Jump to content
Server time: 2017-10-21, 14:10
Safe Zone: CLOSED


Cerna Liska
Last Team Standing

"*Drops weapons in Chernarussian*"

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Country

    United Kingdom

Para last won the day on October 17

Para had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

313 Barely Recognized

Account information

  • Whitelisted YES
  • Last played 6 days ago

About Para

  • Birthday 11/06/98

Personal Information

  • Sex

Recent Profile Visitors

6316 profile views
  • Mak

  • Skinner

  • Jamie

  • Macbrine

  • Mexi

    • Para
    • Hebi Kotei

    Took you long enough

    1. Hebi Kotei

      Hebi Kotei

      Perfection can't be rushed ;P

    • Sleepyhead
    • Para


    a new player has joined the game @Jamie ?
    do I sense a squad?

  1. henlo nice to see you visit profile very nice

    hope u are havin good day yes allah bless u very much 

    how are u hope u had good visit yes miss you

    jackie legs forever yes 


    1. Para



    2. WildCurtos o7

      yes very good thank u me too

      praise allah


  2. @Cody Husky & @Puncture will be temporarily banned until they provide their PoVs. Additionally, please provide any evidence you may have.
    • Para
    • Iso







    1. Iso


      I feel betrayed.

    2. Para



    3. DinoCasino
    4. Iso


      This is all coming back to bite me in the ass :( 

  3. Para

    Tfw you're butt naked in your bed, sleeping... and a fire alarm goes off.

    1. Lyca


      butt naked fam? 

    2. Jinx
    3. Galaxy


      Buy some pyjamas! 

    4. Red


      Sleeping naked is nice

    5. Lyca


      True red :D 

    6. Anouk


      Just tell it to stop (;

  4. The Vale of Shadows

    A group that willingly accepts permadeath rights if they choose to leave... i like it. Not something I've personally seen done before. Loving the goals too, literally the good stuff without the overused edgy shit. If this group works i might actually find an interest in hostility again as this hopefully will provide something that doesn't feel forced as fuck. Wishing you the best of luck with this!
  5. Safe Zone Trial Poll

