Topic: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)  (Read 13706 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #60 on: December 19, 2004, 07:00:33 pm »
And that couldn't have been your very last battle of GW4.  Your very last battle of GW4 was me(KCRF) and Dizzy(KRCS) vs you(CVAR), Jinn(HDW something) and Komodo(CLC) resluting in the death of the CLC and both me and dizzy.  :)

You are right! It must have been the one right before that, before I came over to the Rom front.

That was a GG BTW.  :)

Offline Firehawk

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 159
  • Gender: Male
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #61 on: December 19, 2004, 07:29:54 pm »
And that couldn't have been your very last battle of GW4.  Your very last battle of GW4 was me(KCRF) and Dizzy(KRCS) vs you(CVAR), Jinn(HDW something) and Komodo(CLC) resluting in the death of the CLC and both me and dizzy.  :)

You are right! It must have been the one right before that, before I came over to the Rom front.

That was a GG BTW.  :)

Yes that was a good game.  ;D
Firehawk of the Romulan SPQR

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #62 on: December 19, 2004, 08:04:55 pm »
And that couldn't have been your very last battle of GW4.  Your very last battle of GW4 was me(KCRF) and Dizzy(KRCS) vs you(CVAR), Jinn(HDW something) and Komodo(CLC) resluting in the death of the CLC and both me and dizzy.  :)

You are right! It must have been the one right before that, before I came over to the Rom front.

That was a GG BTW.  :)

Yes that was a good game.  ;D

How could it have been a good game if J'inn lived?   ;D
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


762_XC

  • Guest
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #63 on: December 19, 2004, 09:40:19 pm »
Dude, J'inn WON the game!

Offline madelf

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 181
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #64 on: December 19, 2004, 09:46:54 pm »
Ok, entire topic read and absorbed.
      First, to all Klingons/Lyrans, if you're having trouble breaking a castle, just find someone who knows how to do it, and Learn!!!  Part of that might be needing to actually break a castle if need be.
      Second, to DH.  Ok, sounds like being allowed to call your opponent a twat if they castle is a sufficient punishment to me.
      Third, tOOl, umm...  stop being a tool.   :P  If someone isn't gonna charge into OL range, but they're staying in saber range, then they are engaging.  Don't try to bully folks in the forums to thinking they have to charge your overloads (though it is funny to watch sometimes). ;D

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #65 on: December 19, 2004, 10:00:44 pm »
"Learn"?

Again if I ever planned to "learn" something don't you think I would have done it by now?

Sides now that I'm back to flying Lyran Ill have no problem with castles.
Just run right up, smack them with OL's and rng 0 ESG sand Ill win the game.
No worries.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #66 on: December 19, 2004, 10:43:42 pm »

Sides now that I'm back to flying Lyran Ill have no problem with castles.
Just run right up, smack them with OL's and rng 0 ESG sand Ill win the game.
No worries.


Hexx is actually quite good at breaking castles, and this photo proves it



<Snicker>

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #67 on: December 19, 2004, 11:31:51 pm »
Elf,

Never in life have I required someone to charge into overload range. Perish the thought; I will always allow my opponent the honor and courtesy of choosing their own tactics, as long as their tactics are designed to win as opposed to simply delay and waste time.

Offline madelf

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 181
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #68 on: December 20, 2004, 12:15:21 am »
Elf,

Never in life have I required someone to charge into overload range. Perish the thought; I will always allow my opponent the honor and courtesy of choosing their own tactics, as long as their tactics are designed to win as opposed to simply delay and waste time.

Well, fighting over castling is just silly.  Just cause it's usually feds wwho do it, vs klingons, it's got a really bad rap.  But I've done it myself, sometimes as rom, sometimes even as Klink (vs Hydran, in a 2v1).  It's a valid tactic, and not at all unbeatable.  You're right to defend it.

Offline FPF-Wanderer

  • Order of Battle Wonk
  • Hot and Spicy
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 354
  • Gender: Male
  • Trek Nerd Since 1976
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #69 on: December 20, 2004, 12:24:33 am »
Well, I guess what it really comes down to is this;  the pilots in mission are really the ones who have to "interpret" whether one is wasting the other's time.  If it comes down to it, the complaintants can send films to their respective RM's for discussion. That is part of the RM's job description, after all...wait a minute, that would mean me....ack!!!  Player complaints, run away!!!
Alliance SAC, SG4 / Alliance SAC, RDSL / Federation A/RM: AOTK, SSII, GW4 / Federation Chief of Staff / Member of the Flying Circus / Alliance Map Guy

Offline KBF-Crim

  • 1st Deacon ,Church of Taldren
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12271
  • Gender: Male
  • Crim,son of Rus'l
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #70 on: December 20, 2004, 01:48:01 am »
I might point out  that "delaying" and "wasting time" of an enemy force IS a valid military tactic...

Running around with no intent to fight is bad sportsmanship....pinning a ship two classes bigger into an engagement, risking destruction, or routing from the hex,....is not.

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #71 on: December 20, 2004, 03:02:00 am »
How many of you use these silly tactics, anyway? Be original. Do something different.

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #72 on: December 20, 2004, 07:18:37 am »
I might point out  that "delaying" and "wasting time" of an enemy force IS a valid military tactic...

