It seems to me that if a player has no disables left he/she should be dead in space. I've had players attack and attack and attack while having no disables left...this "invulnerability" isn't very realistic and should be stopped.
What i would propose would be to have anyone who gets disabled down to 0 be placed on a 24 hour timer. This would reflect the fact that they are indeed out of action, would give them time to reflect on their actions and perhaps time to fall off their opponents ship log. Also, if someone is disabled to 0 they shouldn't be able to hack, guard planets, raid or otherwise engage in PVP actions. Non-aggressive missions should be their only activities until the timer is up...24 hours is just a suggestion.

sounds good, but if you hack or disable anyone your count goes up. i disabled a few people and got my actions up to 35 disables, hacks/raids do the same thing... i like the 24 hour timer tho. if you can set sum1 to zero they should be out for a while. especially if you manage to get em negative...

-1

If they disable/hack/raid then their counter will increase again, so then people could retaliate again. Also, if they're guarding a planet then they can still be disabled even if the counter is 0, so that's not a problem. I think this change would just force people to stop doing PvP for a while, whereas the current system lets them keep going at the expense of opening themselves up again.

I understand what yer saying about the counter going back up as they DISABLE, HACK, or RAID...however, this should not be allowable because until a successful A/H/R occurs that person has invulnerability. I was recently attacked by multiple people at once, and tho they were many levels below me, they were also all at 0 disables. So these ships, who were all 0'd out did their best to disable me...unsuccessfully mind you but nonetheless, had no business being able to. I could do nothing but defend and I find that circumstance wrong.

One other point that i think serves the game well, is that there are many disputes and more than one war going on. If the timer system was used, it would better reflect a true conflict...as it stands now, taking an opponent out doesn't mean a whole lot. In fact not having any disables is a HUGE advantage...taking someone down to 0 and out of the conflict...and forcing them to do missions that doesn't involve any aggressive action is an appropriate penalty not only to them, but also to their legion, in this captains view.

I agree with manus. Yes once you zero them they can't be attacked again, but it's up to them if they want to sacrifice this. In our recent little shindig with DS, I had almost 50 dissables raids and hacks on me, they didn't dissable and raid me hardly at all but they zerod out my hacks. So basically if someone is zeroed out, they've already got an ass kickin. IF they want to keep playing it should be their choice.

But they should not have immunity. Being 0d out should be a penalty, not a plus.

Actually the original intention was for it to be a plus, to keep people from pounding other people too much.

And with what you're suggesting, as soon as the timer was reset somebody could be hit 5 times and then not be allowed to do anything.

Being hacked to 0 is far easier to dismiss than being disabled. If ur hacked to 0...no one can hack u until u have a successful hack...if ur disabled to 0 then u can attack till ur hearts content and as long as u don't disable, u cant be touched...i spent buko bucks having to restore 6000 hull several times...thats a real advantage if there are several peeps attacking...all u got to do is have energy and let someone else get the kill and u can go on indefinitely.

Yes, and if they can come up with a way to fix that that would be nice, but your method is much worse in my opinion, I'd rather things be the way they are now than your way. PvP sucks enough as it is, between everybody having a ton of traps and having a whole Legion after you because of 1 disable, what you're proposing would be the nail in PvP's coffin.

Just don't repair, let them disable you, then kill them.

I don't think it would be worse by any means...if anything it would allow the 0d person to recoup some losses, to re-trap, gain energy...re-think their actions, ask for a truce...let tempers cool...do a number of things. Most importantly, it would temper the "revenge" impulse that seems to lead to foul language, hard feelings and ugliness we all endure in here. A 0ing out of someone should be a statement that enough is enough, you've been beaten now go away, it should not be a licence of immunity.
I would think that even if this "immunity" was designed to protect the weak, setting off someones traps should count the same as a disable. Meaning if u attack and set off a trap, then ur disable count should go from 0 to 1 for every trap u set off.

I agree.

I agree... this getting attacked by guys you can't attack back is serious BS. They eat up resources and you have no recourse against them but to turtle.

If some is 0 maybe make it that they can reset there count and fight again that way they can be hit back.

I would say that instead of a timer to keep them out of any battles that any aggressive move be it attack, hack whatever when hey are zeroed out gives a 1 to their disables so that they can be attacked again. This way if your zeroed out and you just want to hide until that wears off you can but if you want to continue to be aggressive you can get attacked back. This seems more fair to all involved and keeps the PVP going.

That could work.

while 0'ed out, they can still attack. But ass soon as they get another disable, hack, or raid the count increases.

Also you not safe when defending a planet and your timers are zero.. I found that out the hard way (8 disables in 8 hours)