Rules Feedback

[KingGodDiabloZ]

FEEDBACK: 

Change the initiating rule. Please remove it that you have to tell people that you have friends in the area and make it like that people who are in the same gang (gang tags required) can shoot if a fellow gang gets attacked/initiated on. A risk of robbing someone should be that there might be friends of him around who can harm you. It's pretty stupid that you have to make people aware of you having friends.  

Positive:

*There is actually a risk for robbing someone

*Friends have time to prepare themselves to help their friend

Negative

* Will increase people being called to teamspeak (therefore gangtags are required)

What do you guys think?

 

[Andres Martinez]

Could we please get the rule of having atleast try to resolve back. Its getting stupid reading reasons like : its not the first time it happend this week so i want them banned. We are in a ADULT community not a creche. Try to resolve things first before trying to get them banned for reasons wich take a 2 seconds to  talk out. I understand why this was removed but maybe try to make it so their is to be a staff member present in the room when they are talking it out so he/she can still decide to take it further if it looks like the offender just bought his way out.

 

[Scott S]

@James Williams the problem is that people do not want to resolve things anymore they just want to see the person that has done them wrong get in trouble, luckily the staff team usually see's if it is a genuine mistake and is able to get them to have a civilised conversation where it gets solved anyway

 

[FergusW]

Nevermind

 

[Vlad Vodka]

I think there should be a rule, that requires it to have audio through a whole video when putting up a report. Because i think to many people just mute their audio if they are breaking rules to get out of it. and i think this will decrease the amount of unnessesairy reports.

 

[Madmatt150]

Change rule 

[SIZE=medium](5.4) When you are revived/downed:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You may not actively enter or continue any combat situation for the next 15 minutes.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Your character retains all knowledge of the time before they are downed.[/SIZE]

While you are downed you may not divulge tactical information to anyone. The exception to this is information spoken in direct chat in game. Please be mindful that you are heavily injured and should act accordingly.

TO

[SIZE=medium](5.4) When you are revived/downed:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You may not actively enter or continue any combat situation for the next 15 minutes.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Your character retains all knowledge of the time before they are downed.[/SIZE]

While you are downed you may not divulge tactical information to anyone over your radio. The only communication to be done is via Direct chat in-game, you are injured and thus cannot use the radio to call assistance. Please be mindful that you are heavily injured and should act accordingly.

 

[Gurlanin]

Change rule 

[SIZE=medium](5.4) When you are revived/downed:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You may not actively enter or continue any combat situation for the next 15 minutes.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Your character retains all knowledge of the time before they are downed.[/SIZE]

While you are downed you may not divulge tactical information to anyone. The exception to this is information spoken in direct chat in game. Please be mindful that you are heavily injured and should act accordingly.

TO

[SIZE=medium](5.4) When you are revived/downed:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]You may not actively enter or continue any combat situation for the next 15 minutes.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Your character retains all knowledge of the time before they are downed.[/SIZE]

While you are downed you may not divulge tactical information to anyone over your radio. The only communication to be done is via Direct chat in-game, you are injured and thus cannot use the radio to call assistance. Please be mindful that you are heavily injured and should act accordingly.

I'm not sure I would completely agree with that. Even heavily injured IRL it is still possibly to use a radio. 

 

[Pilatus344]

I'm not sure I would completely agree with that. Even heavily injured IRL it is still possibly to use a radio. 

I second hes statement, even in real life like he said, your able to still use your radio, unless they shoot your radio, your tounge or ripped of you both your arms. yes your heavily injured, but a few words on the radio is usually possible.

 

[Shuttle]

I suggest that rule 

(9.2.4) Combat Reviving - If combat is in effect, or shots have been fired within the last 5 minutes, the area is not safe to enter for rescuing the injured. Therefore, you cannot revive at this time. This rule is exempt for civilians using defibrillators.

Gets changed to:

(9.2.4) Combat Reviving - If combat is in effect, or shots have been fired within the last 5 minutes, the area is not safe to enter for rescuing the injured. Therefore, you cannot revive at this time.

I believe the reason for civs still being able revive with shots fired as there used to be a script which took around 5minutes to actually revive the civ, where their viewpoint became like a dream, with text on the screen. In recent gunfights against civs, i have seen someone been revived twice, and continue selling gold to the gold buyer (with his weapon in his backpack so he is not necessarily involved in combat) I feel like this rule should be updated based on the fact that this script is no longer in place

 

[Rossss]

I'm not sure I would completely agree with that. Even heavily injured IRL it is still possibly to use a radio. 

I agree with you, but I would give examples of what is tactical information. Saying the word "help" could be argued as tactical as you're calling for backup from friends, but it could also be argued that it is isn't as there is no specific meaning as to what has happened. It is vague and I can see it being one of those rules which become pushed to the limit.

Gets changed to:

(9.2.4) Combat Reviving - If combat is in effect, or shots have been fired within the last 5 minutes, the area is not safe to enter for rescuing the injured. Therefore, you cannot revive at this time.

