Jump to content
Server time: 2017-08-22, 03:50

Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Suggestion: Firefight ruleplayers/looting combatzones.

Should the rules be changed to include this?  

86 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the rules be changed to include this?

    • Yes.
      74
    • No.
      9
    • Other suggestion (Post.)
      3


Recommended Posts

Guest   
Guest

This is an issue that has been around for quite a while, with no real solution available at the moment, contrary to what common sense should dictate. 

At this point, people are free to wanter into firefight and do what they want, whenever. I understand absolutely and completely that people shouldn't be able to be shot for just being in the area without being informed there is a firefight. That is not the concern I'm dragging up. The concern I have is that people, after being warned multiple times, that they're in a active firefight simply ignore it. They move around, loot bodies, do whatever kind of RP they want, showing little value for their lives and clinging on to the fact that they can't get KOS'd according to the rules. 

The only solution at this time is to initiate on them, and get even more combatants involved or grab more hostages. This is something that gets absolutely abused to force initiations or to simply loot bodies, spot for their friends who are involved or just annoy the people risking their lives there. 

What I think should apply, and should also be considered common sense is that if you are warned that you are in an active firefight, repeatedly, yet you choose to ignore this and stay. Then you should be considered fair game, an active combatant, and your claims of mis-id or KOS should ve thrown out the window as you made a conscious decision to stay inside a firefight, against common sense, value for your characters lives and proper roleplay etiquette. It's ruleplaying to say the least

This of course means if they actively stay or do not move out of the area. Meaning, do not shoot them as they leave. Obviously.

To make it very clear - This is not an excuse to kill more people. More so to kill less, so people actually value their lives.

The intention is not to add more victims, it's to not make the shooter a victim when the person is very well aware and makes a conscious decision to stay at risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest CUDA   
Guest CUDA

People hiding behind the rules should not be supported.

+1 to this, $asha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Heroz_Nick    21

How many times this has happened to me yet somehow magically me and my friends are the ones that get punished [OOC].

the lesson here for all the new people, dont use the rules as a shield, play by them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

I agree with this 100%, always found it ridiculous that people complain after willingly staying in a war zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  1. In hostile situation
  2. Random approaches area
  3. I say "Hey some shit is going down here, you might wanna get out of here with your life while you can."
  4. Shooting occurs
  5. Get shot by the dude I just warned because this has been interpreted as hostile action (because he's been circling the area like a vulture)

: - )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grihm    16

This of course means if they actively stay or do not move out of the area. Meaning, do not shoot them as they leave. Obviously.

To make it very clear - This is not an excuse to kill more people. More so to kill less, so people actually value their lives.

So you do agree that some people express little to no value for life.

In these cases, could you either not

1: Escort them out of the area under gunpoint, and if you are the active participant of the present hostility, you need not to initiate on the spectators, but only under gunpoint lead them out and away?

2: Go with the commonly "record and report" if people present NVFL and Bad RP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1: Escort them out of the area under gunpoint, and if you are the active participant of the present hostility, you need not to initiate on the spectators, but only under gunpoint lead them out and away?

I could see this being considered initiation - not to mention you're sticking your neck out for some morons whilst the original group you are engaged in hostilites with can just dome you ezpz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grihm    16

1: Escort them out of the area under gunpoint, and if you are the active participant of the present hostility, you need not to initiate on the spectators, but only under gunpoint lead them out and away?

I could see this being considered initiation - not to mention you're sticking your neck out for some morons whilst the original group you are engaged in hostilites with can just dome you ezpz.

Sorry i don´t understand that last part. Sticking the neck part out is one way of putting it, but if the participants in the area are in the direct line of fire, then it´s ones responsibility to ID them and deal with it accordingly. If they are in the background just combat looting for free stuff, then most likely a NVFL report is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hebee    2233

This of course means if they actively stay or do not move out of the area. Meaning, do not shoot them as they leave. Obviously.

To make it very clear - This is not an excuse to kill more people. More so to kill less, so people actually value their lives.

So you do agree that some people express little to no value for life.

In these cases, could you either not

1: Escort them out of the area under gunpoint, and if you are the active participant of the present hostility, you need not to initiate on the spectators, but only under gunpoint lead them out and away?

