Quote:6.7 Attacking transports, liners or demanding cargo from the same is not allowed for cruisers and battleships.
Exceptions to this rule are:
a) Terrorist, Nomad, Wild, Phantom ID players;
b) LSF or Liberty Navy Guard vessels operating within Zone 21 or Alaska;
c) Order Guard vessels operating within Alaska or Omicron Minor;
d) Blood Dragon Guard vessels within Chugoku;
e) Corsair Guard vessels within Omicron Gamma;
f) Outcast Guard vessels within Omicron Alpha;
g) Guard ID players in their -own- associated Guard system.
h) Special OP players within the guidelines of their approved RP.
Traders whom are attacked in these areas may be pursued and destroyed beyond them.
If you post in this sanction and are not directly involved or a leader of the accused person's faction be advised that you are consenting to be subjected to the reprisal of my choice which may involve in game repercussions up to a ban.
Quote:"I'm sorry transport, I see you're being Pirated by another transport--however I'm too big to care."
The RP reason behind that eludes me.
If this in fact your sanction report, then the reason for this is so everyone doesn't just get into caps and gank transports whenever they see them. I mean in theory by your reckoning the smallest freighter in the game is fair play to gank with a massive cruiser. Hardly fair play, is it? There is such a thing as totally excessive force. Transports have no chance whatsoever against capital ships, and don't cry that they should bring escorts because you'd need a half dozen escorts of bombers to even easily beat a decently piloted carrier. So yeah, it is to promote fair play and reasonable interaction, something you forgot when you blew away the pirate transport with your liberty carrier.
I think you may have missed the scenario that happened. The Pirate was using a transport to pirate another transport who was affiliated with the IMG. I ran this scenario past a friend of mine who happens to be in the military, I can point you in his direction if you'd like to confirm this. This is how the conversation went:
Me: I've got a scenario to run past you, say that you're on patrol in an Abrams, and you see two freight trucks that are driving in front of you when one of them pokes a 50cal machine gun out the windows and demands that the other truck pay them. The "innocent" truck attempts to flee and yells at you in your Abrams for help. The "evil" truck opens fire on the "innocent" truck with lethal intent and prevents them from getting away. You request they cease fire, they reply to you, "I don't think so," what do you do?
Him: Well, before they opened fire, we would have asked them to stand down, our goal is to prevent violence. If they continued to disregard us or, in this case decline our cease fire, we would fire a warning shot near them, but not at them, to let them know we're not to be trifled with. If they then opened fire we would be obligated to perform a "grill kill."
Me: Err, grill kill?
Him: We'd use the 50 cal. on the top of the MBT to shoot out the engine of the "evil" truck. Shoot the grill of the car, hence: "grill kill."
Me: Hmm... well this particular Abrams is unable to perform that, seeing as this "evil" truck has an engine impervious to anything below 51 cal. ammunition. And now the "evil" truck has opened fire on the "innocent" truck.
Him: lol, ok. If they had opened fire, we'd be sure that they had lethal intent, and the "grill" part of "grill kill" would no longer apply. Grill + kill - grill = kill, so we'd blast that mother$&#@%^ into next Friday.
Let me make sure I address this completely as to prevent confusion. I'll go through this line-by-line.
' Wrote:If this in fact your sanction report,
It is.
' Wrote:then the reason for this is so everyone doesn't just get into caps and gank transports whenever they see them.
Gank? This wasn't a gank, I wasn't trying to get my lulwut on, I didn't just go "LOLTRANSPORTUDIENOWK?" I mean... really? I don't have plans to "gank" every transport I see, nor -was- I. I have seen tons of transports fly by, I guard them and assist when they're in trouble. I didn't cruise through the trade lane I was in and say, "Hmm, that there is a Pirate Transport attempting to Pirate an IMG Transport, LET'S MAKE SOME POPCORN, THERE'S GONNA BE FIREWORKS" I thought, "Hmm... that IMG Transport is being Pirated, what would a military officer do?" I didn't stop to demolish a Pirate Transport, I didn't even know it -was- a Pirate Transport until I stopped and scanned. Saying I would "just get into [a cap] and gank transports whenever [I] see them" is an extreme example of a one-time scenario.
' Wrote:I mean in theory by your reckoning the smallest freighter in the game is fair play to gank with a massive cruiser. Hardly fair play, is it? There is such a thing as totally excessive force.
Wait, what? How did you pull that meaning from my reply? This transport was in danger for it's life, it had no shields remaining and was losing hull quickly. Saying that I would assume it's fair for a "massive [carrier]" to gank a Dromedary is just... I mean... do you assume I'm retarded? Seriously, do you? I'm not mad because I think this rule is unfair now, I'm mad because for whatever reason you assume I'm in the lowest percentile of... pet rocks? I know this is excessive, perhaps the Pirate should've thought, "Hmm... that's a carrier, it would make space dust out of me." Instead they went "Haha! Rules, booyah! I get to hide behind a totally unrealistic rule and perform something totally unrealistic! I'm going to pirate someone in the middle of the road, in plain sight of the law, look at how in RP I am!"
