Jump to content

Server time (UTC): 2023-02-03 16:59

New Rule: involve Civilians during a firefight at a settlement


Syrell

U wanna civilians be more responsible for not leaving a firefightzonet  

103 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

We need a simple rule like this for ongoing firefight at as ettlement in my oppinon to avoid reports, the time amount mentioned 3 or 5 mins time can be discussed too:

Possible RULE during a firefight at a settlement:

When a CIV/more CIVS run towards an attacked settlement/camp (400m around) - warn him of a firefightzone - when he not will leave the area in 5 mins, he is not a neutral person anymore- he looses his Immunity. And the robbers + defenders gain KOS rights on him for that area. When he further start looting bodies/or vehicles/tents in that area, robbers and defenders gain KOS rights on him instantly!

This CIV or his friends securing him never gain KOS rights, when there are no new initiations been spoken or heard and also not after his death(passing 5 mins without initiation). By this, baiting with hidden allies is impossible during a firefight.

short spoken:

As CIV: Initiate ( choose your side) or leave the firefight zone within 5 minutes simple as that or you risk gettting killed without gaining KOS rights for u and ur possible hidden friends.

With this rule robbers + defenders are able to defend their friends bodies / vehicles / stashes and tents during the heat of a firefight. And CIVs has 5 minutes to leave or get involved without KOS/RDM report capabilities.

And this is the point: The CIVs will be forced to solve and clear out those situations for the robbers + defenders, so they dont have to open up their positions.

(Compyling after new initiations not included)

I think every CIV is able to take responsibility inside settlement firefighting zone.

The pressure here should be on the CIVs to decide quick, because hiding behind neutrality without leaving will be no more excuse and the pressure will raise every minute staying. This is realistic pressure and should be not put on the shoulders of the fighting parties who are mainly focusing on the fight itself.

Addition:

Maybe extend the rule that CIVs without a GUN/Rifle inhand should not be allowed to enter a settlement firefight at all. Because they cause problems only to all sides.

RL Connection:

When u donot leave after beeing warned or when u obviously heared a firefight, u cannot be seen as neutral anymore by own decision. U risk to get killed without negotiations. This would also be a RL Rule: It's realistic.

To underline my statement I have a example from a firefight with >20 people involved.

I was involved in that big firefight at Desal Plant as CIV these days, I reached it neutral but I was lurking around in the area and near the desal camp. After 10 mins staying there I was taking shots without spoken/written warning and without initiation, without beeing identified. But surely I did not made a report because I heard the shots and saw the bodies I definetly knew what was going on and decided not to leave. My decision = my risk beeing shot.

And both groups couldn't see if I'm CIV or a disguised spy/spotter -I knew that- and this made me an unknown threat to all. This is realistic and I deserved to get taken out and the shots at me forced me to leave. A neutral person would never stay, thinking " Oh I'm neutral and I have immunity."

Every CIV decided staying in firefighting zone has intentions against the targets of the robbers or the defenders or against both (stealing). There is no possible reason/way to claim urself neutral. ( only throwing ur stuff away and complying )

At the end indeed I was a disguised spotter in that area and people died because I opened up their positions through radio to the side I chose when I reached the fighting area.

whats ur oppinion about hiding behind neutrality during an obvious firefight without leaving?

Link to comment
  • Sapphire

I agree with this as well. +1

Link to comment
  • MVP

Simple. Clan skins.

Anyone not wearing them does not get a transferal of KoS rights and is a civ. They can then be warned to leave the area. If they remain there, then they can be shot.

Civs being active in fights is a nightmare and by choosing a side you are only promoting a system of mis-identification where people will shoot first and ask questions later.

Edit: added a bit more.

How do we do clan skins with so many active clans?

There are enough skins in the mod already to limit the skins per group.

Link to comment
  • Legend

The second part about looting bodies will already be rolled out when the situation demands it, we have decided to not punish those that kill people who negligently contribute to their own deaths in fight. Use this sparingly though, if we judge the kill wasn't fair normal punishments will apply.

CR's can already order this under existing provisions.

Link to comment
  • Emerald

Wolfgang you have my beans ;-P +1

I have had to many times where Civs have ran in while a fire fight is on and will not leave while looting body's.

Not that I would go around shooting Civs but it would stop them running into a fire fight.

Link to comment
  • Emerald

Here's the problem with rules protecting civs in settlements during firefights - a civ walks up and gets shot in between warnings or whatever, because they were oblivious to a firefight already in progress. There is no way around it. None. Sorry, but you're going to keep getting reports because people will arrive at the wrong time. It's going to happen. Period.

A better way to handle the whole thing, frankly, when you approach a settlement, you're putting your life on the line. Nothing more, nothing less. It is what it is, just as it would be in real life. When you get close to something that might be defended or attacked in the apocalypse, no one should be holding your hand. I used to think differently, but I just don't anymore.

