Jump to content
Server time: 2017-10-21, 17:43
Safe Zone: CLOSED

Sign in to follow this  
Rolle

Anti - telepathic communication rule

Recommended Posts

Poppy    378
Posted (edited)

I really like this, however it may still be somewhat difficult to prove/stop completely...

 

If we can get it to work, I am all for it. It will improve RP a lot. 

Edited by Saradomin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexi    1309
Posted (edited)

No way to prove the rule being broken in reports..

Q: Do you have a recording of the situation?
A: Nope

- Word vs Word.

Wouldn't mind it though!

Edited by Mexi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marcunt    240

Hallelujah!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ghoozov    272
Just now, Jetwells said:

+1, I think a poll is needed. 

Or not, I'm pretty sure we're all unanimous on this, are we not? I mean, the only reason someone would be against it is if they don't want to prioritize RP over PvP or GearRP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rolle    2963
Just now, Mexi said:

No way to prove the rule being broken in reports..

Q: Do you have a recording of the situation?
A: Nope

- Word vs Word.

Of course, just like most of our rules (the only things we can really prove without a recording are the kills since they are in the logs). But it's important that it's there even if we're not able to enforce it 100% of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jetwells    0
Just now, Ghoozovich said:

Or not, I'm pretty sure we're all unanimous on this, are we not? I mean, the only reason someone would be against it is if they don't want to prioritize RP over PvP or GearRP.

Yes, I feel the same. But as we know, some people don't want to prioritize and I would rather them have hard evidence that they are the minority. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rolle    2963
2 minutes ago, Jetwells said:

+1, I think a poll is needed. 

It's not really a suggestion whether or not it will happen, it's so that you guys can help to formulate the rule so it is fair for everyone, easily understandable and with as little grey area as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexi    1309
1 minute ago, Rolle said:

Of course, just like most of our rules (the only things we can really prove without a recording are the kills since they are in the logs). But it's important that it's there even if we're not able to enforce it 100% of the time.

Urite.

Edited it saying that I wouldn't mind it, wouldn't be a bad addition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Red    252

I really like this suggestion to be honest and I feel it's definitely worth a try. Meta gaming could become really easy to spot. For example when a group of people shows up to aid hostage even though hostage has not said a thing in character. It always bothered me that people found their way to their friends even though nothing was said in character. I think it would improve RP a whole lot.

Traveling groups will be much more common as everyone wants to remain in voice/view range.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexi    1309

If/ when this gets put in so many people are gonna suddenly be using the word "initiated".. "I'VE BEEN INITIATED ON KAB CHURCH 7 OF EM"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spartan    1235

I like this, it will make it more realistic. Just wonder how many people "stopped" recording

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Western    502

I remember when I got capture by @Solo and his band of merry men, and He gave me back my radio to tell the boys to stop shooting or I would be killed and I spoke in IC on Ts and in VOIP. I hate when you get captured you just wait until they finished talking in ts. And when ever I do hostile actions I never go in ts everything I say i do in Voip. I love this idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nihoolious    1248

Here is a compromise.

Instead of going silent when initiating on in game, people are required to hot mic their compliance. Saying "ok I'm putting my hands up" through voip and ts seems like a reasonable rule to enforce and it also shows the initiators that the person acknowledged the hostile action so there is no "I never heard the initiation" confusion. 

Now people being silent and using ts when in an intense gunfight is fine in my eyes since you would need to communicate with peole outside of voip range. If people were hiding behind cover in a standoff, I don't think their callouts should be required in voip since realistically there would be chaos and people talking over each other, and with dayz's shirty voip it would be impossible to get anything done. Let people use their radio in firefights like how it is now. 

However, if there is a hostage situation and gunfight breaks out, you are still required to rp. Going silent on your hostage imo should be considered bad rp. Gunfight can get intense, but the hostage who is lying on the ground restrained still needs something to do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ghoozov    272
1 minute ago, Rolle said:

It's not really a suggestion whether or not it will happen, it's so that you guys can help to formulate the rule so it is fair for everyone, easily understandable and with as little grey area as possible.

Okay, then I would alter it slightly as, for me at least, it doesn't become clear what it's about if I didn't already know what we were talking about.

 If you must communicate information to your allies via radio (TeamSpeak) in the presence of other players you must use in game communications as well (EXAMPLE: Holding down DayZ and TeamSpeak PTTs simultaneously). This is especially important during hostile situations where you may not use external communication like TeamSpeak to share in character information like your location or details about the attackers unless it is also said in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Idole    185

+1 I like this rule but sadly it might be hard to prove because people will either say they don't have evidence or will edit it out or just press push to talk on shadow play and freely talk whilst recording. But I like this idea if you are in front of other players in game everything you say should be heard but if you are in a gunfight think it would be fine just talking in ts and not ingame. I wouldn't be overly strict about that if your just with your friends then that's fine but if you are with other people who aren't in your group they should know what is being said. Bright side the reports might be less if people don't have "recorded evidence" to prove their innocence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hollows    453
32 minutes ago, Mexi said:

No way to prove the rule being broken in reports..

Q: Do you have a recording of the situation?
A: Nope

- Word vs Word.

Wouldn't mind it though!

