Player Warned: NC-Enma.Loyola

[DiscoveryGC Admins]

NC-Enma.Loyola has been warned for:

3.6 Attacking without Roleplay

Consequences:

Yeah it was an ongoing fight, but two words is quite disrespectful. Make an effort.

---

Original Link for Admin/Mod Use | Discovery Server & Forums Rules | Before You Post Here

---

If you require evidence, you may request such via PM from a Staff member. Only the accused or an official faction leader of the accused person's faction may request such. Once you have the evidence, and if you wish to dispute it, you may post in this thread. Blaming members of your immediate family, neighbors, friends, pets, and assorted Orcs, Trolls and any other legendary creatures may result in the use of Admin Right #CTE 750AE

[Shiki]

quite disrespectful

I guess I remember this fight, during the which cap6 dulzian battletransport spoiled snub duel. Yet, you consider my behaviour as quite disrespectful. I was staying cloaked (I don't RP while being cloaked) before trasport engaged, and actually just was moving my ship when have seen the encounter. Did not plan to take a part in any PvP actions and did not even have full bots. Even though this ship has the wild id, I usually try to make a proper RP before the engagement. This particular encounter just pissed me off so it was my bad. I just don't think that reposting side gave you the full context.

Make an effort.

Here I just want to clarify if typing /l1 /l2 is counting as more effort than typing 2 words. If not, then why /l1 /l2 engagements are not being warned like this? Because, you see, not using set messages is a matter of principle for me, but I can make efforts to set them up it seems.

---

[sindroms]

Sanja, dude, come on.
We are not able to see the context of the fight you were joining nor your motivations or intentions for dropping a two-word engagement at the time. We deal with the evidence we are able to physically see and then process with what we have. The matter of the fact is that you indeed did. And which is why you were warned.

Warned. Not sanctioned.

And while what you say about /l1 and /l2 is true, you still did not have enough motivation to do even -that-.
All we are asking from our players is to give at least the minimum amount of roleplay needed before jumping into the fight.


At least two lines of coherent roleplay in most cases if a fight is about to break out.
Or at least one line (coherent sentence) before jumping into an existing group fight, just so other people who are too busy shooting things to see the radar are given some heads up. That is really all that is to it.

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------

[Jack_Henderson]

The reporting side gave the full context.
You spoke 2 words and engaged. Fact.
The DSAce log of the encounter was attached, as were screenshots into the past of the incident.

Jack

[Shiki]

Mhm. So you agreed that typing /l1 /l2 is less effort than typing two words. Why do you mean even that? I did not have a motivation to make /l1 /l2, never, obviously why. What I'm saying is if efforts are now being reason for warning, then /l1 /l2 engagements should be revalued. Spend 30 seconds to set them (more if it's a nomspeak) and use for months or years is not an effort. Lines of roleplay provided?

Even yesterday I had a dude following me in New London and engaged me twice with the same one line setmessage. (first time I just took the lane). Should I report people like this?

The reporting side gave the full context.
You spoke 2 words and engaged. Fact.
The DSAce log of the encounter was attached, as were screenshots into the past of the incident.

Jack

Wild ID is the terrorist ID that still can engage even without 2 lines. Fact. (Yet, I'm trying trying not to use such doubtful arguments and admit that 2 words engagment is not a good style.) Full context that is you and your members are spoiling snub duels. Fact. And then just docking when facing resistance. Fact.

Bye Jack.

---

[Jack_Henderson]

@Setmessages. Setmessages have never been part of this argument, nor does that discussion belong here. I do not understand what you are trying to do here.

@Can engage without RP: But you remember you are a SRP, do you? And you do know what is expected of SRP, I bet. So, why are you discussing the obvious?

Anyway, I'll not allow you to trigger me by your accusations and the attempted counter attack. Enjoy your day.

Jack

---

+ IMG| DISCORD: https://discord.gg/TWrGWjp
+ IMG| IS RECRUITING: Click to find out more!

[Shiki]

@Setmessages. Setmessages have never been part of this argument, nor does that discussion belong here. I do not understand what you are trying to do here.

@Can engage without RP: But you remember you are a SRP, do you? And you do know what is expected of SRP, I bet. So, why are you discussing the obvious?

Anyway, I'll not allow you to trigger me by your accusations and the attempted counter attack. Enjoy your day.

Jack

If you can read then you can see that I'm refering to text of the saction that is speaking about the efforts regarding engagement. I asked to clarify the part about efforts, questions were forwarded to the admin team, so it's strange to see you replying to it.

Speaking of SRP, I do accept feedback over here: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=143666
I did not use this argument before you rolled here with your facts and I still consider 2 words engagement as a bad thing, which I admitted many times here. If you like the facts so much then there is a fact that I did not break any rules.

Bye Jack.

---

[sindroms]

Wild ID is the terrorist ID that still can engage even without 2 lines. Fact.

Way to wake up the Admin skype chat.

In the light of This thread, what makes you say that?
Any and all participants of the roleplay environment must, by the server rules, provide sufficient roleplay before an attack, while giving the other player reasonable time to respond.

The current Wild ID has no lines that would (or should) override this rule.
If you need a green statement to re-enforce the notion that all IDs on the server that are in a RP environment (A.I minus Connecticut) must roleplay before attacking (With the exception of the Nomad IDs who also in addition to that, must RP uncloaked), we can provide it right now.

[Shiki]

Wild ID is the terrorist ID that still can engage even without 2 lines. Fact.

Way to wake up the Admin skype chat.

In the light of This thread, what makes you say that?
Any and all participants of the roleplay environment must, by the server rules, provide sufficient roleplay before an attack, while giving the other player reasonable time to respond.

The current Wild ID has no lines that would (or should) override this rule.
If you need a green statement to re-enforce the notion that all IDs on the server that are in a RP environment (A.I minus Connecticut) must roleplay before attacking (With the exception of the Nomad IDs who also in addition to that, must RP uncloaked), we can provide it right now.

Line from K'hara ID:
>Can freely engage any ship anywhere.

This line was overwriting the rules until it was changed with this: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread...pid1725486 and some lines to ID added.

Liner from the Wild ID:
>Can freely engage any ship anywhere.

Which looks (and I guess means) exactly the same, regarding the rules as well?

I'm acting like I'm flying with the regular ID and actually implying that I'm flying an Outcast ship. An not really intend to use this argument in my defense, unless people being aggressive after I admitted my legit derps.

---

[sindroms]

Noted.
It seems as though the line is misleading. We will discuss it and come up with a suitable replacement.

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------