Rules Feedback

[angellfall]

That, is incorrect. Once your tires are shot at, it is a threat to your life. If you INITIATE on tires they cannot shoot back, but as soon as you start spraying at the vehicle you can be shot. So what do you do when you on as a cop and someone starts shooting at your vehicle, get out and initiate?

Yes this is currently what happens on the server in most cases. However the rules are pretty clear about it and do not allow it at current state. Let me refer the rules what affects this:

(2.2) Random Deathmatch (also known as RDM) - Shooting at someone without engaging in any form of quality role play (eg. Giving enough time for them to comply with your order. Count downs are not considered quality roleplay, please at least attempt to create an interesting roleplay story before considering shooting.) is considered RDM. (Punishment is a ban).

This rule is not applicable in the red zone.

(7.1.3) Killing and executing someone must be carried out with high roleplay, “put your hands up or I will shoot” etc is considered low RP and may lead to a ban for RDM/Fail RP.

(3.7) Baiting - Baiting for the sake of a gunfight is not roleplay. Punishment is a ban. Examples: Flying over someone with a chopper waiting for warning shots to instantly shoot them back, robbing a service station with the intent of a gunfight, etc.

Thing is that you initiate not just because of RP, but to have mutual agreement with parties involved that bullets are about to start to fly and what is about to happen. Therefore making limitations to the gameplay from normal wasteland stuff. It surely is not realistic, but it is how the gameplay is designed to be. 

It is clearly defined in rule 7.1.3 that to kill someone more RP than simply couple words needs to be said for you to kill someone. In this example you are literally shouting "stop or ur tires will be shot" what is literally the equivalent to "stop or die" in this case when the lad then jumps out and starts shooting. 

Personally I would feel that if its allowed there should be a example included in the rules about this kind of exact situation as it is really common.  Also what the party shooting the tires are allowed and not allowed to do if the driver jumps out with a gun. 

Currently the situation is that really large scale gunfights starts with nearly 0 RP because how people behave around these rules and think it is allowed.

 

[James Travers]

Yes this is currently what happens on the server in most cases. However the rules are pretty clear about it and do not allow it at current state. Let me refer the rules what affects this:

Thing is that you initiate not just because of RP, but to have mutual agreement with parties involved that bullets are about to start to fly and what is about to happen. Therefore making limitations to the gameplay from normal wasteland stuff. It surely is not realistic, but it is how the gameplay is designed to be. 

It is clearly defined in rule 7.1.3 that to kill someone more RP than simply couple words needs to be said for you to kill someone. In this example you are literally shouting "stop or ur tires will be shot" what is literally the equivalent to "stop or die" in this case when the lad then jumps out and starts shooting. 

Personally I would feel that if its allowed there should be a example included in the rules about this kind of exact situation as it is really common.  Also what the party shooting the tires are allowed and not allowed to do if the driver jumps out with a gun. 

Currently the situation is that really large scale gunfights starts with nearly 0 RP because how people behave around these rules and think it is allowed.

Well I believe it should be changed so it is allowed then. Plus you haven't understood what I've said as you stated about the stop or your tires will be shot and then people shooting, that is considered as RDM. However I think it is idiotic not to fight back when your life is in danger. If someone is spraying bullets at you, your hardly going to get out, raise your hand and say stop, it just ain't the way it works, especially when cops hit the driver instead of the tires. I'll get a staff member to clear this up @Jefke V. Just in case I'm in the wrong.

 

[Lincoln]

X.X.X: If your group does a HM and stores gold in a gang base/personal house before restart, you MUST relog back in to the same server after restart.

This idea came from the new hop on rule, people may do HM on S1 then hop on to S2 after restart to sell. To stop metagaming on both sides, it would be fair if both sides know that the situation (Or police raid on house" can continue on the save server?

 

[Edgar Ville]

X.X.X: If your group does a HM and stores gold in a gang base/personal house before restart, you MUST relog back in to the same server after restart.

X.X.X: If your group does a HM and stores gold in a gang base/personal house before restart, you MUST relog back in to the same server after restart if you are returning to the server.

Otherwise you force people to log in even if they intend to come back tomorrow.

 

[Lincoln]

X.X.X: If your group does a HM and stores gold in a gang base/personal house before restart, you MUST relog back in to the same server after restart if you are returning to the server.

Otherwise you force people to log in even if they intend to come back tomorrow.

Yeah something along those lines is what I meant. I think that would be fair for both sides, because then police could still use the information from previous restart to raid the house (If they witnessed it obviously) 

 

[YoCo]

Brought this up in the community and was greeted with a good reception, obviously open to change and adaption, but i believe this rule would be a benefit to all the community.

