+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: The Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Real Life Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Thread: To: Admins (/showthread.php?tid=93632)
To: Admins - Timmy - 02-04-2013
Though I am kinda pissed, I will try to be as polite as I can.
Quote:5.6 Fleeing from combat and then docking at a station or planet while you are in range of the ship you were fighting counts as PVP death. Transports and freighters are exempt from this rule.
This need correction. Because you should already know how many lolwuts buy armored transports, flying out, shooting, almost dying, but docking, resupplying, and continue shooting. And if that would be only problem. But they also resupply people who are not exception from this rule.
Thanks for your attention, even if I deserve such.
RE: To: Admins - JayDee Kasane - 02-04-2013
I can agree with that. if trader ship provokes aggression first, he must be legally PvP died when docked.
if he was pirated and attacked after refuse - this is another matter.
RE: To: Admins - bloogaL - 02-04-2013
Take a look at the thread where the recent changes to rule 5.6 were announced. Particularly:
(05-15-2012, 06:07 PM)Gheis Wrote: As a note, we may waive the exemption at our discretion for transports being used purely for combat, however few and far between they are.Gather evidence, report.
RE: To: Admins - Jack_Henderson - 02-04-2013
I agree with the thought if: If a transport actively goes for pvp, he needs to be dead when docking.
The exemption was meant to give the "real transports" a win condition (= getting away alive). This protection should not be used for pvp advantage. It creates ridiculous situations that only cause rage and hate.
I would also say: Screen it, and report him. This is not what the transport rule was meant to be.
RE: To: Admins - Timmy - 02-04-2013
(02-04-2013, 05:35 PM)bloogaL Wrote: Take a look at the thread where the recent changes to rule 5.6 were announced. Particularly:
(05-15-2012, 06:07 PM)Gheis Wrote: As a note, we may waive the exemption at our discretion for transports being used purely for combat, however few and far between they are.Gather evidence, report.
Very well, this have been settled, but to avoid such topics in future, would be easier to add this update in server rules thread. Since most of people begin from it. And if rule says that exception for all transports, then what use of making report.
RE: To: Admins - jammi - 02-04-2013
To affirm the above in green - if you feel someone is exploiting the spirit of the rule, submit a report and we'll deal with it appropriately. Largely speaking, the intention is to provide a "win condition" for transports, as Jack put it. That part shouldn't be changed.
RE: To: Admins - sindroms - 02-04-2013
Cap 5 mammoth with TS, TZ and Type 4 turrets. Just saying.
Cough.
RE: To: Admins - Haste - 02-04-2013
CAU8 Bretonian Liner, pirate ID'd.
Perhaps some sort of written addition to the rule that'd cover ships like this?
RE: To: Admins - Pavel - 02-04-2013
(02-04-2013, 06:24 PM)jammi Wrote: To affirm the above in green - if you feel someone is exploiting the spirit of the rule, submit a report and we'll deal with it appropriately. Largely speaking, the intention is to provide a "win condition" for transports, as Jack put it. That part shouldn't be changed.
Wait wait.
Does it mean if I use battletransport in a fight, and dock in range, let's say to Freeport 1, I have pvp death? Of course I wouldn't undock and return to a fight, but why should I have pvp death in the system, against agressor? If he meets me 20 minutes later near jump gate, well, I wasn't looking for that. not my fault.
Repair-ship constantly docking to replenish bots supply is self-explanatory though, and I believe in that case it would be obvious rule abuse, sanctionable.
RE: To: Admins - jammi - 02-04-2013
(02-04-2013, 07:17 PM)Pavel Wrote:(02-04-2013, 06:24 PM)jammi Wrote: To affirm the above in green - if you feel someone is exploiting the spirit of the rule, submit a report and we'll deal with it appropriately. Largely speaking, the intention is to provide a "win condition" for transports, as Jack put it. That part shouldn't be changed.
Wait wait.
Does it mean if I use battletransport in a fight, and dock in range, let's say to Freeport 1, I have pvp death? Of course I wouldn't undock and return to a fight, but why should I have pvp death in the system, against agressor? If he meets me 20 minutes later near jump gate, well, I wasn't looking for that. not my fault.
No. Of course not. The first post clearly examples exploitive behaviour. Docking under fire and then leaving to carry on trading isn't exploitive. It would be exploitive if you went back to fight, then repeatedly docked and undocked to repair whenever you were close to dying.
Don't worry about malicious sanctions. That's why we're here as judges, as opposed to automated sanction processors.