Triyun Posted April 26, 2011 Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 [img]http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/5386/sigintroll.png[/img] Requesting Signal intercepts from my large array of signal intercept capable aircraft deployed in the combat space from Timmy's Aircraft posted here, with the goal of both getting the data and finding the subs. [quote name='King Timmy' timestamp='1303851859' post='2699912'] [b]Meanwhile, the Naval vesels which remained began transmitting any data[/b] they could about Mount Katahdin. The people who recieved it, hopefully those from Boston, would know of the secret exit from Mount Katahdin and be able to have assets ready to capture anyone leaving from it preferably alive. [/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 26, 2011 Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 [quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1303853604' post='2699931'] [img]http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/5386/sigintroll.png[/img] Requesting Signal intercepts from my large array of signal intercept capable aircraft deployed in the combat space from Timmy's Aircraft posted here, with the goal of both getting the data and finding the subs. [/quote] 1-30= Fail 31-100= Success [img]http://data.treksimming.com/rolls/rollstriyun4.png[/img] You got a winner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted May 1, 2011 Report Share Posted May 1, 2011 I wish to bring attention to [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=101399"]this thread[/url]. Due to previous articles written about the UFE, and discussions with the UFE government, DDB would not have been allowed to leave the country. Further, there was no RP having DDB leave the country prior to the nuclear weapon striking right outside the GR headquarters. Since there would have to have been RP to get around my security for DDB to leave the country, and there never was any, it can be safely assumed that DDB was in-country, and therefore at the headquarters, when the nuclear missile went off, therefore leaving him deceased. Furthermore, when the action first happened, Kitex came on IRC and was !@#$%*ing about it, asking if DDB could be alive but simply have cancer from the radiation. When told it was highly probably that he was just a shadow now, he dropped the conversation. This highlights the fact that DDB was, in fact, not only in-country but in the headquarters at the time of the blast. Logs can be provided if necessary. I am asking the GMs to retcon the highlighted thread for blatant god-modding. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted May 1, 2011 Report Share Posted May 1, 2011 A main character can not be killed unless with permission or if the owner purposefully puts the character in a situation of danger. This has been a primary tenet of RPing for years - we've had threads devoted to it, we've even had a poll on it, and this has not changed for, again, [b]years[/b]. It doesn't matter if DDB was carpet-nuked with 20 19megaton bombs, DDB could not be killed, regardless of Triyun's OOC motivation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted May 1, 2011 Report Share Posted May 1, 2011 I am with Sargun on this, DDB was in a protectorate zone, not in the Empire proper, moreover, he wasnt in Maine. He was not under any direct threat from war to warrent being killed and Kitex did not give permission for his character to die. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted May 1, 2011 Report Share Posted May 1, 2011 [quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1304289862' post='2703441'] I am with Sargun on this, DDB was in a protectorate zone, not in the Empire proper, moreover, he wasnt in Maine. He was not under any direct threat from war to warrent being killed and Kitex did not give permission for his character to die. [/quote] I would counter that with how chaotic the Empire is right now, ANY character within the Empire is under threat of being killed. Further, the "Empire proper" and the Empire's protectorates fall under the same umbrella. If one is under threat, they are all under threat. And when you have nuclear missiles flying over your territory, you are always taking a risk. Triyun could have dropped one of them out of the sky on Long Island, and I wouldn't have been able to say anything because I was allowing them passage over. To go back and say "oh, I wouldn't have let them fly over" would be a god mod. The missiles were flying over my protectorate territory. One malfunctioned and exploded near the GR headquarters. It is a risk taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted May 1, 2011 Report Share Posted May 1, 2011 If your argument is based on where the UFE was at war at, you'll find that the UFE was just as much at war with the rebellion within the PI and its protectorates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 And he did not willingly place himself in a war zone - in fact, he was [b]forced[/b] to stay in it because of SMH, again helping my point. There is no reasonable expectation for a nuclear missile to "malfunction" and land directly next to a non-combatant in a different political and geographic area than the target, and if there was (there isn't, this is for argument's sake) then Kitex was forced into that position without a choice because of SMH's policy which did not exist when DDB was originally placed. It's pretty simple: there was no permission asked, and nobody here can argue that Kitex put DDB into a dangerous situation by having him sit peacefully in an untargeted area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Whether he was forced into that position or not, he was still inside a war zone. A 4 year old girl was killed in a Syrian city by a sniper while walking down the street last week. She couldn't leave, she was forced to stay. She had no reasonable expectation