Rule Discussion: Smugglers and Lawful interaction, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4,

[Binski]

So, here's an interesting tidbit.
Regarding smuggler and lawful interactions - how much protection are we giving either party rules-wise. For example, we all know that the following line:

4.4 Every char must have only one type of ID equipped and they must play to that ID.

is used to cover situations where a player who is engaged by a hostile party combat-docks on the attacker's base. The best example where this situation is very obvious is a battle happening between OCs and Corsairs in either Gamma or Alpha, where a freelancer ID mercinary is hired and, upon getting shot, they decide to dock on their own target's base in order to escape.

Now this particular line has never been used when it comes to smugglers. If a smuggler comes out from the lane and is encountered by lawfuls, they make a run for the mooring point. This is why in most cases and in most manuals you will find that it is more important to intercept smugglers at gates via tlagsnet. Players who fly off the lanes and manage to sneak in are thusly rewarded with a bigger chance to dock before succumbing to enemy fire.

That is, if we assume that 4.4 does not apply to smugglers.

I am more interested in what happens after this has been done. How much protection is the smuggler given rules-wise. Once they undock, they are fair game for an attempt at applying the ''Levy Fines'' line on lawful IDs. The issue here is that at this point the transport is empty or with recently bought cargo.

4.2 Demands should be reasonable and only one monetary or cargo demand can be issued during each piracy interaction.

With this interpretation, we can (again) assume that the player has out-played the lawful forces and cannot be fined for more than the worth of their current cargo. In other words, the lawfuls, presumably, cannot demand the smuggler pay a fine that is equal to the cargo they just delivered. The cargo is long gone, after all. The player docked and the ''encounter'' or ''interaction'' presumably ended.

That is one grey area. The other regards 4.2 in general. In most cases you will see a smuggler be told to drop the contraband and pay a fine. If this was a unlawful ID pirating a trader - they would get sanctioned as you may not in any case issue a demand that exceeds the profit of the player.

I would like this to be elaborated a bit more and, hopefully, the 4.2 rule be amended to mention fines. This would make smuggling less punishing and in turn would allow lawful players to have more things to do in the offtime between Storta raids.



Now let us jump back to 4.3 for a moment. When a smuggler successfully docks at a base, say - under fire by the lawfuls, the interaction ends. In most cases a player will log off, but in the few times they undock - the lawful party opens up on them as if the interaction continues. If not - they are fined and the situation as described above resumes.

The question in this case is if docking under fire for a smuggler 'concludes' the engagement. Or will they fair game if they undock. And if yes - can they dock back in that case, given they are not smuggling anymore and the regular 4.4 would apply. There is a certain video I am in the process of making and double-checking the green team's as well as the community's thoughts on this will prevent unnecessary edits.

As far as I had always believed, if that smuggler is flying a transport, they should be able to undock, and if they do they're fair game. Transports still have exemption, and most smugglers would be using them. I would say freighters would even be included in that, so really if you qualify for combat docking from using a combat ship or battletransport, you can't launch again anyways.

Now, if they had been clearly seen smuggling, a fine is fair still. That is, if the smuggler wants to face that immediately. If they do disappear, forum RP for it is up to how much work the lawful wants to do. If it were me, I'd pursue it. If they have the screens, they can prove a smuggler's a smuggler. If they are still in game, its gotta be legit. So assuming they launch again to keep on their way or just to communicate, just because they dumped their cargo doesn't mean it wasn't seen or didn't happen. But for long term collections, where a smuggler did take that option to log off, it should be done via the forum (like a bounty posting) to pursue it beyond that immediate time period (say 1 hour). Otherwise you shouldn't be able to fly up to an empty ship you saw smuggling 2 weeks ago and open fire or levy fines (unless you screened the proof and posted). That's pretty much the system everyone uses, but has been less common in recent years. Lawfuls should always have the option to add ships to 'arrest' lists (bounty lists) and allow them to be pursued for their inrp crimes.

If a smuggler comes out from the lane and is encountered by lawfuls, they make a run for the mooring point. This is why in most cases and in most manuals you will find that it is more important to intercept smugglers at gates via tlagsnet. Players who fly off the lanes and manage to sneak in are thusly rewarded with a bigger chance to dock before succumbing to enemy fire.

A couple months back I posted Smuggling problems and possible options to help. In regards to the tactics of smuggling, getting them at gates, along lanes, or near the planets/sell points...I suggested an alt dock point on the back side of the planet locations, allowing all ID's to dock (except aliens etc). This would allow for many things to change. Pirate ID's could actually pirate and sell at at least 1 lawful location per region. Inrp I would expect Houses to make such landings illegal, meaning approaching them can get you intercepted. The problem I always believed is that if a lawful is near the manhattan moor, and a smuggler approaches, even from the lane, can't they /nodock? is that still a thing?

So my point was if you don't know where someone might be waiting, you take a chance either way. A lawful could then have to bounce around or act in groups to cover the various ways to approach a planet, with no guarantee on the path. So if the smuggler saw a lawful in system, or even on scanner obviously next to the Mooring fixture, he could try the back route. The lawful could try to patrol, or catch them well away from the planet...etc, and a great number of new possible scenarios pop up around the doubling of your chance to dock, and increased odds smuggler ships will do more than just wait until lawfuls leave. The more they make a run for it, the more chances lawfuls have to get them, as the double the options, means less camping, less lane reliance. In the case of transports getting right up to a base via the lane, and blasting their way past a lawful at the last minute (probably docking while being yelled at), they at least suffer the RP consequences. Even if this is most common, an alt dock point would let players like that up their chances to avoid guaranteed inrp punishment.

And on the most extreme side, if only the alt dock point on the rear side bought the contraband, it would force all smugglers, lawful, quasi or unlawful, to make a longer approach, making it more plausible to catch them before docking. It would also make smuggling in lawful/quasi ships much more interesting!

---

The Further Exploits of Captain Antares (August 2015) │ (alt) JonasHudson
*Argo | Special Operative ID (Approved Request)* | Argo Compilation Video
################ *Proposed OF Challenge System* ################
############### The Book of Piracy (Piracy Tutorial) ###############
############### Binski Alamo (Youtube Channel) ###############