Make You ROE Known.

[Xepshunall]

Today I and several other non-guild-affiliated players, along with members of PK, have come up with a plan that we hope will help resolve disagreements regarding violations of Rules of Engagement (ROE). When A topic exists which outlines our basic plan, a link to it will be placed here: http://www.piratesglory.com/main.php?mo ... 45%23p1445
The actions that led up to this agreement were not pretty or, for the most part, beneficial to the parties involved so we hope to help eliminate losses to you like those that we suffered to come to the conclusion that we now see.
We don't all share the same views on how we should play Pirates Glory. Some of us want war while others want peace. Some want to earn gold by trade and still others, by plunder. For these reasons, there will be friction. When there is friction between individuals or groups, bad things happen.
We are playing a pirate game. We should expect friction. What we are trying to avoid here is for these occurrences to become personal.
This is why we respectfully request that you post your ROE here since there is no place for us to see it in detail while playing.
If you feel that a player may be acting in violation of that player's guild's ROE then we hope that you can find the information here that will prove or disprove your suspicion.
This area isn't intended for information about a guild's methods for advancement so if possible, save that for your guild guides.
Thanks for all you do to add depth an interest to Pirates Glory.

[Talyn]

Why not ask the admin to make a sub forum in Tavern dedicated to ROE? Like a bulletin board
There are other topics in the Tavern so all the guilds posting their ROE on it and all the complaints from players etc will undoubtedly be every which way (confusingly messy and therefore user unfriendly)

[Xepshunall]

Why not ask the admin to make a sub forum in Tavern dedicated to ROE? Like a bulletin board
There are other topics in the Tavern so all the guilds posting their ROE on it and all the complaints from players etc will undoubtedly be every which way (confusingly messy and therefore user unfriendly)

All opinions are valuable and your suggestion will have already been on the minds of the developers for some time now.

To all others:
This is not a topic for discussion. If you are not posting you ROE here to help keep the tensions down until the developers take Talyn's idea into account and likely implement it, then please don't post here so that there will not be extra information for researchers to comb through. Thanks for your cooperation.

[Hellfire]

From hereafter, unless total agreement arises for a change to the RoE charter of PK, it shall be as fallows;

Rules of Engagement:
PK member(s) may attack any and all unguilded players five times per day, unless having cooperated with higher-ups to commence a strike upon selected player. Said PK member(s) Will be the ones to deal with the affair they have started between them and said player.

PK member(s) may request to attack guilded players by a case by case ordeal, to be decided by those of the Veteran rank or higher. Whereupon the player may be given the go-ahead or not, and the permitting officer will be held accountable for any diplomatic repercussions from said event.

Upon being attacked unprovoked, any and all PK members are given the free rein to retaliate and call in any allies they see fit for the assault upon the hostile party.

Voodoo is allowed to be cast on any approved targeted player, with the exception of overly aggressive and or wasteful amounts on the unguilded player(s).

-This is the basic charter, and some numbers may be tangible until approved by the guild.

[Hellfire]

From hereafter, unless total agreement arises for a change to the RoE charter of PK, it shall be as fallows;

Rules of Engagement:
PK member(s) may attack any and all unguilded players five times per day, unless having cooperated with higher-ups to commence a strike upon a selected player. Said PK member(s) Will be the ones to deal with the affair they have started between them and said player.

PK member(s) may request to attack guilded players two times a day, by a case by case ordeal, to be decided by those of the Veteran rank or higher. Whereupon the player may be given the go-ahead or not, and the permitting officer will be held accountable for any diplomatic repercussions from said event.

Upon being attacked unprovoked, any and all PK members are given the free rein to retaliate and call in any allies they see fit for the assault upon the hostile party.

Voodoo is allowed to be cast on any approved targeted player, with the exception of overly aggressive and or wasteful amounts on the unguilded player(s).

For a general engagement rule, you may not attack somebody with three or less digits of fame than you.(IE: a player with 1,000,000 fame may not attack a player with 1,000 fame.) -unless they are a major target or enemy of the guild.-

Second draft, but still under work.

[Horatio Nelson]

Dear Hellfire,

This appears to be a reasonable step in the right direction because two more of your members [RoiLeon (#11503) & mohammed1 (#10325) - both repeat offenders] have attacked The Royal Navy members and I am on the brink of losing my tolerance with your alliance. A policy change in this direction may avert what could be imminent disaster for The Pirate Kings. I have previously voiced my concerns of unwarranted attacks against The Royal Navy by your alliance which have fallen on deaf ears. I feel the King has been more than lenient to date with rogues attacking His fleets and his patience is thinning by the hour.

I shall inform him of The Pirate Kings Policy direction but He may want to know two things:

1. What disciplinary action are you going to take with your members should they breach your RoE?

The two aforementioned scoundrels I mentioned are guilty of more than one attack on His Majesty's fleet and I want to know under your new RoE what punitive action, if any, you intend to take against them should they breach your RoE? The Royal Navy dishonorably discharges members for breaches of our RoE. I make our RoE very clear and there are no excuses to breach it. I want an answer to this question to see how genuinely serious you are about enforcing your own RoE.

2. If a member of yours breaches your RoE, what compensation do you offer the aggrieved party?

At present, The Royal Navy has not received a mere apology for The Pirate Kings past atrocities but some garble stating "this is our policy". With this policy change there should be compensation offered for such breaches. An example is: One of our members breached our RoE and is expelled - I ordered the rest of my members to send voodoo cards as compensation to the aggrieved party. [ooc]Until admin adds a facility to send gold this is all we can do[/ooc] Alternatively, you let him stand alone and bare the fall out for his actions.

3. Also, am I to understand from your policy that any future attack by a member of The Pirate Kings towards us or our friends of the CTC is an act of war?

PK member(s) may request to attack guilded players two times a day, by a case by case ordeal, to be decided by those of the Veteran rank or higher. Whereupon the player may be given the go-ahead or not, and the permitting officer will be held accountable for any diplomatic repercussions from said event.

From the above, it appears that any future aggressive act by a Pirate King member towards any alliance will be and endorsed by the leadership. How am I meant to differentiate between an act of war or an accident? May I make a suggestion here to avoid confusion - if you endorse attacks against a guild then it is an act of war. If you are declaring war, you post a Declaration of War thread. The world knows where you stand. If you do not do this then you are really confusing things here and it will have a dire outcome for The Pirate Kings as accidents shall be automatically be considered as war by other alliances.

4. And finally, you appear only too happy to have your rogues attacking others but when the shoe is on the other foot there is no diplomatic means considered. If I employed your policy (see below) - we would be at war - for all the Pirate Kings attacks upon us have been unprovoked. Maybe you should reconsider this part or again be prepared for the consequences. You know as well as I do that some of the new seafarers have no idea on what they are doing but that is not taken into account - there is no diplomacy mentioned, you almost make it sound like an act of war.

Upon being attacked unprovoked, any and all PK members are given the free rein to retaliate and call in any allies they see fit for the assault upon the hostile party.

To be clear, in response to your RoE on the whole you are demonstrating positive change but it still needs to be tweaked.

And finally, we shall not be tolerating any further attacks from The Pirate Kings or any other guild (although The Pirate Kings is the only guild that has attacked us on multiple occasions interestingly enough). Any member that attacks a Royal Navy ship shall be held solely responsible and we shall maintain the right to retaliate without prejudice should diplomatic means fail. That does not mean war with an alliance but merely retribution for the individual who impinges upon our or our treaty partner's sovereignty.



Horatio Nelson
Admiral of the Fleet
The Royal Navy

EDIT: clarification/grammar