' Wrote:Congratulations on missing the fact that the rule changes aren't being proposed by Ursus. The changes to 5.7 and 6.7 were proposed by other people in other threads.
Congratulations on missing me say the word "others" meaning not just directing the statement to Ursus. Also, congratulations on not realizing Ursus edited his post to include his little note AFTER I made my post (even so my statements still have, and were meant to, address the clauses provided, not address Ursus himself).
It's ok though;)I forgivez you
The first line is the only direct statement to Ursus, the rest address specific points. Congrats indeed.
I'd like to know what world that people live in to think that traders are in any way defenseless, or should be so, against pirates. It certainly can't be this one.
People try to protect their investments from those who would take it. Traders have very little recourse than to pay or die currently, which doesn't make too much sense if you think about it for more than a few seconds.
There's an easy, but time consuming, way to change this without introducing any kind of death mechanic, but pirates dont want to be forced to organise against a lone trader (even though, as the attacker, that's exactly what they should do; defenders should choose their response).
That would be to make the commonly traded commodities cost a lot more to buy (and probably make bases consume less of them in return for the increased cost), so it actually becomes cheaper to pay the pirate in absolute terms, rather than in waffley opportunity-cost terms. Then of course, pirate demands go up as well, but there's scope to make some cash without relying on the trader's emotional, rather than economic, status.
Then you just strengthen the guns of traders, so they dont fall off after two novas, and do a bit more than scratch a shield.
Gosh, some of you are pretty rude in this thread, man is just asking what you guys think of his thought process. No need to tear him down and attack him, sheesh! Have some respect!
Anyway, I think that traders are fine. I have no issues flying my freighter/transport smuggling and getting around lawfuls. I simply RP my way out of it, try to bribe, or run like the devil himself is on my heels...and if I die, it's still just a game. I can withdraw some more money from my bank account, and try another route! After all, I've got enough of em!:)
' Wrote:That would be to make the commonly traded commodities cost a lot more to buy (and probably make bases consume less of them in return for the increased cost), so it actually becomes cheaper to pay the pirate in absolute terms, rather than in waffley opportunity-cost terms. Then of course, pirate demands go up as well, but there's scope to make some cash without relying on the trader's emotional, rather than economic, status.
Yes this thread does have a few RAEG posts in it, which is rather stupid.
I like hearing all the different ideas for how to change the system, and of course the people who say it needs no changing. I think a slight buff to trader guns, regardless of rules changing would be appreciated, if only in projectile speed.
Blah, but ah well, things are working now I guess, people are going to say don't break it.
I for one think its great that Ursus have tonnes of opinions - they are always presented well organized, although one-sided. Ideas are what propels this community and this mod forward.
I think a great transport rebalance would be:
1. Add +10 speed to transport thrusters - would also have an effect against currently OP'd (according to some) all-basic GB's, as the turrets have a rather short effective range. Would make GB's a poor choice for solo-piracy and solo contraband interception.
2. Add shield resists for transport shields vs. cruiser and BS weaponry (such as 75% resist).
3. Ditch rule 6.7 and the trader exception in 5.7 (although in my opinion fleeing and docking at a station shouldn't count as pvp-death when it comes to transports).