(4.7) Using out of game communications to encourage other players to log on and sway the result of an event or roleplay situation is forbidden. Similarly, joining the server using metagamed information is forbidden. (Punishment is a ban)

Changed to 

(4.7) Cannot join or initiate combat within the first 15 minutes of joining the server when joining an RP situation/event.
 

Reasons behind this rule;

1. "hop on" squads have never been an issue in the last 3 years until recently.

2. gives more credence to reality, in IRL terms, police will have "off duty" (on call) cops who attend serious situations and rebels also.

3. (for police in particular) the new rule makes seeing an operation in teamspeak and wanting to join a bannable offence.

4. (For everyone) when joining the server, you can see the server that your friends are on  a particular server and could get in trouble for joining based on this if they are in a RP situation (possibly a bannable offence by just joining them)

5. People would prefer this i believe, and it is easy to determine when checking logs. (so and so logged on <time&gt against (so and so killed/was killed <time&gt

6. I personally believes it creates a balance between rebels and police.



Lastly, this would be very similar to the revive/downed rules that have been so effective recently in preventing fail RP situations and issues.

Kind Regards

YoCo

 

 

[Gretalian]

Brought this up in the community and was greeted with a good reception, obviously open to change and adaption, but i believe this rule would be a benefit to all the community.

(4.7) Using out of game communications to encourage other players to log on and sway the result of an event or roleplay situation is forbidden. Similarly, joining the server using metagamed information is forbidden. (Punishment is a ban)

Changed to 

(4.7) Cannot join or initiate combat within the first 15 minutes of joining the server when joining an RP situation/event.
 

Reasons behind this rule;

1. "hop on" squads have never been an issue in the last 3 years until recently.

2. gives more credence to reality, in IRL terms, police will have "off duty" (on call) cops who attend serious situations and rebels also.

3. (for police in particular) the new rule makes seeing an operation in teamspeak and wanting to join a bannable offence.

4. (For everyone) when joining the server, you can see the server that your friends are on  a particular server and could get in trouble for joining based on this if they are in a RP situation (possibly a bannable offence by just joining them)

5. People would prefer this i believe, and it is easy to determine when checking logs. (so and so logged on <time&gt against (so and so killed/was killed <time&gt

6. I personally believes it creates a balance between rebels and police.



Lastly, this would be very similar to the revive/downed rules that have been so effective recently in preventing fail RP situations and issues.

Kind Regards

YoCo

 

Add NLR timer to players when they connect?

this will help on recordings to prove they are or are not hop on players

Brought this up in the community and was greeted with a good reception, obviously open to change and adaption, but i believe this rule would be a benefit to all the community.

(4.7) Using out of game communications to encourage other players to log on and sway the result of an event or roleplay situation is forbidden. Similarly, joining the server using metagamed information is forbidden. (Punishment is a ban)

Changed to 

(4.7) Cannot join or initiate combat within the first 15 minutes of joining the server when joining an RP situation/event.
 

Reasons behind this rule;

1. "hop on" squads have never been an issue in the last 3 years until recently.

2. gives more credence to reality, in IRL terms, police will have "off duty" (on call) cops who attend serious situations and rebels also.

3. (for police in particular) the new rule makes seeing an operation in teamspeak and wanting to join a bannable offence.

4. (For everyone) when joining the server, you can see the server that your friends are on  a particular server and could get in trouble for joining based on this if they are in a RP situation (possibly a bannable offence by just joining them)

5. People would prefer this i believe, and it is easy to determine when checking logs. (so and so logged on <time&gt against (so and so killed/was killed <time&gt

6. I personally believes it creates a balance between rebels and police.



Lastly, this would be very similar to the revive/downed rules that have been so effective recently in preventing fail RP situations and issues.

Kind Regards

YoCo

 

Add NLR timer to players when they connect?

this will help on recordings to prove they are or are not hop on players

 

[BennyBait]

Brought this up in the community and was greeted with a good reception, obviously open to change and adaption, but i believe this rule would be a benefit to all the community.

(4.7) Using out of game communications to encourage other players to log on and sway the result of an event or roleplay situation is forbidden. Similarly, joining the server using metagamed information is forbidden. (Punishment is a ban)

Changed to 

(4.7) Cannot join or initiate combat within the first 15 minutes of joining the server when joining an RP situation/event.
 

Reasons behind this rule;

1. "hop on" squads have never been an issue in the last 3 years until recently.

2. gives more credence to reality, in IRL terms, police will have "off duty" (on call) cops who attend serious situations and rebels also.

3. (for police in particular) the new rule makes seeing an operation in teamspeak and wanting to join a bannable offence.

4. (For everyone) when joining the server, you can see the server that your friends are on  a particular server and could get in trouble for joining based on this if they are in a RP situation (possibly a bannable offence by just joining them)

5. People would prefer this i believe, and it is easy to determine when checking logs. (so and so logged on <time&gt against (so and so killed/was killed <time&gt

6. I personally believes it creates a balance between rebels and police.



Lastly, this would be very similar to the revive/downed rules that have been so effective recently in preventing fail RP situations and issues.

