As far I know - there was some changes made in Xeno ID, but -
since when Xeno ID = Terrorist ID? and allow to engage all target at will?
I get that expresion after meet one group of Xenos today in Colorado (a specially one guy)
--
I'm not an specialist - but what phrase" I've done my RP " mean?
is reply 'dissect Yourself' to question may I collect of the pilots mean 'Engaging'?
and is that subject to the 'done RP' before kill?
--
Is raming, and droping shield by nukes and shooting - while 'awating' to respond
is not some sort abuse?
-------
I'd like to hear some opinion becouse I might be wrong, about RP concept,
understanding the rules and stuff.
And maybe reasonable question What The Hell ? is now taken as QQ or wining about get killed.
The group you encountered were my boys. As I mentioned in PM after you failed to contact him, an engagement notice is not needed. Roleplay was. You were RPing with them for around two minutes, then left and then came back. And at that point, you were diced.
As for the reason you were killed, you were talking about dissecting innocent people. No go, bromo.
--------------
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
----------
Apparently I got the encounter on tape. Wait for it to upload.
--------------
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
----------
' Wrote:Only if they take your shields down to <50% without any RP.
Actually, this is false. We made a demand. Pirates are allowed to drop the shields of a target when they make a demand, but they can't kill them. We demanded he leave the immediate area.
' Wrote:Only if they take your shields down to <50% without any RP.
As usual, what you want instead of what is.
Quote:5.2 All attacks must be the result of some form of role play. "Engaging" is not sufficient. An attack is any hostile action that drains shields to less than 50%. Being hit with a CD is not considered an attack. If a player is attacked he has a right to defend himself regardless of who is attacking.
Quote:6.6 Aggressors are not allowed to destroy a trade vessel prior to issuing a demand, in system or local chat, and allowing sufficient time to respond. Demands may be cargo, credits or an RP demand, such as leaving the system. "Halt" is not a demand. You must say more than this to ask a ship to stop however you may destroy them if they attempt escape.
They are allowed to bring your shield to do any damage to you including leaving you at 5% hull and using shieldbusters to keep shield down, provided there was RP. The requirement for issuing a demand and allowing sufficient response time is for destruction.
' Wrote:As usual, what you want instead of what is.
They are allowed to bring your shield to do any damage to you including leaving you at 5% hull and using shieldbusters to keep shield down, provided there was RP. The requirement for issuing a demand and allowing sufficient response time is for destruction.
' Wrote:Actually, this is false. We made a demand. Pirates are allowed to drop the shields of a target when they make a demand, but they can't kill them. We demanded he leave the immediate area.
What I said was correct.
' Wrote:They are allowed to bring your shield to do any damage to you including leaving you at 5% hull and using shieldbusters to keep shield down, provided there was RP.
Did I say anything to the contrary? You need to read posts before you respond to them.
If you had dropped the shields below 50% without any form of RP, it would have been against the rules.
Quote:5.2 All attacks must be the result of some form of role play. "Engaging" is not sufficient. An attack is any hostile action that drains shields to less than 50%. Being hit with a CD is not considered an attack. If a player is attacked he has a right to defend himself regardless of who is attacking.
' Wrote:What I said was correct.
Did I say anything to the contrary? You need to read posts before you respond to them.
If you had dropped the shields below 50% without any form of RP, it would have been against the rules.
Prepare to get roflstomped
' Wrote:
' Wrote:Is raming, and droping shield by nukes and shooting - while 'awating' to respond
is not some sort abuse?
Only if they take your shields down to <50% without any RP.
"while 'awaiting' to respond" = the waiting period between demand and response. So yes it is different than simply doing so w/o RP, as RP has been performed. It is the second part of 6.6 (5.2 has been fulfilled) that has not been fulfilled. This means that your statement of dropping shields below 50% would break the rules in this case is incorrect.
Yes dropping shields below 50% breaks the rules, but this is not what you said. Here's the door.
![[Image: del0ff8-6ae63268-e37c-480b-a9a1-44137339...GwgitMB7x4]](https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/5cd2b623-bb9e-4b23-a168-13801e44d21e/del0ff8-6ae63268-e37c-480b-a9a1-4413733979d8.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcLzVjZDJiNjIzLWJiOWUtNGIyMy1hMTY4LTEzODAxZTQ0ZDIxZVwvZGVsMGZmOC02YWU2MzI2OC1lMzdjLTQ4MGItYTlhMS00NDEzNzMzOTc5ZDgucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.JZyWKvfIsWyvt08IYqUbLyPXTC7RAwd9wGwgitMB7x4)
![[Image: jKk7NOg.png]](http://i.imgur.com/jKk7NOg.png)
![[Image: 1iGGFXz.gif]](http://i.imgur.com/1iGGFXz.gif)
![[Image: zonerzonerzoner.gif]](http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae96/Dourden4/zonerzonerzoner.gif)