Quote:3.3 Aggressors are not allowed to issue further demands during the same encounter after the trade vessel has complied, or destroy a trade vessel prior to issuing a demand, in system or local chat, and allowing sufficient time to respond. "Halt" on its own is not a demand, however, a trade vessel can be destroyed if they refuse to stop after being asked to in the form of a proper demand.
now lets say i did pirate a trader/hauler and got payed.
Then after that the hauler/trader starts to insult me or my wing men normally we/i would have shoot the hauler/trader up but not kill the trader/haule but dish out some good ammount of damage.
Now with the new wording the victim can get away from it or are the encounter ended when the demand are fullfilled IE payment are given to pierating player ?
I am not a native English Speaker, so i make grammar errors.
But it annoys me when people make silly comments about that... especially brits who for the most part can't speak their own language let alone anyone elses!
Sorry Snak3 but i will want a admin saying that befoer i dare to belive it
i have allways and that is since 2005 when i startet to play here belived it to be so.
but with the wording now i feel that we need a Adming ruling on when a encounter have stopped and when new encounter have startet
I am not a native English Speaker, so i make grammar errors.
But it annoys me when people make silly comments about that... especially brits who for the most part can't speak their own language let alone anyone elses!
Much nicer runs the fact... Aggressors are not allowed to issue further demands during the same encounter after the trade vessel has complied,...
along with that... ..., a trade vessel can be destroyed if they refuse to stop after being asked to in the form of a proper demand.
which is insanely awesome, bc demanding the trader to halt his ship, done properly, accounts as demand, but after the trader complied and stopped, the "aggressors" are not allowed to issue further demands, say... ask for the money they stopped the trader for to begin with.
Just... awesome.
Call that one bad wording of a rule.
Good luck pirates. Have fun.
Pirate "trader moneymaker1 cut your engines --"
"ok i cut my Engines"
Pirate " what a nice cargo you have what do you say about to pay me 500,000"
Trader " sorry but i did stop at your first demand you may not make a new demand"
2 days later the pirate is scanctioned for issuing a new demand in first encounter
Now admins are that what what you did intend with this wording of the rule
I am not a native English Speaker, so i make grammar errors.
But it annoys me when people make silly comments about that... especially brits who for the most part can't speak their own language let alone anyone elses!
Take the ones who wrote down that rule didn't realize that context-spin, despite it being pretty obvious.
Such a rule cannot work. And will be redone soon enough.
actually asking a trader to stop is a demand
so then this Rule is invalid cuz it is damanging RP
I am not a native English Speaker, so i make grammar errors.
But it annoys me when people make silly comments about that... especially brits who for the most part can't speak their own language let alone anyone elses!
Halt, Stop, Cut your engines, all that is not a demand. Just because the rule only says "Halt" does not mean you cannot get creative with telling them to stop. What is with all these rule clarification threads recently? Common Sense is seriously not common here on Disco apparently.
![[Image: 2ibiwie.jpg]](http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd69/jgroadrunner/2ibiwie.jpg)
![[Image: rTrJole.png]](https://i.imgur.com/rTrJole.png)
![[Image: LJ88XSk.png]](https://i.imgur.com/LJ88XSk.png)
![[Image: ka0AQa5.png]](https://i.imgur.com/ka0AQa5.png)
![[Image: QwWqCS8.png]](https://i.imgur.com/QwWqCS8.png)
![[Image: 2whqqh0.png]](http://i41.tinypic.com/2whqqh0.png)
