+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: attacking /engagement (/showthread.php?tid=19029)
attacking /engagement - Tavarez - 04-09-2009
A CD should not count as an attack, its the only way to stop a ship and have a decent RP session without the baddie just bolting away.
Most unlawfuls dont stop when requested to do so in chat, which either ends in a gunfight due to non compliance.
With a CD you can stop the ship, RP and even let the person go after wards, no bloodshed:)
attacking /engagement - Quorg - 04-09-2009
' Wrote:A CD should not count as an attack, its the only way to stop a ship and have a decent RP session without the baddie just bolting away.
Most unlawfuls dont stop when requested to do so in chat, which either ends in a gunfight due to non compliance.
With a CD you can stop the ship, RP and even let the person go after wards, no bloodshed:)
So I'm driving down the highway with my truckload of legal or less-than-legal goods.
A police officer or highway robber starts following me, then shoots my tires out (let's even say that with time my tires will re-inflate).
He claims that "it's just to have a nice chat".
Are you really going to believe him?
attacking /engagement - Tavarez - 04-09-2009
' Wrote:So I'm driving down the highway with my truckload of legal or less-than-legal goods.
A police officer or highway robber starts following me, then shoots my tires out (let's even say that with time my tires will re-inflate).
He claims that "it's just to have a nice chat".
Are you really going to believe him?
Just a routine stop Sir, carry on...
attacking /engagement - cmfalconer - 04-09-2009
No. You would have stopped already if you were a law abiding citizen. If you were not, or if you were not heeding the warnings of said officer...then yeah, you'd be getting your tires shot out (extreme situation yes...common sense would prevail).
The Highway robber wouldn't care about your tires, or you. He'll shoot them out anyway so you can't escape...or do worse to you.
attacking /engagement - El Nino - 04-09-2009
Meh, this only serves as rulelawyering.. Isn't it quite obvious when someone engages you?
If he's any much of a roleplayer he screams insults and opens fire... If close enough and at the right speed regular gunfire, if cruising a CD... but most of all he should be screaming well placed insults. Nonflaming, Nonpersonal, without adult language. In character. Say ** suck on my salamanca this squiddy **... I think that constitues and engagement notice, and most of all marks the beginning of combat.
attacking /engagement - Unseelie - 04-09-2009
' Wrote:really now? So when you CD someone to scan his hold because he is not stopping meaning you will 100% Destroy him? That is just wrong i hope you do not act like that.Right. The BPA, for example, scans -before- CDing. If you're talking about people trading over Malta, which is what I suspect, these traders pass right by you. You can well scan before stopping them, and messing up their profits.
I would suggest that CDing counts as a hostile act. It is a gross overuse of the force it takes to scan a cargo. Cargo scans are passive...CDs are not.
attacking /engagement - sovereign - 04-09-2009
Advanced Cargo Scanners are your FRIENDS. You can scan people before they get into CD range. If you have suspicions about their cargo, then CD'ing them might be excusable. But really, police types should have Adv. Cargo Scanners and shouldn't need to stop people unless scanners indicate something funny.
EDIT: Wait a minute, this thread had nothing to do with revision of the CD rule to begin with. Why are we arguing about that and not the 'engagement' vs 'attack' bit? Come to think of it, I actually like the idea that if we trade a few blows and then come to a diplomatic agreement, rules don't mandate someone "loses"...
attacking /engagement - darthbeck - 04-10-2009
' Wrote:Advanced Cargo Scanners are your FRIENDS. You can scan people before they get into CD range. If you have suspicions about their cargo, then CD'ing them might be excusable. But really, police types should have Adv. Cargo Scanners and shouldn't need to stop people unless scanners indicate something funny.
EDIT: Wait a minute, this thread had nothing to do with revision of the CD rule to begin with. Why are we arguing about that and not the 'engagement' vs 'attack' bit? Come to think of it, I actually like the idea that if we trade a few blows and then come to a diplomatic agreement, rules don't mandate someone "loses"...
my point. is that there is a problem when you CD someone, and that someone has a large capital vessel. and they open fire without a word.
if they are allowwed to do that. well. i will make a gunboat with razers and pulses so that i can pirate, and then when the police cd me, i will fire all of my guns at them. killing the police instintly. pvp abuse anyone?
attacking /engagement - hack - 04-10-2009
' Wrote:my point. is that there is a problem when you CD someone, and that someone has a large capital vessel. and they open fire without a word.
if they are allowwed to do that. well. i will make a gunboat with razers and pulses so that i can pirate, and then when the police cd me, i will fire all of my guns at them. killing the police instintly. pvp abuse anyone?
Blindly shooting at a target and getting you butt handed to you for not verifying who you are shooting at?
Priceless.
Unless you were TRYING to pirate a carrier class ship....
Don't blindly cd people. Easy as.
CDing is an attack.
And stop bringing up this example, it is making you look real bad.
attacking /engagement - obnoxious1 - 04-10-2009
Simply stated in the rules..
Quote:*For purposes of these Rules, an attack is draining shields to 50% or lower, or hull damage, or when a Cruise Disruptor is fired. Intentional ramming of any large ship is also considered an attack.There for it is considered an attack if you are CD'd