Temporary Suggestion: Make CDs disrupt JDs until the next patch

[nOmnomnOm]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.


The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

---

[Wesker]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.


The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

The guy would still get arrested drunk driving leads to arrest doesn't matter if you sue.

---

[t0l]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.


The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

without alcohol you probably would never have been hit in the first place

---

[nOmnomnOm]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.


The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

without alcohol you probably would never have been hit in the first place

politicians already tried banning alcohol. Didn't work. See my point yet?

---

[t0l]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.


The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

without alcohol you probably would never have been hit in the first place

politicians already tried banning alcohol. Didn't work. See my point yet?

but this is a game

removing jumpdrives would do exactly that

tell me how someone is going to make a jumpdrive themselves in FL

---

[nOmnomnOm]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.


The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

The guy would still get arrested drunk driving leads to arrest doesn't matter if you sue.

yes because there are RULES AGAINST IT.

you do realize that the server had this type of problem before jump drives and cloaks, right?

miners F1ing in fields as they look on player chat for pirates and see some coming.
Pirates running from cops even before the cops get there.
F1ing in jump gates or jump holes.

The way we fixed these issues is by implementing rules to stop it from happening. Well the last one ... Those 2 other points still exist. How is it different from jumping away ? Yes it is faster but im comparing it to jumping before the players gets to the other player.


My point is: make rules to stop the problem from happening. That is the best quick solution. When the new tech was made by devs, it should have come with its own rules.

---

[Lythrilux]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.

hello this is a space game set 800 years into the future will aliens.

Real world examples don't really work here.

The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

I wouldn't mind this. JDs are pretty much a legitimate way to break the rules.

---

[Black Widow]

tell me how someone is going to make a jumpdrive themselves in FL

I am in my P.O.B

[Wesker]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.


The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

The guy would still get arrested drunk driving leads to arrest doesn't matter if you sue.

yes because there are RULES AGAINST IT.

you do realize that the server had this type of problem before jump drives and cloaks, right?

miners F1ing in fields as they look on player chat for pirates and see some coming.
Pirates running from cops even before the cops get there.
F1ing in jump gates or jump holes.

The way we fixed these issues is by implementing rules to stop it from happening. Well the last one ... Those 2 other points still exist. How is it different from jumping away ? Yes it is faster but im comparing it to jumping before the players gets to the other player.


My point is: make rules to stop the problem from happening. That is the best quick solution. When the new tech was made by devs, it should have come with its own rules.

People will not follow those rules like ever, also putting limits on that would make it useless since that's all ppl use the JD for, you may as well delete it, it's toxic to RP and to combat. It hurts disco In general rules against it won't solve as much as if you just delete it.

---

[nOmnomnOm]

this is how I see this logic here:

INCOMING RL EXAMPLE

a guy that drank goes to drive a car and crashes into me. Should I sue alcohol and make it weaker as a percentage or should I punish the wrong-doer.

This thread to my understanding supports the suing of the drink . It doesn't deal with the initial problem but tries to fix future problems... Which there still will be loopholes against.

By example as mentioned you could run away before someone catches you on radar.


The solution I see is to either punish the wrong-doer that abuses the tech OR make a admin rule against it.

Such as.... No jumping away in an engagement... Or no coming back after for 4+ hours (yes more than normal)
Etc

without alcohol you probably would never have been hit in the first place

politicians already tried banning alcohol. Didn't work. See my point yet?

but this is a game

removing jumpdrives would do exactly that

tell me how someone is going to make a jumpdrive themselves in FL

removing them will also lead to loosing players since there are other servers WITH them.
You'd just make the population decrease while other servers would prosper.
Or you'd just get a bunch of ppl to leave. Period.

Again... Removing something just because some players abuse it to get nom remains is ridiculous.

---