Jump to content
Server time: 2017-08-20, 21:16

Sign in to follow this  
Mexi

Safe Zone.

Safe Zone Options/ Opinions.  

156 members have voted

  1. 1. Would YOU like a safe zone implemented?

    • Yes.
      42
    • No.
      56
    • Yes, but with very light rules. (To be discussed)
      16
    • Yes, but allow ALL types of RP to take place.
      18
    • Yes to both of the "Yes" options.
      8


Recommended Posts

Mexi    1034

So basically the title explains what this thread is about,

The Staff team/ Rolle has decided that a safe zone will be implemented that prohibits certain RP styles that promote hostilities, which I and a few groups I have discussed with don't particularly like the idea of it coming into play, now it's actually been announced here.

Basically I'd like to see what people would like with a poll as we, the players are the ones that will have to deal with it being put in. I'll put a few suggestions on the poll but if you would like something alternative please feel free to comment below.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
   568
Posted (edited)

I want a safe zone, just don't want to get banned for calling someone a mean word...

Just to throw some more of my thoughts on here, a lot of people seem to be against the zone I'm all for it.  I think it'd be a good place to meet for deals. Like you don't meet your drug dealer you don't trust in a back lane. You meet in a public place so he can't pull a gun on you. It just seems like it can spawn more good than bad.

So for this reason I want a safe zone.

Edited by Kevin
BONELESS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
evanm23    293

To be honest, a safe zone is a'ight but pretty much what kevin said. 

Its not there little shelter to be safe from being called a prick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rolle    2453

I think the poll is confusing af :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nihoolious    1107

If it was all IC I'd be all for it. But as it is presented now, its entirely built on OOC rules and policies and for that reason its a No from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rolle    2453

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Your poll man, I just think "Yes" and "No" would be plenty and produce more accurate picture than one big no and several small yes'es.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexi    1034
Just now, Rolle said:

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Your poll man, I just think "Yes" and "No" would be plenty and produce more reliable picture than one big no and several small yes'es.

Issue is there's a lot of different routes to take instead of prohibiting something to a point where the area becomes OP, which is why there's the option to add something onto the thread. If you feel a yes or no would be better I'd be happy to change it if it's going actually be taken into consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a safe zone is a good idea. It allows people to have some control over how they want to RP on that day, and it also allows people to have a social hub where people can get to know each other more, forge alliances, and make friends or enemies. It also allows more for more character development - what does your character do when they're not scared for their life and just trying to survive? How do they interact without their group?

 

It also might lead to the bandit groups having to do cool things like hide up in the hills waiting for specific people to come out who are in hiding, send someone in to track down a person in the safe zone and lure them out with a sick storyline or underhandedly threatening them without alerting anyone else.

 

 We have the rest of the map for hostile RP, why not let a small zone be a place where people can do non-hostile RP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexi    1034
Just now, KittieWriting said:

I think a safe zone is a good idea. It allows people to have some control over how they want to RP on that day, and it also allows people to have a social hub where people can get to know each other more, forge alliances, and make friends or enemies. It also allows more for more character development - what does your character do when they're not scared for their life and just trying to survive? How do they interact without their group?

 

It also might lead to the bandit groups having to do cool things like hide up in the hills waiting for specific people to come out who are in hiding, send someone in to track down a person in the safe zone and lure them out with a sick storyline or underhandedly threatening them without alerting anyone else.

 

 We have the rest of the map for hostile RP, why not let a small zone be a place where people can do non-hostile RP?

I think you missed Rolles comment about allowing ghosting to take place to be able to enter the safe zone without any troubles.

Because it doesn't promote realism where-as the majority of the community are here for just that, realism. You have the rest of the map to avoid hostile RP, why not go there for it??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rolle    2453
1 minute ago, Mexi said:

Issue is there's a lot of different routes to take instead of prohibiting something to a point where the area becomes OP, which is why there's the option to add something onto the thread. If you feel a yes or no would be better I'd be happy to change it if it's going actually be taken into consideration.

No need, was just a protip :D And no, it probably won't affect much, but it's always nice to see some numbers behind the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is realism though. You wouldn't go to a police station and start firing off shots. Why? Because there's rules and consequences to your actions.

We have many rules in place in society today that stop you from doing things you shouldn't do.

If you wanted to rob a person, you'd do it in a back-alley away from anyone's eyes. Why? Because that's smart, and you don't want to be seen, you don't want any heroes helping and you want it to go off without a problem.

As it stands now, the entire map is a back-alley where you don't have to worry about who you rob or where.

