' Wrote:Posting pictures (with names in them) and/or naming names makes this a trial by forum. This is not permitted and so I've marked the 3 offending posts invisible.
To answer your original question: My understanding of the rules is that each ship does not have to indicate its intention to attack if it is clearly part of the same group and battle. This is quite common for any engagement involving more than 2 ships on each side.
thank you cannon for clarifying "trial by forum" and i am sorry to those who were mentioned.
the player that is being attacked has to be given a notice of that attack. - you must not be "jumped" unaware. - when that notice is given by another player that KNOWS that he can command players NEAR you and make them attack you. - you "have been informed of an immediete attack" haven t you?
i think....even when you are not in range of ANY player at the time, but a bunch of players is searching for you - making it clear that .... in the very case they catch you, you ll have to expect an attack.... you have been made aware of an immediete attack, henceforth, you are not "jumped" and been attacked "unaware"
here is an example:
a smuggler enters a system. he has NO lawful near - but his hold is full of cardamine. - a lawful trader passes him in sensor range and gives a silent call to the lawfuls ( all the time, you, the smuggler are totally unaware that processes have already started )
then - through system call, you hear "to all officers, the ship [your name] is suspected to be smuggling contraband and is to be stopped at all costs!"
still, no lawful in your range BUT you know that you are being searched.
the police is flying search patterns - and finally, you are being spotted by a gunboat. of course you re cruising... so the gunboat fires a CD and immedietely attacks.
is that a correct behaviour?
i do think "yes". an attack notice has been given, you know that an attack is to be expected once you are spotted. it was also RPed and not just a silly ooc notice. - but the actual attack was NOT announced.
yes, the gunboat could say "sir, i have spotted the enemy and i am opening weaponfire to stop the smuggler" - that would have been "nice" ... but still, you cannot say that the attack came out of no where.
why we have this rule anyway?
- BHGs and especially freelancers / mercs used to jump players that had NO way to know about an immediete attack, giving the hunters a great advantage. - nothing is worse than sitting in your usual spot as a lawful for example - and suddenly your s hield is down to two deb salvos and a SN is about 0.0001 seconds from impact in your hull.
so - an engagement notice must be given so even the chances.
' Wrote:i just ran into a little circumstance. long story short.
one ship commanded a battleship and a gunboat to attack my battleship.
the commanding officer is the only one who gave the order, and niether one of the attacking ships gave ANY kind of engagement notice.
they were ordered to "Take Him Down" by someone else.
Then they simply opened fire without a word from them.
allowed or not allowed?
is another character allow to give an engagement notice for someone else?
Simple answer ... YES ... it is legal. The engagement notice was given ... the order to attack you. Engagement notice form an individual or a group counts as notice. Think man ... this rule was created so you have notice that you are about to be attacked ... I'm guessing you knew your ship was about to be attacked when he ordered his fellow ships to attack you, correct? That's the point behind the rule.
' Wrote:AgentMike.
I'm sorry about how I said that stuff up there ^
I need to learn to be calmer/more.gentle.
My overreaction was not needed. I'm sorry.
and i apologize for assuming an emotional response from a text based message.
that is the fatal flaw of text, you cannot usually interpret one's emotions accurately.
and i apologize if i mis-interpretted your response.
it shouldnt have gotten that "heated" and if what i said was partly responsible for that, then for that i sincerly apologize.
also, i apologize for passive aggressively attempting to antogonize you further.
thank you for being the "better man" and being the first to say something about this.
sincerly.
EDIT: also, i'd like to apologize for assuming that you were wrong by saying it was a "trial by forum". i was taken by the literal sense of the phrase, and not the actual definition of the phrase. you were right. my intention was not a "trial" in its literal sense, but still, you were right about that. And i was wrong.
Ah well ... seems i am a bit late ... you already solved this ... ah ... i have to say sorry ... i hated OR back then and i was killing everything that helped them:D... i changed now ... i am calm person now:D
I havent read the majority of the thread this is generally a response to the first post.
I think that the group leader calling the engagement notice is enough. I generally do most of the RP on my CR you see. You might get an aye sir from a few but that is it. The reason i cover the RP is so that they can spend more time enjoying themselves in the PVP rather than being worried about having to dodge and type.
But when another member joins i tell him to give an engagement notice.
So for those in the actual staring group no for those joining after, yes.
![[Image: just_a_signature_by_sjrarj-d63yjsx.png]](https://img00.deviantart.net/ca73/i/2013/123/e/a/just_a_signature_by_sjrarj-d63yjsx.png)
alatino Linotype">
