Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The Sukuuvestaa Corporation, or SuVee as it is commonly known, is the head of the self-proclaimed 'practical' faction within the Caldari State? Read more here.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7

Author Topic: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem  (Read 9428 times)

Katrina Oniseki

  • The Iron Lady
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
  • Caldari - Deteis - Tube Child
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #60 on: 27 Jan 2014, 13:42 »

The irony about all this discussion regarding "what do we do in these situations" or "how do we handle this public setting" is that there is a remarkable amount of agreement in this thread. This is a hint that the people who cause issues are usually fairly specific people, which is further a hint that they are typically doing it on purpose.

This.

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #61 on: 27 Jan 2014, 13:49 »

I don't think there is a solution.

I don't see one either, that's why I started the thread to begin with. See if there was something I was missing.


So, while clone backups are possible, and useful in cases of genuine accidents, what then is their usefulness in RP? other than situations for showing off? E.g. "I explored an uncharted world" and other such grandstanding? Is there a use for them in RP ?

Or is it just one of those things that has no direct usefulness in RP, because using it just gets messy and overcomplicated ?

That's a good question no ? What are they for ? To reassure players that even if their character dies, that they have an insurance policy and they can get it back ? Not really when you think about it. As with any RP, every player is totally free to accept something or ignore it, as said above countless times. So, if someone kills your character, you can perfectly say that you don't agree and tell people your character didn't die.

So, what are really soft clones for ? They are mostly here to provide additional RP opportunities revolving around film noir / thriller atmospheres. I have heard about so many assassinations of capsuleers now, sudden and brutal deaths... That it feels right to think that it's indeed for those precise reasons soft clones are so strongly advocated by many players.

Now then, that's why I never really felt the need to use soft cloning in my RP. It is true that I do not bring my character in dangerous situations all the time (I'm playing Eve and capsuleer in space, not Shadowrun), but even if I did, I could perfectly make sure that my character doesn't die, after all, it's my character and nobody is the GM. But if I do that all the time even when my character obviously has to die, people will start saying that i'm godmodding. So soft clones are the perfect tool to avoid that.

I guess that's what you have to deal with when you want to thread a bit outside of the game setting and go baselining in dangerous situations out of the capsule. The lore setting was never truly designed for this, but it's still perfectly possible. I personally have nothing against soft clones as even CCP has hinted at them so many time that it's not only a player creation anymore anyway. But I don't personally feel the need to use them. Maybe someday I will.

Now to your example, it relates basically to a more general set of cases where it's eventually something happening ICly and a player suddenly notices that he is absolutely not fine with it. It can unfortunately happen. Like, omg, my character died, I didn't want that, but it's only logical that he dies because I screwed up as a player. If that's the case in your example, than it should be best for player B to be understanding and try to sort it out. Especially if it's the first time... Not necessary to be a dick on that.

If player A knew he put his character at risk, well, maybe he should learn the almighty rule of Eve (and RP in general for that matter...) : deal with the consequences. Usually I go by those rules. If player A is not happy that player B (and maybe others as well) start to tell a fake version of it ICly, then deal with it and call them out for that. It can actually be interesting, but I also understand that it can make a player not happy in certain cases. Especially when it starts to thread sometimes into thrash/gore/sexual/offensive content. There are limits.

So, eventually, it's a lot a matter of case by case and it's essentially hard to draw concrete, unmovable rules around that.

Generally in your case example, when drama occurs it's that people have not even tried to sort things out between themselves, or tried but failed because they want to win at RP. Not saying that it's always the case, but it's often the case in my experience. Especially on Eve.
Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #62 on: 27 Jan 2014, 14:30 »

How would you make your character (A) react when another character (B) brings up ICly something on which you as a player (p-A)  is in fundamental disagree with the other player behind (p-B) ?

Like the most stupid example but likely to happen :

Character B : "What do you think of soft clones ?"
Character A : "Soft clones do not exist"
Character B : "Of course they exist, I have several of them, as well as saves in an implant"
Character A : "Liar"

=> OOC drama.

Ok there, fine, players A and B start to ignore each other, as well as their characters.


I think the simplest solution is to not bring it up. This is of course a very 'meh' solution, but it works well in a lot of cases. To give a bit of an example, Saede and Ava have a lot of very fundamental differences in perspective surrounding religion, philosophy and Minmatar society. Saede's solution to avoiding conflict with Ava is to not bring it up, thus starting arguments. Anther example, my father is a republican, I'm a (dirty) liberal, and we don't remotely see eye to eye on it, but we still manage to peacefully interact as long as we don't discuss politics. So if you have a fundemental disagreement with a player on the nature of canon, you can just avoid talking about it and starting unneeded fights. To solve you example then, the best solution would have been for player B to not bring it up in the first place when they knew it had to potential to create conflict. This isn't an amazing solution I'll admit. The better solution would be for the players to come to some sort of consensus, but when that's not possible, just choosing not to force the issue isn't a terrible way to go about it.

The law of solipsism, as I said above. I do not find it especially satisfactory, but we have to deal with it yes.

Let's take another example. Someone says his character B has a special ability that you disagree with OOCly.

Character A and B take part in an event. Player B starts to use his ability even knowing you disagree with it, after all, he is free to have his fun too, which is legitimate.

How are you supposed to explain that to yourself, and your character ? How to react ICly after something like this happens ?

I'm not sure what you might be referring to here, but lets go with a relatively extreme example of someone deciding they're a wizard and starting to sling magic around everywhere. The solution to this is really just, ignore it, don't let it effect your character. In most cases people won't force something on your character, and if they do you can call them out for the more relevant OOC issue of them godmodding your character, then of the issue of whatever it is they're doing. If they're not actually effecting your character, then its pretty easy to just let them have their weird fun and just let it go. Again, its not an amazing solution, but there are solutions.

I can just be "I will kill myself and soft clone !", and then "No you don't". Then you see the character dying in front of you, and since you don't agree with soft clones, seeing him coming back again a few minutes later literally breaks the rationality of your world.

It's not necessarily about godmodding special powers on your character, it can just be using a player creation that directly conflicts with the rationality of your own universe. It's extremely irritating when it happens. Especially because it's a player made thing without any place in the Canon.

The main issue is that the more a player creation start to invent new, universal things, or take them as facts in a setting where it's not only between character A and B, but a whole world, then that player starts to stomp on the RP of another player.

I will not lie and say that these days I do not feel especially good when I see all those sciencey new technologies burgeoning like flowers everywhere, arising from the needs of players to find new stuff and create their own little special thing.

And what if something like that then starts to bleed over something like SeyCon ? If a player comes up happily and starts to explain his own new technology ? Yeah, you can ignore it, but some will not and you will be left torn between people happily playing with it and some not so much. And eventually, you just start to feel more and more oppressed. You start to feel that your own little meddling with PF, trying to be respectful of the Canon and not creating wild fantasies, but just going with minor details or just using your own version of an existing device, is rather vain and bland. Then you ask yourself "Why bother ?"

It generates drama, or just divide people, and I find it unhealthy on the long run. Especially as it creates a race for "the new awesome idea that is better than the last tech created by another player !" "but wait, I can do better !" and so on and so on.

What is so limitating in the PF to begin with ? We have plenty of tools to play with. Eve PF is incredibly dense for a MMO.

But let's take it in another way : it is generally assumed that the more you create something to be universal, or well spread, the more the probability to be called godmodder increases. Saying that you invented the apocalypse battleship, is an extreme of that. The other extreme, the one generally assumed to be positive, is basic world building with very regional player made creations. Saying that your own little native town on planet X is like this or that, and that it's like that because *insert good explanation showing that you did your homework to insert your little town into the Matari world the planet is located" all the better.

Why not keeping that rule for technology too ? Why trying at all costs to invent new tech, rather than just taking what we have in PF and create your own flavour of it ? Drones exist. Gallente are libertarian fashionista. Then they must use Rouge Drones ! And Whore drones ! Or whatever floats your boat.

Technology now. Clones are created with biomass. Biomass is rather central in Eve setting. If we can create blank corpses, what prevents people in some twisted corners of space to do the same, implant them with basic electronic implants or control, and turn them into flesh puppets able to do basic or elaborated moves through a computer ?

I mean, why trying to insert stuff from other universes when we already have stuff from... New Eden ?

A well know and discussed case now.

Player A blows up player's B ship in space. There is nothing to loot, but player A claims that he abducted player B crew as part of his RP.

Player B disagrees OOCly and claims ICly that never happened.

