Jump to content
Server time: 2017-11-19, 14:01

MatthewFC

Hall of Famer
  • Content count

    324
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    Argentina

Community Reputation

56 Noobie

Account information

  • Whitelisted YES
  • Last played 9 hours ago

5 Followers

About MatthewFC

  • Birthday 02/01/86

Personal Information

  1. Offworld Heist. Do or Die time.

    Gold bullion is famously heavy, not something you carry on a bag in any quantity. Just saying...
  2. Hall of Shame

    It was never implemented. EDIT: Just to add my own opinion on the thread and don't derail it... I feel like the hall of shame encourages the wrong kind of behaviour. Forum (mis)behaviour has very little consequence and people already made their own little games about getting some points, so I doubt that kind of thing needed more encouragement. If anything, I would suggest more substantial consequences being implemented for forum misbehaviour.
  3. Staff Feedback: Nihoolious

    Be assured that I hardly have any bias for or against the people in that report, or towards yourself. If anything, and just for the sake of transparency, it does irk me to see people hashtagging and memeing in official parts of the forums as it was happening on that report, but that's about it. I do note and have mentioned that the rulebreaks I list are presumptions based on what little evidence is available. I would hardly rule for any of those with the currently available evidence, but the opportunity to have more evidence was lost when the thread was closed before all PoVs and video evidence was collected. So, the situation you describe is right: I would have been ok with a longer report being closed after more evidence of rulebreaks is presented if the people that had been wronged show agreement in having said report closed and the rulebreakers to go unpunished... or if the evidence amounts to nothing. That said, if it's your prerogative to choose whether said report is closed, whether it is by yourself or as a group, and whether it is consistent with the method used on previous closures or not, then carry on.
  4. Staff Feedback: Nihoolious

    Link to the situation: Hasty closure of this case: Any supporting evidence or notes: Recent similar case where things were handled quite differently: Feedback: I fail to understand why the report was dismissed so immediately and without gathering any real amount of proof but only based on the desire of the OP and his allies to close said report, when said wishes can and have been openly disregarded before. More so, why it was made as a single GM's decision. In the current state of the report and under a clear lack of PoVs and complete recorded evidence, breach of rules 5.3 (Ruleplay) and 5.6 (NVFL) by trying to abuse 11.5 (Double micking) comes to mind immediately, followed by more simple breach of 5.6 for running into a known firefight and False report for reporting their own failure at infiltrating said firefight by trying to portray it as Mis-id KoS... all from the reporting party, not the reported ones. Ironically, no real rulebreak can be discerned from the reported party, but proof could have been brought that may have proven otherwise. All in all, and only based on the current and incomplete evidence you had, the closure of said report only benefits the OP party, and said request should have waited until you got a better picture of the situation. I could understand that the situation right now with reports can seem a little overwhelming and you might want to jump at the opportunity to quickly close a report, but when clear differences are made between the handling of certain reports, a lot of people will immediately jump to the conclusion that there's some partiality going on. Most of these conclusions are clearly unfounded and based on an incomplete understanding of particular situations or rules, but every now and then you get these kind of situations where reaching said conclusions is almost a logical explanation, even if partiality might not be the correct explanation. Because the report was closed so early now a lingering taste of injustice and favoritism remains, and Staff's image is tarnished as a result. This is what you should be avoiding. Suggestions for improvement: Wait until a better understanding of the situation is reached before you close a report, and if they must be closed make said closures a group decision, more so when evidence is being brought that the reporting party may have a vested interest in having said understanding not come to light. Maybe choose not to close the report at all, depending on available evidence and the seriousness of the situation's rulebreaks. @Play3rFTW's report seems to have fewer, smaller and more debatable rulebreaks and the Staff involved in it's closure (including you) waited until getting a better picture, and made sure of making said closure as a group decision.
  5. Pots & pans, the reckoning

    The report was quoted on my first question, "Pots & Pans", back in 2015, so it was easy to find. The irony that this is my second question about such an outlandish issue (Pot & pan abuse!?) doesn't go unnoticed, thus the question's title and first paragraph. I also find hilarious that you keep switching the word "pans" with the word "pants" for some reason, thus you get beans.
  6. Pots & pans, the reckoning

