Jump to content
Server time: 2017-10-20, 18:12
Safe Zone: CLOSED

Sign in to follow this  
Primus Palus

KOS Rights and Other Clans...

Recommended Posts

I've seen some confusion and some uproar about groups helping other groups in combat. That joining in the fray is not proper RP and they have no rights to shoot anyone.

I have to beg to differ and here's why:

SFOD set up a checkpoint and came under heavy fire. They called for all MEU members to come help that were in the area and three of us were able to run on foot to assist.

On arrival I hear gunshots. I see them actively engaged so I moved into position. While setting up and moving about I came under fire and was struck 3 or 4 times. Near death, I pulled back, was healed up by a friendly and resumed.

Now had I died, it would have been COMPLETELY justified. I wouldn't have reported anyone for KOS and I would have called it good. Why do other people try to report KOS like this?

Has anyone actually served in the military? Or even Law Enforcement? If a call for help goes out presumably on the "radio"... when you get there and are directed to the enemy... why is that not appropriate to engage them?

You can't say an ally joining in a fight or helping to pursue a fleeing enemy isn't appropriate. It very much IS. It makes it so we have an actual purpose on this server instead of just farming and getting into our own messes. We actually get to rely on others to help.

Now... that all said, if I was under attack and some random came along and fired at the enemy... while I might appreciate the help they probably aren't justified in killing the other because they don't know what's happening. I would have had to get on voice chat and let them know something, to enlist them in fighting.

But I fail to see how ANYONE can call KOS for an ally moving into a fight to help when called. It's not about passing KOS rights, it's about COMMON SENSE.

If I get stabbed and I call the Police saying it was a guy with a black coat and blue jeans walking North and the cops come and see him walking and confront him... that's legitimate. They don't NEED me to tell them anything more than what I already told them. They don't need me to be there to guide them or walk them through the contact. They act based on the information I give them... why would RP in the server be any different than real(istic) life?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Fusk    2

Because of this mate, most people would have made an report. saying no i was just passing by, also its against server rules to shoot anyone you see in a firefight.

So theese new guys called in get the drop.

We gotta ID all our targets.

This isnt real life, if you want to compare it to real life then anyone involved in a fireght would have rights to shoot anything moving.

Wich isnt the case.

Rules break the realism, so it doesnt work.

Of course it makes sense to call in backup. But the rules dont support it.

We need either clan skins. or some other sort of fix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of this mate, most people would have made an report. saying no i was just passing by, also its against server rules to shoot anyone you see in a firefight.

So theese new guys called in get the drop.

This isnt real life, if you want to compare it to real life then anyone involved in a fireght would have rights to shoot anything moving.

Wich isnt the case.

I know it's not real life, I'm using real life as examples. It puts RP (ROLEPLAY as in playing a real life or realistic role) into perspective.

I don't see how firing at an enemy you've been directed to by an ally or friend... is against the server rules. In that case, we'll only ever get into our own fights and never have allies. I mean what's the point then? If you can't help, why even bother having relations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
   0

This isnt real life, if you want to compare it to real life then anyone involved in a fireght would have rights to shoot anything moving.

Wich isnt the case.

+1

This isn't real life, we need to try as much as possible to avoid "collateral damage" by killing innocent people.

I think most of the people understand when they die in a firefight, even if they were not part of the battle.

Personally, I wouldn't mind being killed by accident during a fight, if I was there at the wrong time...


I don't see how firing at an enemy you've been directed to by an ally or friend... is against the server rules.

Well, it's not exactly against the rules... once again, we need to try our best to avoid innocents being killed. Most of them will understand but, because the server is non-KOS... Let's do our best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Fusk    2

Its not against the rules, its a gray area. Causing to much drama.

Since everyone on the internet are super honest sports.

Not everything in real life is applyable to real life.

If i was a mad survivor dude with a sniper rifle in a zombie apocalypse id shoot anything that moved yeah. But with RULES id refrain from this, seeing a car with say some other clans tags on it. Can i open fire? No they arent the guys we initiated on.. oh wait it looks like they just got out and killed a bunch of our guys.

If im on overwatch, i confirm with clanmates if its a enemy like 2-3 times before i shoot.

Its against server rules to shoot anyone in the area, but its not against server rules to call in people that know where people are, that can walk up and just gun you down. And after your like.. Aaah yeah we are enemies.

You see my point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reacher    2

On the part about ID'ing targets:

Those who witness hostility are able to step in, such as witnessing a robbery [or in this instance seeing a gunfight between friendlies and non-friendlies], and are able to shoot at the offending party.