This is a pretty clear case of outright godmodding and should rightly be called out as such.

Well obviously it is not shared by everybody. Silas does it, Sansha loyalists also deal in that sort of things. I am not saying that they are doing it wrong or right. I am just saying that they have a point too. if that is godmodding... Well, there was other discussions about that already, and it is not what i'm interested in.

What i'm interested in is the possibility that people can disagree over it OOCly. So yes, they will ignore each other. Until it eventually bleeds over in the universe around and start to affect other people that you will meet too. Eventually if you have to cut yourself from everyone that got touched by it because you try to ignore it, you will soon get completely blind to everything happening around. It would be like adding 75% of a channel to ignore list and then trying to sort out what is being said on said channel.

Of course though, I think that I took a bad example with Sansha or Blooders abducting crews as I think it would be a shame not to play that since it's what happens in PF after all. I would be rather tempted to say that it's people not rolling with it that are godmodding their way out of the setting... It's a complicated issue.

Player A doesn't care and sells those slaves to someone else, player C, who starts to do all sort of stuff with them.

This escalates further with not only godmodding but another player (C) being party to the godmodding. If I were player A in this case, I would contact player C and see if something couldn't be worked out with them. Godmodding like this is only really legitimate if other players identify it as legitimate. If player C doesn't go along with it, the buck stops there. This is a case where the community shouldn't be supporting/endorsing godmodding in that manor, its poor form.

But is it still godmodding when it's literally part of the setting ? Probably since you are dealing with someone else characters. But as I said above, the other player just feels like trying to godmod out of it as well.

It's the kind of situation that only the two players can sort out between themselves, but if it does not happen, then it creates divides. Even if you can still get out of it with the law of solipsism, OOC scars remain.

Eventually player A can still claim it's fake, that it's other people and not his crew and it will be up to everyone ICly to believe him or not. But it will still make a lot of OOC drama behind. That's basic godmodding, even out of good intentions.


At best it will lead to disagreeable solipsism, at worst both versions of what happened are conflicting.  Most of the time it will just be 2 versions of what happened conflicting but as they are exposed ICly, everyone can ICly deny them, so it's fine. But what isn't is the OOC behind.

It is godmodding, I agree. But its not caused by having disagreements about the canon, its outright infringing on another player's existence without their consent, and that's not okay. If someone came to me and said they wanted to capture my crew after they'd blown up my ship, I'd probably go along with it. But if they just went ahead and did it without asking, I'd consider that godmodding and (I think rightly) call them out on it. To give another example. If someone wanted to turn their character into a suicide bomber and blow my character up with it, if they talked about it with me beforehand, I would probably agree to it and help them sort something cool out (because yeah! roleplay conflicts), but if they just ran up to my character somewhere random, and tried that, I'd remove my character from the channel, and again, call them out on it OOCly. That's really in my mind the best way to deal with that sort of godmodding, don't legitimize it by responding to it or giving it the time of day ICly. Its an OOC issue and should be treated as such.

Then yes, of course, it would be better if abducters always asked before doing it. Question of good form, perhaps.
Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #63 on: 27 Jan 2014, 14:39 »

I disagree. As long as there's no conflict with the existing canon, I see no reason expanding the universe. I mean, my corporation is out in wormhole space forming our own space civilisation right now. That's pretty original. Should we be denied and told we can't start our own faction because 'there is no originality from players and this is a premade world?' I don't think so at all. There's tons of originality and room for player made stuff in the universe. Napaani, Happy Chips, Starsi, there's all sorts of player made things in the universe, and I think saying 'no, you can't make stuff up' is unnecessarily restrictive to everyone. Where would we be if we could only roleplay within the bounds of existing canon? How many times would we have walked the same tired roads in 10 years of RP? After the 300th slaver vs. nonslaver argument in the summit, it starts to get stale and people start looking for something new. This is supposed to be a living breathing universe, and it should be allowed to do so. 

Wormholes, colonies, etc., all exist within the Eve universe very explicitly and logically. There's a difference between utilizing material in interesting ways and inventing off the wall unicorn stuff. And things like Napaani were again, developed based on the stuff we were given within the Eve universe. Granted, that one had more invention in it than normal - but it was also done very well, was an uncontroversial idea, and was widely accepted by a community that wanted to use it.