I'm all for a robust rule set, but there are times when you just have to say "You know what? This shit is too complicated!" and keep it simple. Want to go to a settlement? Alright, fine, but there's a very good chance you'll be lit up if you turn up at the wrong time. Keep what we have now ("Civilians, GTFO!") and give them time to comply, but you just can't babysit every person who turns up.

Link to comment
  • Emerald

Ill just mostly on do a warning shot 2 meter beside of them to let them know they can eb shot so i see what the responce is wich is usually running away AKA Innocent or Shooting back 'Hostile' and no respect for own life. Also i consider anybody hostile with weapon up outside the camp and anybody weapon lowerd as innocent pretty mutch.

Link to comment

@Frisia

during a firefight u cannot move out of positions to do some warning shots. because the other side could use that civ approaching to open up your position to the enemy. 1 text warnings should be enough and it would be in the logs to, easy to prove if the civ receive the warning and decided to stay

Link to comment
  • Emerald

@Frisia

during a firefight u cannot move out of positions to do some warning shots. because the other side could use that civ approaching to open up your position to the enemy.

Im not moving out of position the usual Defensive positons of altar got wide area to cover and good spots to cover behind.

Link to comment
  • Emerald

yeah but at other settlements not, text warnings should be enough.

It is kidna of a problem outside the 40m radius of the camp youknow.

Link to comment

Here's the problem with rules protecting civs in settlements during firefights - a civ walks up and gets shot in between warnings or whatever, because they were oblivious to a firefight already in progress. There is no way around it. None. Sorry, but you're going to keep getting reports because people will arrive at the wrong time. It's going to happen. Period.

A better way to handle the whole thing, frankly, when you approach a settlement, you're putting your life on the line. Nothing more, nothing less. It is what it is, just as it would be in real life. When you get close to something that might be defended or attacked in the apocalypse, no one should be holding your hand. I used to think differently, but I just don't anymore.

I'm all for a robust rule set, but there are times when you just have to say "You know what? This shit is too complicated!" and keep it simple. Want to go to a settlement? Alright, fine, but there's a very good chance you'll be lit up if you turn up at the wrong time. Keep what we have now ("Civilians, GTFO!") and give them time to comply, but you just can't babysit every person who turns up.

thats the point the civs should decide on their own to leave after a warning or not. But not report later when they got killed , although they ignored all warnings and shots. I saw so many civs running into a firefighting zone although there were 100 bullets fired in that area and the CRs or robbers had to babysit them. They run away and came back every minute. I think they will stop it when there is no hiding behind neutrality after being warned once.


@frisia ithink text goes 80. Im not talking aboutwhen everything is quiet at a settlement. We need a rule while tons of bullets are flying and the warning was spoken out to an approaching civ.

Link to comment
  • Emerald

People should just learn to turn aroun when they hear gunshots close to settlement, but since people decided it's smarter to run straight into a firefight and loot bodies, we sort of need a rule to prevent uneccesary KOSes, like this one.

+1.

Link to comment

I agree with this as the problem also comes when you have groups that use civilians in operations as well as they use skins that are designed to confuse the defenders so the defender has to worry if he can shoot or not and risk being banned giving a serious tactical disadvantage and almost powergaming situation.

It is not fair to a defender when they see a civ running toward a settlement under attack to say they have to ID them. If the civ is innocent then they put themselves in harms way, but there are alot of cases where the person is running because they are involved get an advantage on the defenders because the defender cant shoot them for fear of being banned. The clans that attack settlements know this and use this tactic, it has been seen many times, and to me it says they are using the fear of being banned to get an advantage.

Link to comment

@R Steele: This is also big point, but u can also use civs against the robbers.

If the civs have only some mins to leave or join the fight. The defenders or robbers dont have to be bothered because the problem will be solved by the civs becaus the civs know they can be killed with this rule in some minutes.

Link to comment
  • MVP

Clan skins - nuff said.

Link to comment
  • MVP

Well,though luck - if someone is looking for a fashion show - bad for him. Implementing clan skins would be highly beneficial compromise of loosing 'fashion factor' but gaining a LOT in terms of MisID,immitating other clans,kos rights problems etc etc.

Not to mention general bigger joy from gameplay experience as you wouldn't fear that much of 'ban game' after you shoot person similiar to one you had rights on in area of conflict.

In regards to Civ's - Yup, they acted stupid, they will act stupid. Current rules already allow GMs to blame 'civs' for their stupidity in game(for example very hyped - disregard for life argument) only thing that is needed - are GM's with enough evidence and common sense to see such events and deal with them accordingly.

Link to comment
Guest Maggorra

I really support some kind of rule for this.

Right now there are very many civilians using KoS rule to run straight into a fire fight just to loot bodies.

I read an incredible number of reports where people write

"I heard a lot of shots fired, so I ran over there to help. Saw some dead bodies, so I tried to loot then somone killed me, no contact was made"

Link to comment

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...