Jump to content

Regarding the latest changes to Rule #2


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, i dont wanna od in LA said:

Well post on here then?

As long as folks don't metagame it, sure.

 

7 hours ago, Manic Pixie said:

If the car's owner or the cops are led to the garage I use by the GPS I can't see or destroy, I'm turbo fucked.

This is your problem - you're jacking the car and going straight to your garage. If the car is truly and wholly required, be smart and don't take it straight to the garage. 

 

Take it to an empty parking lot, and watch from a distance. If the car has anti-theft AND someone monitoring it, they'll show up. If nobody arrives after twenty or so minutes, leave your concealment and take the car to your garage.

 

What I won't be sharing is where I park specifically, but I've got this nice little place with a good amount of escape avenues, but only one obvious way for police to go if they want to confirm the location of the car. Makes it easy to see that they're checking, and allows for a quiet and inconspicuous departure.

 

What won't work is some fast n' furious nonsense. Stealing cars isn't meant to be fast and safe. It's meant to be risky and tedious, moreso if you have no intention to be smart about it.

 

  • Applaud 1
Link to comment
52 minutes ago, DasFroggy said:

Or, maybe pick cars that are unlikely to have anti-theft?

There's no such thing. Like, yeah, in theory a higher-end car is more likely to have anti-theft—but there's no barrier to entry on security purchases on GTA W. A $50,000 sedan is just as likely to have level four anti-theft as a $300,000 sports car.

 

31 minutes ago, DasFroggy said:

Except there is a counter - scope out the car, see if it's being monitored, and then check for anti-theft.

This isn't actually a counter. If it's been working for you, that's really just luck of the draw. Letting a car sit for a half-hour doesn't guarantee it doesn't have anti-theft—they just might not notice it's missing and track it down for 45 minutes, when you're neck-deep in roleplay. And let's not forget that, for these hours expended trying to circumvent an intensely janky, reality-busting system, you're just not making enough money to justify the investment. I covered that in my post.

 

Anyway, you're making a lot of weird, bad faith assumptions about me and how I play, so I'm not really interested in engaging with you further about this. Thanks for your input.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Manic Pixie said:

There's no such thing. Like, yeah, in theory a higher-end car is more likely to have anti-theft—but there's no barrier to entry on security purchases on GTA W. A $50,000 sedan is just as likely to have level four anti-theft as a $300,000 sports car.

Which is fine. Not every car has anti-theft though. There are cars you can take undetected, you just need to adapt and spend time roleplaying. Car theft isn't meant to be fast or easy, it's intended to be challenging.

 

3 minutes ago, Manic Pixie said:

This isn't actually a counter.

According to you.

 

4 minutes ago, Manic Pixie said:

If it's been working for you, that's really just luck of the draw. Letting a car sit for a half-hour doesn't guarantee it doesn't have anti-theft—they just might not notice it's missing and track it down for 45 minutes, when you're neck-deep in roleplay.

It has been working, as the more time that passes without a response indicative of detection is just more evidence that it won't be detected. Your argument at this counterpoint now hinges entirely on the basis that any proposed solution in which bad luck can do you in, is not viable.

 

You're not interested in an actual solution outside or changing the rules for an easier time.

 

7 minutes ago, Manic Pixie said:

And let's not forget that, for these hours expended trying to circumvent an intensely janky, reality-busting system, you're just not making enough money to justify the investment. I covered that in my post.

It pays enough for me, because I don't grind the criminal role for the sake of script gains. It's, as with most criminal activity, something to add to my legal gains.

 

9 minutes ago, Manic Pixie said:

you're making a lot of weird, bad faith assumptions

With your insisting that solutions can only be viable if they allow you to survive bad luck and poor planning, the bad faith assessment seems to be mutual one. That said, if you want your suggestion to be taken seriously, you'll need a better argument than "What if I just happen to be unlucky?"

 

I'll be here to address future concerns, regardless of your participation.

  • Upvote 2
  • Applaud 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, DasFroggy said:

the bad faith assessment seems to be mutual one.

No, you're just... definitely being so aggro as to verge on discourteousness, and I'm not up for arguing about this with somebody who is like very clearly not going to see my side of it no matter what I say. But yeah, like, it's a public forum. By all means.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Manic Pixie said:

I'm not up for arguing about this with somebody who is like very clearly not going to see my side of it no matter what I say.

It's not that I don't see your side, it's just that it's not even an issue. I've indulged the method I use to bypass the system, and that offer to show you ingame exactly how well it works is still very much on the table.

 

You don't want that solution though. You want the rules to change, and you'll accept nothing else.

