2. Combat by consent only, except in the designated combat systems (6-CZ49, PVH8-0).

Combat system (6-CZ49, PVH8-0) specific additional rules

1. No fighting or other aggressive actions at the station and gates (no targeted or AoE warp inhibiting modules).
2. No capitals in PVH8-0

1. No fighting or other aggressive actions at the station, gates, nor prior to entering the acceleration gates (no targeted or AoE warp inhibiting modules).

Accel gates are also basically a warptozero situation, aka it'll get camped and then you'll be crying about people blobbing in another thread. stuff like this just complicates things, it doesn't solve the basic problem.

I'm no coder but here's how I would pseudocode the ensuing action, should we implement this solution.

IF SubcapShipOnGate WHEN WarpImmunity=False THEN goto GateBumpAndMassiveSuperBlobAttack

Instead of using acceleration gates (since they have the drawback of not being able to warp in at range) you could have the filter in place for anyone using the system gates (star gates?) to enter EZA-FM. To prevent someone from using a capital to bring officer mods into EZA-FM you could cyno block the system using code similiar to the pos module or code similar to the cyno blocking for incursions. This would automatically prevent any capital usage in those systems as well thus eliminating the need to police the no caps in those systems rule.

For fighting on stations/gates you could make the station/gate guns act like concord and instakill anyone doing any aggressive action on those grids.

AFAIK concord is still enabled in Sisi highsec so live EFT as you put it is already in the game. Go to any highsec system, fit ship you wish to test, undock, fire 1 volley at the station (attacking the station does trigger concord right?...maybe i should go test that haha!), watch concord blap you, get live EFT results from the loss mail.

To anyone following the rules the measures I suggested are already "in place" since those people would not even attempt to light a cyno in PVH8-0 nor attempt to attack anyone on the stations/gates. These measures simply provide actual unbreakable rules to the rules you already said no one should break but they totally can and apparently aren't receiving any punishment for doing so. I don't understand how that is in any way making any part of Sisi something other than a test environment since those following the rules would not be doing anything different.

Also we did just go over how since you are not a coder you have no idea how much coding it would take to do that (thou I will admit the station/gate gun thing might get measy since IDK how yall wrote the aggression mechanic code...but since you aren't a coder neither do you know how measy or not measy it would be to do so)

as i said last time there was seeded/reedem system supers.....no bugs got reported no testing got done and local was this every 5 minutes "X UP FOR CAP FLEET" Then you ended up with 35 godtank supers on beacon at 0 popping cruisers

It has and no one is coding anything special in to accomodate supers and deadspace mods.
Can we get a lock on this.

2. Combat by consent only, except in the designated combat systems (6-CZ49, PVH8-0).

Combat system (6-CZ49, PVH8-0) specific additional rules

1. No fighting or other aggressive actions at the station and gates (no targeted or AoE warp inhibiting modules).
2. No capitals in PVH8-0

If reading is too hard for you then please do us all a favor and go somewhere else as that issue has been addressed already in this thread.

here I'll requote this just for you and your bias against supers The above is a direct quote from the current test server rules, is that simple enough for you to understand that preventing super blobs against sub caps is already in place and no coding or any other whining from you needed.

Coming from the "Coder" That's trying to tell CCP how do do their job in a thread...


Also

IF(ModMetaValue="meta0",pass,IF(ModMetaValue="meta1",pass,IF(ModMetaValue="meta2",pass,IF(ModMetaValue="meta3",pass,IF(ModMetaValue="meta4",pass,IF(ModMetaValue="meta5",pass,fail))))))

Just needs to be

IF(ModMetaValue<=5,pass,IF(ModMetaValue>5,fail,fail))

Learn to Streamline Psuedocode
You don't need an IF statement for every single Meta level due to the fact that Meta 5 is T2 and anything Higher is Faction/Deadspace/Officer, It's Either Less or Equal to 5 or Greater Than.

Aggression agianst NPCs And/Or Stations isn't considered aggression on a player, You can shoot station all you want. Nobody will drop a coin to report you.

I'll give you a D- for your effort and a F for talking about stuff you know nothing about. "meta 0" is as text value not a number value in the show info and since that is likely the case in the database then a <=5 would never work as text values dont have numerical equivalents to run a mathematical equation on...hence why I broke it down the way I did in my formula. Now the coding language of Spreadsheets does have a method of converting a text value into a numerical value, however adding that in the above code would not make a very good example since I nor you know what coding language EVE is written to know (and i highly doubt it's in spreadsheet code) if THAT language also has that function cause if it dont then the example would not make much sense.

Oh and you might want to give https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4812310#post4812310 a read as CCP Goliath ain't a coder so yes he needs "someone" (whether that be me or someone who works at CCP and is a coder) to tell him how the code should be written. Not to mention your usage of "IF(ModMetaValue>5,fail,fail)" is entirely unnecessary and could be replaced with just "fail" (hence why I gave you a D- for effort since you didn't get your code written correctly but tried to school me on mine)

IMO i think everything should be seeded solving the issue of building supers, if your actually testing game mech's or combat and dont wanna be blobbed go somewhere else for actual testing purposes, i see the combat system as a place for people to test personal fits and derp around/ have fun, from my understanding of the rules you can have combat in any system providing both sides agree to it, so fleet ops and such can be done other places if people choose to fleet up and stage it.

most good testing of alot is done solo or in small groups with a certain bug there hunting, so to me saying "i cant test anything because i get blobbed" is not a valid statement IMO

CCP Goliath is Minmatar, Hi'll probably just throw Booze at someone to code it for him... or you know... be a QA Director :|

you didnt read my post did you, there's thousands of systems to test in, use them, 6-C is nothing more than a derp fest, dont like it go to another system, CCP doesnt cater to whiners on tranq, why should they do it on SISI, seed the supers and all mods, people who wanna actually test have ways at there disposal if they choose to use them

go "test" when 45 nyxes are chasing cruisers around 6-c then come back and post.

ignore that guy, he hasnt read a single post anyone has made in any thread yet. he's just trolling cause he's afraid someone will get better at flying supers and him end up losing his super...assuming he has one to begin with

The better question is where an ISD to delete his trolls when you need one?

im not trolling anyone, and ive spent the last hour reading post's, im just making a realistic point, i dont have a super nor do i ever want one on tranq, i can fly them and have, but that doesnt mean i dont have an opinion on the matter