DELETE

[Occam Razor]

not hard as a trader to do this beforehand: /setmessage 1 "Wait! Hold your fire! I will comply with your order!"

then type a quick /1 when you actually run into a pirate.

So much for the "not enough time to type a response" excuse.

better do a quick "/l1", pirates usually don't like it when the trader uses system chat.

---

"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it."
René Descartes

[Flash™]

I am staying cool, but seeing what's happening is a little sad, and I understand they have lives.

Edit: That probably seemed like I have something against the Admins, and I really don't.

---

[n00bl3t]

not hard as a trader to do this beforehand: /setmessage 1 "Wait! Hold your fire! I will comply with your order!"

then type a quick /1 when you actually run into a pirate.

So much for the "not enough time to type a response" excuse.

better do a quick "/l1", pirates usually don't like it when the trader uses system chat.

Default message is local anyway, right?

[Flash™]

Setmsgs can be changed when you are using them. /s1, /g1, and /l1. You can choose either for system, group or local, so if they don't use /s1, I'm sure the Pirate(s) will be fine if it is used in /l1.

---

[SnakThree]

DELETE

---

[Sabru]

not to go semi-off topic, but timing and how long to wait for a response is affected also by whats been done to transports in previous updates.

As others have said, how long is enough when transports can spend that time silently thrusting to a base and absorbing damage easily.

imo if they dont respond within 30 secs or they start cruise or thrusting to escape, then ill start shooting.

TL;DR:
if you make a demand to stop and the trader thrusts or goes to cruise, IMO it should be considered a refusal of the demand. Because if you wait even 30 seconds, that does give the trader plenty of time to try and silently get away.

---

[Nerva]

aggressors are not allowed to destroy a ship before allowing sufficient time to respond

It doesn't specify a written response. Starting to run is clearly a response and if he does run then he had enough time to provide said response.
Then, there is this:

a trade vessel can be destroyed if they refuse to stop after being asked to in the form of a proper demand

which also covers the running part.

I don't think people should be forced to use set messages to avoid getting blown up in some seconds by terrorist wannabes who don't even give enough time for a written response.

[Oldum]

aggressors are not allowed to destroy a ship before allowing sufficient time to respond

It doesn't specify a written response. Starting to run is clearly a response and if he does run then he had enough time to provide said response.
Then, there is this:

a trade vessel can be destroyed if they refuse to stop after being asked to in the form of a proper demand

which also covers the running part.

I don't think people should be forced to use set messages to avoid getting blown up in some seconds by terrorist wannabes who don't even give enough time for a written response.

Perfectly pointed out. I actually do the same as Sabre said, if I give a demand, and the trader starts to run like hell, I don't ask again ... and never got sanctioned, cause the trader knows well that he/she tried to run ...

---

| Faction Information || Recruitment || Feedback || Internal Communications || Nightmare on Shetland |
| The Mindoro Massacre |

[Danny-boy]

TL;DR:
if you make a demand to stop and the trader thrusts or goes to cruise, IMO it should be considered a refusal of the demand. Because if you wait even 30 seconds, that does give the trader plenty of time to try and silently get away.

I completely agree with this, if when I tell a trader to stop they actually listen then by all means I'm willing to give them half a minute to a minute to give me some kind of response, however if they decide to try and run then they are pretty much asking to be shot at.

[SnakThree]

DELETE

---