(03-11-2025, 12:23 PM)EisenSeele Wrote: The rule clarification is largely about trade ships that are getting issued a reasonable demand from a large group of pirates, and then expecting to be treated to a 'fair duel' by the pirates when they refuse, ending in a VR - After discussion, that was found to be an unrealistic expectation.
Why is this an unreasonable expectation by trade ships, but not by combat ships? Do you really think battlecruiser-sized semi-gunboats are the class that deserves to be "legally" ganked? Why do you even find the need for a legal loophole to gank people to exist?
(03-11-2025, 12:23 PM)EisenSeele Wrote: 1. Conviction to never pay pirates means you accept that you're going to get shot at. It's not a 'free pass to gank' so much as you are accepting the consequences of refusing all demands.
"Playing to your ID now allows people to gank you." Amazing.
(03-11-2025, 12:23 PM)EisenSeele Wrote: The issuing of a 'reasonable demand' is seen as the opportunity of an 'out' for avoiding a gank.
What? No, really. What? The opportunity to avoid getting ganked to shit was the implementation and enforcement of the 1.0 rule. Why are you now allowing the threat of ganking to be used as leverage? Is there something I'm missing here, or missed about the original intent behind 1.0?
(03-11-2025, 12:23 PM)EisenSeele Wrote: not assume that pirates will completely violate all roleplay sense
I'll be sure to have this handy next time we have the terrorists vs transports talk.