Brethren of the Brick Seas (BoBS) Introduction and Starting Thread

[Legostone]

There have been a couple of small rule updates.

While I'm not exactly interested in building a larger art building, weren't those supposed to only be available through upgrading?

[Jacob Nion]

While I'm not exactly interested in building a larger art building, weren't those supposed to only be available through upgrading?

In the case of cultural buildings upgrading means that you first have to build a small, license it, then build the medium, unlicense the small, license the medium instead and so on. As far as I understand same with fortresses.

[SkaForHire]

Just to clarify, FORTs do have to be built in order still.

[Capt Wolf]

In the case of cultural buildings upgrading means that you first have to build a small, license it, then build the medium, unlicense the small, license the medium instead and so on. As far as I understand same with fortresses.

How does one go about "unlicensing" a build? Use the adjudication form, or is there some other provision for it?

[Kai NRG]

In the case of cultural buildings upgrading means that you first have to build a small, license it, then build the medium, unlicense the small, license the medium instead and so on. As far as I understand same with fortresses.

That whole process is actually also very inconvenient for automation; but it's more complicated and is not involved in this rule change.

Currently you are not expected to actually "unlicense;" just license the next one and your other license is supposed to automatically expire; but this is easier said than done.

[gedren_y]

I would think it would be like when someone wants to upgrade their ship, as in when a ship is re-MOCed to conform to a higher class. I would think the builder would therefore be need to pay the difference in the cost between the already held lesser license and the greater license, since it is in effect the same place. This makes the most sense to me.

[Kai NRG]

I would think it would be like when someone wants to upgrade their ship, as in when a ship is re-MOCed to conform to a higher class. I would think the builder would therefore be need to pay the difference in the cost between the already held lesser license and the greater license, since it is in effect the same place. This makes the most sense to me.

Yes; the problem is programming that into the automation system.

[Capn Frank]

I would think it would be like when someone wants to upgrade their ship, as in when a ship is re-MOCed to conform to a higher class. I would think the builder would therefore be need to pay the difference in the cost between the already held lesser license and the greater license, since it is in effect the same place. This makes the most sense to me.

That whole process is actually also very inconvenient for automation; but it's more complicated and is not involved in this rule change.

Currently you are not expected to actually "unlicense;" just license the next one and your other license is supposed to automatically expire; but this is easier said than done.

Up-licenses for ships are all manual entry, but ships are easier to calculate than properties with the lack of yield. To unlicense a vessel, I would actually recommend submitting another Ship license response, but add Unlicense to the prefix or at least adding a note about unlicensing. Automatically, you will be charged again for the license. When I do periodically review new Ship License Responses, I'll adjust the fees accordingly with the unlicensed vessel and new vessel. I do have a "check box" that verifies that the entry has been reviewed.

Pretty much the same story for Up-licensing, only add a note about up-licensing.

[Bregir]

A question to the monster that is sistershipping.

Let us imagine that my vessel is captured, and I sistership her. And that I then bid on the auction and win the sistership. Would that be considered unfair?

It seems to me that who wins the captured ship should be irrelevant for whether the sistershipping is allowed. In any case, payment would fall for both vessels.

[Maxim I]

My point of view about this (which is only the case in auctions):

Sistershipping is only allowed if the original ship has been auctionned for the original licence cost or more

[dr_spock]

A question to the monster that is sistershipping.

Let us imagine that my vessel is captured, and I sistership her. And that I then bid on the auction and win the sistership. Would that be considered unfair?

It seems to me that who wins the captured ship should be irrelevant for whether the sistershipping is allowed. In any case, payment would fall for both vessels.

It is basically build once, paid twice if you can get lucky through auction, future MRCA capture, etc. of the original ship. Although, sistershipping does not encourage building. Maybe some limit on the number of times a MOC can be sistershipped.

[Kai NRG]

Currently (and this most certainly will change) the rules on sistershipping are very loose. It's just a matter of paying the license and giving it a new name. So, yeah, you could sistership a ship you lost and then buy it back as well. Or you could sistership a ship before you lost it. I don't think anyone has done this, but the rules certainly allow for it.

[Bregir]

I disagree with your second statement. It has always been clear that sistershipping was only for those who lost their ships. If this is not in the rules, that is an error.