2: Go with the commonly "record and report" if people present NVFL and Bad RP?

#1 is a horrible idea being that it is an initiation granting another group kos rights on you now your potentially fighting two groups.

#2 the problem he is having is that he shouldn't have to do this there should just be a rule in place specifically prohibiting this behavior. But since there is nothing specifically about this people abuse it to force initiations or to vulture the gear off bodies for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

This of course means if they actively stay or do not move out of the area. Meaning, do not shoot them as they leave. Obviously.

To make it very clear - This is not an excuse to kill more people. More so to kill less, so people actually value their lives.

So you do agree that some people express little to no value for life.

In these cases, could you either not

1: Escort them out of the area under gunpoint, and if you are the active participant of the present hostility, you need not to initiate on the spectators, but only under gunpoint lead them out and away?

2: Go with the commonly "record and report" if people present NVFL and Bad RP?

If I'm part of the people getting shot it'd make more sense keeping away from people like this. I'm not going to stand and have a biscuit with people as others are looking to shoot me. For both of our safeties. 

There's literally no reason to. Telling him to fuck off if he doesn't want to risk getting shot should be more than enough.

And having to throw up reports every second firefight isn't something that should have to be done. This is something that should be common sense, and it shouldn't be our problem that people decide to stay in a firefight after they've been told multiple times there is a firefight going on. If they choose to stay in a firefight and risk their lives, it should be their problem. Not ours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grihm    16

This of course means if they actively stay or do not move out of the area. Meaning, do not shoot them as they leave. Obviously.

To make it very clear - This is not an excuse to kill more people. More so to kill less, so people actually value their lives.

So you do agree that some people express little to no value for life.

In these cases, could you either not

1: Escort them out of the area under gunpoint, and if you are the active participant of the present hostility, you need not to initiate on the spectators, but only under gunpoint lead them out and away?

2: Go with the commonly "record and report" if people present NVFL and Bad RP?

If I'm part of the people getting shot it'd make more sense keeping away from people like this. I'm not going to stand and have a biscuit with people as others are looking to shoot me. For both of our safeties. 

There's literally no reason to. Telling him to fuck off if he doesn't want to risk getting shot should be more than enough.

And having to throw up reports every second firefight isn't something that should have to be done. This is something that should be common sense, and it shouldn't be our problem that people decide to stay in a firefight after they've been told multiple times there is a firefight going on. If they choose to stay in a firefight and risk their lives, it should be their problem. Not ours.

A common problem from both sides. The lack of value for life. There sure is need of a fix indeed and when common sense is not on the table, a swift consequence should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TLake    23

I'm down for a rulechange for firefights. I don't see why this isn't already a thing, because if you're dumb enough to wander around in a gunfight then if you die you die. If I wander into a gunfight I usually fallback and observe or just leave the area. If I do stay it would be to assist one side or the other. Wandering around looting just doesn't make sense from an rp standpoint and is bad form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

I mean, we're supposed to RP realistically.

Realistically, would you stay in an area where you hear lots of gunshots?

Hear 1 gunshot, sure go check it out.

Hear a firefight(i.e. > 4 rifles being fired), sure go check it out. But if you die, you knowingly went into an area from where you could hear gunfire.

The dead guy is the most wrong in this situation, in my opinion. Which of the parties could have easily avoided it? The party that walked in and got shot. Since there is literally no reason what's so ever to walk into a firefight(unless you are a combatant).

People is going to much with "They don't have KOS rights so they can't shoot me", then they die and make a report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
   5

I think except in cases where someone clearly logged in and got shot soon after,  a certain burden should be on the victim if they're in a firefight area. It's not like running around into gunfire ever makes rp sense anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grihm    16

I mean, we're supposed to RP realistically.

Realistically, would you stay in an area where you hear lots of gunshots?

Hear 1 gunshot, sure go check it out.

Hear a firefight(i.e. > 4 rifles being fired), sure go check it out. But if you die, you knowingly went into an area from where you could hear gunfire.

