Quote:And what the hell is wrong with that in a competitive environment which involves multiple multifaceted interests?
Nothing is wrong with a competitive environment. You don't want a competitive environment, though. A competitive environment allows equal opportunity for all competitors in all facets of the competition. The system you are defending favors a select few over the many, granting them huge advantages with little to no chance of the many achieving the same advantages. That isn't competition. That is you playing out your single player fantasies at the expense of others. Your entire stance is based on the argument that the new system isn't fair because it doesn't allow you to unfairly stack the odds against the other players. Wonderful argument.
' Wrote:First of all this is just a idea and i don't know if it was discussed already or not. So: we have factions with SRP ships and those ships are the final results with some really long and hard RP and now they get nerfed with this new system so factions have no more use of them from a point. Don't worry this isn't gonna be a QQ about why this whole thing happens and such. I just got this idea how to solve this...maybe. So why don't just make a other version from that ship for the faction. It is simple, no need to change the stats of the ship or anything else. Just copy and paste and a few magic tricks in the "tech-nerf" system about the copy of the said ship, so it'll recognise the ship as it belongs to the other faction. Let me make a exapmle:
As i know correctly there is a Ossie in the SCRA and they got it from the Order but the nerf system gonna see that ship as a Order ship with SCRA stuff so it's gonna get nerf, BUT if the dev team makes a copy from the Osiris, same power core, weap placement...everything and adds it to the game as a SCRA Osiris the nerf system not gonna recognise it as a tech mix. The ship is already balanced and everything so it's not that big work, just give it a bit different name in the files (in the shiparch...correct me if i'm wrong) and there you go. It can be easily done with that few ship, not?
So you basically want us to start hardcoding at the devside, into the mod (not the Discovery GC player world that uses the mod) the various interactions between players. That, would completely defeat the purpose of this system, which is to provide a counterbalance to prevent players from utilising out-of-faction tech to gain a PvP advantage. The SCRA does not have a battleship. They do have a destroyer and will have good snubs. They also got a carte blanche to pew anything and everything from a rules perspective. They don't have access to a battleship, especially one that handles like the Osiris (I think most players will agree that the Ossie is quite powerful in the right hands, being agile for a BS).
So no. Exceptions like this will NOT be hardcoded in. There is the possibility for an exception by using the Special Roleplay ID or the Terrorist ID, but those are handed out at the admins discretion, and rarely so. The Osiris is Corsair and Order tech, neither of which the SCRA has direct access to. The SRP/Terrorist IDs can use anything as if it were green.
Capships and bombers, which rely heavily on the power core, will be relatively heavily affected by this system. More so then fighters anyway.
Wide awake in a world that sleeps, enduring thoughts, enduring scenes. The knowledge of what is yet to come.
From a time when all seems lost, from a dead man to a world, without restraint, unafraid and free.
Mostly retired Discovery member. May still visit from time to time.
' Wrote:granting them huge advantages with little to no chance of the many achieving the same advantages.
Could you name few and back with some strong arguments?
I just see people throwing all these claims about some kind of mythical OP combos, yet zero evidence to back it up. Why this is important? becouse of some deliusion people choices of having diffrent interactions with other people and prefered pvp gameplay will be limited intentionaly. Without any sound reason even to begin with.
Aeternus provided you with an example right above your post.
Factions gaining capabilities in terms of ship classes they would otherwise lack access to when compared to other factions in the game. SCRA and GC for example. Why don't the GC have a battleship?
He said that this tech chart was meant to put balance back in the hands of the devs. This is exactly what he's doing.
Though, on that, I really disagree with Special IDs existing in conjunction with this new system, assuming that SRP requests remain closed. As this chart is meant to provide equality (which it does mathematically, whether people have a problem with this or not), leaving special IDs out of the system but preventing people from obtaining those special IDs means that the entire framework is still inherantly unfair. It would mean that PvP benefit is still based on how long you've been here, with the cutoff period for these benefits when SRPs closed. This would mean that nothing has been acheived by this new system, except for taking away more freedom, which is always a bad thing if it isn't offset by something else.
I hope you take this into account. Even though what admins do isnt the concern of devs and vice versa, there should be communication between the two. If admins dont intend to open up SRPs, special IDs can't be justified remaining in their current form.