Running around with no intent to fight is bad sportsmanship....pinning a ship two classes bigger into an engagement, risking destruction, or routing from the hex,....is not.

As long as they're actually risking destruction I agree.

Offline Grim

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1004
  • Gender: Male
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #73 on: December 20, 2004, 08:12:50 am »
How many of you use these silly tactics, anyway? Be original. Do something different.

Nice comment i assume its sarcastic, seriously though if i'm flying aginst someone in the case of castling i will do so if i feel it would be detrimental for me to chase the opponent down at high speed. Its a valid tactic and most of the time i speed up and then recastle or creep along so i dont castle all the time.


el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #74 on: December 20, 2004, 09:38:18 am »
I have an easy solution to all this delaying debate mess in PvP done in patrol missions on the dyna. 

Come up with a max. cap time for PvP in all the patrol missions. Then when that time expires, the mission can start spawning new enemy AI. It could be randomized to determine which side get the reinforcements first. The side that did not get reinforcements for the given cycle would get them no later than 3 minutes after the other side got theirs.  You can then repeat the reinforcment cycle when the max. cap time period expires again.

The rationale behind this is that when a PvP is going on, both sides are sending out comm traffic for back-up. Sooner or later that back-up will arrive but not necessarily at the same time.  Practically every EEK mission that is NOT a patrol mission already does reinforcement cycles after set time periods. For example, attack a convoy and within 4 minutes reinforcement escorts for the convoy show up. Attack a Planet and every 10 to 15 minutes the defenders are getting reinforcements. Same goes for Homeward, Base and shipyard assaults.  Mine and Dizzy's favorite:  Dockyard raid.  Smoke 2 FRDs fast otherwise 4 enemy defender reinforcements shown up at range 30 about 10 minutes into the mission. Can you say phaser those FRDs chop-chop. *snicker*
« Last Edit: December 20, 2004, 09:52:17 am by el-Karnak »

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #75 on: December 20, 2004, 10:39:16 am »
Interesting idea Karnak, although I'd suggest making victory (for purposes of DV shift) be contigent on destroying the primary defenders and not the reinforcements. The only problem I do see is where a frigate might fly around vs a dread not engaging but hoping to draw the first reinforcements. 

Offline KBF-Kurok

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 829
  • Gender: Male
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #76 on: December 20, 2004, 11:01:30 am »
starcastling is a valid tactic. What  makes me  mad is when it is beeing done and the person in the starcastle starts complaining about how long it is taking. When the castler started that  tactic they knew  they  had just made a decision to prolong the  battle. to those people i say STFU and deal with it. I will take as long as I need to to break your castle after all it WAS YOUR
CHOICE in the first place.
 If I DECIDE I CAN"T BREAK THE CASTLE I WILL LEAVE. Wheter or not you think I can  has absolutly no bearing on my decision.
Kurok

el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #77 on: December 20, 2004, 11:16:17 am »
Interesting idea Karnak, although I'd suggest making victory (for purposes of DV shift) be contigent on destroying the primary defenders and not the reinforcements. The only problem I do see is where a frigate might fly around vs a dread not engaging but hoping to draw the first reinforcements. 

Thanks. :D

EEK Patrol missions do not end until one side loses all their ships, so waiting around doing nothing would be a bad idea if the EEK patrol were to have recurring reinforcements feature added in.  If a frigate player facing a DN player rolled the dice hoping to get the first reinforcements it would not be much of an advantage because the DN would get their reinforcements 3 minutes after the frigate did. But, if I was the DN player I would go at speed 31, right at mission start, and tractor the silly frigate. If the DN can't do that cuz it's under-powered (like many early DNs) then it should be escorted. Most heavy iron ships like DNs and BCHs should be escorted so I am not gonna worry too much if the DN cannot go speed 31. Find an escort and have that player run down the frigate in the first couple of minutes of the missions at speed 31.

Offline KBF-Crim

  • 1st Deacon ,Church of Taldren
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12271
  • Gender: Male
  • Crim,son of Rus'l
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #78 on: December 20, 2004, 11:18:20 am »
I might point out  that "delaying" and "wasting time" of an enemy force IS a valid military tactic...

Running around with no intent to fight is bad sportsmanship....pinning a ship two classes bigger into an engagement, risking destruction, or routing from the hex,....is not.

As long as they're actually risking destruction I agree.

 ;D....Dennis threw in the "battle pass" rule before the wind went out of SFCoC....brought a whole new risk to pickets,pins, and holding actions...

I would think closing to scanning range at least once in the battle....would be risk enough...depending how outclassed you are... ;)


Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: OK Rules interpretation needed (well it might be)
« Reply #79 on: December 20, 2004, 04:56:24 pm »
I have an easy solution to all this delaying debate mess in PvP done in patrol missions on the dyna. 

Come up with a max. cap time for PvP in all the patrol missions. Then when that time expires, the mission can start spawning new enemy AI. It could be randomized to determine which side get the reinforcements first. The side that did not get reinforcements for the given cycle would get them no later than 3 minutes after the other side got theirs.  You can then repeat the reinforcment cycle when the max. cap time period expires again.



I hate this idea, I do not want AI interupting my 2 hours battles  ;D

I LOVE long PvP fights, matches against good pilots should take a long time.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .