Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2020-10-28, 13:45
Sign in to follow this  
Sylva

Discussion regarding "ideological initiations"

Recommended Posts

My post was removed becuase it didn't conform to the norms of report posting, which I understand, and accept, but that doesn't mean the points made weren't valid, and as such, I'd like to open the floor to what you all have to say. Tell me what you think.

Also hoping @Rolle and @Stannis can continue the productive discussion they were having, here.

Just now, Spartan said:

Not quite sure I follow. So how do groups come to any end to any conflict besides a white peace? This makes it impossible for a group to "win" an ideological war if they can't force an ideology on the losers of the war. I mean, if the Chernarussian Republic went to war with Chedaki and beat them, this makes the only possible outcome for the group a status ante bellum. The CDF wouldn't be able to say "okay, renounce Communism," even though that is the entire reason for the war in the first place. Which, for a site dedicated to RP, seems counter-intuitive, as this just invites a never-ending PVP battle between the two factions. 

Now, the next thing to say would be "Oh, well, then don't start wars based on ideology."

But if thats the case, whats the purpose of RPing an ideology at all? The end goal of most ideologies is to grow its ranks and incorporate more people. And your saying that they can't do this. So by "protecting" this neutral RP,  you've eventually destroyed Svoboda (and any other ideological group's) entire reason for existence. So by extension, are you saying that the RP of this neutral group is more important than the RP of an ideological group?

So your next answer. "Well they can spread their ideology, but people have to want to embrace it." Well then that just goes back to saying that peaceful/neutral groups have more important roleplay than hostile RPers. 

So lets make another example. Bela Ruku initiates on me for being a cannibal. Your saying that they can't force my character to NOT be a cannibal, because that goes against my character goals? He's just a neutral guy who likes to eat dead people. And if they can't do that, then that ultimately means that a) they can't initiate on ANYONE for breaking the law, or B) every situation has to end in the permadeath of the accused. And if that is NOT correct, and Bela Ruku can do this, then why are the rules regarding individuals and groups held to a different standard? 

Because technically, if they aren't, I could initiate on everyone individually and force them to change ideologies like that, with no mention of the group whatsoever. 

This goes back to Svoboda's initiation. The cannibal, obviously, thinks eating people is okay; the police do not. Its an ideological battle. Saying that the police can't initiate based on the fact that they don't like that he is a cannibal destroys their entire reason for existence!

Svoboda is the exact same thing. Its a group that doesn't like that foreign doctors hold by an ideology of following the geneva convention and treating everyone, so they choose to end it. By ending one of these, its only fair (and logical) that the other be outlawed as well. And if you make it impossible to initiate on someone on the basis of ideology, well, we've come full circle.

I don't mean to pile-drive or anything but it seems like a logical fallacy and as a member of this community who really wants to see it succeed, I think its worth pointing out.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Look m8, if we wanted a server where nobody fought, everyone here would be doing Arma 3 life. But we're roleplaying in a post apocolyptic survival shooter. Shit happens - bad shit to good people. That's the apocalypse for you. And taking that away from the server is taking away exactly what makes this server special. This isn't a law-abiding, goody-two-shoes society. Its a fucked up world. And the trademark of the world isn't the infected or the struggle to find your next meal. Its how humans band together and drop into the wretches of depravity, or stand up and form a light shining in the darkness. 

If you take away the ability of the strong to prey on  the weak, you decapitate the cornerstone of any sort of conflict in this server. The hostile groups need the good groups just as the good groups need the hostile groups. If the hospital can't defend itself, there don't need to be magical barriers defending it. If its weak, its weak, and it will fail, as the roleplay dictates. Let them either adapt to what is going on, or be left in the dust. That's the apocalypse for you. 

ty for reading

Quoted Spartan because the original post was hidden, and after a request he PM'd the post to me. Much thanks for that, btw.

Edited by Sylva

Share this post


Link to post

/moved to general discussions 

Share this post


Link to post

- User was Warned for this Post. -

Share this post


Link to post

They just need to not be abused. Just feels like RP is being put in a chokehold if we can't even do that.

Share this post


Link to post

Enforcing Ideologies/Demands is rather better than constantly PvPing and getting nothing from it other than bragging rights on the forums, and then wait till the other archives. 

Share this post


Link to post

We should be able to fight over ideologies.. I think its dumb that we cant tbh.

It cuts off a major section of rp like

Share this post


Link to post

My groups whole reasoning to be back in South Zagoria was initially to prevent a Russian invasion from the North- and just stuck around for the chaos.

So- seeing a Russian military person/squad in my country, I am held at the will of the rules- that I cannot do what my group is solely made to be done.

 

Yet the rules are 'you can't just use text on a group page as reason to initiate'. But when it comes to the neutral doctors, the text on their group page 'geneva convention', makes them untouchable from all parties because, my group, a group nationalistic/patriotic terrorist, is not being powergamed into following the geneva convention.

Is this not a two way street? Us forcing them to change their idealogiy = powegame, yet them forcing us to change ours(not attacking a geneva hospital) =/= powergaming?

Or are we just treating hostile RP as the 'second class citizen' when it comes to this?

Share this post


Link to post

Russia follows the convention, only not going in to recognize protocol III (new symbols) from my understanding. As nationalists you want independence for your country. As terrorists you will use any means to get that control. 

At the same time, why would you care that there is a hospital willing to treat everyone? A terrorist organization would have problems being able to find actual doctors willing to treat them. Especially in a country that has both worked with and is at war with your homeland. Thus you've likely been left to not having medication, proper treatment and botch jobs. a lot of your people would have suffered and be in extreme pain. Why would you want to attack and demand things of place that's actually willing to solve all of those problems for your people?

Make sure you get the proper drugs and care you need for your people to not suffer. Make sure that the people whom matter to you and the people of Chernarus are taken care of. When technically they never had to do this in the first place. no one is forcing them, they're willing to take care of your people because its what they do. Yes they also take care of your enemies when wounded but that's how it works. They wont get in your way, they won't cause problems, they just want to be left alone, and in return will treat your people. Without demanding payment, something that ic is almost unheard of when everyone wants to profit. 

I get that you don't like the ideological concepts of the group, but at the same time they're giving you a service for free that most would not. Why would you want to give them a reason to take that away from you? 

You want to interact with the group do so, talk to us. You don't have to go in demanding things. We're more than happy to interact with other people and we strongly promote rp, we just don't want to deal with all of everyone else's big dicking. IRL people who are terrorists and warlords actually SEND their own people to protect these kinds of doctors. Because they know even if they go treat other people, they're willing to care for them, and that's an invaluable resource.  

 

I get wanting to fight over ideals and stuff but it makes no sense to me that everyone wants to attack the neutral group because we take care of their enemies. That's how it works, doctors take care of any wounded. All humanitarian groups do this.  Even with enemies in and out, your men are being treated with just as much respect and care, which is better then they will get from nearly anywhere else.  You may not agree with our ideals, but having a resource like that long term is critical to survival. 

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, RogueSolace said:

 

 

I don't think people are going to be following this so-called convention in the apocalypse.

I don't get how you guys want this green zone yet you all play the same characters from other groups that I have had a shit ton of hostile encounters with.

You also openly work with groups that are actively participating in hostilities with each other. 

Yet you are surprised that you guys are being singled out and attacked? 

Based on the attitudes of your security team and the characters you portray and past encounters I would not call it a neutral group. 

 

Edited by LouieRP

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, RogueSolace said:

 

I get wanting to fight over ideals and stuff but it makes no sense to me that everyone wants to attack the neutral group because we take care of their enemies. That's how it works, doctors take care of any wounded. All humanitarian groups do this.  Even with enemies in and out, your men are being treated with just as much respect and care, which is better then they will get from nearly anywhere else.  You may not agree with our ideals, but having a resource like that long term is critical to survival. 

How does this make no sense to you?

> Enemies get wounded during fight
> Enemies go to get aid due to easily being accessible
> Enemies ready to go within the week depending on wounds
> Constant fighting between the two
> War goes on

What they're doing makes sense

> Win fight against enemies
> Stop 'neutral' group from providing support to enemies
> Enemies bleed out/ die due to wounds
> Enemies potentially surrender due to substantial losses, providing new RP to the community
> War over

If anything, as a neutral group you should treat NEITHER of the parties to remain impartial to what's going on and to make sure this sort of shit doesn't happen.

As much as you don't like it, the shit you do IC doesn't fly with a lot of people due to you treating their enemies, people aren't all the same as everyone else. They hold the right to be pissed at the fact people they don't like are getting help from people who are supposed to be remaining out of conflict and being neutral.

You getting involved with healing one side or the other, whether you're friends with both or not will not fly under the banner of 'neutral' because it doesn't make sense to sit there getting treated yourself to then look to your left and watch the bloke you shot the day before getting pressure put on his bullet wound.

12 minutes ago, RogueSolace said:

You want to interact with the group do so, talk to us. You don't have to go in demanding things. We're more than happy to interact with other people and we strongly promote rp, we just don't want to deal with all of everyone else's big dicking. 

As for this comment, might want to double check with your security on the big dicking part, from what I've seen and heard they're a fan of attempting to throw their 'weight' around.

Edited by Mexi

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, RogueSolace said:

Russia follows the convention, only not going in to recognize protocol III (new symbols) from my understanding. As nationalists you want independence for your country. As terrorists you will use any means to get that control. 

At the same time, why would you care that there is a hospital willing to treat everyone? A terrorist organization would have problems being able to find actual doctors willing to treat them. Especially in a country that has both worked with and is at war with your homeland. Thus you've likely been left to not having medication, proper treatment and botch jobs. a lot of your people would have suffered and be in extreme pain. Why would you want to attack and demand things of place that's actually willing to solve all of those problems for your people?

Make sure you get the proper drugs and care you need for your people to not suffer. Make sure that the people whom matter to you and the people of Chernarus are taken care of. When technically they never had to do this in the first place. no one is forcing them, they're willing to take care of your people because its what they do. Yes they also take care of your enemies when wounded but that's how it works. They wont get in your way, they won't cause problems, they just want to be left alone, and in return will treat your people. Without demanding payment, something that ic is almost unheard of when everyone wants to profit. 

I get that you don't like the ideological concepts of the group, but at the same time they're giving you a service for free that most would not. Why would you want to give them a reason to take that away from you? 

You want to interact with the group do so, talk to us. You don't have to go in demanding things. We're more than happy to interact with other people and we strongly promote rp, we just don't want to deal with all of everyone else's big dicking. IRL people who are terrorists and warlords actually SEND their own people to protect these kinds of doctors. Because they know even if they go treat other people, they're willing to care for them, and that's an invaluable resource.  

 

I get wanting to fight over ideals and stuff but it makes no sense to me that everyone wants to attack the neutral group because we take care of their enemies. That's how it works, doctors take care of any wounded. All humanitarian groups do this.  Even with enemies in and out, your men are being treated with just as much respect and care, which is better then they will get from nearly anywhere else.  You may not agree with our ideals, but having a resource like that long term is critical to survival. 

My group had already established their own group of doctors to get aid from. And it isn't in the military base.

 

And you are correct- us warlords do send people to our doctors to make sure they are protected and everything is running smoothly. We check in on our doctors at least once every 2-3 days.

Even if my group doesn't use your compound, we still check in daily to make sure you aren't harboring bad-guys(Corporation, Syndicate, enemies, etc.)

 

Your security detail waves their ego much more than my group ever has in Pavlovo Mil. And quite honestly, it's strike 2 out of 3 with the bullshit comment's we've heard from UN-beret-toting-foreigners.

 

And everytime we have talked to you, and asked that you don't aid syndicate/corporation/etc. We get the SAME REPLY EVERYTIME: "This is a neutral zone, we will help all who come, we don't care who their enemies are, and we hope you respect that." and everytime it just ends in a loop of bickering about how we don't really care and would prefer you to just null aid to them, and everytime we get told 'no thats not how the geneva convention works'.

 

Yet not a month ago, the CDF chlorine bombed Anarchy... I honestly don't think the geneva convention means piss in South Zagoria.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not surprised at all and people are allowed to think whatever they want

Most of people my character cares about have been hurt, abused, and even murdered by your associates. Yet I still would take you all in if you were hurt. That's my ideology. You don't have to like it or agree with it. that's the entire point of being medically neutral.

 

Quote

If anything, as a neutral group you should treat NEITHER of the parties to remain impartial to what's going on and to make sure this sort of shit doesn't happen.

That's exactly how humanitarian law does not work. its based on the opposite concept, people fight and war and do awful things, but none of those people should be forced to suffer. 

 

I made the points I was wanting to make, people are going to agree or disagree. I'm not arguing about it with anyone anymore. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, RogueSolace said:

I'm not surprised at all and people are allowed to think whatever they want

Most of people my character cares about have been hurt, abused, and even murdered by your associates. Yet I still would take you all in if you were hurt. That's my ideology. You don't have to like it or agree with it. that's the entire point of being medically neutral.

 

That's exactly how humanitarian law does not work. its based on the opposite concept, people fight and war and do awful things, but none of those people should be forced to suffer. 

 

I made the points I was wanting to make, people are going to agree or disagree. I'm not arguing about it with anyone anymore. 

 

Law is not a thing currently, no one is upholding it therefore no one has to take into consideration or account that you're 'neutral' when you're healing their enemies.

It's not an argument, it's a debate. Arguing consists mostly of insults or provocative replies, but it's nice to see how far logic goes when it's showed to people. Best of luck with the neutrality you're attempting to keep together.

Edited by Mexi

Share this post


Link to post

I just think it would be nice if regardless of what a conflict/"war" is fought over, that there were some actual notable consequences to it. Because as of recent it just seems like basically "war" means just keep shooting at a never dying and never waning enemy until one says that they're bored and they archive and just -blip- out from existence. So I think that if it were possible to have two separate ideologies go head to head and have one actually WIN and indoctrinate the surviving enemies and possibly in turn indoctrinate the enemy's allies- that would make for some awesome RP and an interesting story. 'Cause, as of now, "war" doesn't seem to mean fuck all and is more of a general petty inconvenience than an actual, genuine, struggle. 

Just my two-cents though.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, CaliforniaRP said:

My group had already established their own group of doctors to get aid from. And it isn't in the military base.

 

And you are correct- us warlords do send people to our doctors to make sure they are protected and everything is running smoothly. We check in on our doctors at least once every 2-3 days.

Even if my group doesn't use your compound, we still check in daily to make sure you aren't harboring bad-guys(Corporation, Syndicate, enemies, etc.)

 

Your security detail waves their ego much more than my group ever has in Pavlovo Mil. And quite honestly, it's strike 2 out of 3 with the bullshit comment's we've heard from UN-beret-toting-foreigners.

 

And everytime we have talked to you, and asked that you don't aid syndicate/corporation/etc. We get the SAME REPLY EVERYTIME: "This is a neutral zone, we will help all who come, we don't care who their enemies are, and we hope you respect that." and everytime it just ends in a loop of bickering about how we don't really care and would prefer you to just null aid to them, and everytime we get told 'no thats not how the geneva convention works'.

 

Yet not a month ago, the CDF chlorine bombed Anarchy... I honestly don't think the geneva convention means piss in South Zagoria.

Preach.

Nobody follows the Geneva Convention at this point. Not the Americans in the mainland US, not the Russians, and certainly not the Chernarussians. But then again the people they are fighting don't follow it anyway. It only works when both sides use it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, RogueSolace said:

I'm not surprised at all and people are allowed to think whatever they want

Most of people my character cares about have been hurt, abused, and even murdered by your associates. Yet I still would take you all in if you were hurt. That's my ideology. You don't have to like it or agree with it. that's the entire point of being medically neutral.

 

I made the points I was wanting to make, people are going to agree or disagree. I'm not arguing about it with anyone anymore. 

 

The point of this thread is less about the specifics of recent events and the lore/tenets of your group but, rather that "you don't have to like it or agree with it" and so we should be able to act however we want in response to that ideological disagreement. Not just agree to disagree. 

If you didn't want to discuss your points why even post in this thread

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion, people would try their very best to keep a hospital that offers medical assistance to ANYONE open. Hell, they'd even protect it with their very life. But who am I to put my opinion out there since people don't really like logic. This isn't anything new tho so why should anybody be surprised that this is happening? Anyhow, good luck with this community if people continue acting this way, since I doubt that everything will be "okay" if people try to fuck eachother over OOC and IC. 

Share this post


Link to post
43 minutes ago, Blackburn said:

In my opinion, people would try their very best to keep a hospital that offers medical assistance to ANYONE open. Hell, they'd even protect it with their very life. But who am I to put my opinion out there since people don't really like logic. This isn't anything new tho so why should anybody be surprised that this is happening? Anyhow, good luck with this community if people continue acting this way, since I doubt that everything will be "okay" if people try to fuck eachother over OOC and IC. 

It's all IC, it's hardly OOC. If you really think people are trying to fuck over a group which is attempting to be neutral but has members such as yourself and the security force taking that idea down a very slippery slope. If you don't want hostilities, don't be hostile. Simple stuff, talking about logic but the simplicity to stop this shit is hilariously easy.

As I explained previously: 

4 hours ago, Mexi said:

How does this make no sense to you?

> Enemies get wounded during fight
> Enemies go to get aid due to easily being accessible
> Enemies ready to go within the week depending on wounds
> Constant fighting between the two
> War goes on

What they're doing makes sense

> Win fight against enemies
> Stop 'neutral' group from providing support to enemies
> Enemies bleed out/ die due to wounds
> Enemies potentially surrender due to substantial losses, providing new RP to the community
> War over

If anything, as a neutral group you should treat NEITHER of the parties to remain impartial to what's going on and to make sure this sort of shit doesn't happen.

As much as you don't like it, the shit you do IC doesn't fly with a lot of people due to you treating their enemies, people aren't all the same as everyone else. They hold the right to be pissed at the fact people they don't like are getting help from people who are supposed to be remaining out of conflict and being neutral.

You getting involved with healing one side or the other, whether you're friends with both or not will not fly under the banner of 'neutral' because it doesn't make sense to sit there getting treated yourself to then look to your left and watch the bloke you shot the day before getting pressure put on his bullet wound.

As for this comment, might want to double check with your security on the big dicking part, from what I've seen and heard they're a fan of attempting to throw their 'weight' around.

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Mexi said:

It's all IC, it's hardly OOC. If you really think people are trying to fuck over a group which is attempting to be neutral but has members such as yourself and the security force taking that idea down a very slippery slope. If you don't want hostilities, don't be hostile. Simple stuff, talking about logic but the simplicity to stop this shit is hilariously easy.

As I explained previously: 

 

Not being hostile nor trying to be hostile. It's just hard to be nice when people don't cooperate when you ask them to do things in your compound. You probably know what I'm talking about, but will probably deny it. If you have any concerns about that situation just PM me about it.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Blackburn said:

Not being hostile nor trying to be hostile. It's just hard to be nice when people don't cooperate when you ask them to do things in your compound. You probably know what I'm talking about, but will probably deny it. If you have any concerns about that situation just PM me about it.

No. I get exactly what you're talking about.

But why me and my group, of nationalist insurgents, give two shits about what foreigners say in regards to their lands? Like you said, it's your compound? Of course locals are going to have an issue with that?

 

Also, playing 'big bad boss' is a two way street. How are you going to sit here, and justify your security detail enforcing commands to people, yet when someone like my group or Svobada try to enforce commands to your group, we're powergaming?

 

The issue is, noone want's to RP as the loser. Noone can accept loss.

 

For example; famous TV show TWD.

Negan FORCES compounds to pay a tax or else they will get attacked by his overpowered gang... sound familiar?

What did Rick and the gang do? Went with it. They had no choice- they didn't look at the camera and file a report to the director that it 'isn't fair'. They delt with it. They bent the knee, kissed the ring, and played bitch for a while... That's how a scenario like this works.

 

One group get's big and bad, people will have to fear them and do what they say- regardless of personal beliefs or not.. I don't see why this is so frowned upon by the community? And now telling a group that they are no longer allowed to associate with my groups enemies is against the rules?

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, CaliforniaRP said:

No. I get exactly what you're talking about.

But why me and my group, of nationalist insurgents, give two shits about what foreigners say in regards to their lands? Like you said, it's your compound? Of course locals are going to have an issue with that?

 

Also, playing 'big bad boss' is a two way street. How are you going to sit here, and justify your security detail enforcing commands to people, yet when someone like my group or Svobada try to enforce commands to your group, we're powergaming?

 

The issue is, noone want's to RP as the loser. Noone can accept loss.

 

For example; famous TV show TWD.

Negan FORCES compounds to pay a tax or else they will get attacked by his overpowered gang... sound familiar?

What did Rick and the gang do? Went with it. They had no choice- they didn't look at the camera and file a report to the director that it 'isn't fair'. They delt with it. They bent the knee, kissed the ring, and played bitch for a while... That's how a scenario like this works.

 

One group get's big and bad, people will have to fear them and do what they say- regardless of personal beliefs or not.. I don't see why this is so frowned upon by the community? And now telling a group that they are no longer allowed to associate with my groups enemies is against the rules?

You are right! But you got to understand where we are coming from as well. We want to help people out and give some proper medical RP, but it is close to impossible when group are acting hostile towards us. I hope that we can resolve this issue sooner or later because we are kind of tired of it. You might be too. Next to that, we are trying our best to be neutral but it just feels like we are being forced into a corner and have to chose sides even tho it is against the entire idea of the group itself.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Blackburn said:

You are right! But you got to understand where we are coming from as well. We want to help people out and give some proper medical RP, but it is close to impossible when group are acting hostile towards us. I hope that we can resolve this issue sooner or later because we are kind of tired of it. You might be too. Next to that, we are trying our best to be neutral but it just feels like we are being forced into a corner and have to chose sides even tho it is against the entire idea of the group itself.

No I get the issue here..

 

But take this back a month ago or so; Anarchy v Coalition... If your group was a group then.. you wouldn't have a choice..

You were either forced to help Coalition, or forced to help Anarchy.. because the hate between said groups was painfully obvious IC. You wouldn't be able to just 'sit in the middle'. Had Anarchy of seen you helping a white armband? Camp would of gotten raided for aiding the enemy.

Had coalition saw you help a blue armband? Same consequence.

You would of been forced to choose a side, or you wouldn't of been able to make it.

 

Being a neutral really isn't an option in a divided nation.

 

The only reason hospitals and medics can stay neutral in a modern war is because;

-Geneva convention is relevant(if war is conventional, I don't think ISIS gives two shits about a red crescent if an infidel is in the back of the ambulance)

-WHO/UN back it, and have the guns, bodies, and politians to do so

-They have the backing of the UN saying that- anyone to break the geneva convention and attack hospitals will be punished greatly..

 

You have NONE of these going for your group.

If I come in, gun to your head, and say 'you are no longer allowed to treat this man/this group', a piece of paper isn't going to change my mind. You can either use your security detail to fight back and finish treating the man, or you will hand him over. Being neutral really isn't an option there.

 

Tl;DR, being neutral in an apocalypse is practically impossible. And trying to fight off both sides, rather than picking one, will inevitably end with a hospital getting burnt down.

 

Edit: My issue here isn't your group, how it's handled, or what not. My issue here is the fact that the RULES are the one's preventing a scenario to even develop. It's how it would play out- and encourages good RP. Hell, most of the hostages yesterday even admitted the RP was pretty solid.

Edited by CaliforniaRP

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, CaliforniaRP said:

No I get the issue here..

 

But take this back a month ago or so; Anarchy v Coalition... If your group was a group then.. you wouldn't have a choice..

You were either forced to help Coalition, or forced to help Anarchy.. because the hate between said groups was painfully obvious IC. You wouldn't be able to just 'sit in the middle'. Had Anarchy of seen you helping a white armband? Camp would of gotten raided for aiding the enemy.

Had coalition saw you help a blue armband? Same consequence.

You would of been forced to choose a side, or you wouldn't of been able to make it.

 

Being a neutral really isn't an option in a divided nation.

 

The only reason hospitals and medics can stay neutral in a modern war is because;

-Geneva convention is relevant(if war is conventional, I don't think ISIS gives two shits about a red crescent if an infidel is in the back of the ambulance)

-WHO/UN back it, and have the guns, bodies, and politians to do so

-They have the backing of the UN saying that- anyone to break the geneva convention and attack hospitals will be punished greatly..

 

You have NONE of these going for your group.