People is going to much "They don't have KOS rights so they can't shoot me", then they die and make a report. Both parties are equally wrong in this situation, in my opinion. Which of the parties could have easily avoided it? The party that walked in and got shot. Since there is literally no reason what's so ever to walk into a firefight(unless you are a combatant).

Another part of the problem is that people end up in gunfights for literally no reason at all. KOS has no meaning, initiation has no weight, reasons are near extinct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

Another part of the problem is that people end up in gunfights for literally no reason at all. KOS has no meaning, initiation has no weight, reasons are near extinct.

How is this even remotely close to this discussion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
johnm5425    2

Whenever we hear gunshots coming from a town in game we get the hell outta their, people who decide to wander in show little value for life.

And those people who loot the bodies knowing they are protected by KOS, seems like their using rule play over role play.

Completely agree with this thread 100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grihm    16

Another part of the problem is that people end up in gunfights for literally no reason at all. KOS has no meaning, initiation has no weight, reasons are near extinct.

How is this even remotely close to this discussion?

A firefight is far too common. The fallout of 50 firefights / week compared to 5 is that whenever you see this too often, people get numb and it´s just seen as an everyday occurrence. This in term leads to people not giving a damn and you get none-involved people in the crossfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MatthewFC    9

This is a non-issue, covered in an already preexisting rule.

Knowingly staying at a firefight area in a way that shows NVFL should be ruled as NVFL (a rulebreak) but NOT grant anyone any KoS rights whatsoever. NVFL, of course, is a vague enough rule that leaves it to staff interpretation, something that might be intended...

...much like people going out of their way to initiate through text only is totally fine unless someone someday will find it as AoGM and Ruleplay > Roleplay.

Bottom line: specific rules to cover these kind of very specific situations that leave staff with no room for interpretation and assimilation to circumstances should be avoided, as they are ruleplayed easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zar    5

Now if you change the rule, how am I supposed to get easy loot????

Nah, I support the rule change 100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

This is a non-issue, covered in an already preexisting rule.

Knowingly staying at a firefight area in a way that shows NVFL should be ruled as NVFL (a rulebreak) but NOT grant anyone any KoS rights whatsoever. NVFL, of course, is a vague enough rule that leaves it to staff interpretation, something that might be intended...

...much like people going out of their way to initiate through text only is totally fine unless someone someday will find it as AoGM and Ruleplay > Roleplay.

Bottom line: specific rules to cover these kind of very specific situations that leave staff with no room for interpretation and assimilation to circumstances should be avoided, as they are ruleplayed easily.

No, it is very much an issue. And one that needs to be covered at that. Discussing this with staff members it was made clear that regardless of warning these people they are in a firefight, they're untouchable. Period. No matter how long they decide to chill and loot around.

You need to initiate on them, thus granting them KOS and getting yourself more combatants to avoid mis-id's.

The suggestion of the NVFL rule covering this, no. It doesn't. What it does is force you to make a report after every second or third firefight instead of providing a solution. If people abuse this, then they'll get punished for it. This is to provide a safety net for people who go out of their way to warn people they're in a firefight, and having to deal with the fallout of them refusing to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Samaritan    254

Sure that what the report system is for, if you think that someone is displaying NVFL when a firefight is taking place e.g. looting bodies while a firefight is taking place then they can be reported. I do agree however that I have an issue with people just walking into an active firefight zone, if something was kicking off close to me and I wasn't involved I'd be getting out of there. The problem is that if there is a lull in the firefight with no firing taking place for a prolonged amount of time and innocents walking into the area. It is one of the situations that would be difficult to prove NVFL as it can turn into word vs word in regards when someone enters the firefight zone.

I'm sure that his was brought up during the mod days and I believe some kind of rule was passed or at least discussed. I'll have a hunt through to see if I can find the thread.

EDIT: nope cannot find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

On the right tracks here. Quite often you see people hiding behind the rules when some people are fighting it out. Some just like to stand around there, watching all the shooting while chewing popcorn, thinking they're invincible due to no one having killing rights on them. That's just something one would not do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mak   
Guest Mak

Absolutely agree, +1 from me, if you hear gunshots and don't want to get involved, then don't go there, simple, what idiot would do that anyway in a real life situation?

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.

×