Kind Regards

YoCo

 

This got a lot of positive feedback in the community meeting @Edgar Ville

 

[Vinny McGraw]

(1.3) Swearing at someone outside of roleplay is not tolerated and will be punished by a ban.

Admins do this all the time and it is never enforced (they swear quite a lot in support channels (Not all admins) ). The only time I see someone bring this up is in liaisons and then people scream 1.3 and try to get out of the situation through this. 

 

[LukeN]

The new change highlighted by Vladic Ka is welcomed by myself and many others I'm sure, however a quick question.

If we are in a situation where a player is masked, or their name is obscured by a ghillie suit/inside a vehicle and they are breaking clear rules that you ultimately end up reporting, would you get in trouble for checking the keychain to find out the reportee's indentity?

I could imagine you would not but I just want to be sure.

 

[DELETER]

The new change highlighted by Vladic Ka is welcomed by myself and many others I'm sure, however a quick question.

If we are in a situation where a player is masked, or their name is obscured by a ghillie suit/inside a vehicle and they are breaking clear rules that you ultimately end up reporting, would you get in trouble for checking the keychain to find out the reportee's indentity?

I could imagine you would not but I just want to be sure.

Yes if the player breaking server rules then you Are allowed to check key chain 

 

[Samatlewis]

Just to clarify. As @DELETER said you can check the keychain AFTER they've broken said rules. You should not be doing it as a preventative measure in order to find out their identity as that means you'd be doing it for metagaming purposes and not for the purpose of reporting/resolving. 

@LukeN Nord

 

[Daniel 2sec]

I would like to suggest, that people need to resolve "rule-breaks", before somebody actualy reports somebody. It always used to be like that, and obiously there is some people that still do it. But some people do not care about resolving problems on Teamspeak first. They straight go to the forums. Therefore there should be a rule like this:

"One party may only report a second party after contacting them on teamspeak, on the forums or in-game. Screenshots of the contact effort should be provided in the report."

or

"A report may only be filled, if the problem is resolved via text message or voice chat (Teamspeak or the forum private message). Screenshots of the contact effort should be provided in the report."

People seem to forget resolving something is often A lot More Useful and Faster, then reporting somebody on the forums. At the end an adult community should aim to resolve problems, instead of running to admins for every little problem. This would most likely help the admin, too, as they would not need to do as much forum work, as before. And we should not forget, we are supposed to have fun in-game, having a small chat with somebody is often a lot quicker and causes less drama, then big messages on the forum report section.

 

[Vladic Ka]

I would like to suggest, that people need to resolve "rule-breaks", before somebody actualy reports somebody. It always used to be like that, and obiously there is some people that still do it. But some people do not care about resolving problems on Teamspeak first. They straight go to the forums. Therefore there should be a rule like this:

"One party may only report a second party after contacting them on teamspeak, on the forums or in-game. Screenshots of the contact effort should be provided in the report."

or

"A report may only be filled, if the problem is resolved via text message or voice chat (Teamspeak or the forum private message). Screenshots of the contact effort should be provided in the report."

People seem to forget resolving something is often A lot More Useful and Faster, then reporting somebody on the forums. At the end an adult community should aim to resolve problems, instead of running to admins for every little problem. This would most likely help the admin, too, as they would not need to do as much forum work, as before. And we should not forget, we are supposed to have fun in-game, having a small chat with somebody is often a lot quicker and causes less drama, then big messages on the forum report section.

Used to be rule until people would just pay people off all the time. Now people are encouraged to resolve instead. Too many players spend more time resolving situations because they would rather PVP than RP. 

 

[Daniel 2sec]

Used to be rule until people would just pay people off all the time. Now people are encouraged to resolve instead. Too many players spend more time resolving situations because they would rather PVP than RP. 

I absolutly understand, it is a pain to resolve to many things. But does it not take longer to write a report and upload a video, instead of messaging someone on Teamspeak or PM on the forum, and asking about it/ resolving it? Resolving something doesn't even need a lot of words - Just explain the second party what you think they have done wrong or ask them if they know what they have donw wrong. If they disagree. then take it further. It is two simple steps.

Would be nice, if other people say what they think about it, as a rule.

 

[Samatlewis]

@Daniel 2sec it's so that we have it written down and evidence of what's happened. If someone's constantly in the grey areas then it's highlighted to us and we may take action, whereas if it's resolved without us knowing then we go back to the problem of people " paying people off".

