Hm.
I think this FR5 against the whole faction is wrong.
Reasons:
> much too harsh punishment: FR5 to hostile to OC basically limits the faction's accessible bases to Freeports. An FR5 needs to be checked for gameplay ramifications. This one is a death penalty by the vehicle of "roleplay consequence". And even if no malicious intent like "let's kill off that faction!" is involved, a player-player interaction (even a non-dodgy, perfectly white one) should in my opinion never be enough to ruin a complete ID/faction.
> unfair collective punishment: Why FR5 the complete group when you can hit the one player that is responsible? The individual FR5 is a much better instrument, the "FR5 let's wreck their roleplay!" should be heavily restricted and checked for potential gamebreaking consequences for the faction threatened with it.
> Cloaked evidence: Even though the rules limit this for lawfuls only, the "message" of the rule has to be interpreted as: We do not want cloaked info gathering in order to harm others. A Kruger-IMG round of cloaked Kruger| spying shittery made that change come true. The message of the rule change is clear, and I do not see why it should not also be there to protect unlawful roleplay. Roleplay needs to be protected against bad, perhaps even malicious and disruptive ways that cause unusually harsh consequences. That was what Kruger tried, and the agreement was that it is not okay. I do not see how 101st case is any different when it comes to the "spirit" of the rules.
> A bounty before the FR5: That's a rule violation as the same ID cannot shoot the same ID. Even if you run it via a proxy, it is against the rules. It should be reported as part of the case against this sanction, as the criteria for a "civil war" have not been met. For information on this see the last few admin rulings/announcements that allowed for "you can shoot your own ID". > Suspicion of metagaming: Transferring ingame knowledge between your own characters to harm another group that you share an irp, but as I have heard also an oorp rivalry? Sounds fishy to me and speaks against an acceptance of the FR5 on a complete faction that ruins them effectively.
> Suspicion of powergaming: Taking a character into custody without the player agreeing is in my opinion powergaming. If it took place like it was described to me, it would be powergaming in my book.
I agree that roleplay can have consequences.
However, a roleplay encounter should never have the potential to wreck a faction.
Reality shows that this is totally unrealistic (look at international diplomacy that knows 1000s of nuances before a war is fought)
For the reasons I named, I think that an FR5 against the one ship (or all the ships of that player/character?) is okay. That would be acceptable consequences for valid roleplay.
But killing off a faction (whether you like 101st or not does not even matter here) by means of FR5 against its own ID should never be an option except for the worst (and I really mean the worst) cases like total lolwuts, etc In this case, so many aspects yell "fishy!" to me, that I am surprised that the FR5 against the complete faction actually went through. It makes me worry a little, and I will definitely draw the consequences and move all relevant sensitive chat into group or green message, roleplay the meetings 40 k off plane or move it to Skype completely. That's the logical consequence when faced with such damage for a roleplay screwup.
