+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: For the love of god! (/showthread.php?tid=22476)
For the love of god! - lw'nafh - 06-29-2009
' Wrote:Kila.Kanga .. I hope you will chose your words carefully. You are the ugly face of this community.I didn't lie, you engaged us without provocation, now, I'm off this thread.
you whine,OOC, OORP and much more while you are in game.. the irony is that you do all that while saying we are those who "OORP"
Let me explain you something about the RP we play. Its a squadron that : protect our home and our traders.. We do protect other traders as well.. part of our M.O.
We do not seek fights unless they are for the greater good.
Killa You don't like this game much correct? Why would you play here if your soul goal is to whine when you get a fair 2 bomber and a fighter against your cruiser and a saber fight?
Should we send one bomber against your Cruiser? or a light fighter? Please do yourself a favor and don't post here anymore.. consider this a friendlily goodbye, we can be nice, or you can see how cruel we can get. One more thing. We did not engage any pirate that is not OC or did not pirate someone right in front of our scanners. So please do not lie. We did meet Phate however.. and we found a way to communicate without the use of guns.
For the love of god! - -Zulz- - 06-29-2009
' Wrote:Well, considering you opened fire on me near FP 10 with no provocation, I'd say that you were being hypocritical.
Well, I can see this turning into a flame war, so if anyone wants to pick a bone with me, PM me.
Turning into a flame war? YOU started a flaming-thead, simply because your ship exploded. Now you acuse of rule violations without any proof in a public string. Im done talking to you.
For the love of god! - lw'nafh - 06-29-2009
' Wrote:Turning into a flame war? YOU started a flaming-thead, simply because your ship exploded. Now you acuse of rule violations without any proof in a public string. Im done talking to you.Once again I'm dragged back, I DIDN'T ACUSE THEM OF ANY RULE VIOLATIONS, they gave an engagement notice, but they attacked us without provocation! But the IMG CAN do that, but it's this whole death squad thing that's really off, they are IMG, not Vigilantes. Oh, and the first encounter, when I first posted, my ship never blew up, we WON.
For the love of god! - Wuselkobold - 06-29-2009
' Wrote:Read the stuff in the news bulletins, says somethig about Brets attacking IMG populations and a Tau war.Althoug i am new to Discovery i did my homework. I know that there is a a war going on in the Tau systems but i didn't know so far, that there is war between Bretonia and the IMG as well, but maybe i overlooked it - my fault then. I do know however, that the IMG ID restricts unlawful action of its owners to BMM targets in Taus and Omegas. Nor is the BAF the BMM, neither this incident happened in the Taus or Omegas. That was the point i was tying to make.
I'm talking about rule lawyering, not pirate rp.
' Wrote:Well the Bretonia armed forces Destroyer attacked us, we went in as self defence. When we finished up with him you came along, so we continued to defend ourselves, Sorry if you got caught in the mess but hey we won't stay still and let you kill us, and further evidence ask a BAF we talked to to clear our Problem up. And we were in Bering just stopping for a sec to let our squad catch up, we were heading to the omegas through rhineland, and Navy and Rhineland happen to get in a skirmish there. We watch with no engageing. So i don't see the problem there. And also Killa kanga ? What is your problem. And we are already kicking one of our squad mates out for trying to over do his RP rights in our squad. And we will not break any Neutral pacts with any unlawful group long as they keep there hands off img traders
As i stated above, i didn't know who started the fight and i was just trying to assist the allied cruiser. If he attacked you first, of course you had the right to defend yourself.
Since i am not a member in the official BAF faction i am not always up to date with the things happening around Bretonia, but i am tying to catch up.
Thank you for clearing the situation up.
For the love of god! - Athenian - 06-29-2009
Moderator notice: Avoid inflammatory posts or insults. Be excellent to each other. Or you might find the community has an even uglier face.
Back to the<strike> trial by forum </strike> hello's you guys were exchanging...
For the love of god! - pieguy259 - 06-29-2009
Yes. For the love of God!
...Sorry, are we not doing Poe references?
For the love of god! - Mobius-One - 06-29-2009
Right because you decided to stay Killa, you will get to hear a bit more.
We are IMG. The 118th tactical fighter squadron is not "MINERS" our fighters, and bombers are not meant to shoot rocks. The skills of the pilots that were selected for the mission of protection.. You see the outcast presence is not helping the IMG.. you are pirates, i don't understand why don't you understand that a war ship going into tau-23 or 37 is a very very hostile activity in our books, and we are being deployed to protect.
For the love of god! - JMScomp - 06-29-2009
Ok, I've seen you Mobius in-game. You do follow the engagement rules, and all-in-all your RP isn't bad. But you have to think of this bit that you said:
' Wrote:Let me explain you something about the RP we play. Its a squadron that : protect our home and our traders.. We do protect other traders as well.. part of our M.O.
Protecting you home and your traders. It is a good RP, though I fail to see why IMG would care about any traders other than their own, but regardless you DO stray away from that. If you were truly following this, it would mean you patrolling IMG territory and running escorts. Not hunting down each and every unlawful in sight even in their systems (and I've seen you go after more than just OC before even when they weren't pirating a trader).