If you think about it, any report without evidence is WvW. However, 9/10 the accused will not know when to shut up and usually tell on themselves accidentally by either saying too much or contradicting themselves later in the report and then get the YEET for it.

However, I'm in favor of this rule. I'm guilty of this, at least the," I'm being initiated on," part without talking in VOIP. My only thing is, I know now people will be like," Talk in the radio and you die!" crap now, so I know I'm probably going to taste the rainbow of 5.56 saying it quickly as the initiation happens the exact moment it drops. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Majoo    742

Hello, it is me...weird person. I support this and like this addition to the rules in case you do it Rolle. It will give the initiations more realism/immersion instead of magically your friends knowing what, where, who, how many and other stuff...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sam Fields    156
31 minutes ago, Nihoolious said:

Let people use their radio in firefights like how it is now. 

Eh, with a rule like these it's going to have to be all or nothing, or risk further subjection in the reports (which everyone loves to complain about).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cid    333
20 minutes ago, Nihoolious said:

Here is a compromise.

Instead of going silent when initiating on in game, people are required to hot mic their compliance. Saying "ok I'm putting my hands up" through voip and ts seems like a reasonable rule to enforce and it also shows the initiators that the person acknowledged the hostile action so there is no "I never heard the initiation" confusion. 

Now people being silent and using ts when in an intense gunfight is fine in my eyes since you would need to communicate with peole outside of voip range. If people were hiding behind cover in a standoff, I don't think their callouts should be required in voip since realistically there would be chaos and people talking over each other, and with dayz's shirty voip it would be impossible to get anything done. Let people use their radio in firefights like how it is now. 

However, if there is a hostage situation and gunfight breaks out, you are still required to rp. Going silent on your hostage imo should be considered bad rp. Gunfight can get intense, but the hostage who is lying on the ground restrained still needs something to do. 

I'm still not okay with what I bolded.

People would realistically see you reach into your pocket/container/on your hip/wherever the hell your radio is and know that you are doing something like that.  You should be required to emote to do stuff like that, try and sneak your communications.  You would be shot or at least questioned for whatever the hell you are messing with.  It should also be considered metagaming, or even powergaming in some situations depending on the actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheProxJack    0
49 minutes ago, Spartan said:

I like this, it will make it more realistic. Just wonder how many people "stopped" recording

My playsTV has been having problems recently

ok rule I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KronicMunky    16

It's been a long time coming so +1 here. It's gotten to the point where I get annoyed if anyone in ts standing next to me when we're RPing asking me things like "can we trust this guy" or "shall we initiate?" Etc and I'm like "Dude, these people are right in front of us and can't hear us just speak in game" it's badRP in my opinion and immersion breaking to the max. How can three guys talk to each other on the radio right in front of you without you hearing it? Why or how could they even do such a thing realistically? 

 

There's quite a few situations regarding KoS rights where I'm pretty sure if the hostile party was heard saying "is this the guy that was running away? The person who shot at you?" Etc etc, the other party could hear this and be like " woah woah! We don't know what you're even talking about" or just you know RP in general, rather than just being gunned down without a word and with a fairly high risk of being a misID and ending up in a report. Nobody wants to get banned for an accident and everyone wants to RP. I see this as solving alot tbh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oliv    1882
2 hours ago, Nihoolious said:

Here is a compromise.

Instead of going silent when initiating on in game, people are required to hot mic their compliance. Saying "ok I'm putting my hands up" through voip and ts seems like a reasonable rule to enforce and it also shows the initiators that the person acknowledged the hostile action so there is no "I never heard the initiation" confusion. 

Now people being silent and using ts when in an intense gunfight is fine in my eyes since you would need to communicate with peole outside of voip range. If people were hiding behind cover in a standoff, I don't think their callouts should be required in voip since realistically there would be chaos and people talking over each other, and with dayz's shirty voip it would be impossible to get anything done. Let people use their radio in firefights like how it is now. 

However, if there is a hostage situation and gunfight breaks out, you are still required to rp. Going silent on your hostage imo should be considered bad rp. Gunfight can get intense, but the hostage who is lying on the ground restrained still needs something to do. 

I like parts of this idea here. I think callouts might be a bitch if you had to do them both in game and in TS. The main point of this rule, which I will dub the Professor X law for it's telepathic abilities, is when people are RPing in front of you and communicating in a third party means. In an active firefight, I don't think that is such a big deal other than the slight benefit it gives you of hiding your position a little bit by not talking in VOIP.

I double mic at times when I want people in TS to hear me if I'm being taken hostage or something. If your hands aren't up and your radio hasn't been taken, it's fair game for the most part. People will have to get smart is all. Think of ways to signal eachother if they want to be quiet. Hand signals, code, etc. Safe words are for more than ERP.

 

1 hour ago, TheProxJack said:

My playsTV has been having problems recently

ok rule I guess.

Might I suggest overwolf, manycam, OBS, or the plethora of other software available, usually for free then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Odap the Corruptor    415

*he would meekly raise his hand*

If I got the yeet dropped on me by gear hungry bandits and it follows as is:

"Put your hands up and don't say anything or you will be shot!"

Would I be not be valuing my life by saying something, or would they be ruleplayinginginging

wouldn't they be playing in a realistic immersive matter by doing so though?

 

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.

×