    Anyone can spam picking up apples, metagame, go OOC over VoIP and KoS. It certainly doesn't make those actions ok on this server, no matter how widespread they are. The military's armor usually makes sense, it's ergonomic and effective... it doesn't take the shape of makeshift cumbersome cheap thin metal armor that you somehow can hide within your clothes. And yes, sticking a pot inside your pants totally works. I have seen as soon as today people strategically spreading these items on their pants, top and vest, not just the bag. With obvious intent. It makes RP sense and it's realistic to gain an advantage by having a better weapon than your opponent. It makes less sense having a person that's carrying a lot of extra weight in cumbersome cooking ware, somehow go around without looking ridiculous, making loads of noise, and impeding their own movement with said wares. The effectivity of said armor outside of the game (and thus, realism) is also something I heavily call into question. It certainly doesn't seem to me to be that different than the report I cited above: Actions taken solely for a gaming advantage that make no sense in RP should have no place here. One? Even I still carry one for cooking... How about carrying six or seven? EDIT: Also, protector cases kinda make sense for storing and organizing stuff in your bag, it's after all their purpose... And no, I'm not trying to cover myself, I usually just carry one with spare clothes in my character if I can find it as well. It's more about carrying something that makes no sense being carried around in large numbers, but it's done anyways for the game advantage.
  7. Pots & pans, the reckoning

    A while ago I made a question about carrying multiple pots & pans within your character. Let's call it "Pots & Pans, the origin". Back then, there was an inventory advantage to carrying multiple pots and pans attached to portable stoves. Someone had gotten reported for carrying a myriad of these, so I worried because I used 3 for RP purposes and made the question. I explained that what I did, I did it within reason and with a legitimate RP purpose, and it was understood that it was ok. Now, It has come to my attention that there's a different type of advantage to carrying multiple pots and pans within you character's inventory. They seem to work by lessening damage taken... whether it is health damage, blood damage, shock damage, bone damage, probability of bleeding, probability of ruined equipment or a combination of all/some of those is debatable and I don't know. There's even claims at some kind of fix having been implemented, but also counterclaims that it still pretty much works, like here. So, my question is: Is this kind of abuse of game mechanics still considered a punishable offense, more so when it's clear that the objective of carrying a high number of these objects within your body cannot be reasonably justified as anything but an attempt at gaining a PvP advantage?
  8. Gasoline

    I think I made a question like this a couple years ago (!). Oh! Here it is: I do think that the answers I got are still valid. If this bandit of yours takes your gasoline bottle and drinks it in front of you without you somehow warning him first, he would most likely gain kill rights as there was deadly intent in not informing him. If he leaves with your gasoline bottle and finds out later, then I can imagine he would try to find you again, because he would gain kill rights as you just poisoned him. If you gave away something like that intentionally to some random that you have no kill rights against, then you're RDMing/KOSing, even if it may be difficult to prove if the other party isn't somehow recording the whole thing.
  9. A rebuke to our behavior

    People, I don't have a set position over this issue, don't get all defensive about this. I communicated my impressions at reading the case and worrying about what the unintended effects might be. Maybe "rebuke" is a strong word and I apologize for that. I also think @Iso and @Galaxy make very good points. I met @Polat on what may have been his first day on the server. He clearly was very new to RP and needed a few pointers, so I made him jump on my TS channel and gave them to him. Now, I have met newcomers to DayZRP that are experienced at Roleplay that will take all and any good interaction as positive, provided the RP is good. That's not the case when someone is new at both DayZRP and RP as a whole. They will still hold onto that "pub mentality", as some call it, and tie ingame success to fun as I said before. It is a learning experience to lose IC and be able to enjoy it. But many of you cited small examples of IC loss as new players, not comparable in scale to what happened this time around. Scale is important, psychologically. I certainly hope Polat and the others non-banned players enjoyed the experience and will come back for more. Maybe they were thirsting for relevance as some of you declare to do. I trust that the names and names of veterans piled up in this situation gave their best RP. But I can't help but think that most newcomers on the same situation will feel extremely frustrated and decide not to come back. Was the IC justification enough, coming from people that may not have known them for more than just days? Is this an example of big dicking on the radio, when he mocked the very title he gave himself in public on his second transmission? Or they just irked people on an OOC level and made others jump to act thus..? After all, we see far worse "big dicking" over the radio daily and no parties of half the server gather to put those people down. My own point, again, is that it's a matter of scale. And I'm afraid we went far overboard in our IC response to little IC justification. Should we fix this? I really can't come up with a solution that doesn't damage RP. But it warrants being brought up as we are a shrinking community and I'm certain this is gonna damage our capability to retain new players in the long run.
  10. A rebuke to our behavior

