Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal

Recommended Posts

  • Bospy pinned this topic

"A player who has been Conflict PK'd may not functionally acknowledge the conflict on any IC basis and must take every step they can to act as though the conflict does not exist."

 

Could you elaborate on this?

 

Talking about a beef with your affiliates IC is largely different to actually getting re-involved in a conflict. Under this rule, your character can't RP throwing up gang signs for opp sets they beef, they can't acknowledge that their life might be in danger due to growing tensions with another faction; they have to practically run away from any conversation that might come up IC about the beef, mainly for an OOC reason.

 

Getting re-involved directly affects the opposition, going out on an attack or finding an opposition member somewhere and shit-talking them based on previous engagements directly affects the opposition. Talking about the beef among affiliates doesn't affect the opposition, so long as you do not try to tell people to make a move, or encourage them to attack.

 

Not being able to talk about beefs IC amongst affiliates makes roleplaying in times of conflict quite difficult if you're PKed, if I can defend myself in direct attacks; why can't I acknowledge the beef and just simply not act on that knowledge?

Edited by EffPee
Removed text highlighting
Link to post
1 minute ago, EffPee said:

"A player who has been Conflict PK'd may not functionally acknowledge the conflict on any IC basis and must take every step they can to act as though the conflict does not exist."

Could you elaborate on this?

 

Talking about a beef with your affiliates IC is largely different to actually getting re-involved in a conflict. Under this rule, your character can't RP throwing up gang signs for opp sets they beef, they can't acknowledge that their life might be in danger due to growing tensions with another faction; they have to practically run away from any conversation that might come up IC about the beef, mainly for an OOC reason.

 

Getting re-involved directly affects the opposition, going out on an attack or finding an opposition member somewhere and shit-talking them based on previous engagements directly affects the opposition. Talking about the beef among affiliates doesn't affect the opposition, so long as you do not try to tell people to make a move, or encourage them to attack.

 

Not being able to talk about beefs IC amongst affiliates makes roleplaying in times of conflict quite difficult if you're PKed, if I can defend myself in direct attacks; why can't I acknowledge the beef and just simply not act on that knowledge?

 

You can use caution and acknowledge your faction has enemies, you're just not allowed to specifically say "Man fuck the Grape Street Watt Crips that we're currently in a conflict with that I was PK'd out of let me give you some guns." You can definitely note your conflict with Crips or other gangs in general, and if you see the Crips on your block you can obviously run away or defend yourself, just leave it very ambiguous in terms of conversation surrounding it. Avoid involving yourself in strategizing, dividing war spoils, or anything like that. Gangs are always at war with people. So acknowledge that you're at war, just don't go into too many specifics.

Link to post
1 minute ago, Bospy said:

 

You can use caution and acknowledge your faction has enemies, you're just not allowed to specifically say "Man fuck the Grape Street Watt Crips that we're currently in a conflict with that I was PK'd out of let me give you some guns." You can definitely note your conflict with Crips or other gangs in general, and if you see the Crips on your block you can obviously run away or defend yourself, just leave it very ambiguous in terms of conversation surrounding it. Avoid involving yourself in strategizing, dividing war spoils, or anything like that. Gangs are always at war with people. So acknowledge that you're at war, just don't go into too many specifics.

I think this needs to be specified in the RoE then. The way it's written it's easily interpreted as 'don't acknowledge the conflict at all'. This is damaging to the flow of roleplay in war-time. It should be written in a way that suggests you can acknowledge the war you just can't mention ANY specifics, and you can't offer any help or guidance.

 

If a group of people in GANG A are discussing their distaste for GANG B, a PKed character in GANG A shouldn't have to stand in the sidelines or just avoid the conversation entirely just because they're PKed. 

Link to post

What's the reasoning behind the 12 hour cool down? I feel like most people liked the fact that there wasn't a cooldown. I personally never saw anyone complaining about there being no cooldown. Honestly, a 12 hour cooldown will just incite people to "block wipe" or kill as much people as they can in one single attack because they know they won't be able to attack again in a day or two since diverse time zones and work schedules have an affect on when two factions will be on at the same time. 

Link to post
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, EffPee said:

I think this needs to be specified in the RoE then. The way it's written it's easily interpreted as 'don't acknowledge the conflict at all'. This is damaging to the flow of roleplay in war-time. It should be written in a way that suggests you can acknowledge the war you just can't mention ANY specifics, and you can't offer any help or guidance.

 

If a group of people in GANG A are discussing their distaste for GANG B, a PKed character in GANG A shouldn't have to stand in the sidelines or just avoid the conversation entirely just because they're PKed. 

I'll fix that up to reflect that.

 

12 minutes ago, Peezy said:

What's the reasoning behind the 12 hour cool down? I feel like most people liked the fact that there wasn't a cooldown. I personally never saw anyone complaining about there being no cooldown. Honestly, a 12 hour cooldown will just incite people to "block wipe" or kill as much people as they can in one single attack because they know they won't be able to attack again in a day or two since diverse time zones and work schedules have an affect on when two factions will be on at the same time. 

We can tweak this if it's too restrictive but this was an amount agreed upon with the IFM council. This was requested by numerous faction leaders. A proposal from the IFM council is to make it so if two factions agree they can tweak this between themselves.

Edited by Bospy
Link to post
19 minutes ago, Bospy said:

We can tweak this if it's too restrictive but this was an amount agreed upon with the IFM council. This was requested by numerous faction leaders. A proposal from the IFM council is to make it so if two factions agree they can tweak this between themselves.  

Something like 2-3 hours sounds more reasonable if there has to be a cooldown. 

Edited by Peezy
Link to post
1 hour ago, Peezy said:

Something like 2-3 hours sounds more reasonable if there has to be a cooldown. 

 

I've added a new rule to the ROE to reflect that two factions can mutually agree to increase or reduce the cooldown.

Link to post
2 hours ago, Stiggz said:

Does this mean there will be punishments for factions that jump immediately to using guns?

Factions have always been liable for punishment if escalation reasonings are poor. As with most things, punishments only occur if they're actually reported.

Edited by Naeno
Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...