' Wrote:Transports have no chance whatsoever against capital ships, and don't cry that they should bring escorts because you'd need a half dozen escorts of bombers to even easily beat a decently piloted carrier.
PFFFHAHAHAHAHA! This actually got a laugh from me IRL. So tell me, why isn't there a rule against bombers attacking Transports? I suppose that's fair, right? Transports barely have a chance against Fighters. Transports don't have an inkling of a chance against Gunboats, but that's a fair fight, right? But a LAWFUL cruiser, making a LAWFUL demand of an UNLAWFUL character in blatantly LAWFUL space is totally unfair. And don't say you'd need half-a-dozen bombers to kill a carrier, you'd need two, maybe one if they know what they're doing.
' Wrote:So yeah, it is to promote fair play and reasonable interaction, something you forgot when you blew away the pirate transport with your liberty carrier.
REASONABLE interaction? I was reasonable, I suppose the next time I see a police cruiser (or police car, to be sure you understand, that's the lingo we use around here) in the streets, I'll break out a hand-gun and mug the nearest pedestrian I can find, and--according to this rule--it will be reasonable for that cruiser to... what? Say, "Sorry buddy, but my car is much to nice to stop and help you, in fact, I'm pretty sure I could solve this with my eyes closed, but who cares? Better cough up that dough! I've got places to be, those donuts don't eat themselves!"
So what do I do next time I see that happen right in front of me? Just say, "// Sorry I have to break your RP immersion really quick with this blatantly contradictory to RP rule, but you're going to die, and there is nothing I can do about it, I sure am glad I paid 1,000,000,000 credits to hopefully help deal with this ridiculous influx of Piracy to only be ruled out of doing anything against this Transport. Gee-willickers, I should've just bought a bomber." The Cap Ships are already restricted to their "home space," why are they further restricted within those systems by a rule that makes less sense than this picture?
Oh, also, I wouldn't take such a sarcastic approach to this if I didn't get the same vibe from you, Kuraine; if you insult me and mock my intelligence then expect the same in return.
99 bugs in my Java Code, 99 bugs in my Code,
Fix one bug and compile again,
283 bugs in my Java Code.
While you do raise good points, which I will bring to the attention of the other admins, the chances are it will not change (and shouldn't either, in my opinion). The problem is that the "no attacking transports in capital ships" rule is, again, to promote fair play etc. Using a capital ship against a transport, no matter the circumstances, is not very fair play (and also is designed to stop people ideally escorting in capital ships, although they can do it, it is just that they can only engage fighters/bombers/gunboats/other capital ships). A transport against a transport has a fairly even-ish chance really, so it shouldn't be *too* much of an issue. And if it is, just hire a damn fighter/bomber escort.
Quote:So what do I do next time I see that happen right in front of me? Just say, "// Sorry I have to break your RP immersion really quick with this blatantly contradictory to RP rule, but you're going to die, and there is nothing I can do about it, I sure am glad I paid 1,000,000,000 credits to hopefully help deal with this ridiculous influx of Piracy to only be ruled out of doing anything against this Transport. Gee-willickers, I should've just bought a bomber." The Cap Ships are already restricted to their "home space," why are they further restricted within those systems by a rule that makes less sense than this picture?
Yeah exactly, bring something smaller. Use your capital ship for taking on pirate fleets or other lone capital ships etc. It is a main line warship, not a pirate hunting vessel. If we allowed them to hunt pirate transports in their home system, eventually someone would argue that they should be allowed to hunt pirate transports anywhere in their House and then pretty soon people will be arguing for it to happen all over Sirius, and then effectively we'd have everyone in capital ships.
Regardless, the plain fact is that you have never been allowed to attack transports and freighters with any capital ships, ever. It hasn't ever changed, and likely will not ever change. This isn't something new, this is something that has been around for years, and no amount of rules lawyering is going to change that it has been here all this time and has been enforced strictly by all Admins *shrugs*
It may not make any RP sense to you, but if you were in that transport, in my position, a great big Carrier comes up behind you, tells you to stop pirating, would you think it fair that the Carrier fired great big Mortars at you then blew your ship up?
I think not.
Also note that the LN wouldn't waste resources to have a Carrier blow up a pirating Junker Pirate Transport.
If you don't know the rules, don't get such a large cap!