    So, I read this report here: It's justified and everything, I won't go discussing the validity of said report... What worries me is the underlying circumstances of the report: Several groups numbering over 20 people went to steamroll some new community member's camp, made fun of them, tortured them, stole their gear, killed one of them, and squashed their dreams. I don't think a single one of the "Shakhovians" had over 10 days on the server. And I can only hope the non-banned ones will remain a few days more at best. Veterans know that bad things happening to your character can be an enjoyable experience, but people new to RP might not know. No, they most likely don't feel that way at all. It takes time for a new RPer on this community to discard their attachment to gear and IC success as the needed requisites for having fun. In fact, just jump on radio chatter and you'll see some so called veterans that still argue their asses off on who had the most IC success in the last firefight... thus the most fun? Maybe some never discard that attachment at all, but I digress. So, is this way how we will be welcoming new players? By immediately destroying their (in our experienced eyes, nonsensical) little projects and waving our huge e-penises around them? Showing them their IC place waaaay below us and just generally being assholes and bullies. It was some camp in a town in the middle of nowhere, no matter whatever grandiloquent name it may have had. Some hostility may have made a lot of sense IC, but this amount? For people that might not have set up around there for more than just days? How did the community become this toxic towards newcomers? Did their way of dressing, the fact they DARED make their little project public over the radio and any failures they might have had at portraying super-believable and fun characters to be around with, something that irked you so deep that all of this was justified? I mean, I can almost hear what the TS chatter was in some circles the last couple days, calling these new players all types of "cancer" and the possibility of having them banned all righteous and deserved. Shouldn't we have been teaching them? Encourage them to innovate whilst improving their RP? I mean, we are not getting all that many new players on this pre-patch slump that we can afford to be all that picky and maintain the community. Aren't new players something to treasure, at all? Because like this, frustration is gonna take most of them away. You know people, I know that I'm writing myself into a corner. Because there's no rule that might solve this without seriously undermining RP freedom and the ability of players to create new situations and even hostilities. At least I don't think so. But we need a little bit of change. And that change should come from within the community itself.
  11. Thank you guys for the RP provided and being a good learning experience for my character!
  12. Ran into this group tonight. They provided good RP, didn't jump into hostilities until they had a good setup, and never made any overtly obvious comments that gave me the certainty they were cannibals while I was under their custody, like OH SO MANY CANNIBALS DO and believe themselves "subtle" afterwards. 10/10 for living up to their objectives and not falling into the usual pattern of edgy BS. Would really enjoy finding you around again, though I'll probably refrain from any new exploration trips with strangers.
  13. @Eagle and Staff as a whole, after talking things through with the initiating party, I would like to close this report. @Boston and the initiating party as a whole agree that risking initiating on such a big number of people without first isolating their targets or somehow lowering the number of involved people to those they had a problem with was a mistake. They realize that the excuse they had for initiating hostilities was weak, based on faulty information and some IC assumptions, and the hostilities were thus, disproportionate to the actual cause. The IC justification was lacking for taking most of the hostages, it was not explained to its full extent to the hostages, and the initiating party ended up keeping most of the hostages just for their own safety and thus the RP was lackluster and sparse. This was worsened with the status of the server and the need to keep an eye on their surroundings, lowering their number of hostage takers available to RP with the hostages at any given time. In the future, they agreed to be far more careful on the reasons they use to initiate hostilities, and that such hostilities are more proportionate to the actual causes. Additionally and specifically, @Coreena agrees that the escalation she caused by claiming either everyone or @LadyInBlue character's would be executed was disproportionate and unfair to @LadyInBlue's character and the hostages as a whole. She realizes that the nonexistent relationship between her character and Quinn Gray raises suspicions of OOC reasons for the request to execute her, even if there were none, and has personally apologized to @LadyInBlue for the conspicuous lack of IC reasoning and buildup of hostilities before such permarights are requested. In having this discussion, we as a whole have reached an understanding that IC justification for hostilities should be held paramount to everything else when initiating hostilities, and either having no IC justification or a disproportionate answer to very little IC justification should be avoided at all costs.
  14. I want to inform Staff that there's talks being held for the events reported, between me and the accused party, over several channels including TS. I would like any ruling on the report to be put on hold until these talks reach their conclusion, which is expected to be sometime later tonight, as some important people was absent and we agreed to wait for their input.
  15. Ok, posting the videos: A few comments: I was in TS at the time, but most of the time it was muted (You can hear the mute/unmute prompts). As shadowplay mic is set to "push to talk" on DayZ's push to talk key and not TS's, my voice is mostly absent in the recording. I mostly comment OOC some stuff of no strategic value with @Levi Ackerman & @TiviylScratch , who also were hostages, making comments about the situation we were in. Additionally there are a couple of times that I try to get Levi to stop being impulsive and avoid OOC altogether because the OOC from everyone was getting a bit excessive. I'm a big immersion seeking guy, thus I found it kinda hard to RP in the situation as many hostages weren't taking things that seriously and just talking around like we were in a picnic, or I would have expanded the fear RP and other stuff... Additionally, when I did speak out against being treated as animals for entertainment, I was singled out and I kinda feared that too much backtalk might result in my death, thus I really didn't have much of a chance to RP in the whole situation. And finally, yes, for transparency's sake I left in the part where, after everything is said and done and we've been rescued, I do go to get SOME of my own equipment back before running for the hills. IC I didn't want to escape disarmed, OOC I didn't want to waste any more time regearing after my last death. I'm not a perfect saint of RP high in the clouds above all gear temptations, so yeah... deal with it
×