Read by Council homebase invulnerability

[kingreol]

To add a Config variable for minimum number of players within a faction to activate homebase invulnerability. leave it turned OFF as default. Something simple as a deterrent for the "one man faction" and form a sort of empires at war feel if a server wishes

 

[starhaiden]

There will not be many one man factions when people can safely know other people in their faction aren't going steal anything they have made. Why do you dislike one man factions?

 

[Gonzalo]

There will not be many one man factions when people can safely know other people in their faction aren't going steal anything they have made. Why do you dislike one man factions?

because it's lame

 

[wiesshund]

To add a Config variable for minimum number of players within a faction to activate homebase invulnerability. leave it turned OFF as default. Something simple as a deterrent for the "one man faction" and form a sort of empires at war feel if a server wishes

No.
There currently just are not enough controls where you could safely just invite any tom dick and harry and be sure you wont log in tomorrow to find your faction got assraped and they have left.
SO while you carefully look for trustable faction mates, you get targeted and pounded into oblivion because your base cant be defended, while everyone bigger can be?

Just because you have not yet found any faction mates worth trusting doesnt mean you shouldnt still work on building your station, building your fleet ships etc.

And even when you find 2 mates you can trust and work with, someone decides nah you have to have 9 mates or you dont count?
Bugger that, this is the internet, finding 9 people who arent dicks is hard.

There are other things you could do based on faction size but this basic thing is not one of them.
Either all have invulnerable main bases, or none do.

Not to mention, there are lots of valid one man shows going on.
Me, i mine and process resources, run my shops, lease out use of my ship yards, make and deliver drones etc for people.
Even sometimes do direct delivery of processed materials/components
Have public factories others can use to etc.

Not a huge need for a bunch of faction mates, not that anyone else would want to play that way either, but if my main base was not invulnerable i wouldnt be able to do any of that, player B would get mad i build fighters for player A and torch my shipyard, or some
one would decide to bomb the factories and storage areas and loot the place silly.
Then i would have to put big defensive guns everyplace, and set the game to be aggressive to all not tagged specifically friend and it would become a big ugly mess and i would be doing nothing but building big ass reactors to power big ass guns and loading the entire system up with them when i wasnt fighting anyone to begin with.

 

[cyberus111]

This is how you force all new players to join the factions of all the "first in" players ... penalty for failing to join is getting eliminated

 

[Lecic]

This is how you force all new players to join the factions of all the "first in" players ... penalty for failing to join is getting eliminated

Just a quick question- how are people going to find the solo player's HB? Assuming the person isn't moronic enough to actually set their station to HB and get located in that way, there's not really any way to find it.

There will not be many one man factions when people can safely know other people in their faction aren't going steal anything they have made. Why do you dislike one man factions?

I personally dislike single man factions because the large majority do nothing they couldn't do in SP. All that most of them do is do things they could do in SP, while filling up player slots on the server, bloating the database, and making things laggier for everyone who's actually playing MP to do things that require MP.

No.
There currently just are not enough controls where you could safely just invite any tom dick and harry and be sure you wont log in tomorrow to find your faction got assraped and they have left.

Gee, it's not like there aren't ways to prevent this kind of things. How about a configurable timer before you lose base protection if people leave?

As for the random people you invited to your faction to keep the numbers up stealing stuff, how about locking down stuff you don't want stolen?

And sure. Let's say a worst case scenario. You're in the hospital for a week, and when you come back, everyone's left your faction and your base got blown up. Sucks, right? And what if I told you I could give you the exact same "game over" scenario right now? It'd be as easy as using a cloaker to dump a bunch of anti-astronaut turrets around your base's undeathinator, dooming you and your factionmates to an eternal cycle of death and rebirth.

 

[Edymnion]

So you want to take the protection that is specifically in place to help protect new players from being abused by established players, and give it only to the established players?

Here's an idea, how about we flip that? Only 1 man factions get invincibility, and when you get more faction members (and hence greater resources and more people to defend yourself with) you lose it?

Or even better, lets just leave it the way it is and make the asshats accept the fact that they aren't allowed to force someone else off a server entirely by destroying every last block they own? Yeah, I like that answer better. Live and let play.

 

[Lecic]

So you want to take the protection that is specifically in place to help protect new players from being abused by established players, and give it only to the established players?

