jdotmo

Item slider

I thought this was long considered nonrp and was punishable ?

Currently, chemsuits appear to serve no practical purpose since the removal of private tables. I'd like to suggest reworking them to provide an increased chance of producing higher quality product when worn. Here's a rough breakdown of how this could work by level tier: Levels 1–24 – Wearing a chemsuit significantly increases your chance of producing Medium quality product. Levels 25–54 – Wearing a chemsuit significantly increases your chance of producing High quality product. Levels 95+ – Increased chance at producing Top quality product. With a chemsuit equipped, maybe you are potentially guaranteed for the upper product. for your level. Risk of the chemsuit price vs the reward of drugs cooked would have to make sense obviously. If possible, scriptly, the chemsuit buff should only be checked at the moment before the bags pop, not when the product is initially placed on the table. This prevents players from simply placing their product down, stashing the chemsuit, and still receiving the benefit. The intention is to require the player to actually be suited up when the cook completes. It would be cool to see a "dedicated" chemist in the labs for bigger gang cooks. (Bonus suggestion: armor should be unequitable while wearing the chemsuit.)

I think another good way clean the economy of money is house upgrades. I think single time house upgrades would be an awesome addition. imagine if you could scriptly add a “shed” to your property or upgrade the garage from a 1g to a 2g, etc. The “shed” could kinda function like a warehouse but be accessible only outside the house. Would have like 200-500 volume depending on the level and have a lot of slots I am sure there are a handful of upgrades we can think of. Closets, etc

Bala really the goat +1

I think this would be an awesome change. Police brutality RP here we come lmao

As a full time crim I would love for there to be a difference in how fear RP works against cops pulling a gun on a crim. its just not realistic from any perspective. In reality if the criminal is unarmed/not a threat to the cops life, the cop shouldn't and "can't" shoot them as you mention. I think yes if cops are pulling there firearm just to initiate fear rp I think that is considered Rule playing. But on the contrary isn't there a "Use of force matrix" (Never got passed my FTOs so help me out here lol). Does this not encompass when your firearm should be drawn? If not this might be a good change. The issue is I just think in the long term of things it would never be a realistic change for LEOs as much as would enjoy it. People would take advantage. They would run away, call for backup and LEOs would just get obliterated cause now DM rights are given. There is no game mechanic to catch up with anybody running away from you. (Skill checks for vaulting could be cool). Never been a cop so let me know if I am mistaken on any of this.

As much as I would like this change I think all it would do is allow people to risk substantially less when pushing labs. Why ever run an AK when a SNS pistol is a one shot. Nowadays if you scout a lab and see people with heavies and body armor you know in order to win the fight you have to bring equal or better gear along with numbers. All this will do is promote pvp as people are risking 3k instead of 40k. Also it would make the criminal economy super unbalanced.

OSRS in this bihhhh I think there should def be a crim system maybe

I have been told IC many time that the reason PD and SD run heavies on their backs is because of the council? No idea if this is true. My Suggestion Cops are not allowed to carry any heavies on their backs unless something has been called in. Cops should have to pull heavies out of there trunk like any real cop(add a action timer. Maybe 5 seconds). Nobody should be getting pulled over for speeding and the cop gets out with a shotgun.

Feel like the script could just be adjusted to remove finger prints from everything when someone fully dies? Of course who the hell knows how hard that is to implement lol. I don’t think it’s a LEO process problem it’s a script limitation.