You could never just multiply your ships. (Unless you have had some #¤#"%¤" up discussions in leadership, that is... )

[CelesAurivern]

Or you could sistership a ship before you lost it. I don't think anyone has done this, but the rules certainly allow for it.

This is a joke, right?

[Maxim I]

I guess so that should be a joke that last one.

We can all take an example from Faladrin:

He managed to get back his original ship and put his (even free) sistership out of service!!!

This is most certainly a very noble deed!

[Phadeout]

Clearly nobody wants that type of sistershipping in the game but it is true to life, there would have been any number of sistershipped vessels because a shipwright would copy his own design again and again.

Just to reiterate though, this mechanic has no place in this type of game IMHO.

[Dukesc]

I think that sistershipping is fine for those who wish or need to do it. An example of why I feel this way is because there are people out there with limited bricks and time who dedicated a huge amount of time and resources into a ship they have on display and won't destroy. They may have made it for the sole purpose of BoBS, but are then told after using it say one month to rebuild or you can't use your masterpiece. In my opinion, this could drive away would be hardcore BoBS users who may one day again find the time and resources to build another masterpiece to display next to their first one.

Aside from that it is a totally realistic game mechanic to have multiple sisterships, just like how it would be in real life.

If it was insisted on to put more effort into sistersshipping maybe we could have the owner do as little as taking new pics with a revised crew and/or armament, or do as much as make adjustments to it that would change it's classification. Maybe a 3A could be converted to a 3T by removing guns and adding a crane or 3F by changing rigging plus other things.

[Bregir]

Dukesc: We have had all those discussions already, and reached basically the same points you reach.

However, the specific discussion here was when it is ok to do it. And the general rule is that you can sistership your moc when you have lost it, and not before.

[dr_spock]

I think the original spirit of sistershipping is for destroyed ships. http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=118542

If a vessel is destroyed, we encourage builders to MOC a new vessel for the next license. However, we know that that could be time-consuming, so you can attach a new license to an old MOC that was licensed previously even if it has been long disassembled. Do give your ship a new name though. We can assume that your character(s) went to the old shipwright and bought a sister ship.

[Kai NRG]

dr_spock is correct as to the basic intention.

I certainly do not like the unlimited sistershipping rule and was astonished when I first heard of it. But I believe that Ska has made it clear that this is actually the way things are set up right now. I'm just repeating him, admittedly more explicitly. And I'm also repeating him when I say that it is definitely going to change.

I don't know how correct it is to say that as a general rule you can't sistership your MOC until you lost it. That has been general policy, and I feel, as probably many others do, that it should be the rule, but I'm not sure at all that it is the rule (rather the opposite!).

[Bregir]

Well, Kai - let us follow the spirit of the law, rather than the letter, if that is the case.

I cannot remember Ska saying anything like that, though.

[Dukesc]

Dukesc: We have had all those discussions already, and reached basically the same points you reach.

However, the specific discussion here was when it is ok to do it. And the general rule is that you can sistership your moc when you have lost it, and not before.

I agree with that and apologize if I didn't bring any new ideas or content to the discussion.

[Captain Becker]

If I may say my humble opinion on the sistershipping matter, and sorry if this has been said already and im just repeating somebody:

I think when Ska has the time, it would be vice to make the rule somewhat restricting like: When you loose your ship, you will be able to use the sistershipping for once or twice after that. After that, a new ship is required to be made. Or something relating to that. I dont see the problem whit sistershipping, as I understand that most of us dont have the time and the bricks, as some have said before, however, theres also the Digital way of making ships to those who havent got the bricks. therefore sistershipping is fine IF some slight modifications can be made in the rigging or changing the class etc. as suggested.

Fair winds and calm seas!

Yours truly:

Captain Charles J. Becker

[Maxim I]

Not everyone likes building in LDD. As my guilty pleasure are Lego Expositions, I love building with real bricks so I can show it to the world.

Even on micro level: my fiancee is proud every time I show her my creations, except for the ones made in LDD :p

So the sistershipping rule should exist for people like me who spend too much money on a masterpiece and who never would like to destroy it...

[Elostirion]

Is there already a detailed map of island #1, formerly known as "The Pig", now known as "Isla Philip"?