No. He means you should kill a few Reaver armories. I bet there'd still be more to kill. And more.
Lucendez Wrote:
It is every Corsair's responsibility to die a beautiful death in defense of Crete, regardless of how OORP or how capwhoring the opposition is. Launch your fighter, joust the battlecruisers and die a beautiful death. Then, drink it down in the bar.
' Wrote:Hey interesting conversation you boys are having here.
Not going to get too involved as you all seem to be addressing all the issues.
I do have one question though.
Could someone tell me how it is possible to follow the preceding arguement?
How would one get the technology back by killing if one is to just mount new ones?
Would this mean the only way to follow the first advice would be to attempt to drive a player off the server?
I would hate to think it was meant like that, thought I should clarify.
Thanks again.
You are taking comments out of context. Do try not to do such a thing.
Chop here wants the admins to remove the guns instead of having to role play to remove them. That is pure laziness and poor form.
What I said, was go out and kill the person who is using your technology against you if you want it removed. All of that revolves around the idea that someone could build a system that removes white/red cell guns off a ship when it is destroyed. Meaning, killing a Reaver with Corsair guns forces him to take guns from the armory, thus depleting the stock they have.
One is role playing, the other is asking for an admin to do something because you don't like consequences of your actions.
Here's a thought: Factions could just be a whole lot more careful who they give their guns to.
Cannon asked all the valid questions in his post earlier on in the thread, these would need to be considered before we enacted any kind of policy.
Personally I'm not a fan of cleaning up the mess after a factions former friends turn on them - Dont want them to? then dont give mercenaries/whoever your guns - double cross is a valid RP tack as i see it - the doublecrosser already has consequences for this action: You get to kill them.
Or he gets to kill you.
I hate threads like this. You made a stupid RP decision to give away your guns to someone who could turn against you in the future, and now you're paying for it. RP concequences for RP actions. Now you want to add OORP concequences for their RP actions? That's not how it works.
Remember it is not your obligation to hand out tech to anyone who asks. You have the right to deny as many requests as you want. As a rule I never give away tech to Pirate or Merc/Freelancer IDed characters unless I know I can trust them unconditionally.
They might cry and moan about it - but it's not their right to use mismatched tech. If they want to use the tech that badly, then they can use the ID that goes with it.
Also; Pro Tip: Never give tech to Reavers, or hire them for that matter. They're just going to shoot you back once the money is good enough. Any faction that chooses to hire them is pretty stupid tbh. You all might complain about the Reavers behaviour, particularly in regards to tech, but it is you who have enabled them to do so. Even after witnessing them do the exact same to other factions in the past. So who's to blame?
' Wrote:Here's a thought: Factions could just be a whole lot more careful who they give their guns to.
They did it when they clearly knew they can denounce their tech transfer agreement.
If it was, again, too much work for administration in some way, (like with SRPs), if it was considered that policy change in this area is a must, then at least it could be stated that this rule doesn't have retroactive force.
It wouldnt fix any current problems with factions shutting down their tech transfer, but at least it would be a fair game, since again, those early tech transfers were made in a completely different system, under very different rules.
Are we gonna get flooded with sanctions when 4.86 comes out and equipment won't match the one installed on the ships, or a trial period will be given, when the one can change his equipment?
Same should've been done to factions, at least give em time to reconsider their tech transfers, and if not revoke them, then at least add some lines to the agreement.
P.S. I'm not a member of any faction, that transferred weapons to others. But I'm a member of faction, that received it weapons from the others, and considers them highly valuable. But even I see the flaws in how the rule was changed.
I know it will be an added pain for the admins but here is a little easier solution.
You see some one shooting corsairs with Tizzies, snap shot em and post it as a rule violation kinda thing.
A council of all faction leaders (server peers approx 9 of em) can vote yay or nay whether he/she keeps his guns or not. IF gun removal is approved, the following things happen.
1.Moderators can then penalize the player with changing his rep to that faction to all red.
2. Five mil bounty is placed on the player. Covered by the gun fund (heh heh). once a snappy of him being killed is provided....(this can be provided earlier with the evidence of him shooting corsairs)
2a. The admins remove Faction guns form the said player.
2b. In RP material is provided how his guns were sabotaged and destroyed by the shadow breakers (cause they break guns..*giggle*). And how he is not welcome to that faction any more.
What are people talking about when they say this rule change has caused factions to shut down their tech licensing? Doesn't the new rule say tech can still be revoked as long as it is stated in the contract?
If so why would this cause factions to not give out any tech, if all they have to do is say "No using it against us" or "Can be revoked at any time" in the contract?
User was banned for: Griefing others
Time left: (Permanent)
' Wrote:The system hasn't forced you to close your tech to everyone. That is a choice the Elders made. You are free to grant tech and impose restrictions on them.
Hi! That's the the problem. Elders no longer can. The guns were given to some people with idea that they can be stripped away anytime if something wrong happens. Do you get it you get it not? I its so hard to understand..? If Elders would have known that such events would take place no-one would ever have sair guns.
Now admins took away the ability to restrict in such way. And didn't gave any information or time to change the agreements which touches technology distribution. So, as McNeo stated, sairs were SKREW'D
And you mumble something about responsability. How da hell Elders should be somehow responsible for change in the tech regulations and rules?
Quote:Cannon asked all the valid questions in his post earlier on in the thread, these would need to be considered before we enacted any kind of policy.
I think first we should agree that this is not how it should be.
And then we can search for possible ways to solve it.
But I see it gets stuck in the first level, becouse of simple ignorance.