Link to comment

I really should learn to listen to myself when I say things, but,

 

1 minute ago, DasFroggy said:

It's not that I don't see your side, it's just that it's not even an issue. I've indulged the method I use to bypass the system, and that offer to show you ingame exactly how well it works is still very much on the table.

I already use the tactic you described, and it does not address the concern that I outlined at the start of the thread. Likewise,

 

2 minutes ago, DasFroggy said:

You don't want that solution though. You want the rules to change, and you'll accept nothing else.

in my opening post I suggested that a method of destroying anti-theft (I don't know what that would look like, and I'm open to something that would be balanced and engaging, instead of just being a throwaway command) would also suffice.

 

So that, on top of the ways in which you seem to assume that I neither know what I am doing or roleplay the process properly, is why I don't want to bicker with you about this. You're making bad faith assumptions about me, and I definitely have not done the same to you, so—like I said before, I'm gonna leave it here with you. We are absolutely not going to see eye to eye on this. That's fine.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Manic Pixie said:

tl;dr Having no way to combat anti-theft when chopping cars is, to my mind, both unrealistic and unfair, since an update to Rule #2 now requires us to roleplay taking a car apart before we can chop it mechanically. Being able to deal with anti-theft OR just having stricter requirements on roleplay following the mechanical chopping of a car would be really nice.

 

Part of the most recent update to Rule #2 is

 

 

In the past, I've chopped cars and then roleplayed taking them apart (a process that I take seriously, spending a lot of time and effort stripping a vehicle down), and the reason that I do this is pretty obvious—to defeat anti-theft. In character, dealing with anti-theft is, I think, more or less trivial. Unless I'm parting a high-end sports car, it's about as simple as locating, removing and destroying the tracker before I take the car to a garage, right? Something more expensive might require software fuckery with a laptop, but my character is also perfectly capable of doing that.

 

Now that I absolutely must roleplay taking the car apart before I can chop it with a command, I feel compelled to rush my roleplay and put out the bare minimum that I think administrators will find acceptable, because I have no means of detecting or dealing with anti-theft. If the car's owner or the cops are led to the garage I use by the GPS I can't see or destroy, I'm turbo fucked. Rather than being able to take my time and do the job right, I just want to minimize the window in which I'm at risk because of this bizarro magic invincible LoJack. It's really, really pushing the risk/reward ratio towards untenable. We're talking about a system where, benefits-wise, a Huntley can't quite produce a single switchblade and a Benson can't produce two.

 

I don't know what the exact answer is? If chopping the car and then roleplaying it is completely unacceptable, it would be nice if I had some way to combat anti-theft. RF jammers aren't expensive, my character has the knowhow to remove a GPS tracker, etc.—I don't think it's super reasonable that I'm completely at the mercy of the car's owner on this. But, honestly? I don't think there needs to be extra work put into the script to fix this problem. It doesn't seem unfair to me for a chopper to mechanically chop a car before they roleplay doing so, as long as they're putting in the right amount of time and effort to roleplay it afterwards.

This rule change was specifically clarified in order to stop powergaming over anti-theft. Anti-theft and trackers are, in reality, not at all easy to locate and disable. That would defeat their entire purpose. You cannot just locate it in moment, you can't disable them by disconnecting the car battery, and you definitely cannot hide the evidence of your character's crime, in this case the car, by chopping it before roleplay. Its powergaming, plain and simple.

 

If anything, this needs to be enforced further. Cars shouldnt despawn immediately after the chopping command, to be honest. Instead, the vehicle should be disabled and stay spawned for 15 more minutes before it gives car parts.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, mj2002 said:

This rule change was specifically clarified in order to stop powergaming over anti-theft. Anti-theft and trackers are, in reality, not at all easy to locate and disable. That would defeat their entire purpose. You cannot just locate it in moment, you can't disable them by disconnecting the car battery, and you definitely cannot hide the evidence of your character's crime, in this case the car, by chopping it before roleplay. Its powergaming, plain and simple.

 

If anything, this needs to be enforced further. Cars shouldnt despawn immediately after the chopping command, to be honest. Instead, the vehicle should be disabled and stay spawned for 15 more minutes before it gives car parts.

Okay. If that's what you guys think is fair. But it's not a system that I think is viable or worth the risk at this point, and that really bums me out, because it's generated a ton of roleplay for me and a lot of people around me.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Manic Pixie said:

it's not a system that I think is viable or worth the risk at this point, and that really bums me out, because it's generated a ton of roleplay for me and a lot of people around me.

As I've said before, it's perfectly viable. Still, if you want to step away rather than adapt, that's fine.

 

It's a good opportunity for me and mine, and I'm sure there are quite a few that'll be eager to learn the new tricks of the trade and continue on from where you're leaving off.

Link to comment

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...