for a sniper to shoot a 4 year old girl. Yet it happened. And yet this happened. What you are saying makes no sense. If a leader is out in the open, and it is RP'd out by another party to where it would be reasonable that they would be in a position to kill them, then that character can be killed. With all these random nukings that have been going on, if a nuclear missile is launched at a place where the leader is and that leader or character has no means of leaving, then that character can be killed. Our characters are not superhuman. And to point to past examples of Martens and Uberstein, who frankly got laughed at by everyone, would be like using Mael's dragon-person leader as an example for gene splicing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 I found out that the Center for Global Research actually believes in HAARP conspiracies. Can I just Earthquake him to death instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 [quote name='Pravus Ingruo' timestamp='1304295644' post='2703533'] Whether he was forced into that position or not, he was still inside a war zone. A 4 year old girl was killed in a Syrian city by a sniper while walking down the street last week. She couldn't leave, she was forced to stay. She had no reasonable expectation for a sniper to shoot a 4 year old girl. Yet it happened. And yet this happened. What you are saying makes no sense. If a leader is out in the open, and it is RP'd out by another party to where it would be reasonable that they would be in a position to kill them, then that character can be killed. With all these random nukings that have been going on, if a nuclear missile is launched at a place where the leader is and that leader or character has no means of leaving, then that character can be killed. Our characters are not superhuman. And to point to past examples of Martens and Uberstein, who frankly got laughed at by everyone, would be like using Mael's dragon-person leader as an example for gene splicing. [/quote] Unfortunately for you, the existing community standards disagree. Even if the rules were changed, it wouldn't be able to take effect until after the DDB incident anyway - save your argument for a GM-sponsored poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 Same sort of thing happened to me. Queen Whatever her name is.. rerolled and and abandoned part of Sudan. I rolled in, rounded up her leadership, and shot them all. She refused to let me shoot her president and despite being able to provide any reasonable explanation as to how he escaped the country.. she was still allowed to rp him fleeing to Cochin. Annoying yes, but the community spoke and all that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of cochin Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 GM says, "Kitex's character would not die and Kitex is allowed to continue RPing that character. Sargun's reasonings given above pretty much sums up my rationale in making this judgment. Wilful placement of a character in a combat zone could lead to a character being killed, the wilful placing acknowledging of the potential IC death of the character by the player. However where it is not a wilful decision, where the attack has been a total random one and something the player had no chance to know previously, the player has the option to not let the character die. Case in point, that diplomatic meeting RP ages ago when some CFU RPd killing the national leaders RPd by several players in a single strike and the said attack was wiped. Pravus's arguments are sensible and rational however in this case where it is a core character being involved, we give greater RP latitude of freedom. CNRP =/= RL . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 [quote name='king of cochin' timestamp='1304309790' post='2703804'] GM says, "Kitex's character would not die and Kitex is allowed to continue RPing that character. Sargun's reasonings given above pretty much sums up my rationale in making this judgment. Wilful placement of a character in a combat zone could lead to a character being killed, the wilful placing acknowledging of the potential IC death of the character by the player. However where it is not a wilful decision, where the attack has been a total random one and something the player had no chance to know previously, the player has the option to not let the character die. Case in point, that diplomatic meeting RP ages ago when some CFU RPd killing the national leaders RPd by several players in a single strike and the said attack was wiped. Pravus's arguments are sensible and rational however in this case where it is a core character being involved, we give greater RP latitude of freedom. CNRP =/= RL . [/quote] That said in the future rp'd security measures will need to be respected and followed by participants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=93192&view=findpost&p=2710467 Unless Triyun takes every person in CNRP to court for using boeing products, I wont be recognising this as canon what so ever. Moreover, Ive been using the EA-18 for 8 years in CNRP time, so 8 months IRL, since I rolled into England infact. It has never, in my two years of being part of this community, been a problem using aircraft from various companies, regardless of where they are based. Ive never seen it happen. Secondly, you cannot sue for something that happened before you had the company. Which brings me to the next point that if contracts are considered automatic when you use RL aircraft, then the contract with boeing is already concluded... 