That is the difference between a defensive and an offensive force, yours of which, by what you said, is supposed to be defensive. Granted there's nothing wrong with going to a system with many pirates in it that an IMG trader would be passing through (meaning one online and in communication with you at the time) to ensure his safe passage. That's what defenses are for.
' Wrote:We do not seek fights unless they are for the greater good.
Right now you are doing this to an extent. Look a factions like GMG, RepEx, and Gateway. They have their own fighting forces to defend themselves, even collecting bounties on those who've attacked or pirated them, but they aren't off playing rambo. If raiding is what you desire, perhaps a military or militia faction ID and RP would better suit your needs.
I'm not bashing you here, just offering some friendly advice from a more neutral point of view. I play as lawful, unlawful, smuggler and trader, so I view this from all their perspectives, not just one.
For the love of god! - Markam - 06-29-2009
Hmm..
Well, IMG and BAF are -not- at war, it really didnt cause the kusari-Bretonia war, that was just a very flimsy excuse, BMM and IMG arent even likely to shoot eachother in Tau even if they're allowed to, IMG -ARE- bretonia, a war with bretonia would be a civil war and not one IMG would survive long in. the CR and BAF are at war, but they're nothing to do with IMG at all. Furthermore, IMG doesnt have a military, its a corp and has some security, but its not a military power and I dont really think its a good idea to portray it as such.
The IMG ID is honestly just asking to be abused, wide ZOI, its own shipline and the ability to use capital ships mostly unrestricted (except by players), no other corp can even go as far as Gunboats, with merc/freelancer ID yeah, but no respectable corp does that. The IMG ID's current state and the remnants of capital ship use is mostly from CR, the IMG| faction hasnt taken the initiative to fix it, though these fellas are currently fighter/bombers, I cant help but expect capital ships coming sooner or later.
On the BAF incident, just some indie cap as usual, but if you screw around in Bretonia hunting pirates that are not attacking IMG shipments or attempt to act as a military, you will be told to sling your hook or be removed.
For the love of god! - -Zulz- - 06-29-2009
' Wrote:Protecting you home and your traders. It is a good RP, though I fail to see why IMG would care about any traders other than their own, but regardless you DO stray away from that. If you were truly following this, it would mean you patrolling IMG territory and running escorts. Not hunting down each and every unlawful in sight even in their systems (and I've seen you go after more than just OC before even when they weren't pirating a trader).
IMG ID says can hunt pirates in their ZOI, and where they have a base, not 'defend' against pirates there. Falkland base in an IMG base in Tau 37, giving the right to attack a rule-lawyering OC cruiser in Tau 37. The can defend TRADERS anywhere, not only IMG traders. Please read the rules and IDs before you tell people, and other people who werent there, what is wrong and right. And btw while they wer escorting me, I asked them if they wanted to go through california instead of colorado because I saw some pirated in california, they said no that would be oorp. So much for that.
' Wrote:Well, IMG and BAF are -not- at war, it really didnt cause the kusari-Bretonia war, that was just a very flimsy excuse, BMM and IMG arent even likely to shoot eachother in Tau even if they're allowed to, IMG -ARE- bretonia, a war with bretonia would be a civil war and not one IMG would survive long in. the CR and BAF are at war, but they're nothing to do with IMG at all. Furthermore, IMG doesnt have a military, its a corp and has some security, but its not a military power and I dont really think its a good idea to portray it as such.Wasnt there but seems the BAF attacked them, not vice-versa. Some text ingame says there was fighting between IMG and Bret... but I guess what started a war is always open to interpetation on bith sides.
' Wrote:The IMG ID is honestly just asking to be abused, wide ZOI, its own shipline and the ability to use capital ships mostly unrestricted (except by players), no other corp can even go as far as Gunboats, with merc/freelancer ID yeah, but no respectable corp does that. The IMG ID's current state and the remnants of capital ship use is mostly from CR, the IMG| faction hasnt taken the initiative to fix it, though these fellas are currently fighter/bombers, I cant help but expect capital ships coming sooner or later.'Screw around in Bretonia hunting pirates?' The ID specifically says you can do that. The IMG ID can be abused? Lets be honnest... all this flaming of them is pirates lobbying against them because they are messing up your bugget. And ur using not very effective rule lawyering and wrong oorp accusations to achieve your goals. Now you want to change the IMG ID so NO ONE will ever interfere with your pirating? Why not change the rules to 'you arent allowed to defend your self against pirates' while we are at it, which is really what you are trying to achieve.
On the BAF incident, just some indie cap as usual, but if you screw around in Bretonia hunting pirates that are not attacking IMG shipments or attempt to act as a military, you will be told to sling your hook or be removed.
EDIT: You are aware that you were defending a LAWFUL BAF cruiser attacking img fighters and bombers when they were hunting pirates, like their iD specifically says they can, right? Duh?