    If people don't go in game and experience the safezone isn't their opinion kinda unreliable? Like, I haven't voted, largely because i haven't been to the safezone so my votes are a little skewed and hard to actually post.
  6. Verdict: @Boston [BadRP]: Guilty. @Cody Husky [BadRP]: Guilty. @Coreena [BadRP + Invalid Demands]: Guilty. @Taryn [Metagaming + Invalid kill - Roleplayed]: Guilty. @Puncture [BadRP]: Not Guilty. @LadyInBlue [Unnecessary OOC]: Guilty. @InnKinn [Unnecessary OOC]: Guilty. Explanation: In this situation, @Boston and his dynamic choose to initiate on a large amount of hostages in Severograd for a previous incident involving people being thrown out of Severograd. Over a lengthy period of time, the numerous hostages are rounded up into a circle, whereupon Boston's party proceed to remove all of the hostages of their belongings (primarily backpacks, weapons and vests). All of this loot is then dumped onto a pile in the middle. Once this has taken place, Boston takes over as the ringleader and begins to identify person's of interest amongst the crowd, singling 3 of them out. One of them being @LadyInBlue, who is labelled as the Queen of Severograd. LadyInBlue is taken away from the crowd, and is tortured for a little while before she is returned to the town square. Shortly after her return, @Coreena takes over and proceed to tell the crowd either LadyinBlue kills herself, or the whole crowd will die. This demand is reiterated, to which the crowd of hostages heavily protest the reasoning to kill her. After this protesting, Coreena proceeds to ask LadyInBlue OOCly whether or not she may execute her, roughly at the same time as LadyInBlue requesting to go afk. Shortly after this, an initiation is dropped by a group of 'Bounty Hunters' lead by @Taryn. A firefight ensues, resulting in many death between the hostages and the hostage takers. The hostages were released and told to run in the direction of Devil's Castle. @Boston your role in this situation appeared to be arguably the biggest ringleader for the first half of this whole ordeal. You state in your PoV "We initiated on the entire town, with myself dropping a VOIP initiation." Eventually, once you've had your fun you state "I line up the hostages as requested and break off allowing for Andy to take my place as the lead roleplayer for the situation." thus highlighting that you were infact the ringleader. Due to you having one of the most significant roles on this situation, naturally it should all on you to lead the situation throughout. Even if you allow @Coreena to take over, you should still be involved in the hostage situation simply due to the number of hostages your party took (for further clarity, please see the paragraph below explaining why we see this as BadRP). @Coreena, in this situation you had more of a laid back role until the latter half. Your involvement with the hostages remains very little for the initial parts of the situation. You mostly appear to roam around, attempting to round up people that were around the time. The part where you take LadyInBlue off to rough her up is perfectly legitimate RP. As one of the lead roles in this situation, you are found to be in a similar boat to Boston. You state "My character knew Dalton Lowe since before the apocalypse and they had kept in contact for a long time," and had the lead role in the events leading up to your death. In addition to this, your demands to LadyInBlue are also invalid. As per rule 6.3: 6.3 Demands during hostile situations must be reasonable and made clear and unambiguous to all players. For example, you cannot demand that somebody puts their own life at risk or else other characters will die. The following chat-logs highlight why you made this situation much more confusing OOCly than it needed to be, and why your demands were invalid: In this situation, she openly protests being permanently killed in the first instance whereby later you bring her over to the crowd and give her an ultimatum: She kills herself or everybody else dies. Even after this is protested and you explain that "it is just rp", you also ask for permission to execute. These demands are invalid because you force her into a situation where she has to put her own life at risk, directly violating rule 6.3. These demands are also incredibly confusing to follow for both the IC and OOC reasoning. @Cody Husky, your involvement in this situation was minimal. Despite being around the hostages, your appearance in this situation is slight. Your RP entirely constitutes of responses to hostages engaging in roleplay with you, thus you personally showed very little initiative to actually provide an engaging situation of roleplay. As stated in your PoV "I hardly took part in the hostage situation" and "I stayed to myself for the most part unless spoken to". Now, @Boston, @Coreena and @Cody Husky, we will now further address why you have all been found guilty of BadRP. This situation was an unorganised mess. For such a small party, you chose to take an incredible amount of people hostage . The effect of you doing this is that the hostages are left to their own devices on several occasions throughout the videos, often with little RP. There are moments where you do address the majority of the group, however the majority of the hostages in this situation showed little to no involvement with what you held them up for (in regards to being thrown out of town). You singled out 3 individuals who had wronged you, to which the majority of the hostages were left in the town square to do their own thing whilst you took Lady In Blue away to torture her. To further highlight this problem, as shown at 4:52 of the linked video, you have even singled out 2 other hostages that you wanted yet they remain silent and receive very little RP for the duration of that video. There were many, many ways to go about this situation without resorting to leaving several hostages standing around pointlessly. For example you could have extracted the ones you wanted and and organised moving the rest of the hostages away to release them. Instead they were forced to stay around. Even if you feel it is "unfair to initiate on a large group of people and let them go immediately after", it is still equally unfair to make people stay around a situation they have no involvement in. When you take this many people hostage with so few people, you put yourselves in a position where the majority of you should be handling the hostages at all times as to provide engaging and fun roleplay. Rule 6.2.1 is a rule that was broken heavily here: 6.2.1 As an attacker you may NOT: Attack other players just for the sake of gear by doing a quick robbery that involves little to no role play. Ignore your victims. You must provide an engaging role play to keep things interesting for the victims at all times. It is this that the majority of your BadRP rule-break comes from. TL;DR: this should not be happening: 02:19:37 | Chat("Ian Keith"): *Has a bored expression on his face.