Is this breaking rule 5.8?

[monmarfori]

Rule 5.8 is: A player who was killed in a PvP fight must not attack the enemy (character or characters involved in the death) with any of the characters on his/her account(s) for 2 hours. Self-killing, friendly fire kills or death to NPCs during a PvP fight are counted as normal PvP deaths.

Here's an example of an unknown situation.
A player has 2 chars, named A and C. He logs account A, which is a Wraith, and spots B, a Thor. A then kills B in a short fight. B soon then joins a Hessian raiding party against Corsairs in Omicron Gamma. A logs off and switches to C, a Corsair Titan, who then soon joins a Corsair fleet. C then spots B and engages him.

Did A or C break rule 5.8?

[Jaika]

I say it's not rule braking, if i get the picture right. The guy with the A ship kills B and then B moves to Sair space for some raid and fun....and A has a C named Sair ship too...and here comes why i say "no" because C shoots first...you said "A logs off and switches to C, a Corsair Titan, who then soon joins a Corsair fleet. C then spots B and engages him." So virtually after C attacking B...B has no choice but to defend himself.

As i understand, rule sais if you get shot then you can't reengage the guy who killed you within 4 hours with any of your chars. But it's not saing the guy who shot you can't reengage you with another char.

But correct me if i'm wrong.

---

There is no such thing as too much firepower.

[Syf]

I do believe it is not rule breaking simply because A kills B. B switches to Hessian. C later switches to the Corsair. Both switch their characters and since

"A player who was killed in a PvP fight must not attack the enemy (character or characters involved in the death)"
B was killed, he switches to Sair, his sair is not connected/involved with the death of his other character so it's free to engage. Atleast that's what I think. Correct me if I am wrong.

---

Inferno wuz here.

[Draconyx]

As I understand it, that isn't breaking the rules. As an example - lets say I engage a molly on my BAF chara and I then get killed. If I then switch to a character lets say a trader that has a name that is unrelated to my BAF one and am then attacked by said molly and kill him. How could the molly know we are the same person? As an alternative lets say the molly changes to a Liberty lawful chara and I have changed to a pirate chara after the molly kills me in my BAF chara and we then have another fight - how would you know if they are the same people?

[Hone]

This wouldnt be breaking the rule in any way no matter who attaked who in the second fight. A is allowed to attack B with any of his characters wheneve he likes, as long as its not Bs 10 minute system leaving grace period. Thats the benefit of winning.

I addition when you die you are only restricted from attacking the CHARACTER that killed you, not the player. B could attack C, because it was A that killed him, even though they belong to the same player. In this case it doesnt matter cos C attacked B, so its double OK.

TL;DR: No. Did A die? No. Then 5.8 doesnt apply to him.

---

User was banned for: Griefing others
Time left: (Permanent)

[Divine]

All this argument all the time...

A killed B.

B then stays on B joining a party for a raid.

A logs C.

C engages B during that raid.

B is absolutly free to defend himself against any aggressor, that includes C, which is an alt-char of A.

Tricky part here is, if B would be engaging C first, which then falls under mentioned rule, but could also be seen as malicious reporting as A knowing B would be there joined the fight anyways and then reported B for attacking him on C and thus breaking rule 5.8.

It's called common courtesy. If you join a fight willingly, accept the consequences.
In your given example, B sure as hell is free to defend himself... and to answer your question... neither A nor C did break the rules, as they've been the winning side anyways in the fight against B, and the rule itself just covers the losing party.

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=151485
Time left: (Permanent)

[Hone]

Tricky part here is, if B would be engaging C first, which then falls under mentioned rule, but could also be seen as malicious reporting as A knowing B would be there joined the fight anyways and then reported B for attacking him on C and thus breaking rule 5.8.

Wrong.

Rule 5.8 is: A player who was killed in a PvP fight must not attack the enemy (character or characters involved in the death)

when you die you are only restricted from attacking the CHARACTER that killed you, not the player. B could attack C, because it was A that killed him, even though they belong to the same player.

---

User was banned for: Griefing others
Time left: (Permanent)

[belarusich]

If A kills B and then A logs C and B kills him here and C has nickname which doesnt say he is A, this is not rule breaking

---

http://i.imgur.com/kUwDiuk.jpg
more than 1 kill per minute in shooter is cheating now :\

Signature must not be larger than 700x250 pixels
Codes from your picture have been removed.
~ Dim

[Trail]

Tricky part here is, if B would be engaging C first, which then falls under mentioned rule, but could also be seen as malicious reporting as A knowing B would be there joined the fight anyways and then reported B for attacking him on C and thus breaking rule 5.8.

Wrong.

Rule 5.8 is: A player who was killed in a PvP fight must not attack the enemy (character or characters involved in the death)

when you die you are only restricted from attacking the CHARACTER that killed you, not the player. B could attack C, because it was A that killed him, even though they belong to the same player.

with any of the characters on his/her account(s)

Good job reading the rules hone.

To clarify C broke rule 5.8

C is aware who B is and is not allowed to engage that character (and vice versa)

That said since B is not aware of who C is he would not be breaking a rule if he engaged first unless C told B in advance on who he was. Of course if B does know who C is then they are both maliciously breaking 5.8 if they decided to fight anyway.

---

[bloogaL]

To clarify C broke rule 5.8

C is aware who B is and is not allowed to engage that character (and vice versa)

That said since B is not aware of who C is he would not be breaking a rule if he engaged first unless C told B in advance on who he was. Of course if B does know who C is then they are both maliciously breaking 5.8 if they decided to fight anyway.

Nothing in the rules says C can't attack B, nor that B can't attack C. The player behind A and C is on a different character to the one he killed B on in the first place, so B is free to engage him. Where you got the idea that C can't engage B I have no idea.

Admin confirmation:

• Scenario 2: I, LHI|Gheis.Mace, kill LR-Contrived.Name in California. I then, before the two hours are up, switch to OSI-Resolute captained InRP by Gheis Mace, and am engaged by LR-Contrived.Name in a separate interaction. Because the ship names are not notably similar (LHI|Gheis.Mace v OSI-Resolute), I cannot expect LR-Contrived.Name to have known I was the same person - or even the same character - and so no violation of reengagement has occurred. Because I'm notably different as well, LR-Contrived.Name can assume I've logged off and return to California if he so wishes.