Make more gun suppliers and change how suppliers actually work.

[Ren]

You’ve forgotten 1 point - more gun suppliers, more guns in circulation, guns becoming more common; this all means 1 thing.

 

Less hackers.

 

How? Half the illegal community right now wouldn’t be resorting to hacks to win every fight in order to preserve guns. Fear of losing weapons has resorted in every negative connotation and result you could think of.

 

2020 was a fun time where guns were way more publicly available and everyone had so many of them that wars, issues, and the trade felt fun. Back then hacks were available, how come not as many people were hacking? Why’s the community become so toxic? I wonder why.

 

It’s obvious we can’t have a perfect server, so my question is this:

 

Would Management rather have a server with a little more gun crime? A few more shootings? In exchange for less hackers, less OOC dealing, less complaints, lower prices on guns and them being treated as disposable?

 

Or do we rather keep them as scarce and minimal as they are now to the point people are never using them/hacking to keep them/breaking rules to keep them/paying an arm and a leg/waiting IRL months for them in order to prevent a potential surge in gun crime?

Edited September 24, 2023 by Ren

[Inked]

I pushed this issue a few years ago and they upped the amounts a little bit then - but then they stopped. And it's still incredibly lacking. I won't rehash the same shit I've been saying for years but management's fears of the results of an increased presence of firearms is naïve and has been tested and proven false.  

 

The lack of firearms is what causes them to be so high value and in turn; why people rule break more often to protect them. People in general have to stop thinking of firearms as toys and start thinking of them as what they really are; necessary tools to aid in roleplay. 

[BLUE HUNDREDS]

2 minutes ago, Ren said:

You’ve forgotten 1 point - more gun suppliers, more guns in circulation, guns becoming more common; this all means 1 thing.

 

Less hackers.

 

How? Half the illegal community right now wouldn’t be resorting to hacks to win every fight in order to preserve guns. Fear of losing weapons has resorted in every negative connotation and result you could think of.

 

2020 was a fun time where guns were way more publicly available and everyone had so many of them that wars, issues, and the trade felt fun. Back then hacks were available, how come not as many people were hacking? Why’s the community become so toxic? I wonder why.

Nah facts though, you're absolutely right. This is a big point nobody really been talking about recently.

[Eastside.Shady]

Just now, Inked said:

The lack of firearms is what causes them to be so high value and in turn; why people rule break more often to protect them. People in general have to stop thinking of firearms as toys and start thinking of them as what they really are; necessary tools to aid in roleplay. 

That's the mentality everyone tries to harp on to the player-base, all the way from IFM. But that's insanely tone deaf. They want us to treat firearms like they're disposable, but you're either paying out your ass for a gun, waiting 4 to 5 weeks for each one, taking a gamble on a robbery in hopes that they MIGHT have a gun, or a combination of the above. How is that disposable or utilitarian?

[Inked]

1 minute ago, Eastside.Shady said:

That's the mentality everyone tries to harp on to the player-base, all the way from IFM. But that's insanely tone deaf. They want us to treat firearms like they're disposable, but you're either paying out your ass for a gun, waiting 4 to 5 weeks for each one, taking a gamble on a robbery in hopes that they MIGHT have a gun, or a combination of the above. How is that disposable or utilitarian?

 

Precisely. I recall in LS:RP we began testing a new structure. When it used to be upwards of $50K or more for a Deagle w/ 100 bullets, we sold them with 30 bullets at a rate much much closer to factory and just greatly upped the supply to meet the demand (weapon warehouse).

 

The result? People actually disposed of weapons when they were dirty. People didn't rush to report every time they got slumped or robbed, even if the situation was imperfect from a roleplay/rules point-of-view. Because they knew they could get it replaced fairly cheap by not just our faction, but by the network we created to ensure guns could get pushed out to the masses, instead of just to the few select groups that came as a result of limited supply.

 

And that was BEFORE we had any sort of script mechanics that allowed LEOs to investigate crime scenes and link guns to shootings, when guns could not become damaged or broken and didn't have to be maintained. People stopped reporting petty shit because it wasn't as big of a loss then. The loss of a firearm was rarely the end of the world then.

[pogoyo]

The supplier system is heavily skewed in favor of long-term (2+ years) suppliers whose status is bound to them personally, rather than to factions. There are probably four or five of these people. Most supplier now is distributed to be paired with factions, and in amounts that are usually insufficient to supply the whole faction/its network. 

