By "unintentional" I meant they break a rule because they do not know what they do is not allowed and sanctionable. For example: the guy plays a very very mean and bloodthirsty pirate, and he sometimes kills his pray after he paid or fulfilled the demand (let's say, as a punishment for trying to run first), because he does not know it is a rule violation. He gets sanctioned, despite he did not mean to break any rules. If he knew that killing the victim after the demand was met is against the rules (because it is written in the rules), he would alter his RP to meet the requirements of the server rules.
I know it is very mean to kill someone after paying in the first place (and anyone with a common sense would not do it without a strong RP reason), but it can happen, and if I am the victim and I tell the guy it is against the rules, he can say "What, it is not mentioned in the rules anywhere" and then he will be surprised when he sees his ship completely stripped as a punishment.
I proposed this solely to provide "protection" from the dangers and damage this "unwritten" rule might cause.
(12-17-2013, 01:06 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: [ -> ]Exception is that of course the pirate victim should not give the attacker a roleplay reason to have at him again.
This would likely be the main thing we use as context on whether to process it or not. The admins do have brains to think about things, and I heard that some of us even play the game so have a feel for how things are.
In Spazzy's specific example, and in most cases where IDs do not allow credit piracy, even if you accept it there could be plenty of RP reason to continue the hostile encounter or let them go (despite technically not pirating them). Up to the players, and the intent usually shines through for the above judgement.
Summer, I know the Admins have the brains to make a proper decision in this matter, with this thread I'm only trying to say some players might not have the brains not to commit this violation in the first place. And upgrading the rules might eliminate a few sanction request, making your "paperwork" pile a bit smaller. Perhaps.
Cannot be killed without a good and logical RP reason should be in the rules.
For E.G, you can't just kill a trader after he's complied with your demand because "you don't like DSE" or some other stupid reason, however, if they bad mouth you, or call the Navy or whatever, you can kill them, you should also be allowed to kill someone for grassing you up (e.g a Freelancer that you let go coz he's in a freighter).
Recently a trader said to me "I don't have any money you idiot", that was a bad idea, if he'd been polite about it I may have let him go, but he's dead now.
Another time a trader said something like "pirate scum! I tell navy!" when he was 6K away, unfortunately for him, the lane came back up, so I jumped in it, jumped out, CDd him, and took him out. Then I got load of abuse over private chat which was nice, I love it when that happens, it used to happen a lot, recently, there are a lot of silent traders, and they don't even have the decency to insult me in private chat ooRP. Even when they had 50m worth of ore.
Bathing in trader tears is both cleansing and satisfying, miner tears even more so.
Is it a sanction-able offence to demand 100% of cargo?
Because it's easy to do that and get blue messages all day, no trader is going to throw away all of their cargo without trying to run. Most of them take no notice of the "Can't re-enter system" rule anyway.
It's rather amusing when a player says "HELP A PIRATE HERE! NAVY HELP!!!!".
But it's in local, not system
The ID rules on piracy which overrule the server rules state very clearly that people can only be shot if the demand isn't met. It doesn't have to specifically state that if the demand is met, they can't be shot.
Well, I guess it's up to what kind of reputation a pirate gets as to how he wants future interactions to go. For example: if I run into Pirate X...and I know, either from previous encounters, or from hearing about it from others via comms or whatnot, that Pirate X is a dishonorable dog who kills traders after they have met his demands, I will be very hesitant to submit myself to his demand.
If a pirate is known to be more "benevolent" I might be more willing to take my chances with a parlay.
"Not biting the hand that feeds you..." That's kinda the underlying thought.
I don't play to grief other players, my demands are always logical and the trader doesn't lose out, I RP well with them if they want to, but most don't, and a lot of the time there isn't time to have a friendly chat in the middle of a trade lane in NY, however, I have had friendly chat with miners on many occasion.
The only thing I can think of doing in my defence is to post one of my encounters:
Quote:[13.12.2013 07:03:23] SilverOcelot.: Alright Don
[13.12.2013 07:03:29] SilverOcelot.: I want 10 million from you
[13.12.2013 07:03:33] SilverOcelot.: Or you're dead
[13.12.2013 07:03:41] Cloaking device off
[13.12.2013 07:04:00] DonCarlo: Oi! A shadow!
[13.12.2013 07:04:12] DonCarlo: How are ye mate?!
[13.12.2013 07:04:24] SilverOcelot.: Well thanks
[13.12.2013 07:04:31] DonCarlo: 10 mil, eh?
[13.12.2013 07:04:33] Rabla: y have bug man end no can miming
[13.12.2013 07:04:54] DonCarlo: Seems a bit steep...
[13.12.2013 07:05:02] SilverOcelot.: I think not
[13.12.2013 07:05:03] Don't use F1 or disconnect when interacting with other players.
[13.12.2013 07:05:08] SilverOcelot.: You make a lot of money from this ore
[13.12.2013 07:05:15] DonCarlo: Can't argue with that
[13.12.2013 07:05:27] DonCarlo: Blast! me shield!
[13.12.2013 07:05:35] SilverOcelot.: *laughs*
[13.12.2013 07:05:46] DonCarlo: Oi! sorry!
