Jump to content

Continuity Questions & Answers


Keane

Recommended Posts

So far, the perception of the city has been roleplaying as if the city would be a populated metropolis even if it is not represented through actual player numbers. As of lately, a statement made by the server administration / IFM stated "If you are on a public street during daylight and someone sticks you up, assume the street is empty while the stickup is occurring. If there are people on the street, let them call 911. If they aren't calling 911, then that's an IC issue." and "We cannot force players to roleplay non-existent entities restricting their fundamentally rule-abiding activities. This is immersion breaking.".

 

This obviously changes the perception of the city and its population when it comes to crime. However, this factor will subsequently be applied to a multitude of other things unless one wants to upkeep double standards - if no player is there, there is no one present. May it be in crime, driving on (empty) roads through the city or landmarks around the map such as the unused state prison, Fort Zancudo, Jetsam Terminal / Docks, TTCF, any police station - although the latter is covered by safezone rules.

 

The "no person there when no player is there" stretches further out when thinking on the upkeep of the city as a whole. With a population at high of around 1000 individuals, they are unable to upkeep operations of such large city - maintenance and inhabiting buildings, roads, bridges, power & water supply, operations of state prison and military airbase and many more. Furthermore - what happened with the "invisible" masses of people? Xovid18 killing most of the population, moving away from Los Santos' crime rate, Los Santos actually being a prison island used to exclusively congregate hardened criminals from all across the US (in a sorts of battle royale setting)?

 

In lights of this change / statement / stance - how is this going to be addressed in terms of server continuity and world building?

 

 

 

Edited by orca112
  • Upvote 1
  • Applaud 1
Link to comment
14 hours ago, orca112 said:

So far, the perception of the city has been roleplaying as if the city would be a populated metropolis even if it is not represented through actual player numbers. As of lately, a statement made by the server administration / IFM stated "If you are on a public street during daylight and someone sticks you up, assume the street is empty while the stickup is occurring. If there are people on the street, let them call 911. If they aren't calling 911, then that's an IC issue." and "We cannot force players to roleplay non-existent entities restricting their fundamentally rule-abiding activities. This is immersion breaking.".

 

This obviously changes the perception of the city and its population when it comes to crime. However, this factor will subsequently be applied to a multitude of other things unless one wants to upkeep double standards - if no player is there, there is no one present. May it be in crime, driving on (empty) roads through the city or landmarks around the map such as the unused state prison, Fort Zancudo, Jetsam Terminal / Docks, TTCF, any police station - although the latter is covered by safezone rules.

 

The "no person there when no player is there" stretches further out when thinking on the upkeep of the city as a whole. With a population at high of around 1000 individuals, they are unable to upkeep operations of such large city - maintenance and inhabiting buildings, roads, bridges, power & water supply, operations of state prison and military airbase and many more. Furthermore - what happened with the "invisible" masses of people? Xovid18 killing most of the population, moving away from Los Santos' crime rate, Los Santos actually being a prison island used to exclusively congregate hardened criminals from all across the US (in a sorts of battle royale setting)?

 

In lights of this change / statement / stance - how is this going to be addressed in terms of server continuity and world building?

 

 

 

If @Bospydidn’t close the thread before we could respond, these are questions I would’ve brought up as this was supposed to be a discussion. So the military base is abandoned? No one is there IC’ly with this logic. Free to go parading around the base? What about the airport? No one is there IC’ly so I should be able to just parade around the airport right? Twin Towers? Abandoned? Do we live in The Walking Dead? Why do safe zones get the “this area would realistically be populated” but every place else is an abandoned wasteland with only the IC (who’s online) population?
 

If criminal RP standard is now “population is only who is online”, then civilian RP should get the same treatment. Anything is fair game if no one is in there IC’ly. Every major spot is now IC’ly abandoned unless there are actual people there online. Airport is dead. Fort Zancudo is dead. Twin Towers is dead. Time for some new civilian hangout spots! Oh also, cops should change their entire approach to the city being populated too. Next time I get pulled over and they try to bring a reason for the city streets being busy, this is what I will use from now on. It’s only fair. See how this ridiculous this starts to get? 
 