Player extrapolation of already existing concepts or material is entirely different than attempting to completely invent something - especially something in the area of cloning, implants, and other controversial topics within the community that have major implications for other players if the inventor attempts to use or mention them publicly.

People can go ahead and invent what they want, but they certainly can't expect the community to acknowledge their invention in any meaningful way.

I completely agree, though Napaani is far from being universally reckoned. The simple fact that it is often presented as a Caldari universal language makes it close to godmodding, if not outright godmodding. Which made me rather prefer a few voices telling that it's just an obscure aristocratic/meritocratic/elitist/business/whatever floats your boat Caldari language originated from X.

Otherwise though, I respect a lot the people that put literally their souls in creating the language. Same with Amarrad, and other languages.

For something like Napaani, it has no effect on players who don't like it. They simply don't use it. You can't ignore tech in such a way, especially when it comes to things like cloning. Everyone uses clones, thus your invention is now declaring how their character's technology works. That is godmoding.

Not totally true. You sure can just not use it, but you can hardly less hear it. You have to deal with it on a constant basis. So, you start eventually to invent your own explanations on why and why to preserve your own rationale and not ending up crazy/schizophrenic eventually. And then at some occasion you have to bring "but napaani is an obscure language coming from blablabl" and then everyone thinks you stupid/crazy ICly, and a moronic ass OOCly because you can't comply to the tyranny of the majority.

Well, the majority can be damned. I can surely comply to the tyranny of the PF and the Canon, but I rather prefer comply to that than to the will of a democracy of player made creations. Especially when we start to thread into echo-chambers and the likes. Eek.

It's already difficult to make everyone agree on PF itself and its interpretations, and yet, it's the damn Canon. Now if we have to do the same for player made universal stuff... The nightmare /o\
Logged

Saede Riordan

  • Immoral Compass
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2656
  • Through the distorted lens I found a cure
    • All the cool hippies have tumblr
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #64 on: 27 Jan 2014, 15:13 »

I think the distinction I'd draw to in terms of invention technologies is when someone 'invents something that already exists' like, when someone makes some technology and says its been around for 50 years and everyone has one in their home and its like having a microwave or somesuch. That's getting overdone, and Napaani makes some people uncomfortable for exactly that reason. However, I don't see the problem with your character inventing something through roleplay, and attempting to market it IC.
Logged
Personal Blog//Character Blog
A ship in harbour is safe, but that's not what ships are built for.

Jace

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #65 on: 27 Jan 2014, 15:22 »

I think the distinction I'd draw to in terms of invention technologies is when someone 'invents something that already exists' like, when someone makes some technology and says its been around for 50 years and everyone has one in their home and its like having a microwave or somesuch. That's getting overdone, and Napaani makes some people uncomfortable for exactly that reason. However, I don't see the problem with your character inventing something through roleplay, and attempting to market it IC.

Again, with Napaani it is very easy to ignore if someone doesn't like it. You literally just don't mention it or use it.

With technology, the implications are too immediate and important to ignore. With technology that "haz existeds for longs timez": no it hasn't, it would have been put in the universe.

For "look what I made, now you have to deal with my tech to RP with me" well no, your character doesn't have the power over the Eve universe to create significant new tech that has widespread implications for all capsuleers and storylines. That is right up there with "You aren't the CEO of KK."
Logged

Synthia

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 323
  • I ruin RP by existing
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #66 on: 27 Jan 2014, 15:56 »

Technology now. Clones are created with biomass. Biomass is rather central in Eve setting. If we can create blank corpses, what prevents people in some twisted corners of space to do the same, implant them with basic electronic implants or control, and turn them into flesh puppets able to do basic or elaborated moves through a computer ?

I mean, why trying to insert stuff from other universes when we already have stuff from... New Eden ?

It may be possible. There are such items as this: http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=22210

There's a lot of curious bits of PF, in obscure places.


And yes, inserting things from other settings, just makes everything bland and confusing. Especially when the setting of EVE may have laws of physics that are fundamentally incompatible.
Logged
The Explanatory Leaflet is a Leaflet that Explains.

