Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aldrith Shutaq]

Now, to distract from that derailment and horrific train wreck that lead to the deaths of 436 innocent kittens, I will outline KotMC's rank structure.

Knighthood Ranks & Titles

Ranks

Grand Master -

Seneschal -

Master -

Knight -

Squire -

Repentant (Slave) -

Titles

Justicar of the Robe -

Justicar of the Sword -

Justicar of the Shield -

Castilian -

Chaplain -

Champion -

Errant -

Headsman -

Inquisitor -

Smith -

*   *   *

Descriptions may come soon. Currently deciding if I should go the full IC path to explanation, just do brief teasers for each, or leave them all blank to be explained only to people who join and who RP with us. I think most smart people would be able to figure out what's going on, however.

[Aldrith Shutaq]

Decided. No descriptions for you! RoE instead. Please note this is not in a strictly IC voice:

In-space rules of engagement depend upon the diplomatic standings we hold with certain pilots and organizations. Knighthood pilots will be expected to respect these standings and rules to the best of their abilities and in accordance with their greater judgment.

If you violate these rules you will be asked to reimburse any victims of wrongful aggression to a degree decided upon by the leadership. Failure to comply or repeated offenses may result in punishment by demotion or removal from the corp.

**************************************************************

Red (-5.1 to -10): Kill on Sight

Red standings denote organizations and pilots that are:

*At war or soon to be at war with KotMC.
*Enemies of the Empire or Knighthood, either based upon role-play or in-space action.
*Proven neutral support of such enemies.
*Scumbags of varied assortment.

Neutral pilots that are of 'red' security status (below -5.0) follow the same RoE as those with red diplomatic standings.

RoE:

When the opportunity presents itself you are encouraged to fire upon pilots with theses standings, taking GCC if you must. No provocation is necessary.

You may NOT:

*Fleet with reds unless temporarily to destroy a greater, already imminent threat prior to the formation of the fleet. You may not actively roam with reds.
*Remote repair, provide intel to or otherwise support reds, unless at the expense of others with negative standings or in active GCC.


Orange (-0.1 to -5): Caution

Orange standings denote organizations and pilots that are:

*Known to pirate, support pirates, or otherwise fire upon neutrals without provocation.
*Have aggressed Amarr Militia or KotMC pilots without provocation.
*Under suspicion of aiding wartargets, or reds.

Neutral pilots that are of 'yellow' security status (-0.0 to -4.9) follow the same RoE as those with orange diplomatic standing.

RoE:

Not explicitly kill-on-sight but most will be effectively KoS due to low security status. All pilots are advised to use caution when in the same area. If an orange is above -5.0 security status (and thus cannot be aggressed without taking GCC) they may be engaged if they make at least ONE example of threatening behavior in the list provided under the Neutrals section. If they do not, do not aggress or you may be subject to a minor punishment.

You may NOT:

*Fleet with oranges unless temporarily to destroy a greater, already imminent threat prior to the formation of the fleet. You may not actively roam with oranges.
*Remote repair, provide intel to or otherwise support oranges, unless at the expense of others with negative standings or in active GCC.


Neutral (No Set Standings):

Neutral standings denote organizations and pilots that are:

*Are unknown to KotMC diplomatically.
*Do not aid nor hinder the efforts of the Amarr Militia, Amarr loyalists or KotMC.
*Not under suspicion of being hostile or aiding hostiles.

RoE:

You may not fire upon a neutral pilot unless provoked or ordered to do so by an approved Fleet Commander only. (List TBA) If the FC is a member of KotMC then the one giving the order is still subject to these rules, but those following his orders are not. Sufficient provocation includes clear evidence or high likelihood of aiding the enemy or pirates, or at least TWO examples of threatening behavior. Proper examples are listed below.

AIDING THE ENEMY
 1. Flying an industrial ship, freighter or other large cargo-carrying vessel through or into Minmatar or Gallente FW territory.
 2. Obvious scouting of a gate or system frequented by militia forces.
 3. Speed-tanking, destroying, or otherwise interfering with Amarrian rats.
 4. Potentially providing gang-link bonuses to a hostile fleet.
 5. Opening or potentially opening a cynosural field for hostiles forces.
 6. Proven alternative character of a wartarget or red.

THREATENING BEHAVIOR
 1. Locking (yellow-boxing) your ship or the ship of a friendly.
 2. Bumping.
 3. Orbiting at an optimal range.
 4. Entering your FW complex, mission, exploration site or safe spot.
 5. Accelerating directly towards your ship or the ship of a friendly.
 6. Attempting to decloak you.
 7. Following you.
 8. Accompanying reds, oranges or pirates.
 9. Looting, salvaging or destroying wrecks owned by you or friendlies.
 10. Using an Area-of-Effect weapon (smartbombs, ECM bursts, ect.) while you are on grid.
 11. Gate camping or loitering in the warzone.