[13.12.2013 07:05:55] SilverOcelot.: Do you want to pay?
[13.12.2013 07:05:56] DonCarlo: Been having problems with te guns all day
[13.12.2013 07:06:03] DonCarlo: Oh sure, sure
[13.12.2013 07:06:12] SilverOcelot.: Okie dokie
[13.12.2013 07:06:19] DonCarlo: Speaking of guns though, what is that fancy gun ye got there?
[13.12.2013 07:06:24] SilverOcelot.: The miner has already paid
[13.12.2013 07:06:28] DonCarlo: Done take me shields down?
[13.12.2013 07:06:35] SilverOcelot.: Ze Mortar
[13.12.2013 07:07:02] DonCarlo: Tis ze effective...
[13.12.2013 07:07:22] SilverOcelot.: yep yep yep
[13.12.2013 07:07:31] SilverOcelot.: Mostly use it as warning shot...
[13.12.2013 07:07:36] DonCarlo: If this blasted miner could fill faster than molasses on a cold morn, I would ha been out of ere
[13.12.2013 07:07:52] DonCarlo: My loss, your gain then
[13.12.2013 07:07:54] SilverOcelot.: OK, how about 8?
[13.12.2013 07:08:00] DonCarlo: Unless you're in cahoots
[13.12.2013 07:08:09] DonCarlo: I refuse that malarchy!
[13.12.2013 07:08:13] SilverOcelot.: A small discount...
[13.12.2013 07:08:20] DonCarlo: I'll pay 10 and no more!
[13.12.2013 07:08:36] DonCarlo: *hic
[13.12.2013 07:08:43] SilverOcelot.: Oh really? *mutters to himself* this guy's crazy!
[13.12.2013 07:09:06] /leave
[13.12.2013 07:09:09] DonCarlo: Oh no, what have I done now...
[13.12.2013 07:09:16] SilverOcelot.: Incoming pirate
[13.12.2013 07:09:18] DonCarlo: Umm
[13.12.2013 07:09:32] SilverOcelot.: Cmon, pay and I'll be outta here
[13.12.2013 07:09:34] You have received 10.000.000 credits from DonCarlo
[13.12.2013 07:09:38] SilverOcelot.: before this gets ugly...
[13.12.2013 07:09:41] DonCarlo: Go get em tiger
[13.12.2013 07:10:37] SilverOcelot.: Oh, just another Rogue, seems I'll stay until he leaves
[13.12.2013 07:10:44] Drego: so sirs, you wich to mine in the alberta system
[13.12.2013 07:10:51] SilverOcelot.: I don't know this guy, I won't let him extort again
[13.12.2013 07:11:01] DonCarlo: I wich only on a broom!
[13.12.2013 07:11:21] SilverOcelot.: These guys have both paid, they're now under my protection
[13.12.2013 07:12:04] Drego: sigh to bad was hoping on a nice payday
[13.12.2013 07:12:27] DonCarlo: Ye should be wishing on a grammar and spelling lesson!
[13.12.2013 07:12:38] SilverOcelot.: You did, and he had a Rouge IFF
[13.12.2013 07:12:41] DonCarlo: Poor lad...
[13.12.2013 07:13:26] Drego: will depart to if they have payed you off already
[13.12.2013 07:14:35] DonCarlo: Alright then gents, seems my time is done here
[13.12.2013 07:15:08] DonCarlo: Thanks both for your incompetently slow mining and friendly extortion
[13.12.2013 07:16:05] DonCarlo: Bloody yanks...
In short, I take my time, demand isn't unreasonable, I even offer him a discount because he RPed, and I would have accepted less, another pirate turns up, I decide to wait around until he leaves as the guys have already paid.
To top it all off, I'm in a Crusier, I could have ordered him to pay within X seconds and double mortared him, but I didn't, I RPed with them, then protected them from another pirate afterwards.
Regarding my age, I'm way younger than 30 buddy, never heard of retro gamer fans? I'm of the belief that graphics count for nothing, and gameplay is everything.
I never said anything about wanting to force people to drop 100% of cargo, I merely asked if it was against the rules.
The tears I enjoy bathing in are from silent traders, or traders that make stupid ooRP comments like "kill me now". Or ones that run when my demand is one million on 10 mil worth of cargo, then complain afterwards.
I agree with the first point, after the demand is met the pirate ought to move on. As for if the trader antagonizes the pirate afterwards, or simply just tries stalling him through pointless conversation (which would all be inrp unless otherwise stated) consider that a 're-engagement', I.E. if the trader pays the pirate, it is given the option to leave immediately and move on. If at that time it decides to continue talking/interacting with the pirate, it causes a 're-engagement' and the pirate can then issue another demand if they choose, perhaps for more money, or simply to sieze communications and leave the system. Basically it would reset the rule as if the first attack hadn't happened. If they simply want to carry on with just the RP afterwards, its up to them.
If the trader wants to mouth off or talk to the pirate about the encounter make it // oorp. So if he mouths of without the // its inrp and can cause a re-engagement. If its // and legitimate communication, the pirate can't take that as cause to re-engage.