Rules Clarification Thread

[Minh]

====================
RULE:4.3 Docking during combat with hostiles in docking message range (15k) counts as PvP Death, except for transports. If a player combat docks in a transport they may remain in the system for the sole purpose of trading only. They may not attack anyone unless in self defense. This restriction lasts for two hours.
QUESTION: Shouldn't the underlined part reflect the recent PVP Death rule? With the current wording, if trader docks while being under attack, he or she has to wait for two hours rather than one hour in order to be able to attack again on any of their characters
====================
ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:(Leave blank for Admin/Mod comment)

[Grumblesaur]

====================
RULE: 4.2 Demands should be reasonable and only one monetary or cargo demand can be issued during each piracy interaction.
QUESTION: Is this still an act of "piracy" when demands are being issued by a law enforcement character to a smuggler or trader, and if so, is demanding the expulsion of cargo and the payment of a fine considered a single demand or two? Several lawful IDs permit the carrier to demand contraband and levy fines, but is that an "and" as written, or more of an "or"?

TL;DR: I understand this is a very lateral question, but are law enforcement characters permitted to make multiple "interdiction" demands, and if so, should they be?

In my specific situation I was flying a transport of a faction hostile to the law enforcement officer whom I encountered, so I think he had license to just blow me up anyway, but I'd like to know for other characters and other situations. Reason I'm curious is that demanding all cargo (contraband or not) + a fine is literally worse than just dying (i.e. losing all cargo and being set back the death time). I understand it's more realistic for law enforcement to demand forfeit of the contraband and payment of a fine, but the value of all cargo + a fine is demonstrably greater than the total sum of cargo at the sellpoint, which for pirates, is considered to be an unreasonable demand by this post:

ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:
If a report is made against an unreasonable demand, it is judged within the context of the encounter.
We usually do not allow a player to demand more than the total sum of the cargo at the sellpoint. If you are flying a 5k transport and your cargo is worth 3k/u at the sellpoint, anything above 15 million is excessive.
Empty transports can be pirated as their death will result in them not able to return to the system. It is a valid interaction. We would like to, however, think that asking more than whatever million credits per thousand units of cargo space is frowned upon. If it is an empty 5ker - ask around 5 million. If it is an empty medium - around 3million.

Obviously not everyone can play a corrupt cop, but considering some lawful organizations prescribe minimum fines with no discernible upper limit in some cases, the prospect of a drop cargo + fine demand is a disproportionate risk for the rewards of smuggling when, for example, players carrying mined ores are not usually subjected to contraband laws and stand to earn far greater profit.

====================
ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:(Leave blank for Admin/Mod comment)

---

A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay,
brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.

[nevrozac]

====================
RULE:3.6 Attacking without Roleplay. Players must be given reasonable time to react to hostilities.
QUESTION:If playing under an ID that enforces system laws and you hail someone to stop for the purpose of a scan or any RP, but the person refuses to submit, can they be engaged regardless of their ID? For example a RM in Frankfurt wants to stop a freelancer, but the freelancer ignores the hails and demands and keeps cruising, can the RM engage? (this is just an example. im asking about any faction that has certain zoi and can enforce laws)
====================
ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:(Leave blank for Admin/Mod comment)

---

$tfu snek

[R.P.Curator]

====================
RULE: Systems Classification
QUESTION: What is a House (i.e. Liberty, Bretonia, Gallia) Zone of Influence? As in covered in any ID that specifies "ZOI: Liberty" are Liberty House Sovereign Space systems, House Controlled Space systems and House Outer Region systems? Or others - if others please clarify and update.
i.e. Do RHA Indie and/or Official have ZOI in Sigma 15?
====================
ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:(Leave blank for Admin/Mod comment)

[Timinator]

====================
RULE: 4.5
QUESTION: Does the Wild ID and SRP IDs specifying the player to be an infected thrall, count as nomads?
====================
ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:

[Praxor23]

====================
RULE: 2. All faction IDs are allowed to claim bounties within their zone of influence. Generic IDs are only allowed to claim bounties if clearly specified in the ID description.
QUESTION: Does this mean that Zoner ID, for example, can engage to claim bounties?
====================
ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:

[Nightowl]

====================
RULE:1.6
QUESTION: Are names like Luke Skywalker, Charles Xavier or Sean Connery ok?
====================
ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:(Leave blank for Admin/Mod comment)

---

---

---

This is a game, a Roleplay-Game!

[NOVA-5]

====================
RULE: 0.0
QUESTION: Does not answering to this thread for 10 months still make it legit for the community to use?
====================
[b][color=#FFF

[StyleR]

ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:
If a report is made against an unreasonable demand, it is judged within the context of the encounter.
We usually do not allow a player to demand more than the total sum of the cargo at the sellpoint. If you are flying a 5k transport and your cargo is worth 3k/u at the sellpoint, anything above 15 million is excessive.
Empty transports can be pirated as their death will result in them not able to return to the system. It is a valid interaction. We would like to, however, think that asking more than whatever million credits per thousand units of cargo space is frowned upon. If it is an empty 5ker - ask around 5 million. If it is an empty medium - around 3million.

Since this is the last admin answer on clarification i am taking it as a guideline.

- around 5 million for empty 5k'er - This is aprox. 1million per 1k of empty cargo, sounds okay.

Since so many traders are baffled at my requests regarding a guideline above, can someone from the admin team confirm or deny this.
Also it is then logical to assume that any 5k'er that is hauling cargo worth significantly lower then the 5 million, can be asked 5 million (basic PoB supply runs). Clarify this.

I have been demanding less then written above yet nobody seems to accept this. Thanks for the clarification.

[Loken]

ADMIN/MOD ANSWER:
If a report is made against an unreasonable demand, it is judged within the context of the encounter.
We usually do not allow a player to demand more than the total sum of the cargo at the sellpoint. If you are flying a 5k transport and your cargo is worth 3k/u at the sellpoint, anything above 15 million is excessive.
Empty transports can be pirated as their death will result in them not able to return to the system. It is a valid interaction. We would like to, however, think that asking more than whatever million credits per thousand units of cargo space is frowned upon. If it is an empty 5ker - ask around 5 million. If it is an empty medium - around 3million.

Since this is the last admin answer on clarification i am taking it as a guideline.

- around 5 million for empty 5k'er - This is aprox. 1million per 1k of empty cargo, sounds okay.

Since so many traders are baffled at my requests regarding a guideline above, can someone from the admin team confirm or deny this.
Also it is then logical to assume that any 5k'er that is hauling cargo worth significantly lower then the 5 million, can be asked 5 million (basic PoB supply runs). Clarify this.

I have been demanding less then written above yet nobody seems to accept this. Thanks for the clarification.

That post is the standard I have been going off (for now), so yes it's correct. If this changes we'll be sure to make it known.

---