Jump to content

Server time (UTC): 2021-09-16 22:25

Rule Change.


ScarRP

Recommended Posts

  • Sapphire

Would like to know your guys thoughts on people knowingly being in the middle of a gunfight and then being upset after they get killed. There are so many reports including ones that I'm in where people know there is a gunfight going on and they run into town sometimes with a gun on their back and sometimes with it in their hands and then when they get shot they report. Yes people will say that's called NVFL but all the person has to say was I didn't know there was a fight going on and the verdict will be word versus word. So I say that if people are dumb enough to run into a active gunfight to get some "rp" you deserve to be shot.

Link to comment
  • MVP
1 minute ago, Scar said:

So I say that if people are dumb enough to run into a active gunfight to get some "rp" you deserve to be shot.

If they run in unarmed or unaware of the situation or they run in with their hand up, inform that that it's an active fire-fight and ask them to leave (if you can). If they decide to stick around and end up getting shot it's their own fault then in my opinion. 

Link to comment
  • Sapphire
4 minutes ago, Banshee said:

If they run in unarmed or unaware of the situation or they run in with their hand up, inform that that it's an active fire-fight and ask them to leave (if you can). If they decide to stick around and end up getting shot it's their own fault then in my opinion. 

If they have a hand up that is fine. So are you saying if someone is running around in a active gunfight they don't deserve to be shot? I feel like your brain has to work a bit different if can't tell there is a active firefight. 

EDIT: ty for the feedback tho

Edited by Scar
Link to comment
  • Sapphire

imo it depends. if the person is just jogging out in the open, no gun out, and doesn't pose a threat, then I mean, c'mon. But if he has a gun out, is sprinting around, 3d person peeking around corners, etc. I'd smoke him.

 

but whenever I get caught in the middle of a crossfire, f1 and just jog in a straight line out of the situation unless asked to do otherwise.

Link to comment
  • MVP
8 minutes ago, Scar said:

I feel like your brain has to work a bit different if can't tell there is a active firefight. 

Sometimes it can be hard to tell if there is a firefight going on or not, people hiding in buildings, lots of down-time and silence between gun-fights, etc. If it's really obvious that there is a gunfight going on e.g. bullets being exchanged left and right, people in the town with their hands up, etc., and they still decide to stroll in then it's completely their own fault IMO.

It's like @CaliforniaRP wrote above, it depends on the situation and how the person is behaving.

Edited by Banshee
Link to comment
  • Sapphire

In PVP it is really difficult to determine targets and who is a danger, especially when fighting non-uniformed enemies.

After being initiated on you have kill rights on the opposite party for 1 hour or until your character dies, which means people can easily change clothes or try to pick off the initiating group like this:

Although I was in the wrong, I could've easily been a regular civilian at the end. But whoever shot me guessed right. 

It's a super tricky situation where innocents could easily just be gunned down, or people could be making the right choices and it all depends on the situation at hand. Issuing a static rule won't assist with the flow of roleplay as it implies that all situations are the same. 

I'd say it's up to staffs judgement to decide whether things are fair or not because it really does depend on the whole situation.

Link to comment
  • Sapphire

Idk people stick around way to mutch in firefights and use the rules.

When people walk around with a gun, looting bodies, holds a building in  firefight or runs into a firefight for that gear its pretty clear your going to shoot ehm

Yeasterday people litterly said "lets put our hand up and walk into the firefight to loot the bodies" just because the rules protect them

Edited by Farmer-BorisRP
Link to comment
  • Emerald

During mod there was something equivalent to this, where if you ran into the middle of a firefight, to loot or otherwise, you could be killed. 

If I recall this was removed, or at least rewritten, because it is a grey area rule that can be abused. What determines the 'area' of a firefight? How long is an area 'in a fire fight' before they can leave/loot/rp as per usual. Sometimes, fights can be long, drawn out patient games where no shots are traded for decent periods of time, if that is the case do the people that walk in during those times deserve to be killed? How do you know you're in a firefight area if you genuinely haven't heard shots or just loaded in to the area of the fight? Not to mention how easy it is/could be to abuse. You keep kill rights on people for what.. 1 hour now? So are people just supposed to avoid say, Grishino, NWAF, Stary Sobor, etc. For an entire hour after hearing a shot in the distance or shots in the distance that could be anything from killing zombies, to rp stuff, to actual fire fights?

While I do agree, that the opposite of what I said above, where people go rule shielding into the fray of gunfire to loot bodies or otherwise, knowing they're protected by rules or will report if they're killed, is stupid and ridiculous. The groups I've been in have always had issues with these things, and eventually the time came to where we either re initiated on everyone, which occasionally bit us in the ass, or we took random people trying to loot as the signal that our fight has dragged on long enough and that we needed to pull back/disengage. The amount of stipulation, and impossibility of properly enforcing it is also to be considered. I personally think that if someone is doing it blatantly, like what you described OP, then they should be reported plain and simple, and truthfully it should only be NVFL on them, the person in the fight shouldn't get punished as well (of course only if its without a doubt proven). But, I just don't think there's a good way to control this outcome. One way it's too easy to abuse and favored to people in the firefight, the other way the people having the fight have to tip toe around an area to make sure they don't mis-id etc. 

Edited by Phatal
Link to comment
  • MVP

I agree that it is fucking annoying if people stick around fire fights with a mentality of "I'm protected by the rules -you cannot shoot me", now that you can jog with your hand up it is even worse imo. But the thing is... it is hard to hit the right people because there is always a chance of someone just logging in or entering town simply passing through during a silent episode of the fight. Being shot for being unaware is a no no. Being shot for being a rule playing /nvfl  gear- or entertainment- thirsty retard is a yes yes. I simply dont see how to create the fitting rule around this. Only thing is you can do is record and report.

Link to comment

I agree that it could be annoying but on the other hand, making any form of rule change to address this opens up a whole nother can of worms.

Basically, the fact one player made a mistake doesn't mean another player HAS to punish him or capitalize on it. There is something to be said about Good Faith principle here.

As a Free Medic, I am likely to stay away from Active combat but on the other hand I would be inclined to stay close to be able to render any aid to the survivors of the fight, whoever  they may be.

Then again, it WOULD be cool if people dropped some of that paranoia and stopped lighting up anything and everything that moves. Providing first aid IN THE MIDDLE OF COMBAT relies entirely on the mercy of the active combatants. I WOULD NOT provide first aid under fire - this would be considered participation in the  fight, I feel, pacifistic as it may be.

Link to comment

This has always been a tough one, it really sucks when you could of killed someone but hesitated and die because of it. From my expierence on the server so far their is a done of ruleplay (basically people always constantly in reports), these guys know the rules in and out and play them to their advantage. You shouldn't be able to just blast anyone if you're in a firefight, but I think it's something that should be case to case. 

If a person who was KOS'd during a firefight which they knew was ongoing, tough luck, you took the risk at snagging some loot and it didn't pay off. If someone gets KOS'd and had no clue about the firefight (if they can provide proof showing this) then a punishment should be handed out to the killer. I say lenient punishment at first, even just a warning, but if someone who repeatedly is turning up in reports for miss identifying people then they should be hit with a ban.

 

Link to comment
  • Sapphire

Thing is how can you tell someone just logged in unless you actually see him appear like houdini.

Edited by Scar
Link to comment
  • Legend

If they are running in posing no threat, tell them to fuck off and leave the area. If they stick around and start looting body and whatever, it’s down to them if they get shot.

Link to comment
  • Sapphire

To be honest, I agree. There's been multiple instances (mostly in .62) where I've almost shot, or shot at an innocent to realise that it's not a combatant. Most of the time, this kind of confusion occurs in cities (ie Chernogorsk) or large towns. I feel like it's less likely in a field where you can easily ID armbands or clothes. When conflict occurs between a dynamic, however, confusion is extremely easy. With the limited about of civilian clothes, it's not uncommon for multiple unrelated people to be dressed in very similar clothing (namely bandanas, beanies, black clothes). An easy way to overcome this would be to generally increase variations in clothing.

But to reiterate what @Stannis said, it's a tricky situation. When do we make exceptions? I suppose it's for the admins to say, really. But I propose that we just follow what ever seems the most reasonable at the time. For instance:

a) A gunfight has erupted in Chernogorsk. There are multiple parties involved, including a band of people who are not wearing similar, identifiable clothing (for instance, armbands). The gunfight is progressing and doesn't have any periods of silence longer then a few minutes. There are bodies in the street. A group of four men are pinned up in the government building and they see a man sprinting across the street in the distance. For all they know, he's moving a position to shoot at them - so they shoot and kill him. Turns out, he was just a scavenger and he posted a report. Should the group of men be punished? No.

b) A small robbery occurred in Zelen. One man was taken hostage and the other escaped. A small gunfight occurred, but for the most part it's just a standoff. The aggressors are holed up in the firestation with the hostage and the escapee is in a building just across. There's silence par from the occasional "shut up!" from the hostage takers. Then, a woman walks down the street in a light jog. The escapee, all nervous and with an itchy trigger finger kills the woman. Should the escapee be punished? Yes.

TLDR: We should reform the rule, but it should be done so in moderation. Not all circumstances are the same.

Link to comment
  • Sapphire

@XavierWill agree it is only in towns with lots of civilians but it's either put your hands up or leave don't run around idgaf even if you have your gun on your back it takes half a seconds to take your gun out, I will not take a risk of you being a enemy while sprinting around with a gun on your back it just doesn't make sense. 

Link to comment
  • Diamond

If your run into a town when you know there's a fire fight going on and you can hear the mass amount of shots going off and you got shot and you report it. Why would anyone run into it? why would people complain when they got shot? its their fault in the first place. Reports like that should be dropped by the staff team in my eyes because this happens way to much.