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #67 on: 27 Jan 2014, 15:59 »

There might be a good difference between NASA inventing FTL travel and Google patenting a new kind of inventive smartphone.
Logged

Saede Riordan

  • Immoral Compass
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2656
  • Through the distorted lens I found a cure
    • All the cool hippies have tumblr
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #68 on: 27 Jan 2014, 16:05 »

Quote
For "look what I made, now you have to deal with my tech to RP with me" well no, your character doesn't have the power over the Eve universe to create significant new tech that has widespread implications for all capsuleers and storylines. That is right up there with "You aren't the CEO of KK."

Why not? If its not something covered by game mechanics, then it doesn't make any difference in the way the game is played if it exists or not. No one has to use your technology, accepts it, or make use of it. You don't have to deny the existence of it, your character can just deny its value. You could send some new technology to market, advertise it on the IGS, and have it totally flop and no one have any interest in it. Or it could go somewhere, be something people really like and start using in their roleplay, because it adds something to the roleplay and adds possibilities that weren't there before. If my character spends months RPing with people and develops some sort of tech, and tries to sell it on the IGS, it would come off as very immersion breaking to me if people came out and said 'that doesn't exist, you can't make that'.

And yeah, there's definitely a difference of scale behind claiming to have invented a machine that creates wormholes, and creating a holographic neocom interface that works in some clever new way, or even inventing some implant that does something unique.
Logged
Personal Blog//Character Blog
A ship in harbour is safe, but that's not what ships are built for.

Jace

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #69 on: 27 Jan 2014, 16:19 »

Quote
For "look what I made, now you have to deal with my tech to RP with me" well no, your character doesn't have the power over the Eve universe to create significant new tech that has widespread implications for all capsuleers and storylines. That is right up there with "You aren't the CEO of KK."

Why not? If its not something covered by game mechanics, then it doesn't make any difference in the way the game is played if it exists or not. No one has to use your technology, accepts it, or make use of it. You don't have to deny the existence of it, your character can just deny its value. You could send some new technology to market, advertise it on the IGS, and have it totally flop and no one have any interest in it. Or it could go somewhere, be something people really like and start using in their roleplay, because it adds something to the roleplay and adds possibilities that weren't there before. If my character spends months RPing with people and develops some sort of tech, and tries to sell it on the IGS, it would come off as very immersion breaking to me if people came out and said 'that doesn't exist, you can't make that'.

And yeah, there's definitely a difference of scale behind claiming to have invented a machine that creates wormholes, and creating a holographic neocom interface that works in some clever new way, or even inventing some implant that does something unique.

The perspective you are missing is from the other side: new tech is immersion-breaking for them. Unless it is something so inconsequential to be pure fluff (cleaning drones that look like puppies and sing children's songs or something - this sort of topic is very case-by-case), new tech requires a response ICly from others because you have altered the universe in which their character resides.

Environmental godmoding is still godmoding.
Logged

Louella Dougans

  • \o/
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • \o/
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #70 on: 27 Jan 2014, 16:25 »

Inventing an implant that does something unique, says that you are at least as knowledgeable about cybernetics, (and more specifically, implants that are capsule-compatible), as any of the likes of Inherent Implants, Poteque Pharmaceuticals, Genolution, or any of the other cybernetics manufacturers, who have scientists who have spent decades designing and researching implants. Those corporations aren't small ones. They're megacorporations. Employees in the millions, if not billions.

it's a pretty bold claim.
Logged
\o/

Samira Kernher

  • Soulless Puppet
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1331
  • Ardishapur Victor
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #71 on: 27 Jan 2014, 21:01 »

A well know and discussed case now.

Player A blows up player's B ship in space. There is nothing to loot, but player A claims that he abducted player B crew as part of his RP.

Player B disagrees OOCly and claims ICly that never happened.

This is a pretty clear case of outright godmodding and should rightly be called out as such.

Well obviously it is not shared by everybody. Silas does it, Sansha loyalists also deal in that sort of things. I am not saying that they are doing it wrong or right. I am just saying that they have a point too. if that is godmodding... Well, there was other discussions about that already, and it is not what i'm interested in.

What i'm interested in is the possibility that people can disagree over it OOCly. So yes, they will ignore each other. Until it eventually bleeds over in the universe around and start to affect other people that you will meet too. Eventually if you have to cut yourself from everyone that got touched by it because you try to ignore it, you will soon get completely blind to everything happening around. It would be like adding 75% of a channel to ignore list and then trying to sort out what is being said on said channel.