The only stipulation being that you must be certain before you start firing [eg: if the victim gets the drop on the bandit, and makes the bandit get onto the ground, you could mistake it for the victim actually being the bandit - which is bad].

It's been confirmed in that 'Against the Will of Rolle' thread.

Given that the newcomers are very likely aware of who is attacking their allies, I'd say it's easy for them to know for certain who they're meant to be shooting at.


But, in the grand scheme of things, I agree. Perhaps a more defined group-on-group battle rule is required. Or at least some examples and guidelines that can be referred to when needed.


...seeing a car with say some other clans tags on it. Can i open fire? No they arent the guys we initiated on.. oh wait it looks like they just got out and killed a bunch of our guys.

Being up-to-date with certain groups and their alliances will assist in that regard.

Otherwise, since you [presumably] are the aggressors in the confrontation, it would be your responsibility to expect reinforcements or calls for help. It would then be up to you to make a decision on whether you want to shoot the new party, or wait for them to act hostile toward you - and take the responsibility that you could make the wrong call, if you decide to shoot first.

What you have to remember is that the hostile party loses a lot of their rights. They are the ones imposing their hostility onto others, and as such can't hide behind a lot of the non-hostile rules.

If you start hostilities, it should be your expectation that you could - or should, or will - run the risk of having others intervene to lend assistance against your actions.

On the flip side, if the other party is hostile, then it should be their responsibility to expect reinforcements and potentially have reinforcements brought against them - and likewise, face the choice of making an incorrect call and killing innocent passersby.

There is always more of a risk when being hostile - that's what most don't understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Fusk    2

Of course! and i welcome them,. but i dont want them shielded by rules.

What stops a guy called in to flank a sniper that later gets spotted and killed to just report it. Out of pure bitterness.

And just deny all form of communication that led him to sneak around there.

Theres no way of proving that they where there to kill me, he isnt in the same clan!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
   0

I know it's not real life, I'm using real life as examples. It puts RP (ROLEPLAY as in playing a real life or realistic role) into perspective.

I don't see how firing at an enemy you've been directed to by an ally or friend... is against the server rules. In that case, we'll only ever get into our own fights and never have allies. I mean what's the point then? If you can't help, why even bother having relations.

Hello Primus Palus.

As i see this thing.

Relations makes the the backup fair in this server. When you have official allies, its ok to call them to help in any situation and its all 100% legit. But if just some randoms come by and shoot everything who seems to be the "badguy" its all just one big mess.

About us. We are always alone. What about when we were S.D.S? We were always alone AND 100% pure bandits. That made it more tricky.

Everyone just came by and gave some more unwanted action, or tried.

It was mess, unfair and really stupid.

I dont mind dying or losing all my gear. It happens. Its ok if its fair and legit.

Pisses me off when its not.

Have your diplomacy in shape and you have your fair backup. Everyone knows there might be backup coming and everyone knows its all legit.

Simple as snow in the winter.

I just hope everyone respects this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Fusk    2

I know it's not real life, I'm using real life as examples. It puts RP (ROLEPLAY as in playing a real life or realistic role) into perspective.

I don't see how firing at an enemy you've been directed to by an ally or friend... is against the server rules. In that case, we'll only ever get into our own fights and never have allies. I mean what's the point then? If you can't help, why even bother having relations.

Hey Primus Palus.

As i see this thing.

Relations makes the the backup fair in this server. When you have official allies, its ok to call them to help in any situation and its all 100% legit. But if just some randoms come by and shoot everything who seems to be the "badguy" its all just one big mess.

About us. We are always alone. What about when we were S.D.S? We were always alone AND 100% pure bandits. That made it more tricky.

Everyone just came by and gave some more unwanted action, or tried.

It was mess, unfair and really stupid.

I dont mind dying or losing all my gear. It happens. Its ok if its fair and legit.

Pisses me off when its not.

Have your diplomacy in shape and you have your fair backup. Everyone knows there might be backup coming and everyone knows its all legit.

Simple as snow in the winter.

I just hope everyone respects this.

Exactly, use of official allies on clanthreads. That doesnt happen.

Hell people call in IC enemies just to get a piece.

And im like Sikki, if its a nice fair and legit fight. Ill gladly give my pixels away. Its when its foul play. It just stinks, im here to have fun not to see rules bended over and over. (And yes, i follow the rules to 100% and i have so far not gotten a single warning point) Even thoug im in a bandit clan. I dont like mucking around in gray areas just to get an advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reacher    2

Fusk:

From my point of view, your greatest defense against that happening, would be to prove that there were other members of the 'new arrival group', who were aimed at helping those being attacked.

