Such hypocrisy...
Of course that is a consequence and I'm not against it. What you are proposing however, is that the Reavers be the only faction that this type of consequence is applied to.
If the admins or developers set up a system that removed your guns on death, I'd go with it. It is hypocrisy, on your part not ours.