* @Puncture despite being in the accused's party and being involved with the hostilities, the staff team looking over this has decided not to push for a punishment against you. Although your party did initiate on far too many hostages than you appeared capable of handling, that does not automatically mean we will punish everybody in the group. Our reasoning for finding you not guilty comes from your motive to actually attempt to RP with several of the hostages on your own accord, as shown here, here and here. Shown both in the logs and in multiple videos, you took the initiative to engage with the hostages on numerous occasions . When taking so many hostages with so few people, more of the captors need to be actively engaged with RPing with the individual hostages, especially being as they were left to their own devices so often. Because you attempted to keep the flow of the RP going with the uninvolved hostages, you will not be found guilty of BadRP. @evanm23 we have looked over your circumstances in this report and will not be punishing you for anything. Your involvement in this situation was more of a security role. You appear for the initiation, shown in the text logs, and help to disarm the hostages before spending the rest of the situation on overwatch. Nothing you did in this situation warrants a punishment. Now we come to @Taryn's rulebreaks in this report. Firstly we shall address the kill you made on @Coreena. Taking into account this previous report here, your kill on Coreena is of a very similar fashion to the kill on Dusty in that recent report. People in Coreena's group are initiated on elsewhere but you decided you had kill rights on her due to them not complying. Coreena had no visible knowledge her people had been initiated on in game and seconds after the gunfight commences you shoot her. This is shown at 5:04 of the linked video. She shows no visible reaction to the fight and before she is given a chance to react you proceed to kill her. Being as she did not receive the original initiation, and is not initiated on, you gain no kill rights on her when her friends do not comply to that initiation. Therefore you have been found guilty of Invalid kill - Roleplayed. Now we come to the issue of metagaming. In this video you are heard talking about 3 hostiles you've identified around you. On top of that, at 5:15 of the same video you are heard telling your group members to initiate on those at the hospital and that it will "give you kill rights" presumably on Coreena as she is the one you shot. There are various other callouts in this situation that you said in teamspeak but were silent in game for. As per rule 11.5: 11.5 When speaking with another player, you may not communicate over the radio (TeamSpeak) with your allies unless you speak over the radio and in game at the same time. Telepathic communication is not acceptable. You repeatedly make callouts in teamspeak, ones that are vital to your in game situation yet they are not stated in game. Due to the extent at which you broke this rule you have also been found guilty of metagaming. However, because the extent at which you metagamed was so significant, as well as you invalidly killing somebody, we have chosen to aggravate your punishment. Instead you will be receiving 5 days, not 3 (the standard punishment for both metagaming and invalid kill roleplayed). Now we come to @Lady In Blue and @InnKinn. We understand that during this situation a lot of server lag was present. That being said, you both made several comments across the situation that were simply not needed at all. LadyInBlue, whilst we understand that rulebreaks occuring in game can be quite off putting, you are still required to stay IC as much as possible. InnKinn there were also a few chat logs from yourself that have no place in game and simply serve to disrupt immersion. For example, chat logs such as: 02:38:44 | Chat("Quinn Gray"): //dude blackmail? 02:27:36 | Chat("John Baker"): // stuff might despawn at this rate Being present a few times are invalid. I refer you to rules 5.1 and 5.4: 5.1 You are required to role play your character at all times while in game. No OOC events or communication may take priority over your role play. You are not allowed to ignore other players attempts to role play with you. 5.4 OOC communication can be done only through text chat and only when absolutely necessary. You may not use OOC chat to casually chat with other players in game. You may not speak OOC using ingame voice. Use the "//" prefix to indicate OOC text communication. We understand that this situation was a clusterfuck with a significant factor of this being the server lag however these types of chat logs are not permitted. You will both be receiving a verbal warning for this rulebreak. We advise that in future you do not repeat this offence to the same degree. To everybody involved in this situation, a lot of the lag in game could easily have been caused due to the insane amount of entities on the ground. Once the entirety of the hostages were stripped of weapons, they were kept around their loot pile. DayZ is not a stable game, thus when you create a pile of entities this dense it will likely only contribute to the lag significantly. This likely could have been avoided by moving the hostages away from the giant pile of loot. Outcome: @Boston [BadRP]: Punishment (5 ban days & 10 warning points). @Coreena [BadRP + Invalid demands]: Punishment (5 ban days & 10 warning points). @Cody Husky [BadRP]: Punishment (5 ban days & 10 warning points). @Puncture [BadRP]: No Punishment. @Taryn [Metagaming + Invalid Kill - Roleplayed]: Aggravated Punishment (5 ban days & 10 warning points). @InnKinn [Unnecessary OOC]: Verbal Warning. @Lady In Blue [Unnecessary OOC]: Verbal Warning. Verdict by @Para & @Jade & @Red & @Oliv.
  7. Para


    1. Anouk


      You can do it!!! ❤️

  8. @Boston, what was your reasoning for initiating on so many people? Additionally, after you had disarmed and confirmed the majority of the hostages had little to do with you being thrown out of town, why did your party keep them around for so long?
  9. Calling in @InnKinn for his PoV (Character name John Baker). Additionally, please upload and post any video evidence portraying your PoV that you may have. Thank you.
  10. Minecraft PvP

    Ngl this sounds like a fucking great idea to me.... if i wasn't on a craptop and actually had my PC at Uni. I'd have loved to take part, but i doubt my craptop could run FTB without exploding.
  11. @Kirov Mironovich, your video footage at 6:20 appears to jump cut a fair amount of time. There is also a second jump cut at 14:56 and a third at 7:52. We ask that you upload and post the full and unedited footage onto this report. Thank you.
  12. BeanZ WAR