As far as I can see, a safe zone is just a built up area, where the odds are in the favour of the non-hostile for once. If anything, this adds more realism. It forces a person to think about their morality, and how many rules they're willing to break. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexi    1034
1 minute ago, KittieWriting said:

It is realism though. You wouldn't go to a police station and start firing off shots. Why? Because there's rules and consequences to your actions.

We have many rules in place in society today that stop you from doing things you shouldn't do.

If you wanted to rob a person, you'd do it in a back-alley away from anyone's eyes. Why? Because that's smart, and you don't want to be seen, you don't want any heroes helping and you want it to go off without a problem.

As it stands now, the entire map is a back-alley where you don't have to worry about who you rob or where.

As far as I can see, a safe zone is just a built up area, where the odds are in the favour of the non-hostile for once. If anything, this adds more realism. It forces a person to think about their morality, and how many rules they're willing to break. 

 

Ahh yes, society does have rules but as I'm sure you're aware the lore will be set after shit kicks off.. People most definitely would throw all their morals out of the window in order to survive as that is a human instinct. I don't know if you've have time but if you could please do read through the rules and point out which ones are in favour of those who do hostile RP, when I get home from College later I'll be happy to highlight all those which are FOR people who desire non-hostile. It doesn't add realism at all, it's not enforced IC when everything that prohibiting it is on an OOC level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hebi Kotei    302
Posted (edited)

I don't like the idea of it being kind of a ruleplay zone if it was all enforced IC via initiations rather than a 3 to 7-day ban.

6 minutes ago, KittieWriting said:

It is realism though. You wouldn't go to a police station and start firing off shots. Why? Because there's rules and consequences to your actions.

1

Realism where you get banned from the server for doing something IC in a certain area? No.

it is realism to have consequences happen in game to you via the route of RP. There are rules that are needed, this is not one of them.

Edited by Hebi Kotei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KronicMunky    16
Posted (edited)

All I see is a lot of "it's not cool to force people into a situation where they're  not be able to force people". 

Edited by KronicMunky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mexi said:

Ahh yes, society does have rules but as I'm sure you're aware the lore will be set after shit kicks off.. People most definitely would throw all their morals out of the window in order to survive as that is a human instinct. I don't know if you've have time but if you could please do read through the rules and point out which ones are in favour of those who do hostile RP, when I get home from College later I'll be happy to highlight all those which are FOR people who desire non-hostile. It doesn't add realism at all, it's not enforced IC when everything that prohibiting it is on an OOC level.

This isn't a report, Mexi. I'm just sharing my opinion like you are. It isn't a hidden fact that the entire map is an RPPVP zone, because you are able to initiate anywhere on the map. All the safe zone offers is a place to RP, without the PVP which should be an option for people who want to do that. People who want to have a meeting with their club, or hold a social event.

I'm in favour of a safe zone. I'm also in favour of enforcing the rules of the safe zone through IC means. So, for now I think the issue with those opposing the safe zone is that they think they can go into the zone, and people can talk shit and feel protected by the rules, right?

But this a new concept, and we can put rules in place that mean those who want to hide behind rule-armor can't do that. We have an opportunity to set up something really good here, and add a little spark to the RP on the server as a whole and we are lucky enough to be here when the rules are being discussed.

 

I think throwing the whole idea out the window is a little premature when we can have a discussion and put forward rules to be considered so that we can all be happy with the new type of roleplay this will bring.

 

Don't want rule-armor? Add in a factioned force policing the area. Talk shit? Get thrown outside to the bandits, see how safe you feel when you aren't protected and now you have a guy who wants to get even. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Para    190

So, my opinion on a safezone.

The way many settlements have been run by larger groups has lead me to believe that the safezone idea is a bad one. I joined a few groups with large settlements and most of my experiences were poor. People ran around constantly talking about gear in TS and not actually roleplaying with each other. I have no reason to believe a safezone would be much different to that, as it would result in people congregating to trade.

Now, I am not opposed to a safezone being brought into this game for a short duration of time. A safezone would naturally be run by something like the UN at the early stages of the infection. A safezone would be an interesting idea, one that could potentially provide a lot of RP and development to people's stories. That being said, if a safezone was to be put in I would definitely, 100%, like to see some input from the loremasters to destroy this safezone. Lore events that people can take part in to close down the safezone, to cause more chaos and scatter people across the world instead of helping them re-unite. I am ONLY for a lore event IF lore events close this down. I do not want a repeat of some of the settlements that get attacked by numerous bandit groups simply for existing because that shit was relentless. 

TL;DR: Safezone is a yes from me IF lore events destroy it after a small amount of time.