If there are logs stating 'x members from x clan' were killed in the area, and then you shoot another one of that clan who was flanking you at the time, then it's reasonable to assume - and point out in the report - that 'x clan' was clearly involved, and were fully intending to kill you first.

That being said, you can't cure people being assholes, and sadly some will lie and bend the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Fusk    2

Problem is that people invite, clanless people, or clans that arent on their official allies list. and its still legit.

If there was a ruling that you may only call on people on official allies. It would make things so much clearer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reacher    2

I'm pretty sure that exact discussion is going on elsewhere. From what I saw, the only allies idea was favored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Caesar    438

The only problem I see with the Legion members suggestions is how do you apply it to lone wolfs who quite often have extensive allies of their own? I for one am not making a diplomacy table for myself. As it is I could quite easily call on multiple clans for support.

I honestly do not think this issue is so bad it necessarily needs a solution, it keep those engaged in firefights on their toes.

I would like to see a reduction in KoS rights from 24 hours to 2 hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one don't think every group or player has to have a public allies list. Some groups for RP purposes might want to have that anonymous. I don't think JUST allies should be the only ones allowed to get involved either.

If I run into trouble and see a random run by it should be perfectly ok to enlist their help. I'd just have to explain what's happening and they should be safe getting involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spotter    0

I'm with Fusk on this one. We don't base a game entirely on realism. The current state, the one that Primas Palus is in support of, is leading to lots of reports, lots of hate, and lots of controversy for legitimate reasons. The allies that are called in get a very unfair advantage when they are called in.

For instance, Legion gets in a firefight with ZZ at NWAF. A huey flies into the NWAF, and starts circling. The attackers have no clue whether they are hostile or just speculating and passing by. Not until the M240s rip Legion clean in half without them even knowing their involvement.

The hostiles aren't allowed to shoot the allies based on the rules. The allies are allowed to exploit the rules, optimize their approach, scope shit out for awhile, and then open fire when they are ready, but the attackers are told not to touch those allies until they are already wiping the hostiles out.

By realism's standards? It is totally valid. By a game's standards with its current rule set? It's unfair and a bit unsportsmanlike.

EDIT: With clan skins, it would be a bit more fair. Allies would need to start calling out all conflicts though, because if a clan's ally is seen in the area, the hostiles will likely fire on them assuming they are there to assist. This isn't entirely unfair. You should get benefits and liabilities when making alliances.

Some vehicles bug out and don't show the logo and clan skins aren't out yet. Until then, it should likely be that only those at initiation are involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Caesar    438

I don't think forcing people to call on only official allies will make much difference. This will just encourage people like me to add anyone who they like to play with to their official ally list and you will still have a very large pool of potential reinforcement.

Another problem is with mixed groups, for example if I shoot someone and get in a firefight against group A I can call all my allies. However another member of my group has another group of allies that they can call even if they are not related to myself.

To be honest these suggestions would create more of a headache then there currently is. I think that if you engage in a firefight you must be prepared to have death rained down upon you in said firefight.

The best way to limit stupid situations is to add a smaller timer on KoS rights like 2 hours.

Furthermore if you limit it to those who initiated and those who have been initiated on then the initiators will likely always have the advantage because they can have a large group waiting against merely a few. Furthermore this idea goes against the idea that you can call in reinforcement to exact revenge at a later time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uuh.. Since when was this a grey area? It has been asked so many times, and every time the answer was "yes, you can pass on KoS rights". With SFOD-D and the 24th, why are we even questioning if it is legitimate? From a roleplaying perspective it makes more than sense that they ask to help each other.

Let's say that every time someone asked if passing on KoS rights was allowed, let's say that every time the answer was yes, and let's say that every time that answer was a lie, then the common sense rule should still apply. And in the case of SFOD-D and 24th, I don't see the problem

Clans could list all their allies, but what about a mercenary group? You wouldn't have them as allies, but you would call them for help. What about lone wolves? Let's say they make contact with me. I have ties to LSF, so I say to SFOD-D, okay, I will get LSF to help you, but we want full immunity in return. Or something like that. Isn't that a good RP reason?

- You are granted 'KoS rights' the instant an hostile action takes place against you or one of your friends/member of group/RP connected character

- We allow to 'pass KoS rights' to close related people in game (clans - members of group you hang out with often)

From the rules clarification thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-KG-    0

Clan 1 robs clan 2 = clan 2 gets KoS rights on clan 1.

