View Poll Results: Reasonable or Unreasonable?

Voters
352. You may not vote on this poll
  • Reasonable

    293 83.24%
  • Unreasonable

    59 16.76%
Page 1 of 37 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 541

Thread: Is The Code Unreasonable in its Approach to Piracy?

  1. #1

    Post Is The Code Unreasonable in its Approach to Piracy?

    Hello,

    I am curious as to what does the forum population think of our approach to piracy.

    1) We look for cargo hauling ships in a system (Cobra/T6/T7/T9/Clipper/Python/Asp/Anaconda/Corvette), we look at their sub systems in super cruise to make a decision whether it is a trading ship or not.

    2) We interdict said target.

    3) The moment we succeed in interdiction or the target submits, we send a direct message alerting the target of our intention. We all use marco, meaning our target get notified of our intention right away. The content of this message is that we demand the ship to throttle down for a cargo scan. (We give 5-10 seconds for the target to show sign of slowing down or submission, or just a word in chat that says "okay.")

    4) We deploy our hardpoints to scan the ship.

    a) If it's empty, we move on.

    b) If it has cargo, we demand roughly 10-50% of the cargo depending on the targeted ship itself and how many of us there are to split the goods.

    c) If the target runs, we'll start opening fire to extract cargo by force. We'll extract more than what we do regularly since the target refuses to comply. We focuses on the drive and FSD, disabling them, then launch hatch breakers.

    We try to minimize the damage to the ship itself since we want the ship intact.

    d) If the target gives up after it realizes it cannot out run us, we will stop firing and resume regular piracy, with an increased demand due to non-compliance.

    5) We part ways with the target and won't pirate the target again for 24 hours.

    If anything goes wrong in the process, people are free to file a complaint against us in our forum's complaint section, which we will compensate if we find wrong doing on our part.

    Code pirates are required to announce themselves to be a part of The Code when they send that initial message that demands the trader to stop for a scan.



    Is this reasonable or unreasonable?

    What does the community think?

    If unreasonable, please elaborate as to why.

  2. #2
    I'll go first then shall I?

    I don't see anything unreasonable in that description... I'd go so far as to say that it's textbook given the current tools available to pirates.

    This should not be construed as applying to any other possible code activities.

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by Sandmann View Post (Source)
    I'll go first then shall I?

    I don't see anything unreasonable in that description... I'd go so far as to say that it's textbook given the current tools available to pirates.

    This should not be construed as applying to any other possible code activities.
    Agreed. The CODE pirates I've encountered (admittedly only a couple) played by these rules.

    Obviously someone is going to bring up the accusation that CODE does not behave this way, either through personal experience or hearsay, but that's another issue.

    Based on the OP, if that is the rules we can expect to see from CODE on a consistent basis moving forward, you'd be my favorite band of skallywags out there. Those are fair rules. Model, even.

  4. #4
    What's in it for the trader?

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    What's in it for the trader?
    Um... not being blown up and losing ALL their cargo plus having to pay insurance?

    Come on. I'm not a pirate and never will be, but I can at least respect honorable pirate behavior. Beats the hell out of the alternative, doesn't it?

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    What's in it for the trader?
    Realistically? Nothing. But you already knew that so I'm wondering why you are trying to be underhanded with your comment there.

    That being said, some like a fun RP experience.

  7. #7
    Seems reasonable. And this is why we need in game affiliations. If I get interdicted and see [CODE] I am likely to comply because I know they have a set of rules. Likewise, if I saw [Kill 'em all on site] I would run.

    Right now we don't know what to expect because we can't see who the person may or may not be affiliated with.

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by mossfoot View Post (Source)
    Agreed. The CODE pirates I've encountered (admittedly only a couple) played by these rules.

    Obviously someone is going to bring up the accusation that CODE does not behave this way, either through personal experience or hearsay, but that's another issue.

    Based on the OP, if that is the rules we can expect to see from CODE on a consistent basis moving forward, you'd be my favorite band of skallywags out there. Those are fair rules. Model, even.
    Of course, we made mistakes, and we are willing to admit them and compensate for those who suffered due to it.

    This is our model since day one, and we try to uphold it as much as possible and will take complaints seriously as we always have.

    I just want to hear from the community to see if anything seem to be wrong on a principle level for The Code.

    - - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

    Originally Posted by Lokesh View Post (Source)
    Seems reasonable. And this is why we need in game affiliations. If I get interdicted and see [CODE] I am likely to comply because I know they have a set of rules. Likewise, if I saw [Kill 'em all on site] I would run.

    Right now we don't know what to expect because we can't see who the person may or may not be affiliated with.
    Indeed, and we tried to request for the tags to be put in manually but the support said that they stopped doing it for players for some reason.

  9. #9
    I wouldn't say that is unreasonable. Pirates are not the problem. The "OMGZ ammaz gonna PEW PEW u 4 LULZ an RUb ya f@ce innit coz fun innit U scrub" are the problem

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by Asp Explorer View Post (Source)
    I wouldn't say that is unreasonable. Pirates are not the problem. The "OMGZ ammaz gonna PEW PEW u 4 LULZ an RUb ya f@ce innit coz fun innit U scrub" are the problem
    Yes, that gives me a headache every day.

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by Lokesh View Post (Source)
    Seems reasonable. And this is why we need in game affiliations. If I get interdicted and see [CODE] I am likely to comply because I know they have a set of rules. Likewise, if I saw [Kill 'em all on site] I would run.

    Right now we don't know what to expect because we can't see who the person may or may not be affiliated with.
    Total agreement from me . anarchist pirates do add an extra element though (cannon fodder)

  12. #12
    You should by now be familiar with FANGS the Elite Dangerous Comic.

    https://fangs.ink/
    https://fangs.ink/06.html

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    What's in it for the trader?
    live another day. for no extra cost.

  14. #14
    This user was unable to follow the forum rules and ended up banned or suspended! :( X-Terminator's Avatar
    Only 2 Pirates I've ever encountered in 1.5yrs, always play in OPEN, weren't from The CODE and they did not make any requests but just open fire on my ASP. Complete idiots!.
    .
    GluttonyFang has confirmed this with video proof of all members listed or left.

  15. #15
    Absolutely reasonable. CODE pirates attempt to not kill people even though the game (unfortunately) doesn't do a great job of disincentivizing wanton destruction.

Page 1 of 37 1234511 ... LastLast