If TNO kept a simple manifest, it be easier to figure out, I'm sure.
I'm now legal.
It was a very painful process.
Manifest Error
I'm not surprised this happened.
The rule is too short be rememberable and when you throw in a table with all the information about planetary defenses with build time, how do you expect people to think about meterage? Putting the meters would be more logical than the build time that way people would have to do the math rather than go, "Oh it'll take 15 days."
The rule is too short be rememberable and when you throw in a table with all the information about planetary defenses with build time, how do you expect people to think about meterage? Putting the meters would be more logical than the build time that way people would have to do the math rather than go, "Oh it'll take 15 days."
Has anyone else seen this?
Bolding mine, CAPS not. That's a contradiction in the rules right there, for starters. The "Planetary Defences" category also lists only the chart, no meters (though it does say it counts, it does not describe how).
No mention of planetary defences our ground forces.
Hell, even Theren Gevel, who wrote these rules, didn't include his defences in his meterage. I know - I'm in his group!
Bolding mine, CAPS not. That's a contradiction in the rules right there, for starters. The "Planetary Defences" category also lists only the chart, no meters (though it does say it counts, it does not describe how).
No mention of planetary defences our ground forces.
Hell, even Theren Gevel, who wrote these rules, didn't include his defences in his meterage. I know - I'm in his group!
...
If a bunch of us groups scrapped a ton of our crap on a mistake, imma call for a fleet restart...
I swears it... ^_^
If a bunch of us groups scrapped a ton of our crap on a mistake, imma call for a fleet restart...
I swears it... ^_^
I don't think ANYONE should be scrapping ANYTHING. I think the staff should be owning up to THEIR mistake and giving all groups a generous grace period before scrapping commences. With the planet takeover rule, a month would not be out of line before manifests are examined and penalties are issued.
This has just some up today? IMO, NO scrapping should be done today.
This has just some up today? IMO, NO scrapping should be done today.
No, Isstal, the part you quoted is so that people aren't building Gencores in shipyards. It makes sure that people know that if it's in space, it's built in space. If it goes on the ground, it's buiilt on the ground. That's all, really.
And I dunno about Gash not counting them. But that seems odd to me, since he made the new system for a reason.
Edit: Oh, you guys have a grace period. But there's no reason to ignore it today... might as well get started.
And I dunno about Gash not counting them. But that seems odd to me, since he made the new system for a reason.
Edit: Oh, you guys have a grace period. But there's no reason to ignore it today... might as well get started.
Maybe that's what it's intended to do, but if you just read it, it says both those things. The rules don't contain any instructions as to the mantinence defences take - and clearly nobody was aware that they did require meterage. And how, exactly, are we to tell how much? Shipyards build at 100 meters/day. Construction yards have an entirely different system - 200 meters/day for some things, 600 meters/day for others, and set numbers of days for more.
Simply put, the rules are not clear enough, and that is the staff's fault. The writers', yes, but the staff's too. And I am not "ignoring" the grace period (plans are already in motion to bring our mantience up to spec), I am simply saying that because this is the staff's fault more than anyone elses, a VERY generous grace period is in order. People should, imo, have the right to simply claim existing defences as exempt from this rule, but that's not realistic. So they should be given adequete time to repair the problem however they see fit - whether by scrapping or taking planets. To me, because of the numbers some groups now bust by, that means a month.
Simply put, the rules are not clear enough, and that is the staff's fault. The writers', yes, but the staff's too. And I am not "ignoring" the grace period (plans are already in motion to bring our mantience up to spec), I am simply saying that because this is the staff's fault more than anyone elses, a VERY generous grace period is in order. People should, imo, have the right to simply claim existing defences as exempt from this rule, but that's not realistic. So they should be given adequete time to repair the problem however they see fit - whether by scrapping or taking planets. To me, because of the numbers some groups now bust by, that means a month.
You're right that it's not easy to calculate the meterage, which is why we did it for you.
You're wrong that it's the staff's fault. If you don't know how much something counted against your meterage, you should have asked. I'm thinking most people simply glossed over that rule. It's not a problem because it's been found and is being corrected, but the blame is mutual across the board.
And I'm not implying that you are ignoring this problem, just saying that noone should.
You're wrong that it's the staff's fault. If you don't know how much something counted against your meterage, you should have asked. I'm thinking most people simply glossed over that rule. It's not a problem because it's been found and is being corrected, but the blame is mutual across the board.
And I'm not implying that you are ignoring this problem, just saying that noone should.
I never noticed that rule, myself, which as I think Dogman said is easy to do. The description of mantinence only mentions space-faring vessels, those built in shipyards, so I (obviously) wrongly assumed that it was only things built in shipyards (or space stations built in CYs) that counted...