Jump to content

Vindus

Gold Donator
  • Posts

    598
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Posts posted by Vindus

  1. 6 hours ago, BINGBONGGHOST said:

    I don't necessarily disagree with the suggestion, I'm just skeptical on how it'd work in practice.

     

    Admins would surely have to see actual evidence and decent justification to accept a CK which would obviously take time on-top of what they're already doing (IG administration, forum reports, IG reports, CK apps, etc) and can't be done through a quick /b chat which brings up what Dislord slightly touched on, why can't this be done through a CK app? Sounds like a big chunk of the motivation behind this suggestion is the long time it takes to actually have a CK app accepted, having that fixed by basically replacing PK's with CK's and a chance to appeal if you feel you was wronged but having admins stretched between what I listed above with this NEW system in place feels like it's slow things down even more and almost defeats the point.

     

    Also just like the CK rules (unless they've changed since i last checked) would prisoners be willing to CK their own characters if say, they attempted to stab a prisoner in a coordinated attack and were killed in the crossfire of a brawl? Wouldn't feel fair for players to have a PK safety net just because they're established prisoners. 

     

    Ultimately agree with the suggestion on paper, just how I'd agree with every PK on the server being a CK but obviously in practice these things don't work out and I'm not entirely sure from all the illegal RP I've been around and seen if I'd trust the majority with that power, suppose a short trial run wouldn't be horrible though?

    A similar system was in place when the jail opened up. It worked perfectly. You prepared the evidence you needed if you needed any and made a report. You sent the screens on discord and got the ck approved instantly. I doubt you're roleplaying in jail as the illegal RP scene in jail and on the outside is completely different. Don't get me wrong, we don't want this so we're able to CK people on the daily, it is simply because it stops noobs from ruining RP and punishes non fear.

  2. 3 minutes ago, shiroq said:

    I agree, people forget that they can enter protective custody. There are means to avoid getting mixed into general population. And a rule like that would defintively fix prison rp in a major way because this wouldn't only apply to people entering the prison but also to the people that are commiting crimes inside of it and IF they are release one day they could face consequences for their actions inside too, like if they cked someone inside for whatever reason and it was found out that they did it someone could track them down and ck them for killing their associate and what not. When the "no fear rp" rule came into play where you could report and get it done instantly in the game at least from my POV shifted a lot of attitudes but then the rule was removed and now if you want to ck someone who did not show proper fear in an rp scenario you have to make a report and i have noticed a trend in "mallrats" that is shifting back to them not giving a fuck anymore because well lets be honest some people are not willing to make a report and wait weeks for it to get processed.

    So I think all ck's or a very harsh push towards more ck's in prison is the way to go.

    Possibilities are endless my friend. How's SD supposed to even charge and handle deaths in jail when the inmate is walking around doing the same thing again? It's just demotivating and needs to be fixed urgently.

  3. 32 minutes ago, Koko said:

    I mostly agree with the general spirit of the suggestion in the sense of giving an idea of danger to jail, but I also want to step in to remind people that in this server we have a jail that's one-size-fits-all, meaning you can have very dangerous violent criminals together with other offenders when in reality they would serve time in different facilities and at different levels of security. I would find it unfair if say, for instance, a 'lesser' offender had to avoid RP out of fear of a CK because they're mixed in with a lot more dangerous criminals than themselves and they don't want to get involved.

    Not true. I think you are mixing prison security levels up with our jail, what we have is a county jail where you might have someone getting caught for drunk driving and someone that has an ongoing case for armed robbery, locked up together. While it is true that the more violent inmates that have shown a tendency for violence against other inmates might be locked in segregation, that's an issue that's IC but the same could be said for many of the roleplayers that enters jail and would realistically be in protective custody. 

    What I think is important to note is that all CKs would of course be approved by a staff member like it was before. It worked perfectly and everyone who was dedicated to the roleplay in jail liked it. I believe there was a certain type of roleplayers that did not like it.

     

    "I would find it unfair if say, for instance, a 'lesser' offender had to avoid RP out of fear of a CK because they're mixed in with a lot more dangerous criminals than themselves and they don't want to get involved." This is exactly the behavior that's an issue. Lesser criminals should fear the prison gangs and feel the consequences of roleplaying a criminal. If you're roleplaying a white character that gets caught and sentenced to jail, this would allow your character to interact with the white prison gangs and develop into them, maybe even join their faction and continue the rp outside. If you don't want to interact with them, stay out of jail or enter protective custody and roleplay the REDACTED the character is. Very simple. 

  4. Just now, Dislord said:

    Any idea why Notbound removed it in the first place?