Link to comment
  • Sapphire
2 minutes ago, Scar said:

@XavierWill agree it is only in towns with lots of civilians but it's either put your hands up or leave don't run around idgaf even if you have your gun on your back it takes half a seconds to take your gun out, I will not take a risk of you being a enemy while sprinting around with a gun on your back it just doesn't make sense. 

Yeah. It's beyond me why there isn't an animation in yet. All animations are made with that tracking body suit, yet they can't do something that simple. Irregardless, people shouldn't be going into active firefights. Especially when there's a good chance they're gonna get mis-id'd.

Link to comment
  • Sapphire
2 minutes ago, Falk said:

If your run into a town when you know there's a fire fight going on and you can hear the mass amount of shots going off and you got shot and you report it. Why would anyone run into it? why would people complain when they got shot? its their fault in the first place. Reports like that should be dropped by the staff team in my eyes because this happens way to much.

?

Link to comment
  • Diamond

It's completely ridiculous anyone to run and not aspect to get shot and report. Fair enough like if they don't no idea but that would kinda be hard but whatever you know. 

Link to comment
47 minutes ago, Scar said:

Thing is how can you tell someone just logged in unless you actually see him appear like houdini.

This is a pretty rare occurence and I don't think you'd get banned for this, its pretty unlucky. But again if they are walking with no gun and clearly arn't in the firefight don't shoot.

That being said, even playing today, in a firefight a guy acted so casual "hey whats going on" all that bullshit, then I see him pull out his weapon and put it away again, constantly moving around the area. Took a gamble and shot him, no report. It's not really ruleplaying but it's definately metagaming in a way, he knows if he acts like he's not involved he won't get shot, but will take the first opportunity he gets to shoot someone himself.

Also, we don't always have the chance to tell someone to leave the area, I'm not going to run out into the open to tell some idiot to leave and get myself shot.

Edited by Jerry
Link to comment
  • Sapphire
Just now, Jerry said:

This is a pretty rare occurence and I don't think you'd get banned for this, its pretty unlucky. But again if they are walking with no gun and clearly arn't in the firefight don't shoot.

That being said, even playing today, in a firefight a guy acted so casual "hey whats going on" all that bullshit, then I see him pull out his weapon and put it away again, constantly moving around the area. Took a gamble and shot him, no report. It's not really ruleplaying but it's definately metagaming in a way, he knows if he acts like he's not involved he won't get shot, but will take the first opportunity he gets to shoot someone himself.

The word "clearly" is used a lot but there is really not much that is clear. And to the second part yea it's really a gamble sometimes you kill people involved sometimes you kill a random that decided to run around without putting his hands up.

Link to comment
  • Sapphire
1 minute ago, Jerry said:

This is a pretty rare occurence and I don't think you'd get banned for this, its pretty unlucky. But again if they are walking with no gun and clearly arn't in the firefight don't shoot.

That being said, even playing today, in a firefight a guy acted so casual "hey whats going on" all that bullshit, then I see him pull out his weapon and put it away again, constantly moving around the area. Took a gamble and shot him, no report. It's not really ruleplaying but it's definately metagaming in a way, he knows if he acts like he's not involved he won't get shot, but will take the first opportunity he gets to shoot someone himself.

The whole "if he doesn't have a gun out and he's walking around casually don't shoot" doesn't work out. I could easily run into a gunfight where my allies are getting shot at, act all innocent and get the perfect angle to drop a bunch of people.

Link to comment
Just now, Scar said:

The word "clearly" is used a lot but there is really not much that is clear. And to the second part yea it's really a gamble sometimes you kill people involved sometimes you kill a random that decided to run around without putting his hands up.

Yeah it's always a tough call, but if I'm fighting a clan that I know wears a certain outfit, then see a guy dressed in bright colours slow walking I'm not blasting him. 

At the end of the day it is kinda up to the bandits to have control of the situation, don't initiate on a large group of people in a town because that's just a shit show (not taking a dig at Kamenci or anything, just making the point.)

2 minutes ago, Xavier said:

The whole "if he doesn't have a gun out and he's walking around casually don't shoot" doesn't work out. I could easily run into a gunfight where my allies are getting shot at, act all innocent and get the perfect angle to drop a bunch of people.

Like I said in my post, I'd consider that metagaming.

Link to comment
  • Sapphire
2 minutes ago, Jerry said:

Like I said in my post, I'd consider that metagaming.

That really doesn't make any sense to me. How is pretending to be innocent metagaming? Powergaming at the best, but it's not using OOC information. You hear over radio "hey we're being shot at!", then you run over and instead of just shooting at them, you play it safe, act innocent, get in a good position and hope that they don't initiate on you or tell you to go the other direction. In real life, people take advantage of goodwill all the time. Terrorists, guerilla fighters and those types. They take advantage of the knowledge that the opposing force probably won't shoot until shot at.

Edited by Xavier
Link to comment

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...