Clan 2 then calls in another "allied" clan (3) to help against clan 1.

A firefight between clan 1 and clan 2 breaks out, halfway through clan 3 arrives.

Clan 1 identify clan 3 as not being clan 2 and cannot fire upon them, clan 3 could basically walk straight across the field to known clan 1 positions and kill them.

Ridiculous, allies like this MUST be official on the forums and expect to be shot on sight if they show up to fight in a scenario like this. Sure they might expect to get shot anyway but there is no way for clan 1 to know that clan 3 intends to be hostile.


And it gets even more ridiculous when clan 2 call in "personal allies" without tags, reinforcements should be official allied clans ONLY. Otherwise there is no reason AT ALL to be in a clan in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nikolai B.    0

You can't just tell people "no you cant come help becasue you are not in a clan". IF he's a friend, he is a friend.

There are plenty of people whose game style does not allow them to be in a clan. For example, people that can only play on weekends. I dont see any clan taking those in.

So they hang out with clans as "associates". So, jsut because they are not technically in a clan, they should be prohibited from having fun with the rest? thats just silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cadan   
Guest Cadan

I've noticed a increase in people using 2 names on a server.

Just a couple I can think of

Paddy Mayne - Tara O' Lere (or something)

Terra - Claire Anne

Say Tara robbed me, then I meet paddy, am I aloud to kill him?

Surly they can use those second accounts as a get around for KoS rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed a increase in people using 2 names on a server.

Just a couple I can think of

Paddy Mayne - Tara O' Lere (or something)

Terra - Claire Anne

Say Tara robbed me, then I meet paddy, am I aloud to kill him?

Surly they can use those second accounts as a get around for KoS rights.

Huh? That doesn't make sense. In what way would they get around it? If Claire Anne robs you and she then logs out to change character, of course that's not allowed. But it also wouldn't be allowed if she just logged out, because that would be combat logging.

Doesn't mean she can't play Claire, rob you, go on about her business and then change to Terra the next day. Your KoS rights have been expired by then anyway.

If you meet Terra after getting robbed by Claire you aren't allowed to kill her, but if she changed character right after robbing you, you can make a report. If it's the next day/new game session, your KoS rights would've been expired anyway. And whatever you know about Claire doesn't apply to Terra, so you can't execute her for past crimes (if you had a good reason for that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cadan   
Guest Cadan

But what if it was just a change, say 3 hours later. And I find terra in TP doing medic stuffs. And Claire had robbed me 3 hours prior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what if it was just a change, say 3 hours later. And I find terra in TP doing medic stuffs. And Claire had robbed me 3 hours prior.

Depends. Did you log out? Were you actively looking for her the past 3 hours? What happened in these 3 hours? You can't go do other stuff for 3 hours after you get robbed and then when you meet Terra say "OMG you changed character to get away with robbing me!"

Common sense. Not everything is defined in the rules, but that's what GMs are for, that's what the report section is for. Every situation can be handled separately. It sounds more like you're looking for excuses to kill Terra/Claire than she's looking for excuses to get away with robbing you. Unless it's really obvious she changed character to get away with it, of course. But then you could make a report, and she would get banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Terra    1449

I've noticed a increase in people using 2 names on a server.

Just a couple I can think of

Paddy Mayne - Tara O' Lere (or something)

Terra - Claire Anne

Say Tara robbed me, then I meet paddy, am I aloud to kill him?

Surly they can use those second accounts as a get around for KoS rights.

Huh? That doesn't make sense. In what way would they get around it? If Claire Anne robs you and she then logs out to change character, of course that's not allowed. But it also wouldn't be allowed if she just logged out, because that would be combat logging.

Doesn't mean she can't play Claire, rob you, go on about her business and then change to Terra the next day. Your KoS rights have been expired by then anyway.

If you meet Terra after getting robbed by Claire you aren't allowed to kill her, but if she changed character right after robbing you, you can make a report. If it's the next day/new game session, your KoS rights would've been expired anyway. And whatever you know about Claire doesn't apply to Terra, so you can't execute her for past crimes (if you had a good reason for that).

exactly!

3h is not enough, so i would say, it´s combat log aswell. Dont panic Cadan. When i play Claire, i will not log out and change my Name. I never did that and i never will <3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cadan   
Guest Cadan

I wasn't pointing fingers.

I was just using you two as those are the ones I know of. Just an example.

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.

×