Topic: Now that everybody loves OOB....

[Dizzy]

If you say BB's can't run with DN's, you have to say that DNs can't run with DNs, or you'll have 2xDN hunting parties, and that's part of what we're trying to avoid.

If there is a 3-1 limit (I think we can say our player base fully supports just this, no more no less...), then putting all your eggs in one hex is fine with me. 2x DN's shouldnt operate together. That doesnt mean they cant. I think its too restrictive.

[FPF-DieHard]

If you say BB's can't run with DN's, you have to say that DNs can't run with DNs, or you'll have 2xDN hunting parties, and that's part of what we're trying to avoid.

If there is a 3-1 limit (I think we can say our player base fully supports just this, no more no less...), then putting all your eggs in one hex is fine with me. 2x DN's shouldnt operate together. That doesnt mean they cant. I think its too restrictive.

Pleas no more mid server changes!!!!   We have so many DNs built that it is simply wrong to make them sit in dock.   The more they are on the field wht more likely they will get killed.

Limiting this to DNs is not enough.  2 CVD/BCVs flying together are just as evil.   This is complicated and should be discussed for FUTURE servers.

[Dizzy]

Pleas no more mid server changes!!!!   We have so many DNs built that it is simply wrong to make them sit in dock.   The more they are on the field wht more likely they will get killed.

Limiting this to DNs is not enough.  2 CVD/BCVs flying together are just as evil.   This is complicated and should be discussed for FUTURE servers.

I will not make anymore mid server changes unless absolutely necessary that benefit all parties and are unanimously agreed upon. Its tgenerally a bad idea, I implemented my mid server rule change poorly and have learned my lesson. I am sorry to all who got pissed off with it.


Now, back to DN numbers, we need to carefully take into account the playerbase. There are usually not more than 30 online during peak hours and average is about 10.

[Kroma BaSyl]

If there is a 3-1 limit (I think we can say our player base fully supports just this, no more no less...), then putting all your eggs in one hex is fine with me. 2x DN's shouldnt operate together. That doesnt mean they cant. I think its too restrictive.

Agreed, if you had anounnced this earlier maybe, but since you didn't teams may have built DNs last night instead of BCHs or X-ships and now those builds would be largely wasted.  If you really want to get ride of all the DNs then remove the VC penalty from them, and watch them drop like flies. I know of one DNH pilot that will start flying reckless as hell if the VCs were removed. 

[Kroma BaSyl]

Pleas no more mid server changes!!!!   We have so many DNs built that it is simply wrong to make them sit in dock.   The more they are on the field wht more likely they will get killed.

Limiting this to DNs is not enough.  2 CVD/BCVs flying together are just as evil.   This is complicated and should be discussed for FUTURE servers.

I will not make anymore mid server changes unless absolutely necessary that benefit all parties and are unanimously agreed upon. Its tgenerally a bad idea, I implemented my mid server rule change poorly and have learned my lesson. I am sorry to all who got pissed off with it.


Now, back to DN numbers, we need to carefully take into account the playerbase. There are usually not more than 30 online during peak hours and average is about 10.

Actually thinking about it, why not completely unrestrict the total DN limit and remove the VCs from them. Let the carnage begin.

[Dizzy]

I know of one DNH pilot that will start flying reckless as hell if the VCs were removed. 

Well, that was pretty reckless when you hit my NSM. You can get more reckless than that?

[Kroma BaSyl]

I know of one DNH pilot that will start flying reckless as hell if the VCs were removed. 

Well, that was pretty reckless when you hit my NSM. You can get more reckless than that?

LOL....I might even be persuaded to fly without protection, "bareback" if you will. Nothing between us but perspiration and our love.

[KAT J'inn]

No disengagement ever until one ship, be it player or AI, has been destoryed.

[Kroma BaSyl]

No disengagement ever until one ship, be it player or AI, has been destoryed.

Actually, if you just applied that to any mission in which 2 or more allied DNs are drafted, and allowed the other side to disengaged if they only had 1 or fewer DNs, I think you may just have solved the attrition issue.

[FPF-DieHard]

No disengagement ever until one ship, be it player or AI, has been destoryed.

