This was something that I initially hadn't thought of about how this is pants-on-head retarded. This was sent to me in one of the PMs I've received in regards to this matter: the scrolling rules in game clearly state that you should make SOME attempt to resolve the issue WITH the offending player before jumping to sanctions. You, Carmen, made NO such attempt. Filing a Sanction report is a last resort. I really hate drama, I do my best to avoid it, but this is just a petty attempt at retribution.
Let me say that again, it is spelled out very clearly on the scrolling in game rules that sanctioning is a last resort. Last resort, as in not the first thing you do.
It took someone who was in no way involved in the scenario to send me a PM before I realized that someone was throwing a fit about a carrier who killed a Pirate in what I would consider the most lawful zone in the game. I mean... seriously? You've got the balls to file a totally off the wall sanction against someone who was helping a pirated transport, but you dare not say something to them about it? Really? This is completely self-centered, you had no intention of resolving this conflict, you had no intention of making this game better, you only wanted to stroke your ego and make yourself feel better by getting someone sanctioned.
I've said this before, I'm sorry I blew you away in your Pirate Transport. However you are deserving of no such pity from me anymore, your blatant disregard for what (and this is from what I've gathered from asking many, many people about this situation, this is not a personal opinion) many people believe is acceptable RP.
[color=#33FF33]I'm doing my best to not be all negative here, I would like to propose a solution which would benefit all parties, hopefully prevent this situation from happening again, and introduce something fun for super-capital ships to do.
As I said before I've discussed this issue with many different people who fly anything from only transports to barges to mining ships to bombers to VHFs to gunboats to cruisers to dreadnoughts to carriers, across the board they've agreed that it makes no sense for a malicious transport, in a lawful zone, to receive immunity to super-capital ships. I find that it is, however, very reasonable for transports to be otherwise immune to capital ships (personally, I think this should be extended to bombers due to their uncanny ability to two-shot transports).
I see no harmful repercussion to a transport--being caught in the act of piracy--to be treated just like any other pirate. Only, only, only ONLY when they're caught threatening another ship should someone who is lawful in that system be able to step in and follow the procedure outlined by my military friend:
1) Attempt to defuse the situation and escort the offender out of the system
2) Fire a warning shot without lethal intent at the offender if they refuse to comply but have yet to open fire
3) If the offender opens fire with lethal intent on either the system authority or the party being pirated, then (AND ONLY THEN) will the super-capital ship be able to open fire.
This would promote RP between Transports and Authorities and reduce contradictory-to-RP rule lawyering. The Pirate will, if they're smart, survive with their ship intact and get a bit of RP fun in. The trader won't feel like they're being absolutely victimized and that the lawfuls in the area are useless, plus they will be able to move along on their trade route without getting annoyed and having to restart, losing cash and time. The lawful will get some sense of fulfillment that they've done something good for someone, plus they'd be able to RP a bit as well.
The Pirate walks away in a decent mood without losing their ship, the Trader walks away very happy without losing their ship, and the lawful walks away happy without losing their guns.
99 bugs in my Java Code, 99 bugs in my Code,
Fix one bug and compile again,
283 bugs in my Java Code.
I believe the notice states 'please' - therefore a request.
And I only take notice of the official rules posted on the forum by Igiss.
And that was a waste of typing, because this isn't RP we're talking about here. This is fair play and not ganking.
EDIT: Anyway, I think this thread has forfilled it's purpose... Lock?
' Wrote:I believe the notice states 'please' - therefore a request.
And I only take notice of the official rules posted on the forum by Igiss.
And that was a waste of typing, because this isn't RP we're talking about here. This is fair play and not ganking.
EDIT: Anyway, I think this thread has forfilled it's purpose... Lock?
78% (last I saw last night) of the server who responded to the thread regarding Pirating transports being attacked by lawfuls said that what I did was fair if for no other reason than because it was in RP. Also, your point is also null-and-void because of how Piracy works, the intention is to be unfair. If you think attacking a super-transport in a p-trans is a fair fight, then you're beyond help. You'd know that if your read anything that was said in those threads.
EDIT: This was another thing recently pointed out to me in a PM: This rule was not intended to protect pirates, only to protect smugglers.
99 bugs in my Java Code, 99 bugs in my Code,
Fix one bug and compile again,
283 bugs in my Java Code.
