Topic: #10. shields up cloak, flame retardent suit on

[Kroma BaSyl]

An LOS is a rule which limits the actions allowed by deepstrikes and is thus a deepstrike rule whether you call it one or not. 

Are you recanting your earlier position Kroma?

On the basis that 1.) bases are destructable, 2.) planet DV only increases by one on flip, and 3.) missions are always drawn in neutral and enemy space..

I think there should be no rules on "deep strikes". The rules are cumbersome and open to arguement, eg when people log back in to find themselves in "the deep" etc.

I don't even think that Line of Supply should be required for a base, if they can be easily destroyed. People have complained that bases should be able to provide a locus for battles but I think planets can serve just as well as that locus.

There should not be any rule to stand and die either, just the rule to not return to a hex they have run from. Yes this means a deep striker can run around like a hare but he can't return to the spot he was working on. Somebody may have to go around and clean up the big K in Fed space or whatever but, as long as friendly space missions are easier to run, who cares.
I don't think the D2 should be locked into entrenched front lines but non friendly space must be a hindrance to movement so that taking of hexes is encouraged.

Did I mention less rules?

Completely agree.

Huh????....Where do you get that I am recanting my position? The post I just made above is in complete agreement with this one.  It is your own preconcieved notions about the issue that is leading you to think that they are not in agreement. If you try and rid yourself of what you think the posts say and just read the actual words you will see what I mean.

I am guessing that you think they are in disagreement because of this part "I don't even think that Line of Supply should be required for a base,", but that is only becuase you don't read further, "if they can be easily destroyed. ". Now it is my position that if they are not destructable then a LOS should be required to flip. In anycase an LOS should always be required for flipping enemy planets.

As to the "semantics" of what a deep strike rule is or isn't I won't even bother to debate. When I refer to the deep strike rule I mean the specific rule that has the words deep strike in it, and says that you must fight to the death if caught "deep striking" behind enemy lines. Yes a LOS rule could have consequences to deep striking, but then it has consequences to a lot of other tactic that I don't bother to mention either.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

If no LOS is required for a base then how can you place one if you don't flip the Hex first?

I believe Cleaven is refering to placing a base here not deepstriking one.  The reasoning being if they can be easily destroyed they should be allowed to be placed without a LOS.

So that is why I found your statements contradictory.  Looks like you read a different thing than I did, using a "preconcieved notion" of your own.

Now personally I don't like the idea of a base without a LOS because once you have a base you can roam over enemy space without drawing missions until the base is placed.

[Kroma BaSyl]

If no LOS is required for a base then how can you place one if you don't flip the Hex first?

I believe Cleaven is refering to placing a base here not deepstriking one.  The reasoning being if they can be easily destroyed they should be allowed to be placed without a LOS.

So that is why I found your statements contradictory.  Looks like you read a different thing than I did.

Yes I assumed he meant deepstriking one, but that doesn't really change anything, as I have already said above that I was fine with empty enemy hexes being flipped, just not planets or bases (non-destructable).

How does one get a base into an hex without a LOS anyway? Wouldn't this require you to forfiet your way to the surrounded hex?

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Thats why I don't like a base without LOS.

Of course the other way is to buy the base then get to the placement point by the time it arrives from the shipyard.  There are also servers with 2 or 3 hex movement.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I have already said above that I was fine with empty enemy hexes being flipped, just not planets or bases (non-destructable).

but you also said above:

No deep strike rule, just a LOS for flipping enemy hexes. Simple

So thats why I'm confused by your statements.

Please clarify, not asking to be purely argumentative just trying to see where you stand on this issue.

[Kroma BaSyl]

No deep strike rule, just a LOS for flipping enemy hexes. Simple

So thats why I'm confused by your statements.

Still doesn't change anything as the reality is that you can't place a base without LOS or cheating on the typical server setup. Plus Cleavens statement was ambiguous and could have been read (as I did) as destroying not placing the base.

Please clarify, not asking to be purely argumentative just trying to see where you stand on this issue.

Well it appears to me that you are being argumentative as I have already clarified it repeatably above. What about my position are you still confused about, since you just again asked me to clarify?

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Well like I said I agree with you on the base placement issue, as well as most of the other points like not flipping a base or planet without LOS .

Now I did point out that there would be a legal way to place a base behind enemy lines on even a server with 1 hex movement, which would be to purchase it then arrive at destination area before the base arrives, then simply wait on it.  I think this would cause problems and am opposed to it however.

I do agree that Cleavens statement was ambiguous.

Now what I was asking for clarification on was whether or not you agreed with the idea of a deepstrike being able to flip enemy hexes without planets and bases and if this would be only to neutral or if the DV could subsequently be run up by the deepstriker.

As an additional bit, wondring what you thought in regards to VC hexes not containing planets or bases, in regards to this issue.

[Lepton]

Cleave,

You couldn't come up with a cogent arguement to save your life.  Post a reasoned critique and not some snideness and I may dain to respond.  Perhaps you should look up the word "impede" and "impediment" as I think you fail to understand their definitions.

As for all the others in this thread, it is a manifest and undeniable truth that LOS is a simpler rule than any deepstriking system as the implementation of the latter will always require a set of rules restricting it.  If deepstriking were completely unrestricted, then yes it would be the simpler system, but I don't think you are going find a consensus for deepstriking to be completely unrestricted.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Seems like there is no concensus for a total LOS requirement for everything either quite the contrary Lepton.  I think the search is for something relatively simple but without simplicity as the sole factor.