Of course though, I think that I took a bad example with Sansha or Blooders abducting crews as I think it would be a shame not to play that since it's what happens in PF after all. I would be rather tempted to say that it's people not rolling with it that are godmodding their way out of the setting... It's a complicated issue.

Eventually player A can still claim it's fake, that it's other people and not his crew and it will be up to everyone ICly to believe him or not. But it will still make a lot of OOC drama behind. That's basic godmodding, even out of good intentions.


At best it will lead to disagreeable solipsism, at worst both versions of what happened are conflicting.  Most of the time it will just be 2 versions of what happened conflicting but as they are exposed ICly, everyone can ICly deny them, so it's fine. But what isn't is the OOC behind.

It is godmodding, I agree. But its not caused by having disagreements about the canon, its outright infringing on another player's existence without their consent, and that's not okay. If someone came to me and said they wanted to capture my crew after they'd blown up my ship, I'd probably go along with it. But if they just went ahead and did it without asking, I'd consider that godmodding and (I think rightly) call them out on it. To give another example. If someone wanted to turn their character into a suicide bomber and blow my character up with it, if they talked about it with me beforehand, I would probably agree to it and help them sort something cool out (because yeah! roleplay conflicts), but if they just ran up to my character somewhere random, and tried that, I'd remove my character from the channel, and again, call them out on it OOCly. That's really in my mind the best way to deal with that sort of godmodding, don't legitimize it by responding to it or giving it the time of day ICly. Its an OOC issue and should be treated as such.

Then yes, of course, it would be better if abducters always asked before doing it. Question of good form, perhaps.

Bolded important bit.

The crew thing is very simple to me. Whoever gets the loot, gets the crew. This also means that if you don't go back to loot your own wreck, you lose your crew. If you want to be someone that rescues his crew, then you should be going out and actually rescuing your crew.

In-game actions have priority in a full-time RP game like EVE.
Logged

Jace

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #72 on: 27 Jan 2014, 21:20 »

The crew thing is very simple to me. Whoever gets the loot, gets the crew. This also means that if you don't go back to loot your own wreck, you lose your crew. If you want to be someone that rescues his crew, then you should be going out and actually rescuing your crew.

In-game actions have priority in a full-time RP game like EVE.

This doesn't account for crew death or escape pods.
Logged

Katrina Oniseki

  • The Iron Lady
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
  • Caldari - Deteis - Tube Child
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #73 on: 27 Jan 2014, 21:26 »

The crew thing is very simple to me. Whoever gets the loot, gets the crew. This also means that if you don't go back to loot your own wreck, you lose your crew. If you want to be someone that rescues his crew, then you should be going out and actually rescuing your crew.

In-game actions have priority in a full-time RP game like EVE.

This doesn't account for crew death or escape pods.

I can't imagine there would be many surviving crew inside the torn and emptied wreck. It just got finished going through a friggin' thermonuclear explosion. Maybe a few isolated survivors, no more than 1% though. A vast majority of survivors would be in those escape pods as you mentioned.

So, when people talk about rescuing or capturing crew, I have always assumed they meant those crew in escape pods. Of course, that doesn't account for some tidbit I thought I saw in PF about how escape pods pretty much random-warp to a safe spot and wait for rescue with a beacon that capsuleers simply cannot see.

Jace

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Clone backups, and the IC/OOC barrier problem
« Reply #74 on: 27 Jan 2014, 21:33 »

The crew thing is very simple to me. Whoever gets the loot, gets the crew. This also means that if you don't go back to loot your own wreck, you lose your crew. If you want to be someone that rescues his crew, then you should be going out and actually rescuing your crew.

In-game actions have priority in a full-time RP game like EVE.

This doesn't account for crew death or escape pods.

I can't imagine there would be many surviving crew inside the torn and emptied wreck. It just got finished going through a friggin' thermonuclear explosion. Maybe a few isolated survivors, no more than 1% though. A vast majority of survivors would be in those escape pods as you mentioned.

So, when people talk about rescuing or capturing crew, I have always assumed they meant those crew in escape pods. Of course, that doesn't account for some tidbit I thought I saw in PF about how escape pods pretty much random-warp to a safe spot and wait for rescue with a beacon that capsuleers simply cannot see.

Right, which is why so many people started boarding threads a while back - to try to get crews without having to claim they somehow snatched up escape pods so amazingly fast.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7