I agree with you, but I would argue that it is changed to allow reviving when the area is obviously clear. For example, there is one hobo running from the police in a car and gets out with a gun and threatens the police. The police kill him and it is obvious the threat is gone. Then, the police have to wait 5 minutes to revive him, which is a long time when you're stood doing nothing.

The other day, I had a medic roll up to revive someone i'd killed, and asked how long it was since last shots. We weren't sure how long, but he demanded that it was more than 5 minutes which we confirmed. I think it is silly that people are more worried about a rule (rather than roleplaying, ie reviving them when it is obvious it is clear) which is in place for a good reason, but also becomes a bad rule when applied to some scenarios. It sortof makes it ruleplay rather than roleplay in a weird way.

 

[Scott S]

The other day, I had a medic roll up to revive someone i'd killed, and asked how long it was since last shots. We weren't sure how long, but he demanded that it was more than 5 minutes which we confirmed. I think it is silly that people are more worried about a rule (rather than roleplaying, ie reviving them when it is obvious it is clear) which is in place for a good reason, but also becomes a bad rule when applied to some scenarios. It sortof makes it ruleplay rather than roleplay in a weird way.

I disagree, the rule is there for medical personnel's safety and in future the medic involved should actually use the NHS-Police channels before moving in to ensure that no gunfight is occurring, once cleared by cops and they say it is clear fair enough move in, but the rule should remain unless otherwise told that it is safe.

 

[Rossss]

I disagree, the rule is there for medical personnel's safety and in future the medic involved should actually use the NHS-Police channels before moving in to ensure that no gunfight is occurring, once cleared by cops and they say it is clear fair enough move in, but the rule should remain unless otherwise told that it is safe.

When I was a medic this was not a rule and there was never an issue. No medics ever got caught up in gunfights and it was all good. If you're suggesting that the medics communicate for every revive then I strongly disagree.

The current rule means if one hobo is killed by police infront of medics (similar to the situation above) then they watch the body die for 5 minutes before the can assist him. It is obvious the threat is gone and everything is fine. Doesn't sound very realistic to me...

 

[Scott S]

When I was a medic this was not a rule and there was never an issue. No medics ever got caught up in gunfights and it was all good. If you're suggesting that the medics communicate for every revive then I strongly disagree.

The current rule means if one hobo is killed by police infront of medics (similar to the situation above) then they watch the body die for 5 minutes before the can assist him. It is obvious the threat is gone and everything is fine. Doesn't sound very realistic to me...

You misunderstand, if police are there and they are protecting you with no shots being fired then yes feel free to move in to the situation and revive the injured. Obviously if someone is down and you stand next to them for 5 mins this is excessive ruleplay... 

in short as long as the area is secure medics can move in, the rule is just there for our safety and it is enforced whenever is necessary to ensure our men and women don't enter and dangerous situations that may endanger their lives 

 

[Rossss]

Obviously if someone is down and you stand next to them for 5 mins this is excessive ruleplay... 

But that is what the rule says. It seems excessive but technically someone can be banned for it. Same thing with the 3 minute impounding rule in the police

 

[Rossss]

(9.1.3) Rubber bullets and tasers must be used unless lethal force is ordered by the highest ranking officer in that situation.

This rule can cause silly circumstances where an SPC who only has a lethal weapon is being shot at by rebels, but as his SGT hasn't authorised lethals he can't shoot back. Common sense would say he can shoot back but technically he can't according to the rule.

Lethals wouldn't be used in the police until they are being shot at anyway, so this rule is not necessary in my eyes.

 

[Smith]

Why does the SPC only have a lethal weapon, are all officers not required to carry one non lethal weapon?

 

[Samatlewis]

Why does the SPC only have a lethal weapon, are all officers not required to carry one non lethal weapon?

Technically tasers count as a non lethal however who brings a slow firing, short range pistol to an automatic rifle fight? Additionally, if said officer is on his own, then he only has access to that one lethal rifle, even then he wouldn't be able to engage himself until a SGT+ responds and says yes..

 

[Rossss]

Additionally, if said officer is on his own, then he only has access to that one lethal rifle, even then he wouldn't be able to engage himself until a SGT+ responds and says yes..

He could authorise himself to use lethals as he's the highest at the scene, but if he wasn't that's where problems arise.

It seems like a very common sense rule but it can (and similar rules have been in the past) be taken out of context and proportion by people making reports

 

[Kattana]

@Wilco Can u make a rule so can stop Police metagaming please? Like checking your car while your doing copper or anything else and lying about the car getting reported stolen just to get your name? That would be awesome thanks

 

[Josh]

@Wilco Can u make a rule so can stop Police metagaming please? Like checking your car while your doing copper or anything else and lying about the car getting reported stolen just to get your name? That would be awesome thanks

Meta gaming is a server rule, so if you have any evidence then ask the officer why they did what they did.