I have adjusted my thinking to simply no LOS required except for flipping planets or flipping bases or VC hexes.  that is very simple and allows for much deepstriking.

[Lepton]

I agree there is no consensus here, but I'd venture to say that deepstriking will be restricted in some manner if it is presented to the community as an option, which makes LOS the simpler system.

[Kroma BaSyl]

Now I did point out that there would be a legal way to place a base behind enemy lines on even a server with 1 hex movement, which would be to purchase it then arrive at destination area before the base arrives, then simply wait on it.  I think this would cause problems and am opposed to it however.

While "legal" it is sort of exploiting a game quirk. You sould be required to wait for it to arrive and then fight your way in with it, if you want to place it without LOS. Doesn't really matter that much anyway as it won't last long, in the environment you have described. In anycase, it is a weird exception to the overall rule issue and doesn't really matter that much to me either way, would be fine with a LOS for placing bases rule or a rule that requires you to actually carry the base to it's final destination through enemy space.

Now what I was asking for clarification on was whether or not you agreed with the idea of a deepstrike being able to flip enemy hexes without planets and bases and if this would be only to neutral or if the DV could subsequently be run up by the deepstriker.

I believe I answered this one already. To repeat I am fine either way with it, if fact I would love to write "For a good time call KROMA" accross kzin space.

As an additional bit, wondring what you thought in regards to VC hexes not containing planets or bases, in regards to this issue.

I don't see how this matters. If the admin wants a LOS for the VC to count then he simply makes it part of the condition, if he doesn't then he doesn't.

[Kroma BaSyl]

I have adjusted my thinking to simply no LOS required except for flipping planets or flipping bases or VC hexes.  that is very simple and allows for much deepstriking.

I would agree except, the part about the VC hexes. Depends on the intent of the admin creating the campaign. Generally, if the VC is to "take" an enemy planet or base then I think that condition should be subject to the same LOS rules that non-VC planets and bases are subject to. However, the admin might think up something different, like take some empty enemy hexes on a deepstrike, and explicitly require that you do it without a LOS, whatever.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

While "legal" it is sort of exploiting a game quirk. You sould be required to wait for it to arrive and then fight your way in with it, if you want to place it without LOS. Doesn't really matter that much anyway as it won't last long, in the environment you have described. In anycase, it is a weird exception to the overall rule issue and doesn't really matter that much to me either way, would be fine with a LOS for placing bases rule or a rule that requires you to actually carry the base to it's final destination through enemy space.

Problem is you don't draw missions in enemy space while toting a base.  Why I like the LOS requirement for base placement.

I believe I answered this one already. To repeat I am fine either way with it, if fact I would love to write "For a good time call KROMA" accross kzin space. 

That is what I wanted to know, thanks for the clarification.

Kzin space isn't that big on most servers......

As an additional bit, wondring what you thought in regards to VC hexes not containing planets or bases, in regards to this issue.

I don't see how this matters. If the admin wants a LOS for the VC to count then he simply makes it part of the condition, if he doesn't then he doesn't.

Good point, I agree.

[Kroma BaSyl]

While "legal" it is sort of exploiting a game quirk. You sould be required to wait for it to arrive and then fight your way in with it, if you want to place it without LOS. Doesn't really matter that much anyway as it won't last long, in the environment you have described. In anycase, it is a weird exception to the overall rule issue and doesn't really matter that much to me either way, would be fine with a LOS for placing bases rule or a rule that requires you to actually carry the base to it's final destination through enemy space.

Problem is you don't draw missions in enemy space while toting a base.  Why I like the LOS requirement for base placement.

I didn't realize that. I could have sworn I once ended up in a non-base placement mission with the base. I had  thought that was because I took a mandatory in enemy space with it, maybe it was do to getting drafted, was a while ago.

In anycase, I am fine with having a LOS for placing bases or flipping a base/planet, just not for destroying a base.  However, even if you allowed bases to be placed without LOS, I just don't see it as being that big a deal out side of it being a bit of a game exploit. Now if the server could be made to offer mandatories when you are carrying a base then I would say let them at it. If they could get it there alive then they get to place it, but it won't last long if they are destructable. ;-)

[Cleaven]

Cleave,

You couldn't come up with a cogent arguement to save your life.  Post a reasoned critique and not some snideness and I may dain to respond.  Perhaps you should look up the word "impede" and "impediment" as I think you fail to understand their definitions.

As for all the others in this thread, it is a manifest and undeniable truth that LOS is a simpler rule than any deepstriking system as the implementation of the latter will always require a set of rules restricting it.  If deepstriking were completely unrestricted, then yes it would be the simpler system, but I don't think you are going find a consensus for deepstriking to be completely unrestricted.

Lep, a cogent arguement is not needed to counter your ramblings. You don't NEED to have any rules for working in enemy space, therefore this is simpler then a couple of paragraphs on Line of Supply. That is the fact of it. Now if players want more rules instead of less then you are leading them in the right direction.

[GDA-S'Cipio]

How does one get a base into an hex without a LOS anyway? Wouldn't this require you to forfiet your way to the surrounded hex?

No.  Once you have a base in your posession, the only mission you get offered is "base consturction" in friendly hexes.  You get no missions offered in enemy, allied, or neutral space.

In past servers, this was used as a "super warp" to get from your home space to an embassy hex on the other side of the map.  (Where you would then sell the base.)  You could also use it to completely scout out the enemy territory in the days before the web map, and find out where all their planets and bases were.

It was considered very bad form, and I think it was eventually outlawed.  At least I hope it was.  I haven't heard of anyone using it in a long time.

-S'Cipio