    Probably cause a certain type of players were complaining. Don't take my word for it though, I'm not sure if it was Notbond that removed it but he was the one telling me about the change in rule. 

    The way it used to work was that in jail, if there was a situation were someone broke the no fear RP rule or did something that put their character's life at risk, we could report in game and have any administrator approve the CK instantly. This was extremely efficient and took very little time to do, it also has great effect on jail RP and the players there. We as jail roleplayers felt that our RP was actually valued and respected, people who trolled us or ruined it with their nooby shit got punished, for example. There was a female that went up to the leader of the white car and called him a cunt in front of the whole pod. Now, this was before we forced a jail gender segregation. She got stabbed and force CK'd. Similar thing happened to hispanic inmates who outright disrespected the surenos and called them low lifes when they attempted to get the hispanic inmate to roll with them. 

    It enforces a proper jail and proper RP in the jail. What Notbond (I think) did by changing this rule was allowing these nooby players to ruin the RP we have in there, cause let's be honest. Who wants to take one hour of of you limited free time to write up a CK app on some noob who just came and provoked you to kill him in jail and then wait for weeks to get it approved? 

    • Upvote 3
  5. 3 hours ago, SOLID24 said:

    CK app - I would say this, however usually how it happens is people generally don't want to make them due to the response time on them. With this in place, CKs inside of jail would be handed out at a much quicker pace.

    PODS - There are only two pods as of right now, the A pod, aka the male pod and the B pod aka the female pod. I would prefer it if after stabbed a player moves out and PCs up, however barely anyone rps this as again its agame.

    Gangs - What you said about the chopping block, you obviously don't know how things run in jail on here or IRL. In jail things are WAAY more serious then taken onto the streets due to the fact that the people you are around are people as young as 19 all the way up to 40. Some of these people have connections to the prison gangs such as eme, AB or NF. Due to this, the rules inside of jail are taken seriously, if you break them. You die. Thats how it works. At the end of the day, if you role play with a group and don't want to be CKed don't bug them. Its very easy to avoid being killed in jail, all you really have to do is just be a good dude. Nothing else, the RP unfolds its self but if you get into a debt, expect backlash.  Again,  this is why I say if you don't role play in jail then please don't comment on the thread so I don't have to review basic stuff you should already know, no offence. Like I said as well, all CKs will be approved by IG staff and overwatched by them. Meaning the reasons must be approved, thus if its obviously a retarded situation with not enough escalation having taken place, then don't approve it. Its not like these stabbings would go un supervised.

    It's like we had in the beginning, when jail was new we had a different CK rule. We could actually report in game for CKs and staff would approve them on the spot. This was later removed by Notbond if I remember correctly. But it should defiantly be added back. 

    • Upvote 1
  6. On one of my characters I have a similar thing going. It's a big house in El Burro, that's used as a trap house by the local gangs. However, when I applied for it, we wished to RP it as abandoned and we were allowed by PM. There was even a situation where that property was raided and at first PD was putting everything on my character but cause of the agreement with PM, it couldn't be linked to my character as it was only owned script wise by him. So the idea is already there, if there could be a script to support it, that would be great. 

  7. 4 minutes ago, Certified Lover Boy Jola said:

    So how about we just inform them that a new character is being created instead of having to wait for them to approve it?

    Don't quote me on this but I don't really think anyone has been denied from making an alt for their fac. When I requested it, I pretty much did exactly that. I informed a member of IFM that I made an alt and the reasons for it. I think it's obvious the rule exists for a reason, is the reason good enough to limit factions? I don't know, We'll have to wait and see if IFM responds to this thread but there has to be a reason for the rule as the rule is rather "new". 

     

    My personal opinion is that I don't really care. I would never have several alts in the same faction and I don't understand why people do it but some people like having four characters in the same faction, I don't think that should be against the rules though, it's just lame. 

    • Upvote 2
  8. I don't personally mind the rule, I guess it exists for FM to monitor factions. I've personally requested an alt myself and it was very easy to do. Then again, I wouldn't mind it not being a rule either but I can see why FM would want it like that, so they can ensure that factions can survive without the use of alts and control the amounts of alts being used in illegal factions. I don't really disagree or agree with the rule but I think I understand why it is a rule. 

    While it is true that MG is already a rule, and you can report people for mixing info between characters. I guess with FM knowing about alts in factions, it might make their job easier if there is a conflict where someone has used more than one character. Either way, I don't think the rule is a big deal, seems a majority of illegal roleplayers wants it removed though, so maybe that's the way to go. 

×
×
  • Create New...