*NOTE: For any kill made on a non-GCC neutral you should inform the Grand Master, Seneschal or a Master, along with an explanation of why the kill was made and any proof you can offer to support your claims. Your word will be taken above that of the pilot you destroyed, but if there are unbiased witnesses that contradict your story the leadership will investigate the incident and you may be further punished for lying about your reasoning.

There are no fleeting or aid restrictions for neutrals.


Light Blue (+0.1 to +5.0): Non-Aggression Pact

Light blue standings denote organizations or pilots that are:

*Operating in Caldari or Amarrian space and are known to be generally peaceful, anti-pirate or aid loyalists.
*Provide direct support to KotMC, but are otherwise questionable (pirate, operate in enemy territory, ect.).
*Have negotiated standings to avoid hostile incidents in-space.

RoE:

You may only aggress a light blue after they have opened fire upon you or openly aided an enemy. Try to avoid destroying their ship and instead drive them away, as an incident of blue-on-blue hostility is a diplomatic issue that is made more difficult when incriminating killmails are involved. Notify the Grand Master, Seneschal or a diplomatic liaison immediately after such an incident.

There are no fleeting or aid restrictions for light blues.


Dark Blue (+5.1 to +10): Ally

Dark blue standings denote organizations and pilots that are:

*Staunch and proven allies of the Empire, either through RP or in-space action.
*Provide direct support to KotMC.
*Have arranged diplomatic standings to establish a relationship of long-term cooperation and friendship with KotMC.

RoE:

You may only aggress a dark blue when they have fired upon you or openly aided a hostile. If you can, immediately leave the area and open a dialogue to figure out what is going on. If your ship is pointed, you may fight ONLY to the extent of getting your ship and other friendly ships out of danger. If this is impossible then you may fight until destruction, but as this would be a serious diplomatic issue further hostilities should not be provoked by itchy trigger-fingers. Immediately notify the Grand Master, Seneschal, or diplomatic liaison of the situation, providing as much detail as you can.

There are no fleeting or aid restrictions for dark blues.

NULL SECURITY SPACE ROE:

For all intents and purposes we follow a loose NBSI ("Not Blue, Shoot It") RoE when in 0.0 space. This is because the vast majority of players in 0.0 follow this same RoE and strict rules on who can be engaged when, where and how are impractical in such an environment. An individual may conduct themselves as they see fit, but no punishments will apply for firing upon neutrals. Firing upon blues, however, is still strictly prohibited.

*   *   *

This is taken directly from the old KotMC forums. I have been pondering making them more strict, but I don't think it's needed. It would be annoying to put this into IC terms too, since concepts like alts can't be effectively delt with in an IC tone.

I like the idea of our RoE being public knowledge since it lets people outside the corp know they can report violations of it and they will be delt with.

[Lyn Farel]

Too complicated imo. Threatening behaviors and aiding the enemy are good examples (except this one AIDING THE ENEMY 1. Flying an industrial ship, freighter or other large cargo-carrying vessel through or into Minmatar or Gallente FW territory ????), but imo its not up to the average member to decide what to do. I would instead ask them to report it and make the leadership decide if the guy in question is to be set red/orange accordingly.

[Aldrith Shutaq]

Agreed. That bit was leftover from the times I had to appease ex-piratey sorts to make sure they didn't bitch and leave. Will be changed. However, I'm not sure how I could make things more simple without seriously gimping adaptability on the battlefield.

[Ulphus]

AIDING THE ENEMY
1. Flying an industrial ship, freighter or other large cargo-carrying vessel through or into Minmatar or Gallente FW territory.

Does this give your pilots free reign to shoot at neutral haulers who are in the war zone?

Generally your RoE are very similar to EM, except for this one; although we phrase it all IC.

Alts are usually associates - they're obviously being paid to help out (my hauling alt actually charges me for runs, 100k per low-sec jump. How rude is that?)

I disagree with Lyn that it's too complicated. It mostly works. For the average pilot, it's "trust your overview". If the overview is wrong, the Alliance will reimburse. If the pilot makes a choice to shoot a neutral and is wrong, then the pilot might be asked to reimburse if they got it wrong. That allows us to give leeway to decisions by the pilot on the spot, without them shooting neutrals unless they're pretty sure they're right.

edited to add:
Also, for blue-on-blue, we ask people not to shoot back, and the alliance will reimburse if we can't get the blue to.

For all intents and purposes we follow a loose NBSI ("Not Blue, Shoot It") RoE when in 0.0 space. This is because the vast majority of players in 0.0 follow this same RoE and strict rules on who can be engaged when, where and how are impractical in such an environment.