' Wrote:Factions gaining capabilities in terms of ship classes they would otherwise lack access to when compared to other factions in the game. SCRA and GC for example. Why don't the GC have a battleship?
How come it wasn't intented in the first place then someone written that SCRA ID allows using a battleship? If that was a SRP then why to approve it in the first place?
This example isn't relevent to the proposed changes. There are solutions for such situations which doesn't involve limting other people choices of costumization of their equipment (costumization is always a fun thing to have in a game)
also, treating everyone equelly doesn't mean treating everyone fairly.
times change ... and thankfully ... sometimes we even learn from past mistakes.
today:
- the phantoms would have been laughed at - but never made official
- come corsairs may not be sanctioned for using generic civilian weapons instead of their BETTER own ones
well there are more examples - but it should give you an idea
back when something was approved, there may have been several factors
- maybe those who approved were more trusting
- maybe the effect of such a decision wasn t quite clear
- maybe the time was different
- maybe it was a bad decision
treating everyone equally is not fair - indeed. but its a better start than treating everyone un-equally per se.
I agree, customization is a great thing. That is part of why I support this change. It opens up more options for customization. With this system you can mix and match to your heart's content as opposed to the previous system where you could mix and match to someone else's content.
Treating people equally is the very definition of fairness in competition. If at any time one is favored over others then fairness is lost. Fair: Marked by impartiality and honesty: free from self interest, prejudice, and favortism. The previous system was exactly the opposite of this. The new system cannot be anything but this.
' Wrote:How come it wasn't intented in the first place then someone written that SCRA ID allows using a battleship? If that was a SRP then why to approve it in the first place?
Because they write their own lore, they can say what they want about their capabilities and what they have. The reality is that a Coalition BS does not exist, so the only BSs they could use are other people's. This system doesnt stop that, but forces a new mechanic that lowers their capabilities. This might be in contravention to their own lore, but as we all know that self-regulation is asking for abuse of a system, perhaps it was never meant for factions such as the SCRA to become as capable as that in the first place. Thus, they get the battleships, but with lesser capability.
' Wrote:This example isn't relevent to the proposed changes. There are solutions for such situations which doesn't involve limting other people choices of costumization of their equipment (costumization is always a fun thing to have in a game)
This is called micromanagement. We've had a lot of these solutions so far, such as bomber guns, old tech chart, tech rules and so on. It's hard to do, and it's hard to do fairly as somebody always feels that its unfair, which leads me on to the next point.
' Wrote:also, treating everyone equelly doesn't mean treating everyone fairly.
As somebody will always find something unfair to them, treating everybody fairly is an unobtainable ideal. Treating everybody fairly however, is a mathematical possibility. There are those who would rather obtain one than find neither.
And as I also said earlier, the logical conclusion of freedom, which is what fairness relies upon, is chaos, whereas the logical conclusion of equality is sterility. I'd hazard to say that the part of the world in which you live is quite familliar with chaos, and I'm led to believe that it is not a desirable thing.
' Wrote:The previous system was exactly the opposite of this. The new system cannot be anything but this.
Except if the SRP system stays closed while SRPs are exempt from the tech chart limitations. Then the same unfairness is still present, albeit on a smaller scale.
It is better to leave the guilty ones unpunished rather than punish the innocent. One of the main principals in todays law theory. Someone messed up. And now you are all going to the simpliest solution. Zeroing everyone to wash the hands off. That is how it seems for me to be. And it doesn't feel right. Simple as that. But whatever, I have my answers I was seeking thanks for being honest atleast.
"And as I also said earlier, the logical conclusion of freedom, which is what fairness relies upon, is chaos, whereas the logical conclusion of equality is sterility"
I don't live in a world which is either black or white.
![[Image: in5nax.png]](http://i41.tinypic.com/in5nax.png)
![[Image: sigmark2-1.jpg]](http://i801.photobucket.com/albums/yy293/barrenwaste/sigmark2-1.jpg)
![[Image: BioLinkimg-1.jpg]](http://i801.photobucket.com/albums/yy293/barrenwaste/BioLinkimg-1.jpg)
![[Image: just_a_signature_by_sjrarj-d63yjsx.png]](https://img00.deviantart.net/ca73/i/2013/123/e/a/just_a_signature_by_sjrarj-d63yjsx.png)