' Wrote:Here is the question, was it a rule violation, since i never asked him for tax?

' Wrote:Agreed.

1. Fire CD or Drop the TradeLane
2. State Demand
3. Drop thier shield if no response or they hit cruise.
4. STILL no response or they are trying to run. Turn em into a fine pink mist, myself included.:P

What i don't agree with is the "deal as much damage as you want" before stating that demand.

Sure, dropping thier shield is a real good way to get the point across. It lets them know you CAN introduce them to a vacuum at will. However, once your beating on thier hull youve allready passed the point of "piracy" and are in a full blown "assault". In my opinion anyways.

Quote:So an insurance company is going to cough up 110 million credits to replace an Advanced Train that a Trader had destroyed by refusing to pay a pirate 4 million credits?

Nuts.

No insurance company in this galaxy or any other would ever write a policy allowing any such thing. If they did in Sirius, they'd be insolvent inside of a week due to all the traders who get themselves blown up.

In real game terms, if an Adv Train is destroyed you lose the cargo, equipment, and bots and bats that aren't nailed down...so maybe a couple to a few million lost.

In roleplay terms, you lose a 110 million credit ship, and have to fill out a mountain of paperwork. Additionally, buying a 100 million credit transport isn't like buying a used car. In other words, you couldn't possibly lose one, make it back to base, and launch with another one on the same route within 60 seconds.

Plus, why would any insurance carrier continue to write a policy to a pilot who keeps having 110 million credit ships destroyed? Auto insurance companies often drop people's coverage over a few thousand in damages. 110 million credits in insurance claims means you will NEVER be issued a policy by anyone ever again because you are too great a risk! This is a flatly indisputable reality of business.

Some of you call it metagaming if a pirate makes demands based on your treasury, as indicated by your rank. I call it metagaming when a trader refuses to pay more than the purchase cost of his cargo because he knows in the game's terms that is all the credits he stands to lose by being destroyed. It is downright hypocritical to answer what you erroneously call a "non-RP" demand with a non-RP reliance on the game's mechanics in order to save you money.

If you really want to talk serious roleplaying, then any demand up to but not exceeding the replacement cost of the ship is entirely reasonable. Pirates don't do that, because we recognize that we shouldn't "kill the goose that laid the golden egg". Pirates don't want to bankrupt traders in just a couple hits. It's much more fun to get to pirate the same target multiple times. Pirates are entirely reasonable to tax based on profits, not cost. That is the way governments tax corporations, remember. Cost is irrelevant; profits are the only number that matters.

When you traders base your taxing ceiling on the cost of your lost cargo / equipment, YOU are the one who is metagaming and is OUT of role-play, NOT the pirate!

' Wrote:I wrote this a month and a half ago in another thread. It's worth quoting myself here.

' Wrote:a shield regenerate quickly, and automatically.
A hull requires nano.
RPly, every pirate knows that. Should the trader try to run, well, makes his job easier. Plus, it is very convincing.