8 months ago there is no legal basis for the post. Im not respodning to it ICly, until a ruling is made. But the way I see it, unless triyun follows his own example and takes everybody to court for apparent copyright infringment, I probably wont be recognising it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1305219862' post='2710728'] http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=93192&view=findpost&p=2710467 Unless Triyun takes every person in CNRP to court for using boeing products, I wont be recognising this as canon what so ever. Moreover, Ive been using the EA-18 for 8 years in CNRP time, so 8 months IRL, since I rolled into England infact. It has never, in my two years of being part of this community, been a problem using aircraft from various companies, regardless of where they are based. Ive never seen it happen. Secondly, you cannot sue for something that happened before you had the company. Which brings me to the next point that if contracts are considered automatic when you use RL aircraft, then the contract with boeing is already concluded... 8 months ago there is no legal basis for the post. Im not respodning to it ICly, until a ruling is made. But the way I see it, unless triyun follows his own example and takes everybody to court for apparent copyright infringment, I probably wont be recognising it. [/quote] And this belongs in the GM's court why? It's an ic matter and something we are not ruling on, Triyun can rp his own nation and the trial there, you can decide what happens in England. I see no need for an ooc ruling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 Wasn't it originally Mudd who owned Boeing? How did Triyun get it? Second question on companies, should we go by IRL locations (if you own the land where the company is, you have sole rights to it), or are we going by first-come, first-served? It has often worked out that the people who own the land get the companies because all the major ones have been RP claimed early on. Mudd took Boeing and Microsoft, Zoot has the BBC, Uberstein had Volvo, etc. However, Cochin claimed several companies that are located in Europe, and you guys complained, but I haven't seen anyone actually RP those companies out, so they should theoretically be free game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 Cochin claimed only the trademarks. I think we should go by major facility locations. For example, Boeing's RL headquarters are in Chicago, the civilian sector is in Washington State, and the military sector is mainly in Missouri. Therefore, Triyun would have any and all rights to those that are originally produced in Washington. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1305234134' post='2710834'] Wasn't it originally Mudd who owned Boeing? How did Triyun get it? Second question on companies, should we go by IRL locations (if you own the land where the company is, you have sole rights to it), or are we going by first-come, first-served? It has often worked out that the people who own the land get the companies because all the major ones have been RP claimed early on. Mudd took Boeing and Microsoft, Zoot has the BBC, Uberstein had Volvo, etc. However, Cochin claimed several companies that are located in Europe, and you guys complained, but I haven't seen anyone actually RP those companies out, so they should theoretically be free game. [/quote] Actually I remember someone rp'ing a game made by Blizzard Entertainment, Mudd had never laid claim to that but did after the rp and won. So rl location is what matters through a precedent set up years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawoo Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1305234429' post='2710837'] Cochin claimed only the trademarks. I think we should go by major facility locations. For example, Boeing's RL headquarters are in Chicago, the civilian sector is in Washington State, and the military sector is mainly in Missouri. Therefore, Triyun would have any and all rights to those that are originally produced in Washington. [/quote] Major facility operations for Boeing are as follows: Washington State (manufacturing) Wichita, Kansas (manufacturing civilian, military, as well as HQ for Airforce 1, 2 and other major government planes) California (military R&D) Chicago, Illinois (head offices) Washington D.C. (offices, major lobbying) etc... So you really can't go by major operations as they're most often times spread out. Edited May 12, 2011 by Yawoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 Seeing as we can build any plane from real life no matter which company/trademark/etc it goes under, this entire debate is pointless and irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='Yawoo' timestamp='1305235573' post='2710845'] Major facility operations for Boeing are as follows: Washington State (manufacturing) Wichita, Kansas (manufacturing civilian, military, as well as HQ for Airforce 1, 2 and other major government planes) California (military R&D) Chicago, Illinois (head offices) Washington D.C. (offices, major lobbying) etc... So you really can't go by major operations as they're most often times spread out. [/quote] I know. I'm basically saying that there should be a limit to allowing a player to have everything just because that country has the head office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1305234682' post='2710839'] Actually I remember someone rp'ing a game made by Blizzard Entertainment, Mudd had never laid claim to that but did after the rp and won. So rl location is what matters through a precedent set up years ago. [/quote] >:| My RL land has no companies. Thanks a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 Sargun makes the best point. [quote]Seeing as we can build any plane from real life no matter which company/trademark/etc it goes under, this entire debate is pointless and irrelevant. [/quote] This is why I object to the RP being [i]forced[/i] on me by Triyun, and now Centurius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comrade nikonov Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 They can /force/ whatever RP they want on you, but you will come out successful if you defend yourself well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.