Here's an idea, how about we flip that? Only 1 man factions get invincibility, and when you get more faction members (and hence greater resources and more people to defend yourself with) you lose it?

Or even better, lets just leave it the way it is and make the asshats accept the fact that they aren't allowed to force someone else off a server entirely by destroying every last block they own? Yeah, I like that answer better. Live and let play.

Knowing you're a solo player, I can see why you'd be angry at this suggestion, but remember- this suggestion is for a non-vanilla config option, that would, presumably, be turned on for PvP servers, and not the kind of server you described in your rant thread a few days back.

Newbies should not be playing on a difficult PvP server in the first place, and any solo PvP player is likely competent enough to avoid the kinds of issues that occur from having no homebase.

 

[StormWing0]

Having the option to turn it on and off globally in the config file would be handy for those that want to. Also being able to set conditions for it turning on and off on its own would also help as well. That said HB Protection off by default is going to get this idea canned fast. So nope I'd like it on by default with a way to turn it off in the config outright if a server owner wants to.

 

[Edymnion]

not the kind of server you described in your rant thread a few days back.

Hey, you can disparage it all you want, but my opinion on where the game should go is every bit as valid as yours, and I honestly believe that *ANY* ability to remove homebase invulnerability for *ANY* reason is a horrible idea.

Config alterable, procedural, doesn't matter to me. The fact that is is there is the *ONLY* thing that keeps the game playable, IMO.

Maybe you've just been blessed to be on a golden server all this time, but I've been on more than one where people got subjected to coordinated griefer attacks. As in people coming onto the server en masse with disposable names to build disposable ships and overwhelm anything in their path.

There was no gameplay to it, there was no "Oh well you just do this and this and make coalitions", there was just "Wake up an find everything that wasn't a home base had been wiped out" with no one to retaliate against because it was just a bunch of throw away accounts that came in to destroy everything they could find in the middle of the night and then leave never to return.

I've been there, I've seen it happen. I've seen heavily armed stations with millions of shields be destroyed that way.

So again, I would find any ability to remove homebase invulnerability for any reason to be an absolutely horrible idea that should not get any traction at all.

 

[Lecic]

Hey, you can disparage it all you want, but my opinion on where the game should go is every bit as valid as yours, and I honestly believe that *ANY* ability to remove homebase invulnerability for *ANY* reason is a horrible idea.

I wasn't "disparaging" you or your ideal server, buddy. I even agreed with your post on it sucking that there weren't any servers like that around right now. Calm down. Do you need someone to tie your feet to the ground so you stop jumping to conclusions?

Config alterable, procedural, doesn't matter to me. The fact that is is there is the *ONLY* thing that keeps the game playable, IMO.

So... because it's your opinion that it's the "only thing that keeps the game playable," no one who disagrees is allowed to have it as a server option?

There was no gameplay to it, there was no "Oh well you just do this and this and make coalitions", there was just "Wake up an find everything that wasn't a home base had been wiped out" with no one to retaliate against because it was just a bunch of throw away accounts that came in to destroy everything they could find in the middle of the night and then leave never to return.

I've been there, I've seen it happen. I've seen heavily armed stations with millions of shields be destroyed that way.

So again, I would find any ability to remove homebase invulnerability for any reason to be an absolutely horrible idea that should not get any traction at all.

"I had a bad experience with some griefers. NO ONE CAN HAVE A SERVER WITH LIMITATIONS ON HOMEBASES OR FACTIONS NOW. "

The no homebases rule has worked pretty well for the LCB Hardcore server so far. Maybe you should look at the actual evidence and not just make random assumptions based on that time one of your stations got blown up by a horde of griefers?

 

[kingreol]

turned off or the requirement is only 1 player for HB invulnerability as default. the threshold raised for servers that wish to push larger factions... a simple suggestion to allow servers to push to the goal that many players want to see. large scale battles. player interaction. and the empire part. if everyone can just go solo. we are just using the servers as a glorified chat system. but if new players feel compelled to join a faction for safety. at least it allows a push to the right direction. we still have faction points going to. but a simple this must exceed x players would push the desire to be apart of a faction. and change the dynamic of the game. It is a carrot and stick option. and not many like thinking about a game with such things. currently the stick to push people into larger groups is not very big.. if no one is allowed to push people to the carrot of fun with the rest of the players. its going to be a rather stale experience.
[DOUBLEPOST=1458520007,1458519372][/DOUBLEPOST]

Hey, you can disparage it all you want, but my opinion on where the game should go is every bit as valid as yours, and I honestly believe that *ANY* ability to remove homebase invulnerability for *ANY* reason is a horrible idea.

