(08-28-2016, 06:40 AM)Chrono Wrote: Okay, Trivjum, you seem to be asking one specific thing over and over again, and claiming to not be receiving an answer, thus, I will do so now. You claim that threatening a POB with it's destruction without it's owners being a part of any RP leading up to it is wrong. You also claim that because the players are new, that they should be given some leeway and allowed a bit of room for their actions. You claim that this is all an unfair approach on the part of the {SR} and that it is wrong. You say all of this but seem to be overlooking the fact that these payers have OBVIOUSLY played long enough to earn the credits to build said POB, to supply said POB, and obviously have enough knowledge of how this game works to have even BUILT said POB.
Well, they did so in an area who's inhabitants do not like it, a group friendly to said group decided to take actions against such a blatant offense and thus have issued a deceleration of attack. This is all done perfectly well, and I'm sure, knowing the two parties involved, that they went about this properly and with PROPER RP.
So there you have it, they pitched their tent on someones front lawn, the home owner didn't like it and neither did their friend, so their friend is gunna kick it down and throw it out into the street. This is called RP.
As for my comments on nOmnomnOm, I stick by them, but what is said in NO WAY reflects that of the {SR} because as I said i my first post, I am NOT a part of the faction any longer.
First of all, thanks for finally talking about the actual problem rather than resorting to personal attacks, it is a welcome change.
You are right, new player or not, perhaps they should not be given a leeway and I can agree with that so you've won me on that.
However now, the one thing that doesn't sit right with me is this sentence in particular: "You claim that threatening a POB with it's destruction without it's owners being a part of any RP leading up to it is wrong."
Read yourself over a little bit. Read it twice or thrice if need be, does this really make sense to you? Threatening the destruction of a POB without any RP leading up to it is literally just another way of saying that they're threatening the destruction of a POB without any RP at all.
And I don't mean that "literally" in a figurative sense, I mean that "literally" in a literal way. Just analyze the phrase itself. It's the same thing as destroying an enemy player's ship without any RP leading up to it, isn't that what we call DMing and isn't that a bannable offense?
The two parties are nearly one and the same too but under a different name and under different characters, put yourself in that groups situation for a second, wouldn't you think it is a little bit weird to have a declaration of war against yourself by the same group your faction belongs to except under a different name? Now we're being told that they're used as some sort of Catalyst between a Junker and Rogue war which is fine but where is that RP surrounding all that? Shouldn't it be made readily available? All I've personally seen so far is a 3 lines "I don't like where your base is so I will destroy it" excuse of a RP.
I am all about encouraging RPing and advancing the story. Hell, a Junker and Rogue war would be freaking awesome if I must say so myself. I just think it's handled wrongly and that's what really rubs me the wrong way. Not the idea of it but the execution of it.
Just to make things clear here, I used to play looong ago and I'm back from a long break and I'm really rusty about everything. As such I don't actually have a bone to pick with anyone nor do I hate anyone in this thread that's been with or against me, it would be my pleasure to RP with any of you somewhere down the line so do not take this as a personal attack to any of you as that is not my intention, simply my (Albeit maybe a little bit heated) opinion on the whole situation. Thank you!
