Jump to content
Server time: 2017-10-19, 21:45
Safe Zone: OPEN

Sign in to follow this  
Guest Icy

[RULE] Settlement Attacks

Recommended Posts

Guest Icy   
Guest Icy

There were multiple discussions on attacks on settlements. This is not a suggestion from a camp defender but from a RPer.

We all like a nice good fight, I understand that, but it's getting out of hand. These servers are supposed to be focused on RPing and not shooting.

Lately, we had some hilarious attacks at the camps.

2 people initiating on 15, civilians barely armed and unable to shoot initate on an armed camp, Japanese attacking only with hatchets... And no, being a suicidal group is not an excuse to rush for the kills.

IMO, it's getting boring, literaly everyone and his grandmother can attack a camp full of heavily armed and trained dudes. That has nothing to do with RP, and the only thing it offers is deaths of the attackers and 1-2 innocent people, and a brief pause in some good RP that may be happening.

So, my suggestion is to add a new rule, either one that forbids people of attacking unless they have a good chance of winning the fight, OR a longer-NLR rule.

About the first rule. To take over the camp, you need to have a plan. Having 2 snipers and one initiator is not a plan. You need to scout, organize, and then act. So, I'd recommend that the rule forces the attacker to have at least 50% the manpower of the people in the camp. 2 people would never take over a camp of 20. 10 have a good chance of taking over

About the second rule, if you raided the camp and died, you cannot attack for about 1 week. There is no realistic way to RP that the groups are back in full manpower in about 24h.

Leave any kind of feedback you wish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
   0

Having 2 snipers and one initiator is not a plan.

Boy do I know this all too well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Hyperfury   
Guest Hyperfury

I hardly Ever get to be apart of camp raids, but I have been in a few and the RP was just awful. Mind you some raids are pretty fun and RP'd quite well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daexarayan    0

There were multiple discussions on attacks on settlements. This is not a suggestion from a camp defender but from a RPer.

We all like a nice good fight, I understand that, but it's getting out of hand. These servers are supposed to be focused on RPing and not shooting.

Lately, we had some hilarious attacks at the camps.

2 people initiating on 15, civilians barely armed and unable to shoot initate on an armed camp, Japanese attacking only with hatchets... And no, being a suicidal group is not an excuse to rush for the kills.

IMO, it's getting boring, literaly everyone and his grandmother can attack a camp full of heavily armed and trained dudes. That has nothing to do with RP, and the only thing it offers is deaths of the attackers and 1-2 innocent people, and a brief pause in some good RP that may be happening.

So, my suggestion is to add a new rule, either one that forbids people of attacking unless they have a good chance of winning the fight, OR a longer-NLR rule.

About the first rule. To take over the camp, you need to have a plan. Having 2 snipers and one initiator is not a plan. You need to scout, organize, and then act. So, I'd recommend that the rule forces the attacker to have at least 50% the manpower of the people in the camp. 2 people would never take over a camp of 20. 10 have a good chance of taking over

About the second rule, if you raided the camp and died, you cannot attack for about 1 week. There is no realistic way to RP that the groups are back in full manpower in about 24h.

Leave any kind of feedback you wish

In complete agreeance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HAGGLE    5

About the second rule, if you raided the camp and died, you cannot attack for about 1 week. There is no realistic way to RP that the groups are back in full manpower in about 24h.

I've always thought something along these lines would be the answer to groups doing one robbery/attack/raid/roadblock after another. These bandits would have to rest up at some point, regroup and recoup, even if the raid was a success. Because it is a video game, the wear and tear and stress of being a bandit doesn't exist as realistically as it would IRL, but maybe should. Sure, there is a NLR, but that is just keeping that 1 person who died away from THAT particular fight, but nothing stops them from regrouping in the same numbers as before and moving to the next raiding spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree on this, there's times where the attackers stand NO chance whatsoever yet they attempt to kill everyone, it's just absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diggy    0

I agree completely. It seems like every day, these couple clans that always attack literally spend there day prepping to do the same thing. They logg on, gear up, make a horrible attempt to attack, log off, then repeat the next day. I feel it has become apparent that without a rule, shit like this will continue to ruin the RP until everyone gets tired of this community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ancalagon    0

I agree about the timer, yes. There should be some kind of cooldown so that there are no hard-core-1337-bandits which are attacking a settlements every day or even multiple times per day.

How long the timer should be... well this was suggested before and like i said there, i dont know.

I am not sure about the lenght, i am not sure if 1 week is too long or good. Maybe i will know it if Caprile is implemented.

About the other thing with the manpower... well you dont know howmany people are in the camp or how many of them will complie.

And i dont want a rule which causes reports like " );< there were 18 people in the camp but they were only 8! This is against the rules!"

Every survivor or bandit can waste his life. In the open world, you and your friend can try to rob a 9-man-group if you want to.

I think there should be no number of minimal attackers. It would only cause trouble and take the possibility for smallers groups to attack. If they think they can handle it alone, okay then do so. Maybe the have success, maybe not and they just die and arent allowed to attack for some days.

This would maybe force these 2-men-groups to team up to bigger groups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, having a timer cooldown thingy would definitely discourage shitty attempts of taking over a settlement, and people MIGHT actually take it seriously. I'm not saying there's not already serious attempts but it would definitely get rid of the shit ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Siorre    0

Yes, very much so. I wouldn't mind a timer. But Randoms can come and go as they please with this rule because they don't have tags. Tar-nation, you could easily get out of this rule if you don't wear clan tags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ancalagon    0

Yeah, but atleast the groups which already regulate the amouts of attacks to a good number (Good for the Rp and the CRs) shouldnt have a problem with it.

And well, if you dont wear clantags... then you need to recognize the names. And if they really attack so often, you will ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×