If I come in, gun to your head, and say 'you are no longer allowed to treat this man/this group', a piece of paper isn't going to change my mind. You can either use your security detail to fight back and finish treating the man, or you will hand him over. Being neutral really isn't an option there.

 

Tl;DR, being neutral in an apocalypse is practically impossible. And trying to fight off both sides, rather than picking one, will inevitably end with a hospital getting burnt down.

Can't argue with that imo.

 

4 minutes ago, CaliforniaRP said:

No I get the issue here..

 

But take this back a month ago or so; Anarchy v Coalition... If your group was a group then.. you wouldn't have a choice..

You were either forced to help Coalition, or forced to help Anarchy.. because the hate between said groups was painfully obvious IC. You wouldn't be able to just 'sit in the middle'. Had Anarchy of seen you helping a white armband? Camp would of gotten raided for aiding the enemy.

Had coalition saw you help a blue armband? Same consequence.

You would of been forced to choose a side, or you wouldn't of been able to make it.

 

Being a neutral really isn't an option in a divided nation.

 

The only reason hospitals and medics can stay neutral in a modern war is because;

-Geneva convention is relevant(if war is conventional, I don't think ISIS gives two shits about a red crescent if an infidel is in the back of the ambulance)

-WHO/UN back it, and have the guns, bodies, and politians to do so

-They have the backing of the UN saying that- anyone to break the geneva convention and attack hospitals will be punished greatly..

 

You have NONE of these going for your group.

If I come in, gun to your head, and say 'you are no longer allowed to treat this man/this group', a piece of paper isn't going to change my mind. You can either use your security detail to fight back and finish treating the man, or you will hand him over. Being neutral really isn't an option there.

 

Tl;DR, being neutral in an apocalypse is practically impossible. And trying to fight off both sides, rather than picking one, will inevitably end with a hospital getting burnt down.

 

Edit: My issue here isn't your group, how it's handled, or what not. My issue here is the fact that the RULES are the one's preventing a scenario to even develop. It's how it would play out- and encourages good RP. Hell, most of the hostages yesterday even admitted the RP was pretty solid.

oh yes, RP is great. But it gets annoying after a couple of times. But I hope we fix this stuff soon cause it is boring a lot of people I think. Also I can just smell a lot of salt from a lot of directions.

Share this post


Link to post

In my insignificant opinion this thread has way too much mentality like "we must win over others", "there must be a way that we can kill enemies completely and disband their group", "we must be able to attack them as soon as we see them", "we must be able to attack everyone for anything", "we must kill kill kill", "die die never comply" etc etc, rather than focusing on the actual RP and character/group development, but most importantly FAIR PLAY which is the first core value of this community. You still have the mindset like this is a PvP server, it needs to stop. You don't need to win on a RP server, your "wins" over other players have no value here and are insignificant in the large picture of role play on the server, therefore they will never be prioritized or something that rules will take into consideration when balancing gameplay.

Conflicts that are role played out and stick to the concept of fair play - I have no issues with that. I don't ban all hostile RP - if you guys establish that you both want to fight, and you have good reasons - go for it. I only have the problem when the underdogs like peaceful or neutral groups who have done nothing wrong to you are being harassed with hostilities because they are easy targets - to a point where they cannot conduct their own RP they enjoy, they get dominated to a point where they don't want to log in to the server, or are forced to change their group to comply. That's what the new rules are about and that's why you can't initiate hostilities solely based on hear-say, group ideology etc.

 

13 minutes ago, CaliforniaRP said:

My issue here is the fact that the RULES are the one's preventing a scenario to even develop. It's how it would play out- and encourages good RP.

Yep, just like the kill right rules prevent others from dropping you with a sniper hidden in the forest. It's not a hugely outlandish scenario to think of, yet the rules prevent it from happening for the betterment of everyone's experience and abuse prevention. Note how nobody is suggesting to remove the KoS rule because it would be great to see a scenario develop where your brain explodes from a bullet fired by high caliber sniper rifle from 500m away and how your team mates undoubtedly experience great RP involving fear, panic, shock, seeking for cover or mourning - all great things to experience in a survival game that some of us surely miss. However sometimes the available options and freedoms need to take a hit to preserve justice, fair play and order, just like in the case of hostile RP.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...