Controlling NPC to attack hostiles.

[swift]

Well a lot's been said.. and I understand all points made. However, as the case mostly is with me, I am in favour of the fresh out of the oven two in one, third you get for free, solution.

Although this can be abused, I can very easily make the same claim about many other already implemented features, which work at most times, without a hitch.

The good it would do needs not be explained, because you all know it. And you all know it would immensely help.

It could be abused, like anything else. Of course it could.
However, about the admin load, well frankly, although I know little of all the work you have to do, it is easily proved, because of what Mule said about the basic transparency of it all. It is always known who triggered it, and on whom.
Also, it's not that easy to use on someone, what with the usage per time interval, the distance limit, and whatever else there could be.

I know very well of the frustration of having an idea that I think is great, and having people ignore it, or make half-assed arguments against it, so excuse Mule if anyone thinks he's being too aggressive. Cause that's what it takes to make a point.

And at the end of my long, no doubt boring to you, post, what I'd say, in my opinion, for what it's worth these days, is that this should at least be tried. Tried.. for a time.. and evaluated for it's good and bad.

A Little Person

And a final edited thought: Do we seriously wish to allow the "noncarers about RP" make us fear the implementation of functions to improve the RP of the server? Do we cower in fear of the possible abuse, while being such that we do not even give it a go? I hope not.

---

<span style="font-familyalatino Linotype">

<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.

</span></span>

<span style="color:#33FFFF">The CFF</span>

<span style="color:#33FF33">CFF Communication Channel and RP Collection</span>

[VincentFerrex]

Why not make it so that, only the NPC faction hostile to you, on your repsheet, can be affected by the /attack command?

What I mean is that, if you're hostile to the Outcasts, and you spot one, you'd be able to use the /attack command on it.

However, if there's a neutral junker (neutral on your repsheet), the command would be invalid?

---

<span style="font-family:Garamond"><span style="color:#FFFFFF">Saxophile's Signature Workshop

</span></span>

[Muleo]

Why not make it so that, only the NPC faction hostile to you, on your repsheet, can be affected by the /attack command?

What I mean is that, if you're hostile to the Outcasts, and you spot one, you'd be able to use the /attack command on it.

However, if there's a neutral junker (neutral on your repsheet), the command would be invalid?

That wouldn't allow authorities to blow the whistle on smugglers, which was the original intent of the idea. Limiting it to hostile factions isn't necessary if the ID related repfixes go to plan smoothly.(autorepfixing)

[Malcolm_Reynalds]

it seems to be a nice idea, a way to stop players from docking at bases they shouldn't.

though effective as it would be at keeping those players who abuse the rep system; being a criminal and landing at a lawful base or the other way around.

where will the line be drawn?

Will the police/navy use it to drive out BH's and mercs they don't like?
Are players going to try and stop Power trading with it?
Wouldn't it just encourage players who see rep abuse to take it into their own hands rather that just report it?

if it were introduced, don't tell it to everyone, only tell the command to the official factions on a trail basis and omit it from the /help list of commands. if it works on a trial basis the way it's supposed to and nobody abused it, I would not be opposed to also give it to those of us who frequent the boards and having it in the game as long as it remained abuse free.

but, IMO, no matter what the positive value of such a command would be, no matter what good intentions are behind it, players WILL find ways to abuse it, so why introduce a command that has room to be abused to counteract loopholes in game mechanics that are abused?

[AJBeast]

It seems like a GREAT idea. Only problem I can see with it is power traders using a swarm of NPCs as cover to get out of pirating. And eve n that is not that bad , if RPed properly.

[Cellulanus]

I have to say I actually like this idea, but only if the rules that have been stated not only work on the effected faction, but also its allies and if any allies of the offended party are around the offended partys units start attacking the attacker.

Ex. A RFP encounters a Junker smuggler outside of Bonn station, the junker tries to make a break for it. The RFP uses the attack command on the junker. Not the RM stationary BS and Rheinland corps are hostile to him, but Bonn and Bounty Hunters are not because they are not because they aren't directly allied. However a Junker NPC pattrol is passing, after seeing this the Junker NPCs are hostile to the RFP player and start attacking.



To help prevent abuse it could be made so only players with a matching IFF and ID could use it and over a certain level. (Forty maybe?)



Or even better, we restrict in to Guard IFFs.


YES! To use it you must have a factions guard IFF and a faction ID (Guard or no)

[tazuras]

I like the idea. I dont know about the guard restriction, maybe though.

In terms of the admin load I'm sure it would go up, but you wouldn't know how much until it was tried so might as well try it.

It would be nice if it could be triggered by contraband detection instead of a hook command, though it would be a lot less useful that way.

Another ID that would sort of gut it but make it so it fulfills it's original purpose would be if the command would only make the in system bases hostile. I doubt this is possible because everything around them that was allied would also become hostile but I thought it was worth mentioning.

---

[Cellulanus]

I like the idea. I dont know about the guard restriction, maybe though.

Well, it would greatly reduce the chances of most of the abuses shown here happening, because you'd have to invest a ton of time into a petty revenge character.

[Cosmos]

sounds like a great idea, in one way there will be less sanctions and there will be others concerning this,
think about it... we get neutral BH's coming too gamma, we end up writing a sanction thread about them, when all we could do instead, is use the /attack command and just inform you admins over skype or something,

i think the /attack command has Big Win.

(may i also say, if this does get put in the next mod, maybe the targets ID/IFF could be held responsible for the action? say for instance:
rogue is having a bad day, he doesnt like mr Hacker, so mr rogue decides too use /attack on mr hacker, for some reason.. the npc's arent attacking... the npc's realise that mr Hacker is allied too the rogue NPC's therefore they wont attack.. you see my point? if the FLhook, or whatever it is that u could do this with can read the current target's IFF/ID and determine wether its hostile/neutral/allied it could stop an amount of problems.)

---

[22:50:33] ☆ҳ̸̲Ҳ̸ҳEternal†Nightmareҳ̸̲Ҳ̸ҳ☆(illi): i cyber with leather torps (smoking)

[David Petraeus]

It also helps us keep the Powersmugglers and Corsair Huntress's from docking on Fairbanks and Mitchell when we come in Guns blazing... It would be interesting to try this out if its feasible.

---

If Pershings can be pro Marine, so can I.