This bit is actually significantly different - I obviously wasn't reading thoroughly enough (distracted by a neutral hauler)... We don't shoot neutrals anywhere (unless they're being naughty).

[Aldrith Shutaq]

Yes, the neutral hauler bit will be removed in the new incarnation. It will be hard for KotMC to replace ship losses since, as before, I'm going to try to avoid taxing (and therefore providing for) members of the corp and letting everyone maintain their own assets and supplies, so completely disallowing members from firing back on blues is problematic.

The 0.0 rule, however, will remain the same. KotMC's ideology will basically treat 0.0 like hell, which makes neuts out there either lost souls or demons that want to rip your face off. Also, making this completely IC now seems much easier, thanks for mentioning EM's stuff.

[Desiderya]

The rules don't look too complicated. Most of it is common sense once the neutral hauler thing gets out.
Also I think it can be easily put into an IC form with Ulphus's change in mind.

[Lyn Farel]

I disagree with Lyn that it's too complicated. It mostly works.

If you say so.

I just remember the policies when I was in CVA that more or less was "ITS NOT RED YOU DONT SHOOT, UNLESS IT IS SHOOTING AT YOU". Even with that in mind, it was not always easy to make people understand how it worked. I also remember that all these rules you quoted above when in KotMC were mostly a mess for everyone and to my eyes, at least, added to the general confusion more than anything else. It was trying to please both sides (vigilantes and laid back pilots) by being very, very ambigous. It worked, somehow, when some people were like "You breached the ROEs !" "Not at all I happen to understand them differently !"

[Ulphus]

Lyn,

I saw the fine-print in Aldrith's post as examples and guidelines, rather than exhaustive rules covering every situation.

I can understand that some people have a problem working with the sort of ambiguity that our RoE allows, (Neutral cynos are not shot at unless we catch them cynoing in red capitals, for instance), but those people tend not to stay with EM for very long.

For me, and the people who do tend to stay in EM, the RoE we use allows enough flexibility to deal with the situations our FCs find themselves in, while being obvious enough that most pilots don't need to think too hard most of the time.

[Aldrith Shutaq]

What Ulphus said. If you are not smart enough to figure out the RoE, you are not smart enough to stay in the corp. My impatience now means higher standards for all members of KotMC.

[Desiderya]

* Desiderya hugs Aldrith.

[Lyn Farel]

Maybe its just the form of that guide which disturbs me. I think you could still need a tl;dr at the end.

And believe me, I am the first one to follow the rules at the letter. You could put 100.000 rules and bullet points that I wouldnt mind so much myself.

[Lyn Farel]

I read the whole thing again and I think I know now what troubled me. The part that was bugging me is the part explaining what could allow people to shoot at neutrals (aiding the enemy or threatening actions). Not that it is bad, at the contrary I find it good, but reading this bit :

RoE:

You may not fire upon a neutral pilot unless provoked or ordered to do so by an approved Fleet Commander only. (List TBA) If the FC is a member of KotMC then the one giving the order is still subject to these rules, but those following his orders are not. Sufficient provocation includes clear evidence or high likelihood of aiding the enemy or pirates, or at least TWO examples of threatening behavior. Proper examples are listed below.

It seems to me that only an approved FC can order to shoot at a neutral. So, the logic here dictates that the following rules on "aiding the enemy" and "threatening actions" are also subject to that rule : only an approved FC can order to open fire. If I understand correctly, the average pilot can only fire back if under direct enemy aggression/fire (and even in that case it is always better to get the FC confirmation before doing so, from experience, unless your FC has a sudden brainfuck and is unable to follow anymore).

Maybe this is the bit that may need a little more clarification.

Also, this makes me wonder what is the correct course of action when a pilot fly in solo or in a group small enough not to have a clear FC ? Are they considered like "approved FCs" and so, able to aggro dubious neutrals "aiding the enemy" or "threatening them" ?

[Desiderya]

I'd say: When there are not ( believable ) witnesses, as in a 1 on 1 situation, the benefit of the doubt should be given. Obviously an industrial wouldn't open fire, and the pve fit cloaky tengu would very likely not engage a proper pvp ship, let alone two or three of them.

If these questionable things tend to happen regularily to certain pilots...

[Ava Starfire]

Pretty hard to convince someone that a retriever opened fire, yeah.

That being said, NBSI in nullsec only makes sense. Good ROE, and not very different from ours. Dont wanna get shot by me in nullsec? When I enter system, TELL ME THAT. It isnt that hard.

Of course, 99% of nullsec people just sit somewhere, cloaked and shaking quietly, when a neutral enters system. The remaining 1% are looking for fights.