knppel

Sadly there is: We recently had two scripts added (livestream and cctv) that both suffer, besides other bugs, from the same issue: While using them, the player is restricted from using the local chat tools (which are mandatory to roleplay on a text-based server, mind).

Did this guy seriously write an essay about other people being power hungry over a freaking video game? Smh. This here is the real issue we have as community: Opposed to talk about how shitty or enjoyable our rp experience together is, we treat roleplay quality as a "sensitive" topic that is only to be submitted in private reports the accused does not even get to see (unless staff leaks, which it does, but this is a different topic). Our all rp would be better if we openly talked together instead to . Just my 2 cents as someone who, quote again, was not involved and doesn't know shit. My guess: it can't have too much tea in it as elsewise I'd heard of it

I'm so pretty

Comment: TheRealCarrySaunders Name: Ironically enough Noah Wade is exactly what he attacked Marcus Cambridge for all the past year until Hank was elected: Not elected. He's never had to deal with the consequences of his ridiculously low public approval ratings (they are low. Doubt me? Go out and freaking ASK people like I do. Most of them never heard of him even). Needless to point out- what sort of democratic understanding is to expect from a man that tries to bypass democratic processes himself first and foremost? Answer to the rethorical question: The same as from Marcus Cambridge- non at all. Maybe we should first vote a governor and not a city council

Highly in agreement with this. Take in account with such scripts that player-to-player interaction is the base core of our game and thus must be enabled at all times when logged in and acting in character!

I don't make it mandatory. Personally, I feel like A. there's too much metagaming when the ooc motive of creating a cool scene influences ic actions, and B. even if I play absolutely genuine I'll cherry-pick screens where my char/faction will look like they got their shit together (even when this claim might not uphold ic at all times). Consequently, screenshot threads at best offer a selective, at worst a strongly twisted impression of the actual activities people engage in (exceptions state the rule as always). Last but not least, showcasing story development is also the ultimate incitement for other players to metagame: This happens in two ways, the obvious conscious one -where people take knowledge of someone else's events and let their char's actions be influenced by this despite not having heard ic-, and less malevolent but equally disrupting to the game flow, the subconscious one when stuff published in ooc channels mixes with ic knowledge without the respective player fully differing the two. If we applied our server rules consequently, screenshots would be banned due to the aforementioned reason (inciting mg).

I eat them all when the bartender tries to give me my drink and finds out I am overloaded for me.🙂 Or wait, I used to. Now I have this box reminding me 😭

bit off topic but yes, according to recent studies chatgpt is already used (as supportive tool as you describe mostly) in 28% of job applications. Dating september, so by now we'll be at 35-40%. And yes, I mean irl now but the same applies ingame likely. After all we strive for realism!

On the other hand? I search for people who could write essays on a regular base for my faction. This effort is undermined when a single essay over yourself with 0 research can net anyone their very own business

This is false: At no given point did rules protect people from repercussions for the actions their char took. The issue stems from the recent (read: Less than 3 years old) addition of cks as a form of ooc punishment for not freezing. Shooting non-compliant people in, say , a robbery or any sort of comparable situation was at all times* an option well within the rules. What's relatively new is the mentioned -but not generally applied, only when someone cries over, irony, getting to shoot somebody- approach to ck characters off. And for what's worse, the rule name is false as displaying fear might just as much get you killed (it happens, again, not the act of murdering is the issue but that it's a widespread method to issue cks for which in the prior game design you needed either the agreement of the killed party or a really, really good cause such as money you do not just want to take out of someone's pocket but had been scammed for, or such). The addition of this rule has improved absolutely nothing, what it did was streamline robberies to guarantee success for the active party if they point a gun (as freezing is the only option covered in the rules, as unrealistic as it might be that we're ice cold planners that stand still under threat of violence). Consequently, robbing was more or less cancelled by the rules unless you do it on your own turf or walk across town on foot. *At least in any rp server I ever played on from samp-lsrp over M&B warband and Red Dead over to gtaw

Question, how do you define how you'd really act if you got a gun in your face? Oh right you can't. Also what you (and the rule) ignore is that ooc a lot of people have motivations to let their characters conduct murders (as this unironically causes development for criminal characters and having killed is mandatory in many groups to actually get in, or at least progress in higher ranks/inner circles). Murders that irl criminals would not conduct as the risk-profit-relation is just as much ignored by players who do not "really" go to jail if busted for murder- not to mention the unrealistically high chances to get away with crime we reflect. The rule is the worst we have in the ruleset, as it is alleged people act more "cautious" ic to value their e-life (LOL), but it turns a blind eye on the facts that A. criminals have a motive to murder for the sake of it and thus will pick up any reasons that allow them to do so (based on the rules), B. Fear is more divers than freezing and C. Permanently offing characters who get shot for, what is in fact fear of a gun in their face, serves no one but again the people playing would-be-murderers to feel like their killings have "more impact on the game world" (lol again, it doesn't, except for the ic friends of the deceased char). Ceterum censeo fear rules esse delendam

The whole rule is a bad idea- in theory it's supposed to make people act more cautious in character, in practice we see reckless actions constantly regardless. Not to mention the (less relevant but still problematic) part where people circumvent the normal ck apps by trying to get others in a situation where their characters alleged "lack of fear" causes them to be killed over what is in fact petty reasons ("Fear me!") It does not improve "realistic" behaviour by any means, it's a backdoor for ck apps. And should be removed as I stated very often.

Name: TheRealCarrySaunders Comment: Gotta love how he's asked to define "respect" and has no answer to this

I'll stand with you on this but the lobby of wannabe conspirators is strong here so expect resistance

Whispering near other people should be banned imho as it's a textbook definition of powergaming. Many use it due to the highlight, regardless (see above). Allowing this for (adressed) normal speech with /to would be a good improvement as it'd discourage the random whispers in big crowds.