Updating rules and perception around shooting in public areas / daylight / or near cameras

[orca112]

2 hours ago, Sixty said:

Good role players would be fine, but lazy role players would take advantage of this.

And that is where it unfortunately becomes a problem. A good portion of people do thing just because they can / they are allowed to regardless of it making sense or not. Looking back at LSRP, that mentality killed most of the exterior RP, drawing most of the interactions to houses, apartments and occasional open businesses.

 

Sadly, I see the same trend on GTA:World as well in which your average Joe can not enjoy a drink with a friend in their garden or walk in the park without some low quality robbery or other crimes being commited against them.  Giving leeway to commit crime regardless of the environment and time will work as a catalyst in the trend of pushing roleplay into interios and leaving the streets empty - even more frustrating to see with everything GTA 5 has to offer on the outside.

 

It is a fine line to balance things out that it does not end up in an anarchy considering the already high crime rate around Los Santos or second life with almost any crime shut down. A fine line with minor changes having the effect of completely weighting things into either of the two directions is to be maintained, a healthy balance to be found.

 

However, I agree with the suggestion when it comes to the limitations and playtime of the individual player. You should be able to portray your character regardless of the time you are online. This should not be a free pass to just do anything, but allow for their actions to take place in correlation to the time of the day where it is realistic with some leeway rather than being shut down right away solely due to the time of the day (location / situation is another story that can be discussed in lengths).

[knppel]

What's even the suggestion?

Define it as valid whenever a criminal player decides to let their character fire a gun, regardless the circumstances?

Just deal with it and go play shooters if that's the challenge you seek honestly, gtaw requires plenty of looks over the back without people being allowed to ignore common sense und the disguise of playing a "not smart, criminal" character.

[maramizo]

13 hours ago, knppel said:

What's even the suggestion?

Define it as valid whenever a criminal player decides to let their character fire a gun, regardless the circumstances?

Just deal with it and go play shooters if that's the challenge you seek honestly, gtaw requires plenty of looks over the back without people being allowed to ignore common sense und the disguise of playing a "not smart, criminal" character.

If you have a motive to pull the trigger, and it isn't deathmatching, the time of day should not matter. It's that simple. People that can't login during night server times are literally playing RP on passive mode otherwise.

[DasFroggy]

25 minutes ago, maramizo said:

the time of day should not matter.

There is a bit more to it than just the time though. Most rulings, as evident with the complaints here, are not strictly based on time so much as a combination of time, location, and visibility.

 

It is the combination of those elements in which daytime is as important as location - most of these reports in which this was brought up, involved events that took place in public hotspots such as the beach, in front of a bank, at the loading docks, and on one occasion, right in front of an office building during business hours.

 

That said, I am perfectly willing to support allowing a criminal to pull the trigger wherever, whenever, so long as in exchange they face more significant penalties if caught by the police after. 

 

"Criminals will quit if they have to face consequences" 

Civilians will quit if they have to deal with being killed more often by emboldened low-quality crime grinders.

 

Some other alternative balancing measures could be witness NPCs, some sort of auto-call for 911, or even just limiting when-where-who factors to civilian and criminal interactions, while making them null during encounters between violent criminals.

 

...but without some sort of counterbalance, the rule will likely remain.

[Smilesville]

1 hour ago, DasFroggy said:

That said, I am perfectly willing to support allowing a criminal to pull the trigger wherever, whenever, so long as in exchange they face more significant penalties if caught by the police after.

More or less sums up my thoughts. We wouldn't perceive "my character is dumb" as an excuse if there weren't such an OOC incentive attached to acting in a brazen manner.

[maramizo]

9 minutes ago, Smilesville said:

More or less sums up my thoughts. We wouldn't perceive "my character is dumb" as an excuse if there weren't such an OOC incentive attached to acting in a brazen manner.

We'll have to think of ways to come up with more significant penalties. Make it so that murders, et cetera, cause more significant time (if not life) for example. But they already do AFAIK.

[Sixty]

4 hours ago, DasFroggy said:

There is a bit more to it than just the time though. Most rulings, as evident with the complaints here, are not strictly based on time so much as a combination of time, location, and visibility.

 

It is the combination of those elements in which daytime is as important as location - most of these reports in which this was brought up, involved events that took place in public hotspots such as the beach, in front of a bank, at the loading docks, and on one occasion, right in front of an office building during business hours.

 

That said, I am perfectly willing to support allowing a criminal to pull the trigger wherever, whenever, so long as in exchange they face more significant penalties if caught by the police after. 

 

"Criminals will quit if they have to face consequences" 

Civilians will quit if they have to deal with being killed more often by emboldened low-quality crime grinders.

 

Some other alternative balancing measures could be witness NPCs, some sort of auto-call for 911, or even just limiting when-where-who factors to civilian and criminal interactions, while making them null during encounters between violent criminals.

 

...but without some sort of counterbalance, the rule will likely remain.

Perfectly sums it up. 👏👏👏

[DasFroggy]

Someone has suggested an update to how prison sentences are handled, and in the spirit of constructive dialogue, I encourage people go there and share their opinions. Just as I've encouraged here that we find a compromise, I have suggested over there the need for a compromise as well.

 

This would be a good opportunity to tie the two initiatives, so that both sides can present a unified initiative for the betterment of criminal roleplay as a whole.

[CertifiedKiller]

This is entirely dependant on the situation and circumstances, for example in an offensive situation - one that would take quite a bit of planning, criminals generally don't want to get caught and should not take a risky hit on somebody UNLESS they've been hunting a particular person for a long time, and are desperate to kill them for a solid reasoning such as it will literally kill their organization if they don't kill that particular person - and they don't mind getting caught. That being said, I think that time and day, and camera count shouldn't matter, but it should increase your chances of getting caught - idk maybe LSPD can RP cameras?

[Smilesville]

18 hours ago, maramizo said:

We'll have to think of ways to come up with more significant penalties. Make it so that murders, et cetera, cause more significant time (if not life) for example. But they already do AFAIK.

Legal penalties are only one component of the issue - as many are quick to point out, the prospect of prison is so daunting for some that they elect to have their characters (temporarily) killed in a shootout. I believe we could accomplish the desired end result by:

• Lengthening prison sentences across the board. Not to their real life counterparts, but much closer to realistic than the current slap on the wrist.
• More strictly defining when a character is PK'd. I would go as far as to say that unless the intent (of the player, not the character) is to kill someone, they are considered wounded rather than killed. Hardly realistic, you could point out, but this is the best way I can think of to combat the meta game behind jumping into a PK to avoid jail time.

Under my proposed amendments, even if you attempt a suicide by cop, your character is simply wounded by the shootout and is still required to serve time for their crimes when they've recuperated. This adds weight to the decision to commit a crime; with a more OOCly balanced "risk versus reward" ratio, we can get to a point where we don't necessarily have to question the motives of players who claim their characters are "stupid criminals" because there's no longer a mechanical incentive to play that way.