 

[angellfall]

I would like to see a rules around blocking the only access to somewhere with vehicles. For example it is well frustrating when someone decides to go into a military tower and just block the stairs with their car or ATV. In some cases you are able to vault over the vehicle, forexample the HM stairs is a place where you can just vault over the vehicle and it wont be an issue. Sometimes the whole entrance to some combound is totally blocked off and in these cases the issue begins. I think that doing those barricades might be good fun and good planning goes into it and the benefits in those cases are well deserved, however one land entrance should always stay open or so that it can be made open, by pushing/driving the vehicle away etc. Obviously this is something what is really limited by the gameplay mechanics of arma, when you cannot climb or jump. Therefore I personally think there would need to be some visible guidelines for this in rules so that everyone is at equal playing field.

Im suggesting this as guideline under a server rule [SIZE=medium](2.4) [/SIZE], because obviously police can just impound a vehicle away, but it would still leave the issue open to rebel vs rebel. Obviously the same rule could be cleaned up abit from old stuff and removing 2.6 at a progress;
 

[SIZE=medium](2.4) Using any gameplay mechanic outside of its intended purpose to create unfair advantage is classed exploiting. Exploiting includes but is not limited to following: Looting dead bodies, dublication of money/items, transferring/procesing items througt walls/Windows, locking doors before 10minutes have passed from the brake in(or situation is classed clear), blocking all entrances to combounds/houses/towers without leaving one ground passage way clear from obstacles or storing vehicles/money while being chased. Exploiting will be punished with a permanent ban without appeal.[/SIZE]

Obvisouly my grammar is not the best so someone feel free to fix the spelling mistakes.

 

[Domm]

I would like to see a rules around blocking the only access to somewhere with vehicles. For example it is well frustrating when someone decides to go into a military tower and just block the stairs with their car or ATV. In some cases you are able to vault over the vehicle, forexample the HM stairs is a place where you can just vault over the vehicle and it wont be an issue. Sometimes the whole entrance to some combound is totally blocked off and in these cases the issue begins. I think that doing those barricades might be good fun and good planning goes into it and the benefits in those cases are well deserved, however one land entrance should always stay open or so that it can be made open, by pushing/driving the vehicle away etc. Obviously this is something what is really limited by the gameplay mechanics of arma, when you cannot climb or jump. Therefore I personally think there would need to be some visible guidelines for this in rules so that everyone is at equal playing field.

Im suggesting this as guideline under a server rule [SIZE=medium](2.4) [/SIZE], because obviously police can just impound a vehicle away, but it would still leave the issue open to rebel vs rebel. Obviously the same rule could be cleaned up abit from old stuff and removing 2.6 at a progress;
 

[SIZE=medium](2.4) Using any gameplay mechanic outside of its intended purpose to create unfair advantage is classed exploiting. Exploiting includes but is not limited to following: Looting dead bodies, dublication of money/items, transferring/procesing items througt walls/Windows, locking doors before 10minutes have passed from the brake in(or situation is classed clear), blocking all entrances to combounds/houses/towers without leaving one ground passage way clear from obstacles or storing vehicles/money while being chased. Exploiting will be punished with a permanent ban without appeal.[/SIZE]

Obvisouly my grammar is not the best so someone feel free to fix the spelling mistakes.

I think it's fine do do that, in real life it's easily possible and plausible for a rebel/bank robber to use vehicles to block an entrance/exit as it gives them an advantage

 

[FergusW]

Being a neutral sided party, are Police allowed to send ATC messages saying something like "Stay 200M away from the HM Treasury or you will be shot down" or "All helicopters in the area leave the Treasury or you will be shot down." But rebels can't say the same message to Police?

(3.8.1) As Police or UNMC: 1 ATC message must be sent clearly indicating the target and stating intention to fire upon the helicopter followed by 2 minutes to comply to said message.

But rebels can't do this when they have a Police officer hostage? For example: All Police need to leave the area or you are going to be shot. You need to be 2KM away or whatever. 
(7.1.4) Using the in game phone to warn police You are unable to use the ingame phone to warn the police for example "“Any cops seen within ‘x’km will be shot on site”

I am quite sure that they are the same thing.
1 message must be sent clearly indicating the target and stating intention to fire upon
warn police You are unable to use the ingame phone to warn the police for example "“Any cops seen within ‘x’km will be shot on site”

Unless I am stupid, it is saying that Police can do something but rebels can't and it is the exact same thing? Somehow I didn't recognise this 10 years ago when it got released. 

 

[Samatlewis]

@DSGT Fergus that rule applies only to aircraft, therefore police/UNMC aren't issuing the  same message as a rebel would in the example provided in the rule.

I am sure that if a rebel sent a text message to the police dispatch stating " to the NPAS helicopter Hovering above X hostage situation in Z location please fly away within Y amount of time otherwise you will be engaged" (provided warning shots are still provided) would be fine, however it will be a good subject to debate at the next rules meeting and see if it actually needs a rewrite/rewording/removal.