+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+---- Forum: Sanctions and Warnings (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=43)
+---- Thread: Players sanctioned: IMG|Sean.Henderson; IMG|You.Rock? (/showthread.php?tid=129580)
Players sanctioned: IMG|Sean.Henderson; IMG|You.Rock? - Jansen - 05-19-2015
IMG|Sean.Henderson, IMG|You.Rock? have been sanctioned for:
Quote:1.3 Every player must have one ID equipped on their ship. Player should follow the restrictions and allowances listed in their ID and their roleplay and conduct must match the actions of their characters. In cases where these restrictions and allowances conflict with the server rules, the ID overrides the rules.Consequences:
I might have missed the line that alloes you to shoot Freelancer ID'd ships without a reason. If you find one you can put that in here and might even get your guns back, if not they are gone. You should have known better.
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. Blaming members of your immediate family, neighbours, friends, pets, and assorted Orcs, Trolls and any other legendary creatures may result in the use of Admin Right #CTE 750AE
RE: Players sanctioned: IMG|Sean.Henderson; IMG|You.Rock? - Chuba - 05-19-2015
Sorry, but I don't remember shooting freelancers (:
Even tho I did see said freelancer, never got to shoot him
RE: Players sanctioned: IMG|Sean.Henderson; IMG|You.Rock? - Independent Miners Guild - 05-19-2015
Please let me help you find the line that you're missing.
Independent Miners Guild ID Wrote:Can attack ships belonging to houses or organisations considered hostile by the IMG within their Zone of Influence.
As for "without reason", VFK| ships are claiming IMG bounties and they had already killed several of our own. So yes, they are hostile to the IMG.
Thank you in advance for restoring the ships to their prior state.
RE: Players sanctioned: IMG|Sean.Henderson; IMG|You.Rock? - Jansen - 05-19-2015
It feels to me as if the group you mentioned it not really listed as hostile there in your faction status, so thank you for thanking me for restoring the ships which I wont really do, because the way you just try to solve this would mean that you could shoot every random Freelancer with a minimum of roleplay. Im so far lacking any kind of forum evidence that would make the story you try to tell me here sound plausible.
Try again?
RE: Players sanctioned: IMG|Sean.Henderson; IMG|You.Rock? - Jansen - 05-19-2015
Sanctioned reversed, you should say thank you to Snak3 who gave me the link required to check this.
RE: Players sanctioned: IMG|Sean.Henderson; IMG|You.Rock? - Jack_Henderson - 05-19-2015
Thank you for correcting the sanction and sorry for the late reply, I've just come home.
Jansen is correct when he quoted the general rule. IMG ofc cannot engage random Freelancers (we are - as everybody - neutral with the FL ID).
Now, it has already been mentioned that IMG and VFK are bitter enemies and there are like 5+ threads about it. I'll not link them now, as it has already been done. Thank you to Snak3 and Jammi for arguing the point of view.
Our mistake: We should have linked the threads immediately here. We'll do that next time.
The only thing I find a little worrying is not that an Admin missed the on-server thing "IMG vs. VFK". That's understandable - no one can be everywhere all the time and the hostility is rather young. But what surprises me is that VFK bothered to report what is perfectly irp and logical.
I'd also like to stress that it was not "with a minimum of roleplay", but: it was exactly zero roleplay from the other side (and he was not afk, but typing with his mates in Stuttgart). He had more than enough time to say a word. But no. Silence for 1 min 42 seconds before I engaged. I'd say he had his chance to say a word and get roleplay in return. Trying to flee silently, while plotting a baitgame (funny picture actually - kek), can only get you killed in this situation.
Expecting anything else but being blasted as a mute enemy easy target after what happened the day before, only 500 m from a hostile base (he was not yet correctly repped, as Freistadt was not shooting him), but trying a 1.3 stunt instead shows an interesting way of appraoching hostile roleplay that was initiated by VFK.
Thank you for correcting the sanction.
Sorry for not providing the necessary intel faster. Could have helped to save time for everybody.
Jack