In support of rewriteing rule 5.7

[ScornStar]

One writer mentioned that maybe we should compile all the different types of scenarios that right now fall under PVP.

Piracy - When one player demands credit or cargo with the implied threat of death.

Bounties - Killing in the interest of money while hired out by a third party.

<strike>War - Established enemies trying to make each other go broke or dead.</strike>

I crossed out war because that is really like thousands of PVPs in one word. Many capture the flag and hold the base fight can come of these.

insanity - Mon Star

sport - I havent met any but their could be trophy hunters out there. Collecting screen shots for thier memoirs

law enforcement - PVP engaged to enforce a system law or house law.

Are there anymore? Thats all I could think of right now. So any suggestions to how to word these situations or the adding or subtracting of those situations are welcome.

This thread is not to debate over if we should change or ammend the rule. This thread is for those who think we should and have ideas big or small on how to help and improve.

So, please state what you think. In reguards for improveing the engagement rule for max fun and most believable RP.

---

Eat Babies!!!!!!!!!!

Join our cause for a baby free world.

Harvester diplomacy

[ScornStar]

I personally would find a siege of Malta anti climactic if all the defenders were killed and I had to leave or camp alone for four hours. I think that at least Fighters NOT bombers should have unlimited respawn on capital planets. Or reduce the rengagment rule to no rengagement with THAT character, and you may use your others. Obviously ooRP killing is still ooRP killing.

But if Im Bob Villa the Corsair and I beat the smack out of Malta and the only player there has like 12 ships all there then I think it is better RP to fight each of them in turn if the player is willing to launch them to battle. Though even better RP would be flying all your ships at once, into battle. Instead of bottlenecking your self and trikleing into enemy weapons fire.

---

Eat Babies!!!!!!!!!!

Join our cause for a baby free world.

Harvester diplomacy

[Oniros]

The condition of victory : PvP versus RP.
PvP : the death of the enemies, winner, looser. the Rules was made to avoid revenge.
RP : retreat, surrender is a reasonable defeat. To be destroyed should be the end of the character.

IMO, retreat, surrender, etc is all within RP, and anyone resuming a RP interaction after a PvP is not really under the PvP rules of the 4h. When a trader resisted to piracy, but surrender seeing no exit, he is not subjected to the rules because he is alive. But if he died, he should not come back or even resume his trade route.
I am a scout in a LF, spot a dangerous Cruiser that open fire and drop my shield down (=engaged). I flee in order to warn my allies and come back 15 minutes later in the same LF with a wing of bomber. I lost the PvP but in RP the retreat should not prevent me to come back.

EDIT : i did not post the end...corrected.

---

&quot;Perfection, honesty, devotion&quot;
&quot;Immortality is our subconscious main concern&quot;
&quot;To change the system, you have to be inside the system and play by the rules&quot;

[ScornStar]

Good point. I understood that we should measure defeat as an RP defeat or a PVP defeat.

IE: retreat is not punished. But death is still 4 hours outside your home system.

---

Eat Babies!!!!!!!!!!

Join our cause for a baby free world.

Harvester diplomacy

[n00bl3t]

Good point. I understood that we should measure defeat as an RP defeat or a PVP defeat.

IE: retreat is not punished. But death is still 4 hours outside your home system.

This sounds more in-RP. Retreating players should be allowed to re-engage if they are in their home system.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[Oniros]

After a re-thought
RP retreat can also be abused and transformed in a PvP shield running...
In my head a retreat/surrender is perfectly clear. I don't want to be destroy. I'll be stupid to come back while i was about to be destroy once.
So it won't help for rewriting a global rule.

---

&quot;Perfection, honesty, devotion&quot;
&quot;Immortality is our subconscious main concern&quot;
&quot;To change the system, you have to be inside the system and play by the rules&quot;

[ScornStar]

After a re-thought
RP retreat can also be abused and transformed in a PvP shield running...
In my head a retreat/surrender is perfectly clear. I don't want to be destroy. I'll be stupid to come back while i was about to be destroy once.
So it won't help for rewriting a global rule.

How ever an engagement can occur out of a failed recon mission, and thus the recon unit may run but why not lead the fleet back.

I think if you dock your battle is OVER and if you die it is OVER. And shield running wont help if they are smacking you.

Shield running will cease to exist if we remove the retreat restrictions. I think people are compelled to shield run because death and retreat are the same. So loseing becomes not an option. Thus the PVP spirit increases in all of us we are digitally cage dogs in a fight. Not to animals on a field that can break contact yet be in the same region.

---

Eat Babies!!!!!!!!!!

Join our cause for a baby free world.

Harvester diplomacy

[Asymptotic]

How ever an engagement can occur out of a failed recon mission, and thus the recon unit may run but why not lead the fleet back.

I think if you dock your battle is OVER and if you die it is OVER. And shield running wont help if they are smacking you.

Shield running will cease to exist if we remove the retreat restrictions. I think people are compelled to shield run because death and retreat are the same. So loseing becomes not an option. Thus the PVP spirit increases in all of us we are digitally cage dogs in a fight. Not to animals on a field that can break contact yet be in the same region.

mmhmm.

[Oniros]

Realistic death rules
You dock it is over (hospital/repair dock)
You've been exploded, it is over (long repair dock/rescue of the escape pod)
The 4 h rules should be applied and reinforced by the obligation to log out the character. No revenge is allowed with any other character from any other account.
It has been already told : increasing the consequences of "death" can increase the characterization (or RP in PvP)
Nothing annoy me more than a dead pilot who spam the system chat.

You described perfectly the actual situation imposed by the PvP rules : cage dogs in a fight. The only issue can be the death of one of the opponent. Running is not a solution, retreating is same as dying.

Perhaps we should dig around retreat rules that can allow RP interactions after a PvP without winner and loser. Here're the most common situation to think about.

* The main critic : engaging cruise to take distance, regen shield in order to come back. If cruising away is not considered like PvP death, some could do that because it is realistic (RP strategic choice), some do that because it'll allow them a greater chance to win (PvP choice). Some will never do that because they hate to fight 2 h (fair play choice ?). No way to make the difference.
** engaging cruise to retreat, being chased and re-engage is allowed.
** thrusting away to regen shield, being chased by a Cruiser who cruise and engage => the cruiser will be sanctioned.

* the main reaction : if someone engage cruise, immediate CD and chase. 90% of the players do that because Kill is the most important. It doesn't prevent the regen shield (well, it is not so hard to regen fighter shield if you thrust and dodge like hell without jousting. It is not hard to shoot NPC to get few more batts and nano. Who never did that before ?)

Mr mmhmmm size (5), did i resume what you wanted to say with your constructive reply ?

---

&quot;Perfection, honesty, devotion&quot;
&quot;Immortality is our subconscious main concern&quot;
&quot;To change the system, you have to be inside the system and play by the rules&quot;

[ScornStar]

I agree with everything you said last Oniros, I think. Its late. I only disagree on one thing. The shooting NPCs in PVP. Every pilot worth thier salt that I have fought it has been for more to my advantage to continue fireing on them and ignore the NPCs(cept for easy targets of oppurtunity) Be cause player fire is much more accurate and driven to kill you. Fishing for nanos in a PVP is like trying to pick up band aids in a fist fight. In short your going down.

Yes maybe retreat rules need to be expanded to allow more flexible and realistic RP.

---

Eat Babies!!!!!!!!!!

Join our cause for a baby free world.

Harvester diplomacy