Clarify the 2.2 rule

[Tadeusz]

Clarify the 2.2 rule​

Detailed Rule Suggestion:

Currently the rule is rather clear that before any shooting is cleared, then the supplier must give high quality roleplay. However I still get many questions regarding counter initiation. My answer is to refer to what the rule states "you must supply high quality roleplay before shooting" but this is usually led to a concern that whoever was first to initiate will be cleared to fire before the victim even completes their respective roleplay. Now, if we agree that we will stick to what the rule states, I feel we should update it to include allowing time for both groups to complete their initiations or alternatively if the consensus is that once your life is threatened then you can defend yourself it should say such in the rule. Initiating for friends should also be in there.

Outline how your rule will improve the server/community:

Less confusion and discussing it events in liasons and what is or isn't acceptable.

Think about any bad points your rule suggestion might have:

Can't think of any please discuss below.

What punishment if any should breach of this rule have:

As currently enforced.

 

[Riz]

I personally feel as if "clarifying" the rule would put roleplay more "in a box" as to what is required as hostile roleplay. Currently we're in a stage of where you need to provide "initiation" before opening fire. It'd be sad to see even more people using an exact format instead of inventive roleplay. Whilst I'm all for having clear rules, it is down to common sense what "high quality roleplay" is, and if an example was to be specified and put down, there would be nothing but people using that specific "initiation".

-1 from me personally due to simply potentially reducing the lack of creative roleplay in hostile situations

although +1 for specifying the rules around initiating for friends/allies, as a lot of people are confused regarding that

 

[Tadeusz]

I personally feel as if "clarifying" the rule would put roleplay more "in a box" as to what is required as hostile roleplay. Currently we're in a stage of where you need to provide "initiation" before opening fire. It'd be sad to see even more people using an exact format instead of inventive roleplay. Whilst I'm all for having clear rules, it is down to common sense what "high quality roleplay" is, and if an example was to be specified and put down, there would be nothing but people using that specific "initiation".

-1 from me personally due to simply potentially reducing the lack of creative roleplay in hostile situations

although +1 for specifying the rules around initiating for friends/allies, as a lot of people are confused regarding that

Thank you for your input however my suggestion was only to allow for both parties to either be able to complete their own respective high quality roleplay initiations before considering shooting or actually to clarify wether counter initiations are a thing. None of those should effect the quality or creativity in what should be considered to be of sound quality. Personally I would prefer the former as it enforces both parties to complete roleplay before considering shooting as oppose to waiting for threat then Firing. A lot of time is wasted on wether not counter Initiating is to be considered RDM which in my view, it does. 

 

[Riz]

@Tadeusz  May have slightly misunderstood the suggestion to a certain extent (3AM, sorry). 

+1. Clarifying the rule to an extent may be useful for the community due to it often being misunderstood in the subject of "counter initiations". 

Thank you for your response!  

 

[Scorpex]

One thing I've noticed lately is that often when a threat to someones life is made, they just open fire without counter-initiating  or even saying anything back, because they claim "you threatened my life so I can defend myself". It would be nice to see more clarification on this rule because in my opinion if someone just starts shooting after being initiated on, it is RDM.

 

[CSI JAEGARN]

One thing I've noticed lately is that often when a threat to someones life is made, they just open fire without counter-initiating  or even saying anything back, because they claim "you threatened my life so I can defend myself". It would be nice to see more clarification on this rule because in my opinion if someone just starts shooting after being initiated on, it is RDM.

Well, thats pretty much how i would do. I mean, its rather kill, or be killed. As soon as you "counter" you are getting dropped, wich mean there's no other choice to come out with the upper hand

 

[imaK]

alternatively if the consensus is that once your life is threatened then you can defend yourself it should say such in the rule

Well, thats pretty much how i would do.

I got an 8 month long ban for following this. You need to provide high quality roleplay before shooting, I agree the rule should allow you to shoot once your life is threaterned, however this currently is not the case and means whoever initiates is at a huge advantage.

