Allright. This argument has gone beyond being circular and is, at this point, simply going down the drain.
I'll attempt to track down an admin to validate the following points, stand by for his/her confirmation.
Quote:5.2 If a player is attacked*, he has a right to defend himself regardless of who is attacking. There are no restrictions for self-defense.
Quote:*For purposes of these Rules, an attack is draining shields to 50% or lower, or hull damage, or when a Cruise Disruptor is fired. Intentional ramming of any large ship is also considered an attack.
Quote:6.21 Attacking without an engagement notice is not allowed. All attacks must be preceded with some form of RP, regardless of NPC faction diplomacy.
HOWEVER. It is a 100% acceptable practice to cruise disrupt a vessel prior to enabling the demands levied by rule 6.21 in order to enable interaction between the two parties.
So what does this mean?
1) I may disrupt a tradeship before initiating an exchange of words.
2) The tradeship has been attacked. Which under rule 5.2 suggests that he is then in a position to initiate combat. It furthermore suggests that he may circumvent rule 6.21
3) At the point that the pirate has suffered 50% shield damage or issued a reasonable demand (Note that "Halt" is not considered a reasonable demand as per Xoria. It must be another action on behalf of the tradeship) the pirate may destroy the trade vessel within the guidelines set by server rules.
In short:
' Wrote:Finally I've already told you exactly why I am shooting before roleplaying, because I am not going to compromise my escape over a formality.
Is a perfectly valid form of gameplay, though it falls well outside of the spirit of discovery and serves only to cheapen, in my opinion, the gameplay environment and atmosphere.
As mentioned, I'll see if I can get an admin to swing on by to clarify where I may have butchered the rules.