Config alterable, procedural, doesn't matter to me. The fact that is is there is the *ONLY* thing that keeps the game playable, IMO.

Maybe you've just been blessed to be on a golden server all this time, but I've been on more than one where people got subjected to coordinated griefer attacks. .

sounds like a server did not take new players into account. i can understand that everyone joins the servers with the most players. ignoring if said server is pve or pvp. and expects each one to be newbie friendly. but options that will hook the players who have been playing for a couple months to stay. more so then just new features but the ability to promote a more unique server meta

 

[SneakZee]

Not everyone wants to join a faction, some want to enjoy the game on their own. Perhaps enjoying the more creative or even social aspects of the game. My opinion is all factions (Even one person factions) should get one invulnerable station...UNTIL they destroy any player owned major entity...such as a ship or station. At that point, they are no longer isolationist, but rather warriors or griefers..and at that point, the station should lose invulnerability...at least for a long time.

 

[Lecic]

Not everyone wants to join a faction, some want to enjoy the game on their own. Perhaps enjoying the more creative or even social aspects of the game. My opinion is all factions (Even one person factions) should get one invulnerable station...UNTIL they destroy any player owned major entity...such as a ship or station. At that point, they are no longer isolationist, but rather warriors or griefers..and at that point, the station should lose invulnerability...at least for a long time.

If people don't want to join a faction, then maybe they shouldn't play on a server that has this enabled? Or be smart enough to hide their base well.

 

[MeRobo]

If people don't want to join a faction, then maybe they shouldn't play on a server that has this enabled? Or be smart enough to hide their base well.

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't hiding one's station effectively end up in making one person factions completely useless, as claiming a system or setting a station to homebase (I don't know anything else one person could use a faction for) would be a huge detriment to the concept of being stealthy.

Regarding the suggestion itself: I support it because it offers a variation on the vanilla game which seems to be usefull for encuraging a certain playstyle on servers which are set up for said playstyle.

 

[Lecic]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't hiding one's station effectively end up in making one person factions completely useless, as claiming a system or setting a station to homebase (I don't know anything else one person could use a faction for) would be a huge detriment to the concept of being stealthy.

Regarding the suggestion itself: I support it because it offers a variation on the vanilla game which seems to be usefull for encuraging a certain playstyle on servers which are set up for said playstyle.

That's why you DON'T claim the same system for mining that your secret base is in.

 

[MeRobo]

That's why you DON'T claim the same system for mining that your secret base is in.

Thanks for answering my question, I forgot about the mining bonus in claimed systems.
I'd conclude that even with this hypothetical setting enabled one man factions could somewhat effectively do what they do without said setting enabled, although it would be more difficult, as this setting is ment, at least as far as I understand it, to discourage the use of one man factions.

 

[kiraen]

First, the OP is for a config option. I have no objection to something I do not have to use.
I do not agree with removing the invulnerability. If someone wants to run their own server that way, it's not my problem.

Anyway, doesn't Schine have plans about the base invulnerability being dependent on faction points in some way?

 

[SneakZee]

If people don't want to join a faction, then maybe they shouldn't play on a server that has this enabled? Or be smart enough to hide their base well.

Guess its just a matter of opinion..and I respect yours....however, most servers seem to have factions turned on and the creative types that make very cool structures probably want them to be seen by others. Also, why chase part of your userbase away. People that are not into PVP and attacking should have a safe haven...IMHO. Why create this really cool structure with many hours into it in a hidden system that nobody can find? People who attack and grief should not have protected systems...folks that want to build and mind their own business should be safe...Seems like something for everyone= more customers. The idea of "they can go somewhere else" doesn't necessarily appeal to me if I am a server owner. (Unless the players ruin it for others) My 2 cents.

 

[Lecic]

People that are not into PVP and attacking should have a safe haven...IMHO.

RE: Those people shouldn't play on a server with a minimum faction membership count that they do not meet.