You can’t have one standard and cherry pick where it’s applied for convenience. It’s a bad position and completely inconsistent unless applied to all aspects of the IC environment. Would love to have these questions clarified by management, as it seems IFM is only mainly concerned with appeasing police and criminal role play. This goes against server continuity as we’re not supposed to be playing in a ghost town.
 

@Groz @Pillsbury

Edited by Numelo
Link to comment

Your character shouldn't be going into a military base, no. I didn't think we'd need to explain that one, honestly. You can't really equate a robbery on an empty street giving you credence to waltz into what would realistically be an extremely protected government facility. 

 

Our aim here is realism. Bospy's post clarified that unless listed as a safezone, crime is generally allowed to take place in any area. If a seperate rule is broken therein, then its up to admin discretion on how the situation is handled.

 

Government buildings are listed under safe zones for a reason. Assume places that would realistically be guarded, watched and protected. Your character shouldn't be going into places like that under any circumstances. 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Groz said:

Your character shouldn't be going into a military base, no. I didn't think we'd need to explain that one, honestly. You can't really equate a robbery on an empty street giving you credence to waltz into what would realistically be an extremely protected government facility. 

 

Our aim here is realism. Bospy's post clarified that unless listed as a safezone, crime is generally allowed to take place in any area. If a seperate rule is broken therein, then its up to admin discretion on how the situation is handled.

 

Government buildings are listed under safe zones for a reason. Assume places that would realistically be guarded, watched and protected. Your character shouldn't be going into places like that under any circumstances. 

Why should we be forced to realistically assume places are guarded when criminals can ignore that streets would realistically be populated? Do you realize how one-sided this sounds?

 

Criminals - You can ignore the Del Perro Pier would realistically be populated for your criminal activities.

 

Civilians - No, you can’t ignore that place would be realistically populated, you can’t go there. 
 

Come on. That is aiming for realism? Serious?

Edited by Numelo
Link to comment
Just now, Numelo said:

Why should we be forced to realistically assume places are guarded when criminals can ignore that streets would realistically be populated in popular areas? Do you realize how one-sided this sounds? 

If you took the time to read through Bospy's previous clarification on the issue, you'd understand why our stance on this is as it is. Changing these rules would fundamentally lower the roleplay opportunities for the criminal side of the spectrum and in turn, would create less compelling roleplay for both sides.

 

Please re-read through Bospy's response as I feel like at this point I am simply re-iterating what he's already said in great detail. If you feel it is one-sided that criminals are able to rob people in public or in day time using proper discretion, but you cannot go into a military base, I don't know what to tell you. 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Groz said:

If you took the time to read through Bospy's previous clarification on the issue, you'd understand why our stance on this is as it is. Changing these rules would fundamentally lower the roleplay opportunities for the criminal side of the spectrum and in turn, would create less compelling roleplay for both sides.

 

Please re-read through Bospy's response as I feel like at this point I am simply re-iterating what he's already said in great detail. If you feel it is one-sided that criminals are able to rob people in public or in day time using proper discretion, but you cannot go into a military base, I don't know what to tell you. 

I read it just fine.
 

Criminals - Ignore logic about the city being populated, it’s fine. Commit crime wherever you want. 
 

Civilians - Don’t ignore the city being populated. Those places are still magically populated. 
 

Makes total sense. If your goal is to turn this server into Cops and Robbers, you’re on your way 👏👏👏

Edited by Numelo
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Civilian roleplay will subsist just fine. It's never been limited before by this and we've had these rules in place for a very long time, since before you recently joined our server in January. Please dissuade yourself from your obvious bias and try to see the situation from a wider perspective and not just from warped tunnel vision.