Edit: to give my view on the realism:

Early on in the infection, official groups around the world would still exist and try to set up safezones to help people. These safezones would realistically have a lot of soldiers guarding it (because the infection numbers would be large) thus attacking a safezone randomly as bandits is a fucking stupid idea. Realistically bandits randomly attacking a safezone would result in them all being gunned down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hebi Kotei said:

I don't like the idea of it being kind of a ruleplay zone if it was all enforced IC via initiations rather than a 3 to 7-day ban.

Realism where you get banned from the server for doing something IC in a certain area? No.

it is realism to have consequences happen in game to you via the route of RP.

Then just don't do something IC that will get you banned. We do this all the time in RP as it is. We follow the OOC rules. I don't see why that's an issue now. Rule armor goes both ways... The trick is to get the rules right the first time and limit people exploiting them.

1 minute ago, Para said:

So, my opinion on a safezone.

The way many settlements have been run by larger groups has lead me to believe that the safezone idea is a bad one. I joined a few groups with large settlements and most of my experiences were poor. People ran around constantly talking about gear in TS and not actually roleplaying with each other. I have no reason to believe a safezone would be much different to that, as it would result in people congregating to trade.

Now, I am not opposed to a safezone being brought into this game for a short duration of time. A safezone would naturally be run by something like the UN at the early stages of the infection. A safezone would be an interesting idea, one that could potentially provide a lot of RP and development to people's stories. That being said, if a safezone was to be put in I would definitely, 100%, like to see some input from the loremasters to destroy this safezone. Lore events that people can take part in to close down the safezone, to cause more chaos and scatter people across the world instead of helping them re-unite. I am ONLY for a lore event IF lore events close this down. I do not want a repeat of some of the settlements that get attacked by numerous bandit groups simply for existing because that shit was relentless. 

TL;DR: Safezone is a yes from me IF lore events destroy it after a small amount of time.

That would also give some great RP. The fall of the safe zone - everyone reacting to trying to find a safe place to live - shocked by how savage the outside world has become!
All of it is a great catalyst for RP, and I think shutting it down early is really doing the community a disservice. Great idea, Para.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hebi Kotei    302
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, KittieWriting said:

Don't want rule-armor? Add in a factioned force policing the area. Talk shit? Get thrown outside to the bandits, see how safe you feel when you aren't protected and now you have a guy who wants to get even. 

1

Well, it is already supposed managed by factions, therefore, I would rather not see any "rule armour relating to this". And gladly, I will accept the consequences of my, or others, hostile behaviour through any RP route.

10 minutes ago, KronicMunky said:

All I see is a lot of "it's not cool to force people to not be able to force people". 

7 minutes ago, KittieWriting said:

Then just don't do something IC that will get you banned. We do this all the time in RP as it is. We follow the OOC rules. I don't see why that's an issue now. Rule armor goes both ways... The trick is to get the rules right the first time and limit people exploiting them.

1

Not saying it doesn't, but acting like a little piece of shit in a certain area is not grounds for a ban regardless of length, rather just accept the IC consequences of going against that settlement particular rules, not preventing people from performing a certain type of RP in that area.

Realism in RP =/= ban from server

Realism in RP = RP consequences

This:

43 minutes ago, Nihoolious said:

If it was all IC I'd be all for it. But as it is presented now, its entirely built on OOC rules and policies and for that reason its a No from me.

Edited by Hebi Kotei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
King    101

Personally, one of the largest arguments I see on this server is the ratio of people who are here to PvP with the extended rules to improve the quality of conflicts and the amount of people who are here to socialise and roleplay whether that be with hostile or passive intent. While I accept the reasons for a safezone, I feel like the consequences of such a move could cause more issues than it solves.

I will be concise with my points; If anybody needs or wants more details I am happy to give a more informative answer via PM.

  • First and foremost, I believe that the safezone will lead to a massive dip in the number of players around the map. Random events and occurrences which have topically provided some of the best RP will have a much lower chance of happening.
  • It will provide a zone for new players to rely on which is not what the game or realistically this server is all about. HostileRP plays a large part in the activity of this server and I feel as though this will lead to less activity.
  • It actually may lead to more aggression in the safezone itself. If the rules in the safezone prevent initiations and PvP, there are no limits to how hostile a person can be.
  • It will centralise RP from other groups, which for some may ruin conflicts and alliances as it speeds up the time of these events. 
  • The rules will need to be absolutely pinpoint on target in order for this to even be a reasonable suggestion. I can foresee a huge reduction in equity and fair justification at this safezone and it does worry me considering where the current rules subside.
  • As @Mexi has outlisted a number of times now; It may be considered much less realistic in comparison with what we currently have. Although communities may have been built in the few years there has been a lack of anarchic restraint, I do not believe these would have lasted long enough for a stable "Safezone" to have formed. 
  • I feel these rules are more directed to out of character behaviour more than in character. 

