Having rules and enforcing them by a mod or complaint system can work, but in most cases a lot slips by.
Rules enforced by coding will work 100% of the time. This is the easiest and fastest way to get rules enforced, a few lines of yes/no, =/> or if command code rules with enforcement actions code attached to each, could enforce any rule put in place.
You could have a rule for example; if player pod kills X number of players in a faction controlled system and has been attack by CONCORD X number times within 2 hours, they loose faction standing of X value, and as we know once standing get low enough faction sentries and forces engage you.
Now thatâs just an easy example, but more involved rules and code can be done.
As for using CODE to Neff ships in the name of balancing is the worse and laziest method of fixing a problem. Any ship in game should be balanced within 2 months of release on a live server. If you have a good group of development programmers and concept artists any thing added on day 1 should completely balanced from inhouse QA testing.
And that brings up the issue of rebalancing ships/items because certain minority groups bitch about how unbalanced is a joke. If its been in game for more than a year thereâs nothing wrong with it, problem lays with the players not thinking or too lazy to think of methods to counter it. Every game including EVE always has a way to counter everything, and any good player figures it out by themselves or as a group.
Depends on how itâs implemented, done wrong itâs a nightmare, done right itâs a huge benefit.
A classic example is player drones, not sure if anyone has noticed if your drones are set to group agro and have not attacking a target they will engage to target your open fire on with ship weapons automatically (if within range)
Weâve also seen Trig fleets change from agro pulling tanks to high treat or value targets like drones or command ships.
But we also see bad examples like salvage drones not automatically salvaging salvage because you have non-salvage item targeted when you give them the command to salvage.
In general, I think code changes are better than rules.
Thereâs no subjectivity, no interpretation necessary, and no risk of unintentionally breaking a rule and being banned.
Code changes also give room for emergent gameplay, where rules provide for emergence to descend into useless debate.
Pretty much every time CCP has made rules about exploits, theyâve followed that with code changes to eliminate the risk (not all - eg. like spamming containers on grid to cause lag, etc. but just in general).
I think itâs easier for us as a player base if there are few rules and most of the limits are coded into the mechanics.
On a huge server with 30k people, how many GMs would you need to police and enforce the rules you made up? What if a GM messes up, because weâre all just human beings? Code solves that for us, it lets us do things or it doesnât.
Iâve been getting weird forum behavior of late. Sometimes it edits out quotes Iâm trying to respond to, or it doesnât show whom Iâm responding to at times.
With that said, it seems I might have been unintentionally replied to a couple times in this thread. Not sure if you were replying to me as I mentioned nothing about EULA. If you were replying to me, and referring to policy I was talking about, I meant that as in CCPâs âstandard operating procedureâ if they take content away, to make sure to put something equivalent back at the same time. Taking out content and leaving a void is not good PR.
Where did these corps commit outrageous things? These corps had all the hugest null sec blocks under constant war decs and in addition other corps and groups that they were or were not paid to attack. What else are they supposed to do? War dec smaller groups on a schedule? Today is week 14 of the year and we wonât declare war on someone but in week 15 we will again? Where is the outrageous behavior?
And if you want to ban these war dec groups for declaring too many wars, wouldnât you also have to ban CODE and Goons for being the defacto only big time gankers left in high sec. Or TEST, PH and Mogul for nearly monopolizing the structure markets around hubs (after all, they went relentlessly after other structure markets and destroyed tons of Azbels and Fortizars that tried to compete)?
Definitely not when they claim âCCP proved that killing people increases retentionâ while CCP expressly stated the opposite.
Them falling in such an obvious trap makes it hard to believe they could be correct for more complex ideas, eg those that a 5years old monkey may produce.
Weird how you canât accept your BS does not prove anything because
âcorrelation does not imply causationâ
Weird how you distort things to make them suit your storytelliing even though they actually say the opposite.
Since you canât accept when I prove you that your whole argument is logically BS , then maybe when CCP says it you will be more willing to understand it ?
So you are saying that CCP Rise is wrong. That the 80,000 data points mean nothing and that you sitting behind a KB with nothing more, are somehow rightâŚ