 

Crimes happen every single day, the time of day really has no bearing on it. You don't get to pick and choose when a situation like this can happen to you, just as you don't in real life. Robbery at its core is causality, timing and opportunity. 

 

You're grasping at straws and stretching things out to extremes to try and make it sound like an apocalyptic scenario that will burn the server down. These rules do nothing but promote and encourage roleplay and realism. If you feel someone is not robbing you in a realistic manner, you can report it. If a rule is broken during a robbery? You can do the same. These are only guidelines, they are in place to promote roleplay, which is what we're all here to do.

 

Our "cops and robbers server 👏👏👏" will be fine with these rules as it always has been. Relax.

Link to comment
15 hours ago, orca112 said:

So far, the perception of the city has been roleplaying as if the city would be a populated metropolis even if it is not represented through actual player numbers. As of lately, a statement made by the server administration / IFM stated "If you are on a public street during daylight and someone sticks you up, assume the street is empty while the stickup is occurring. If there are people on the street, let them call 911. If they aren't calling 911, then that's an IC issue." and "We cannot force players to roleplay non-existent entities restricting their fundamentally rule-abiding activities. This is immersion breaking.".

 

This obviously changes the perception of the city and its population when it comes to crime. However, this factor will subsequently be applied to a multitude of other things unless one wants to upkeep double standards - if no player is there, there is no one present. May it be in crime, driving on (empty) roads through the city or landmarks around the map such as the unused state prison, Fort Zancudo, Jetsam Terminal / Docks, TTCF, any police station - although the latter is covered by safezone rules.

 

The "no person there when no player is there" stretches further out when thinking on the upkeep of the city as a whole. With a population at high of around 1000 individuals, they are unable to upkeep operations of such large city - maintenance and inhabiting buildings, roads, bridges, power & water supply, operations of state prison and military airbase and many more. Furthermore - what happened with the "invisible" masses of people? Xovid18 killing most of the population, moving away from Los Santos' crime rate, Los Santos actually being a prison island used to exclusively congregate hardened criminals from all across the US (in a sorts of battle royale setting)?

 

In lights of this change / statement / stance - how is this going to be addressed in terms of server continuity and world building?

 

 

 

To answer your original question @orca112, the latter half will need to be discussed by continuty and an official statement given at a later date. But you should refrain from

driving through/breaking into Government facilities, even if abandoned. They fall under the safe zone premise so you should assume they are guarded or watched.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Groz said:

Civilian roleplay will subsist just fine. It's never been limited before by this and we've had these rules in place for a very long time, since before you recently joined our server in January. Please dissuade yourself from your obvious bias and try to see the situation from a wider perspective and not just from warped tunnel vision.

I mean, I've been here longer than you have. This latest policy shift may not have been accompanied by any change in the precise language of any rule, but it's a significant departure from how many reports have been adjudicated in the past.

 

The server has been plagued by unrealistic, poorly roleplayed robberies with a smattering of bad staff decisions for as long as I can remember - to the point at which every time I'm robbed is not an immersive interaction, but an idiotic meta-dance rife with /b chat to see who breaks a rule.

 

I wouldn't describe that as compelling in any sense of the word.

 

7 hours ago, Groz said:

These rules do nothing but promote and encourage roleplay and realism.

What of the absurdly low penal sentencing for violent crimes? My proposal to lengthen prison sentences has been waiting for implementation for some time now - and the current state of affairs is anything but realistic. We have to balance realism with fairness for sure, but you can certainly see why a four day sentence for armed robbery inspires perverse incentives, yes?

 

Meanwhile, something as simple as lifting the prohibition on marijuana achieved through IC means is vetoed due to overwrought concerns about a failed drug market. Can you understand why many players look at these changes and notice a pattern that seems to trend in one particular direction?

 

I would very much like to see the server aspire for realism across the board - not simply realism when it suits a particular group of players.

 

Do staff have any intention of attaching serious legal consequences for serious crimes?

Link to comment
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
  • Create New...