You ruined my first act of piracy on this server by breaking a rule and killing me with a whole dammed Carrier...:(
' Wrote:It may not make any RP sense to you, but if you were in that transport, in my position, a great big Carrier comes up behind you, tells you to stop pirating, would you think it fair that the Carrier fired great big Mortars at you then blew your ship up?
If I were in your position, I wouldn't hide behind a rule and I'd do something that makes RP sense: I'd stop pirating. You obviously didn't read my post prior to this... so before I go on, please read that. I'll wait.
' Wrote:I think not.
Well I suppose that's your choice.
' Wrote:Also note that the LN wouldn't waste resources to have a Carrier blow up a pirating Junker Pirate Transport.
No, they wouldn't, and they didn't. That carrier was moving from Pennsylvania to Colorado, it's your fault for being two feet from a trade lane. Again, read my post for the scenario.
' Wrote:If you don't know the rules, don't get such a large cap!
I never said I didn't know the rules. But it seems RP overrides rules in just about any other circumstance. Do not put words in my mouth.
' Wrote:You ruined my first act of piracy on this server by breaking a rule and killing me with a whole dammed Carrier...:(
Then perhaps this could be a learning experience, Pirate in places where you don't find carriers, not two trade lanes away from... ya know... the capital of Liberty. Then don't hide behind a rule because of your unfortunate choice of location. Considering it's nowhere near the Badlands and incredibly out of RP to do.
99 bugs in my Java Code, 99 bugs in my Code,
Fix one bug and compile again,
283 bugs in my Java Code.
' Wrote:While you do raise good points, which I will bring to the attention of the other admins,
I don't want attention, I want my guns back.
' Wrote:the chances are it will not change (and shouldn't either, in my opinion).
I don't want it to change in any huge manner, it has merit in certain circumstances, but pirating Transports shouldn't be immune to lawful cap ships.
' Wrote:The problem is that the "no attacking transports in capital ships" rule is, again, to promote fair play etc.
Speaking of rules, there's a big rule that was broken when this report was filed, and it's not a sub-rule of a corrolary to another rule--it's the first one on the page. Let's see what the person who filed the report has to say about that:
' Wrote:[23:35:16] Dejavu: The carrier who killed you says he is sorry, he did not know the rule about not killing transports.
I'm going to clarify this before I go any further: I said that I wasn't going to let him Pirate another ship in Liberty Space a-la-loophole, because, ya know, that's sort of the whole concept behind roleplay, otherwise Transports could just lolrolelawyer all they want around a Cap Ship and there's not a thing the Cap could do about it, which is just annoying for the Cap, very agrivating for the transport that just got blown away 10M from a lawful ship and I'm sure it makes the lolwut inside the Pirate Transport squeel with joy.
' Wrote:[23:35:59] Carmen: ugh
[23:36:04] Carmen: Well he will soon enough
[23:36:09] Carmen: Oh boy he will
Sounds like they were dead-set on nothing but a sanction before they even wrote their report. I'm just trying to get my RP on, and I was even kind enough to apoligize to them. However, an unhappy Junker, a happy Transport, and a happy Carrier is an unsuitable outcome to an event, so they filed a sanction report.
' Wrote:Using a capital ship against a transport, no matter the circumstances, is not very fair play.
Using anything to attack a Transport is not very fair play. Ironically the only fair chance a transport has is against another transport, but having one use Class 2 (or is it 3? I honestly can't remember seeing as how any turret on a transport is useless against a bomer/fighter/gunboat/cruiser/dreadnaught/carrier) turrets totally messes that up.
' Wrote:(and also is designed to stop people ideally escorting in capital ships, although they can do it, it is just that they can only engage fighters/bombers/gunboats/other capital ships).
Why would you want to prevent that? Your objective here is to stop RP? It's already gimpy enough having to stop abruptly at Colorado or California and send the Transport on their way.
' Wrote:A transport against a transport has a fairly even-ish chance really, so it shouldn't be *too* much of an issue.
No it doesn't. A Transport mounting turrets that a sane transport would mount (i.e. Class 4 loadout) has no chance against a Transport that is designed to kill other Transports (i.e. Class 2 (or is it 3?) loadout)
' Wrote:And if it is, just hire a damn fighter/bomber escort.
I could swear I just read an article about this or something... Oh! I did! Good, here it is:
' Wrote:and don't cry that they should bring escorts
Since this is no longer letting me use further quotes, I'll use e-mail syntax, yum!
> Use your capital ship for taking on pirate fleets or other lone capital ships etc.
They're all bombers. I fight maybe one Capital Ship in a week.
> It is a main line warship, not a pirate hunting vessel. If we allowed them to hunt pirate transports in their
> home system, eventually someone would argue that they should be allowed to hunt pirate transports
> anywhere in their House and then pretty soon people will be arguing for it to happen all over Sirius, and
> then effectively we'd have everyone in capital ships.