That is retarted

[GDA-S'Cipio]

I know of one DNH pilot that will start flying reckless as hell if the VCs were removed. 

Kroma:

Please report to the stardock.  I'd like to give your DNH to some total noobs who have never had a chance to fly the big iron.  I know you will support this generous attempt to win more players and increase their fun (and to increase the safety of your DNH.)

Don't worry, I've got a nice G-CL (unrefitted) ready for you to fly.  You can be as reckless as you like with it.  

-S'Cipio

[FRA.E.Kehakoul_XC]

Limit DNs to 2 pers side if they are gone they are gone permanently.
OR alternativ
Each lost dn maybe replaced but the cost double  each time bp wise.

Limit BB`s to one max, if at all...  limit BB`s movment allowance to 3 hexes from the  Homeworld.

Kling s get 1 dread and no BB`s at all, look at the historical figures.But they line ships are way cheaper...

Just a few suggestions.

[Kroma BaSyl]

No disengagement ever until one ship, be it player or AI, has been destoryed.

That is retarted

See my amendment above, I agree that no disengagement for any ships is a bit extreme though. Basically what I was trying to do with the amendment was discourage DNs from flying together without completely eliminating it.

[Dizzy]

MB limit BB's to original and neutral zone starting hexes only!

[Kroma BaSyl]

No disengagement ever until one ship, be it player or AI, has been destoryed.

That is retarted

See my amendment above, I agree that no disengagement for any ships is a bit extreme though. Basically what I was trying to do with the amendment was discourage DNs from flying together without completely eliminating it.

I disagree.   So what if you lose a small ship because you got jumped by some bigger ones.  Buy another.   As for the big ships . . . Something as big as a friggin DN running away in space is silly unless some level of battle took place.  We need more fighting and less running.

It depends on the rest of the setup. Non-OOB ships would have to be dirt cheap, with no VCs attached. DNs often ran from battles they might have won, and refused decisive engagements because they were to valuable to lose. This has been a part of real wars for centuries.

Not saying it is undoable, but that it would require the right setup of other rules or it would have other unintended consequences. Like say you unrestricted from the CP system droners, but raise their price to keep them from being used as BCH killing Kamikaze boats, then it would be unfair to force them to fight to the death.

[Hexx]

-No DN's escorting DN's
-Xships (or scouts if you want to put them back in) in mission means opponet can't leave unles Xship
is destroyed X ship on either side means no one gets to run
-Pros- DN's can't run, might actually stsrt to die
        -Give a reason to build the X ships

-Cons -None. It's a well thought out, genius idea that's easy to implement.

[FPF-DieHard]

No disengagement ever until one ship, be it player or AI, has been destoryed.

That is retarted

See my amendment above, I agree that no disengagement for any ships is a bit extreme though. Basically what I was trying to do with the amendment was discourage DNs from flying together without completely eliminating it.

I disagree.

[Pestalence_XC]

Simplest thing would be have an off server price chart for specialized BCH and up...

Allow everyone the ability to pilot 1 and only one ship from the specialized bch, dn, bb list for the server, no exceptions..

no specialized bch, dn, or BB can be in same hex at same time... Unless it is a supply base at least 5 hexas away from the war front.. this will help eliminate drafting 2 DN's into a mission by mistake.

Player will have to have the PP ammount accumulated to purchase the ship of their choice and the RM would have to be notified so that they can coordinate the ship deployment.. If player can not follow the rules or follow RM direction.. the ship is eliminated from the player and player loses the PP for the ship and supplies.. now this would require DB edits, but it allows for fair play and honesty..

once the ship is destroyed, the player can play any ship from Frig to normal or line production BCH, but Specialized BCH and up are forbidden..

this allows everyone a fair chance of flying a ship and once the Big Iron is eliminated on the server, then it is a cruiser fest.. it also promotes hunting parties that will take 2 or 3 CB's against a BB and have a chance of victory...

also this will keep in play the established disengagement rules.. if the DN or what ever is caught in enemy territory, it must fight to the death.

[Green]

I liked the way it was currently running. I'd prefer to avoid another few paragraphs of rules.

[Hexx]

I liked the way it was currently running.

Says the weenie in the biggets nastiest dumbest cheesiest CVA around.

(no offence Green- just jealous )