NEED THIS CLARIFIED

[reavengitair]

think of it as that... - if you are flying a ship that is fighting another ship that has fled out of effective weaponrange - and you have no chance to catch up to get it into your weaponrange - what will you consider it?

A good tactic.

if you feel thta the BHG BS , having no chance to fight you ... should have retreated from the system for up to 4 hours. - and you apply this rule to yourself, if you are in the position of the BS next time... you re good to go to assume that the BHGs were wrong.

Call the escorts. SHOULDN'T THOSE THINGS HAVE ESCORTS AT ALL TIMES?

if you do however think that stalling a combat like that ... forcing a retreat in that way "deserved" a 4 hours lock from a retreat is NOT ok ... then you should not have assumed them fleeing.

Serves them right for not having escorts, or battleship missiles (which can hit me from a range of 4k, but not 5, but by the time I can get out to 5k, he would have drained my shields)

a carrier has no effectiveway to harm a battleship at 5k - the missile do hit. but i highly doubt that you can chew through the shields. - its a bit of a bugger - a situation like a very light fighter. - dodging all the time until all eternity. - never attempting to attack .... is it effectively participating in a combat? or is it just stalling the fight.

I can damage their hull, and I've proved that. They just flee soon after.

would have been best to just agree, that both had retreated from one another - and maybe don t insist on retreats at all ( from both sides ) - insisting on a rule is detrimental ( from both sides ) and harms gameplay - for those involved.

the reason of all this is I don't understand how people can accuse me of fleeing WHEN IM STILL ATTACKING THE PERSON.