@Nighthawk and Swift

[DataPhreak]

You are not waiting for the pirate to CD you, but are immediately opening fire, and, ergo, initiating the engagement.

Did you know that 3 SNs can kill any transport below an Advanced Train that has no armor upgrade, and, with a few debs in the mix, can kill even a mk 7 Advanced Train?...

Reread the first line of the post you quoted. Further, in the previous post, the rules clearly state that an attack is draining shields to 50% or lower, or hull damage, or when a Cruise Disruptor is fired.

---

We need 600m/s and 700m/s Debilitators.

[Derkylos]

Sorry, but you cannot make said presumption. As a BAF, I am fully hostile to the KNF NPC faction, and, presumably, they are hostile to BAF...that does not mean I can assume they are aware of my presence and attack them on sight...

---

[DataPhreak]

And you cannot make said presumption that I am actually going to hit someone as soon as I drop out of the trade lane. The rules are clear on what an attack is. Firing at someone does not necessarily warrant an attack.

---

We need 600m/s and 700m/s Debilitators.

[Derkylos]

Tends to indicate hostility, tho...which doesn't usually get a good response from pirates...

---

[tansytansey]

And you cannot make said presumption that I am actually going to hit someone as soon as I drop out of the trade lane. The rules are clear on what an attack is. Firing at someone does not necessarily warrant an attack.

The presumption comes from you actually posting that you start shooting as soon as you pop out of the tradelane.
You use some very skewered logic. If you fire a full volley at someone, how can it be considered anything but an attack?
The rules are clear on what an attack is, yes, and if a trader starts shooting at me their intention is clear. They don't want to partake in any further roleplay, and the engagement has begun. Don't expect any pirate to be lenient with you if you open fire on them and then go "oh sorry, that wasn't meant to be an attack"

---

http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv46/Ni...gcloudscopy.png
Image turned into a URL because it made your sig too tall. -Zuke
|Ashes and Draya's Epic Adventure|Ashes "Nighthawk" Yotaka|Nightfall|Eva Jones|
[5:50:49 PM] JakeSG (William Darkmoor) says: I like you, Ashes. You're more cynical than God.

[DataPhreak]

The presumption comes from you actually posting that you start shooting as soon as you pop out of the tradelane.
You use some very skewered logic. If you fire a full volley at someone, how can it be considered anything but an attack?
The rules are clear on what an attack is, yes, and if a trader starts shooting at me their intention is clear. They don't want to partake in any further roleplay, and the engagement has begun. Don't expect any pirate to be lenient with you if you open fire on them and then go "oh sorry, that wasn't meant to be an attack"

How can it be considered anything but an attack? Simple, by whether or not it A. Connects, and B. Does 50% or more sheild damage. Neither are mutually exclusive. You may also consider it an attack if the volly does, in fact, contain a CD. There is no Skewing of that logic. It's written in blue and white. Further, it is your own presumption that said trader does not wish to Rp, in spite of the fact that I have reitterated my views on the subject in almost every single post to be contrary. So, if you, and "Any Pirate" do not wish to RP with a trader who fires on you, then that's fine, but I never asked you to be "Lenient".

---

We need 600m/s and 700m/s Debilitators.

[tansytansey]

How can it be considered anything but an attack? Simple, by whether or not it A. Connects, and B. Does 50% or more sheild damage.

Yes, that makes more sense. However I'm sure anyone who sees a trader fire a single volley or two off into space would not mistake that for an attack, but rather a mis-fire. But your post, if I believe, read that you pop out of a trade lane and immediately start shooting at the pirates. Not you pop out of the lane and start shooting at pirates but intentionally missing.
That shows clear intent, so your argument is once again invalid. If the pirate was quick enough to dodge your first volley, I doubt they're gonna stick around long enough for you to deal 50% damage to their shields, just the same as a trader isn't gonna stick around and wait for a pirate to start RPing. Which I believe was the logic you used.

Further, it is your own presumption that said trader does not wish to Rp

Roleplaying on this server is done primarily with words and secondary with guns. If no written roleplay precedes the engagement, then it is not a roleplay engagement, but PvP. If you want to roleplay, then why the hell are you shooting first? Your argument once again, is invalid.

---

http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv46/Ni...gcloudscopy.png
Image turned into a URL because it made your sig too tall. -Zuke
|Ashes and Draya's Epic Adventure|Ashes "Nighthawk" Yotaka|Nightfall|Eva Jones|
[5:50:49 PM] JakeSG (William Darkmoor) says: I like you, Ashes. You're more cynical than God.

[pchwang]

Interesting points have been brought up other than the vindication of one's RP, I see.

But from what I have done from experience, the instant a trader begins firing on me, regardless of what has occurred prior to the incident, I will usually respond with something along the lines of: "Well, that's not nice. Now, eat vacuum!"

...And proceed to rip the trader a new one, regardless of what happens.

The faulty nature of some of the arguments here is the misinterpretation of the actions that are taken by either party: the pirate and the trader.

For one, when piracy occurs, the pirate always begins an engagement. Piracy is inherently a PvP interaction. Now, how the trader responds is different. He or she can surrender by speaking and offering something in return for their lives, or they can meet the PvP challenge by returning fire. To me, disrupting a lane is no different than CDing a trader. An engagement has begun, and the trader has a choice to make:

A) Fire Back - Retaliation. They commit themselves to a PvP engagement against the pirate.