^ Just to see that as a whole, since I'm going to have to butcher it in a second.
> If we allowed them to hunt pirate transports in their home system, eventually someone would argue that
> they should be allowed to hunt pirate transports anywhere in their House
<strike>Again you resort to an extreme example. No one in their right mind would find that at all "in RP" to do.</strike>
Pasted the wrong response there, sorry. What I meant to say was: "Err, yeah... people do sometimes argue points for a reason, because it's a valid point. Why shouldn't a Liberty Lawful be able to hunt a Pirate Unlawful in Liberty space? Does that not make a gratuitous amount of sense? It doesn't matter if it's a Cap or a Bomber or a Gunboat, they're all 'unfair' against a transport, the transport doesn't stand any more of a chance because the lawful is a bomber... it does not make any sense to have a Capital ship excluded from combat against Pirate Transports."
> and then effectively we'd have everyone in capital ships.
I doubt everyone would be eager to jump in a capital ship to blow up all the Pirates who use Transports. I've seen a Pirate in a transport maybe... once every month, and I'm an active trader that runs routes that run through almost all of Sirius, minus the Nomad regions. This is also the first time I've encountered this situation as a lawful in lawful space. I honestly can't even fathom that "everyone" would suddenly drop 1,000,000,000 credits, buy a Carrier with the sole purpose of blowing up that one unlawful, pirating Transport they see once a month. On a serious note, I could actually see more people buying Pirate Transports now, and using them to Pirate, given their Immunity to Capital Ships 'n all.
> Regardless, the plain fact is that you have never been allowed to attack transports and freighters with any
> capital ships, ever.
So the Cap-Ship who RPs an attack on a Transport to save a lawful get a sanction, but the hundred of lulwutting Pirates get to blow away the barge, with no RP, and get away when they say, "Sorry!"
> It hasn't ever changed, and likely will not ever change. This isn't something new, this is something that has
> been around for years, and no amount of rules lawyering is going to change that it has been here all this
> time and has been enforced strictly by all Admins *shrugs*
Very quick to enforce this rule, I suppose. Big bad lawful attacking a pirate, shame on them. Disregarding the Xenos attacking the Barge without RP, they get away with a one-word response, disregarding the sanction I came very close to filing on the fleet of [7] people who came out to interfere with a server event and ram-SNACed me for 3 minutes straight, disregarding the fact that it makes no sense for transports to be immune to Capitals but not to Bombers nor Gunboats, disregarding the fleet of Freelancers with Mining IDs who came out to Tremont today solely to lolwut it up and kill a Barge... I can see that this is a very good usage of time to enforce the rules, not like there's anything else to do, better just show this cap ship who's the boss! That'll learn 'em, better not see anyone bigger than a Starflea fight a Pirate Transport.
It's stuff like this that doesn't make sense. People who have an obviously positive impact on the community around them get sanctioned, I RP every encounter I get into, I do what most people would consider mindlessly boring just so that I can add some element of immersion for others, but the "5 million or die, you have 10 seconds to comply, I need to feed my family" people just get to keep on lolwuttin'.
It's worthy of note that most people I've ran this by are suggesting that the Pirate did this for no reason other than to get a chance to file a sanction report. That seems... oh so petty.
Edit: Fixed a typo and replaced a phrase. The previous phrase has been kept, but marked as deleted, for posterity.
99 bugs in my Java Code, 99 bugs in my Code,
Fix one bug and compile again,
283 bugs in my Java Code.
Again, a totally out of RP rule that makes very little sense, both in real-life applications and in game. If I were in a transport, I'd do my best to replicate what a -real- transport would do (as weird as that is, suggesting you use your brain 'n all.) which is ROLE PLAY, it's kind of a big deal.
' Wrote:The LN would never waste all the energy on firing Mortars at a little transport.
It's gonna cost so much to refill all that energy, I sure hope the Django's reactor takes AA batteries. This isn't the LN's energy, it's from the ship's reactor. I suppose I should also never use cruise, then, since that drains precious energy?
' Wrote:My location might not of been a good place, but it WAS my first go at pirating...
That's not an excuse, this was my first go at shooting a transport for pirating another transport. Except... my move makes sense, your move was senseless. With all that time spent at Tremont, I figured you might know how annoying OORP Pirates are, but how cool IRP ones are. It's not like you've never been pirated before, it's not like you've never been annoyed by something that makes no sense, and it's not, I hope, like you want to be a lulwutter. Did you leave your empathy on the kitchen table?
99 bugs in my Java Code, 99 bugs in my Code,
Fix one bug and compile again,
283 bugs in my Java Code.
![[Image: AiTakedaSignature.jpg]](http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh185/Kuraine/AiTakedaSignature.jpg)