Look, I agree that some form of safezone could be used in order to protect passiveRP from hostileRP. I do agree there needs to be that border as everybody is here for different reasons. Some people are here for hostility and PvP, whether that be anarchical, militaristic or the edgy kind of roleplay. But, some people are here for passive roleplay; building friendships, relationships and forming bonds with other people. So I feel as though this safezone needs to be incredibly well prepared if it isn't already. 

To those are against this, as much as I agree with you, this is happening. There is nothing changing that. All we can hope for is it is done well enough for it to be successful.

(Sorry about the terrible layout, just did physics exam and head is whirring :S)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Para    190
7 minutes ago, KittieWriting said:

Then just don't do something IC that will get you banned. We do this all the time in RP as it is. We follow the OOC rules. I don't see why that's an issue now. Rule armor goes both ways... The trick is to get the rules right the first time and limit people exploiting them.

That would also give some great RP. The fall of the safe zone - everyone reacting to trying to find a safe place to live - shocked by how savage the outside world has become!
All of it is a great catalyst for RP, and I think shutting it down early is really doing the community a disservice. Great idea, Para.

The balance is finding a length of time that has an impact on people's stories without it being there for too long. Many of those soldiers would naturally turn infected over time and their numbers would dwindle. 

My idea for the lore events is for loremasters to set up events that people IC can catch on to and try to take part. Things like infiltration, stealing supplies to force them to go out and scavange, taking partols hostage for their arms and supplies etc. There are limitless options to cripple a safezone without boldly attacking it at first instance. Hell, maybe even the numbers inside become too much and the faction leading the settlement has to throw people out to the world. The lore events can work both ways :D

I would actually like to know what @Rolle thinks of this idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexi    1034
Just now, KittieWriting said:

This isn't a report, Mexi. I'm just sharing my opinion like you are. It isn't a hidden fact that the entire map is an RPPVP zone, because you are able to initiate anywhere on the map. All the safe zone offers is a place to RP, without the PVP which should be an option for people who want to do that. People who want to have a meeting with their club, or hold a social event.

I'm in favour of a safe zone. I'm also in favour of enforcing the rules of the safe zone through IC means. So, for now I think the issue with those opposing the safe zone is that they think they can go into the zone, and people can talk shit and feel protected by the rules, right?

But this a new concept, and we can put rules in place that mean those who want to hide behind rule-armor can't do that. We have an opportunity to set up something really good here, and add a little spark to the RP on the server as a whole and we are lucky enough to be here when the rules are being discussed.

 

I think throwing the whole idea out the window is a little premature when we can have a discussion and put forward rules to be considered so that we can all be happy with the new type of roleplay this will bring.

 

Don't want rule-armor? Add in a factioned force policing the area. Talk shit? Get thrown outside to the bandits, see how safe you feel when you aren't protected and now you have a guy who wants to get even. 

 

Indeed you should have the option to have a place to RP without the fear factor of people initiating on you, I don't disagree at all. However, as you stated previously you have the entire map to organise a meet up point with those you would like to organise something with ICly, social event or some sort of club that you're wanting to have.

If the safe zone was enforced ICly I'm sure the majority wouldn't have a problem with it, which is why I added the light rules option. Allow one of the new factions that are being implemented to run it ICly instead of it relying on OOC rules to completely protect it. It won't really bring in new RP, difference is it'll be a spot where people centralise for some RP. A rule overall could be added in to say that it can be attacked a certain amount of times because sure, RP can be found there but in no way should people NOT feel worried about what could be coming for them instead of knowing that OOC means are protecting them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hebi Kotei said:

Well, it is already supposed managed by factions, therefore, I would rather not see any "rule armour relating to this". And gladly, I will accept the consequences of my, or others, hostile behaviour through any RP route.

Not saying it doesn't, but acting like a little piece of shit in a certain area is not grounds for a ban regardless of length, rather just accept the IC consequences of going against that settlement particular rules, not preventing people from performing a certain type of RP in that area.

I think you should be able to act like a little piece of shit if your character is one. But they should equally know where the line is - talk back, be rude, mock, antagonise, get drunk and dig yourself a hole with a known bandit group. It's all great tension. But be prepared to pay for it outside of the zone. Also, I don't see why we can't emote hostile activity instead of shooting at someone. It's not realistic when someone has to respawn at the coast because they got gunned down. But, we ignore that non-realism and just play that someone got injured.

We should be able to emote RP-fights - someone talks shit, then beat them up with your guys somewhere in the safe zone that's private. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rei    19

And what happened to previous settlements that were ran IC?

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.

×