 

The following is made up stats, but I guarantee you this is actually what supplier distribution looks like. A very small number of people account for a plurality of the server's gun output, and have for quite a while.

 

 

IFM should actually release the stats on it: how many suppliers are there, and how much does each supplier get? Keep it anonymous, just a spreadsheet!

[twinn]

Huge +1, the amount of OOC dealing and stockpiling going in in the server is absurd and nothing is being done about it as far as I can see. 

 

This even includes gun suppliers plugging their OOC homies which I myself have seen, it is a huge issue which needs to be solved ASAP. The gun flow needs to be increased, the reason players are chain robbing, looting and overall acting like idiots is all for the sole reason to obtain a firearm or not lose the one they currently have.

 

Guns are hard to touch for a normal illegal roleplayer as said in your post, it needs to be fixed as it has a domino effect onto other rulebreaks.

[soudiere]

8 minutes ago, Inked said:

 

Precisely. I recall in LS:RP we began testing a new structure. When it used to be upwards of $50K or more for a Deagle w/ 100 bullets, we sold them with 30 bullets at a rate much much closer to factory and just greatly upped the supply to meet the demand (weapon warehouse).

 

The result? People actually disposed of weapons when they were dirty. People didn't rush to report every time they got slumped or robbed, even if the situation was imperfect from a roleplay/rules point-of-view. Because they knew they could get it replaced fairly cheap by not just our faction, but by the network we created to ensure guns could get pushed out to the masses, instead of just to the few select groups that came as a result of limited supply.

 

And that was BEFORE we had any sort of script mechanics that allowed LEOs to investigate crime scenes and link guns to shootings, when guns could not become damaged or broken and didn't have to be maintained. People stopped reporting petty shit because it wasn't as big of a loss then. The loss of a firearm was rarely the end of the world then.

you'd imagine that for a community that lives mostly in the western world that's currently dealing with the consequences of what happens when supply can't meet demand, we'd at least be able to understand that supply not being able to meet demand even for a single market is going to end up resulting in consequences that nobody particularly likes

Edited September 24, 2023 by soudiere

[Franchise Player]

52 minutes ago, soudiere said:

Traffic stops would not nearly result in as many shoot-outs as they do if guns weren't such a rarity. Nobody's risking life for a misdemeanor, but when losing a firearm means losing 10% to 20% of your faction's fighting capabilities, basically being left defenseless for a month minimum and not being able to engage in RP involving store robberies, stick-ups, any kind of crime that is reliant on intimidation with a firearm or basically any kind of confrontational illegal roleplay, then yeah, most people will take that chance.

Hit the nail on the fucking head, I don't think IFM thinks about stuff like this, they probably think more guns = more shootouts, which is actually not true, If my faction has 20 guns, I don't care to lose 1, but when  you only have 5 fire-arms that are being passed around, especially when you don't know how long it'll take you to get more, I'm doing any and everything to not lose it, It's either I get away with it or I die with it.

[orca112]

45 minutes ago, soudiere said:

The only way this could harm the server is by shitty roleplayers having more capacity to enact shitty roleplay upon others, whether it be through excess DM or just poor quality confrontational interactions, such as robberies. But at that point, just ban them. The idea that people who just want to roleplay should have to suffer from bad faith actors that can easily be reported, caught and then banned is insane. It'd be akin to saying that just because some legal RP'ers have poor portrayal when it comes to wealth, that high rise apartments and expensive cars should be restricted when it could easily be resolved with an RPQM report. 

Straight fax. The constant leniency towards bad faith actors has been resulting in a constant downward trend when it comes to roleplay quality, and subsequently a lot of bandaid solutions applied in an attempt to fix the symptoms rather than the actual disease - the rotten applies spoiling the bunch.

 

It is no secret the main motivation for robberies, looting and unnecessarily elevating a speeding ticket into capital murder has been in most cases the plain fear of losing that valuable gun. Because that gun holds too much value compared to any other tool, or type of weapon. Of course there is a risk of another set of problems to arise by "flooding the market with guns", though I believe these are easier to be properly identified and resolved by the admin team than the constant bandaid fix on symptoms rather than the actual problem - especially when bad faith actors are weeded out properly, and not given their 327th final warning.