 

[Tadeusz]

Not necessarily, the consensus is that both parties must supply high quality roleplay. I propose adding into the rule a kind of courtesy time to allow both parties to complete their initiations before Firing. Its a bit of a double edged sword if it was the case someone was allowed to fire after receiving initiation then they could be Firing during what the Initiating party considers as time for compliance. 

 

[Nuclear]

Id really like to see that once you get initated on you can defend yourself without counter initiating cause atm if your not the one initiating you are at a loss, its the only good way to circumvent the current system because giving a rule that says you need to give time for both groups to do their initation would ruin a lot of chances like now you can initiate on someone and if he cant make a counter initiation in time thatmeans you are safe to take him or whatever without a pointless gunfight.

But at the moment everytime i personaly did anything like that it went as it follows:

• If i initiated the person being initiated on just instantly shot me without saying a word back
  
• If i got initiated on i got dropped as soon as i wanted to counter it
  

Theres just no winning atm as it seems or might just be extremely unlucky and i always get people that dont know the rules.

 

[Busterguy]

But at the moment everytime i personaly did anything like that it went as it follows:

• If i initiated the person being initiated on just instantly shot me without saying a word back
  

That's RDM, and even with the current rule they can be banned for that.

 

[I'm Negan]

@Tadeusz loving the suggestion

Now, if we agree that we will stick to what the rule states, I feel we should update it to include allowing time for both groups to complete their initiations or alternatively if the consensus is that once your life is threatened then you can defend yourself it should say such in the rule. Initiating for friends should also be in there. ​

Very much feel like this should be expanded on a bit. Also on the fence as to whether or not it should be reverted to being able to defend yourself if threatened, as others have mentioned it is possible for people to use this time to gain an advantage while a counter initiation is made. Maybe depending on how much attention this gets, a vote could be called regarding this?

 

[Sammmy]

+1 clarify the rule as due to the recent unban myself and countless others are rusty when it comes to initiations. 
For example the making sure you state you have friends in the area bit should be more clear as no other server has it and leads to a lot of confusion

 

[Aethon]

The problem with being able to shoot whenever your life is threatened is what happens on other servers where this is allowed; initiating when visible is a death sentence if the player you're initiating on has a gun out because they can shoot first (don't have to offer time to comply). This means that initiating behind cover is the only way to realistically survive the situation, and that seems detrimental to roleplay to me. This removes opportunities to talk, and while it obviously isn't realistic to not shoot someone who you can shoot and who is trying to rob you, the way counter initiating works on RPUK definitely improves hostile RP.

 

[James Travers]

+1 from me, and I personally think that having to counter initiate is a massive disadvantage to the person being initiated on and would like to see it gone

 

[Henry Atlas]

Bottom line you threaten my life i will drop you like a bad habit and sort it out in liaison afterwards.Sorry but if you're threatening my very existence on the planet am i fuckers like standing and having a conversation with you i'm killing you pure and simple.To many people are using the 2.2 rule as an excuse after they don't win a situation to get payback on the person needs to stop tbh.If you are prepared to take the life of another player do not expect them to have a conversation with you about it.Expect them to defend themselves and defending themselves does not include a half baked "counter initiation"(hate that fucking phrase) there is no such thing as counter initiation there is merely initiation.Once you make that lethal threat all bets are off and expect it to go south quickly.Crying RDM when you've made the decision to threaten someones life and they kill you is stupid plain and simple and if you report someone for it because they killed after you've threatened their life makes you the king of all the stupid.

Before anyone gives it "this is a roleplay server" think about that before you pull a gun on someone and threaten to kill them over a truck full of aluminium,then dont act surprised when that person turns around and gats you.It's embarrassing.Sort your lives out and harden the fuck up.

 

[Aiden]

I hope these two posts provide the clarification needed: