Hey there,
I just wanted to share some of my thoughts on the new rules of engagement/get some clarification on some things.
DSH has been established on the Gold Planet for a while now and have had a “we want to fight for ownership of this planet” sort of attitude towards anyone else who we come across. With the new rules of engagement, this is no longer a possibility without risk of being losing structures, items, being jailed, etc. As Hunters, we should now only attack Pirates and Lawless folks on sight, unless we have a bounty. I have a few concerns with that, I’ll go through them here:
-
We can’t attack other Hunters on sight, so, we’re just forced to allow any other Hunter faction that comes to Gold to build up bases/turrets as they please, and then they can just get a bounty on us and start shooting at us? This seems unfair. I really feel like we should be allowed to defend the Gold Planet as our territory to the fullest of our extent. DSH has never sat in Trader Orbit trying to camp traders, but if a Trader comes to Gold Planet, look out! Now we apparently can’t do that anymore? This leads into my next concern…
-
We can’t attack Traders on sight or without a bounty, so we are required to just allow any Trader that comes to Gold Planet to build up bases/turrets/resources as they please. Then, those Traders can use all of those resources to place bounties on us and wipe us off Gold Planet. This again seems unfair.
-
You might think “well, go Pirate then if you just want to pew pew everyone.” Well, even as a pirate, you are not supposed to completely wipe people. You are supposed to focus the core and steal their stuff, and then leave them alone. This again is not conducive to territorial war and leads into more issues like in the above points.
-
It’s not easy to see who you’re attacking. Even harder if they’re in a vessel. Say we have a bounty on someone who is a Hunter. We attack a ship from someone in their faction, and it turns out it’s not them. Now we have a warning against us because we attacked a target we didn’t have a bounty on… how are we going to deal with stuff like this?
-
Mining on Gold is dangerous for DSH too. There are turrets everywhere outside of our zone of control. We are just never supposed to go to these places after someone from a Faction that we cannot attack sets up turrets there? This again seems unfair.
-
Along the same lines of the above point, it’s not always clear whose base you’re attacking until you get too close, and then you’re dead. I generally don’t know whose base I’m attacking unless that person speaks up in Global Chat. This would make it really hard to hunt someone down for a bounty, or to determine if it’s even a base that we can attack. How do we deal with something like this?
I would love the idea of having to fight with the HWS Police if we did not follow the Rules of Engagement, but it’s not just fighting them. They have the ability to take your stuff, structures, jail you, etc. This sort of punishment makes it cross over from “law” to “rule” 100%. If you can end up with the same punishment as someone who is intentionally draining ammo, then it’s not just an RP law.
Taking all of this into consideration, you might say “well, go Lawless then!”. There’s one huge problem with this. Lawless is basically designed to be punishing so that you want to join a faction. The biggest problem with Lawless as a viable option is the death tax. Without doing fresh starts constantly, the death tax eventually gets so high that you wouldn’t be able to keep any credits. Fresh start as a possible option is great, but as something you would regularly have to do, it’s very harsh. This would be a lot more balanced in my opinion if Lawless had a flat fee for dying, rather than having to eventually reset because the cost of death is so high.
For anyone who is still with me (as in still reading), maybe you’re thinking “Well, if you don’t like it, leave!” and, I understand where you’re coming from there. It does sound like I’m complaining a lot, and I really don’t mean to. I really love the community here. I enjoy helping people, I enjoy answering questions, I just also really enjoy PvP. Maybe some people don’t agree, but DSH has tried to be as grief free as possible. We never camp people, we offer to help people if they are stuck, we just want to try to control our territory.
Thank you for reading. I’m interested in hearing other people’s thoughts on this is well.
Edit: Adding another question based on something that just happened. BQH attacked us even though we are Hunters. They claim to have a bounty. What sort of proof do they need of that? If they don’t have proof, we just go report them then? And okay, so now BQH has hit us. We declare war on BQH. Is that all fine? Or do we just have to deal with their attacks while they try to collect their bounty and we can’t do anything?
Edit 2: Just to be 100% clear, we don’t want to stay Hunters and be able to do all of the things we mentioned here. Now that we are enforcing rules of engagement, we know that a change has to be made. We have changed our behaviour in the last few days. We haven’t been attacking anyone other than Lawless or Pirates on sight, and have been more actively seeking bounties. We understand that if we want to continue our old operations, we need to be Lawless or Pirate. This post is to point out concerns I have for the future of the Hunter Role, to point out how Lawless is truly the role we would have to go with, and suggesting ways to make that a viable role. I’m not expecting changes to be made. I love the community here, and I’ll be happy to follow all rules and laws in place. At the same time I will continue to share thoughts I have about these rules and laws and share any suggestions I have that I think may make certain roles more viable (such as the flat death tax for lawless to prevent needing to use fresh start as a regular game mechanic). Thank you for reading.