B) Surrender - They offer a sum of credits or cargo for their lives.

The Trader does not begin the engagement if he fires on the pirate, the pirate has already begun the engagement. How the trader reacts is how the rest of the interaction will play out.

---

[7:42:05 PM][6:51:36 PM] Igor (Smokey): btw terry
[6:51:48 PM] Terrance Cooper: Ye?
[6:52:00 PM] Igor (Smokey): nothin
[6:52:03 PM] Igor (Smokey): just sayin btw
[6:52:05 PM] Terrance Cooper: <_<

Johnny_Haas: you shot anti criuse speed rockets!!!
Johnny_Haas: but why????
Johnny_Haas: ??
Johnny_Haas: why you shoot criuse speed rockets?

[DataPhreak]

Yes, that makes more sense. However I'm sure anyone who sees a trader fire a single volley or two off into space would not mistake that for an attack, but rather a mis-fire. But your post, if I believe, read that you pop out of a trade lane and immediately start shooting at the pirates. Not you pop out of the lane and start shooting at pirates but intentionally missing.
That shows clear intent, so your argument is once again invalid. If the pirate was quick enough to dodge your first volley, I doubt they're gonna stick around long enough for you to deal 50% damage to their shields, just the same as a trader isn't gonna stick around and wait for a pirate to start RPing. Which I believe was the logic you used.
Roleplaying on this server is done primarily with words and secondary with guns. If no written roleplay precedes the engagement, then it is not a roleplay engagement, but PvP. If you want to roleplay, then why the hell are you shooting first? Your argument once again, is invalid.

First off, immediately out of the lane, I'm not going to be within blaster range, in all likelyhood. There for, I will first attempt to enter cruise. I've already stated this. But your refference to my previous post, in another topic, was made well before whether or not engagement rules even became an issue, which I give you full credit for. When engagement rules did become an issue, I cleared up the fact that it is elementary for a trader to automatically attempt to enter cruise. In fact, it was quite handily quoted in one of Derks previous posts in this thread. Therefore, your arguement is invalid.

Second, I certainly hope a pirate isn't going to stick around long enough for me to deal 50% damage, If my volley scares the pirate away, then it has exceeded its purpose. Fact is, if I can avoid it, I'm not going to stick around long enough to deal 50% damage to their shields. I would also like to add here that currently my trade ship is sporting Justice MK2's from my starflier, and mining turrets, which deal even less damage.

Finally I've already told you exactly why I am shooting before roleplaying, because I am not going to compromise my escape over a formality.

---

We need 600m/s and 700m/s Debilitators.

[tansytansey]

First off, immediately out of the lane, I'm not going to be within blaster range, in all likelyhood. There for, I will first attempt to enter cruise.

Then in all likelihood you were stopped by a CD. Now tell me, what's so hard about typing out one or two messages before you start shooting? "because it compromises your escape" is not an excuse, they've already caught you. A close range CD fired at the front of your ship will stop you indefinitely, CMs or not, and if you start shooting you are subject to, once again, this rule:

6.21 Attacking without an engagement notice is not allowed. All attacks must be preceded with some form of RP, regardless of NPC faction diplomacy.

It's not like the pirate is gonna be shooting you straight away, they're most likely going to be typing as well.

Therefore, your arguement is invalid.

Don't be childish. Taking what I say and saying it back is not clever, because no matter how many ways you spin it you are not exempt from the rules. Or did you forget what I quoted several times in one of my previous posts?

6.21 Attacking without an engagement notice is not allowed. All attacks must be preceded with some form of RP, regardless of NPC faction diplomacy.

This makes even your point of making my point invalid invalid. I don't even know why you are still arguing.

Second, I certainly hope a pirate isn't going to stick around long enough for me to deal 50% damage, If my volley scares the pirate away, then it has exceeded its purpose.

That was perhaps a misinterpretation on my part. By scare away I did not mean run off into the asteroid field with their tale between their legs. I meant to say they will begin evasive manoeuvres and then most likely proceed to kill you. you see, we deal with so many traders like this a day that we don't bother to attempt any further roleplay with them once their intentions are clear. We just kill them and hope the next trader offers more excitement.
And no transport could ever scare away a pirate, I've killed even the most heavily armoured transports in my Greyhound, which has only 4 guns.

I would also like to add here that currently my trade ship is sporting Justice MK2's from my starflier, and mining turrets, which deal even less damage.

Irrelevant information.

Finally I've already told you exactly why I am shooting before roleplaying, because I am not going to compromise my escape over a formality.

Once again, I direct you to the server rules, which is presently making all your arguments invalid. But I see that still has not gotten the message through to you, so this time actually read what I post.

6.21 Attacking without an engagement notice is not allowed. All attacks must be preceded with some form of RP, regardless of NPC faction diplomacy.

You may not want to, but the server rules dictate that you must and I have yet to see you provide a valid argument against this.


Also, on an unrelated topic, for some reason I keep thinking your avatar looks like a Yak. D:

---

http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv46/Ni...gcloudscopy.png
Image turned into a URL because it made your sig too tall. -Zuke
|Ashes and Draya's Epic Adventure|Ashes "Nighthawk" Yotaka|Nightfall|Eva Jones|
[5:50:49 PM] JakeSG (William Darkmoor) says: I like you, Ashes. You're more cynical than God.