Pazz

Just to jump in, as far as the police are concerned, the experience value from playing the game has less to do with the potential roleplay quality that you may bring to the table and more with the familiarity of the server and its features. For example, someone may have been roleplaying on SAMP for years before joining ECRP today and have superb roleplay standards and quality, but they could have zero familiarity with the server's features, so while they may provide good roleplay through their actions, they may very well not know what to do with the actual server scripts. While you're taught a lot about faction-specific scripts and how they fit into the server environment upon joining a legal faction, you're expected to have a basic understanding of the base features the server offers, hence the experience or playtime requirement. I can't really speak for illegal factions, but I imagine it's probably somewhat the same with regard to wanting you to be a little established in the server before taking you in.

Can't speak for how it affects people who frequent prison, but to me this makes sense. If the idea is to require a single hour in prison to accompany the other hours being AFK'd, then it shouldn't matter when this hour is done.

We need consistent enforcement of the non-roleplay rule more than we need no crime zones. It's not realistic to try to steal a car from a police station that would be populated and guarded (the same argument used to force law enforcement away from gang HQs when they're low in numbers), it's not very realistic to be killing each other at the front doors of a hospital, but there's a rule that allows for this to be enforced and prohibited in a way without the need for NCZs when the behavior goes from questionable to unacceptable, it just isn't done consistently across the board. I can do with or without the no crime zones, it doesn't affect me beyond the absolute headache the spur-of-the-moment removal caused in the initial few weeks and the migraines I suffer from because of double standards. While an issue and one I agree with, I think it's more down to selective enforcement than it is about the no crime zones. If a single illegal roleplayer wants to break into vehicles in a heavily recorded and realistically guarded and populated police station because it's devoid of real players, then they shouldn't tell law enforcement that they can't enter a gang HQ because it's populated and dangerous despite it being devoid of real players, and vice versa. The same goes for server staff. If they give out to an LEO for entering a gang HQ devoid of real players because "it's dangerous", then they should enforce the same standard on individuals breaking into cars at a police station. I don't think this argument has any place in this thread or discussion. You're drawing real-life comparisons but neglecting the fact that consequences that discourage this sort of behavior in real life don't really exist in the server. I'm not saying they need to exist per se, just highlighting that this argument is heavily flawed. You're comparing real-life law enforcement, who per status quo are highly paid and thoroughly trained, to people who log on to a game in their free time and get abused and nonsense thrown at them for choosing to play a cop. I concur with this, mostly. I still believe that it's also an issue of inconsistent enforcement. Either way, when the NCZs were removed, it was pretty easy to see all of these issues or concerns coming. I don't think there's much sense in pretending ECRP is something it isn't with regard to how much better or worse the RP would be with the reintroduction of NCZs or by keeping them removed. Goobers will be goobers, that's consistently been a thing for the last six and a half years, they simply need to be dealt with by the staff team in a consistent manner, and then those who do provide something quality can still go on with their day without obtrusive restrictions due to the NCZs.

This would be great alongside the ability to remove an object placed by another player through the /blockade command. I can already see the faction chat spam to "please /removeallblockades" because someone forgot their bag.

what's good mr_nobody

This deflection is silly. I'm sorry you felt that your potential to participate in quality roleplay of your standard was taken from you, but this attempt at a straw man and a gotcha moment is abhorrent. Frankly put, you can't always get what you want, and just because you weren't given the opportunity to spend an hour with a hostage does not make it indicative of poor roleplay standards. The fact is that no one gets a one-hundred percent say in how their scenarios play out. The second it is initiated, you are no longer in full control and you're on a dynamic playing field. If you have a hostage, your risk is assessed by law enforcement or other participants, and you either get the opportunity to have a lengthy dialogue or you get incapacitated based on an assessment made by players roleplaying as specialized units. In that same vein, an officer initiating a traffic stop or an arrest can either have it go smoothly with a dialogue or get shot and wind up dead. I can't imagine all illegal roleplayers would be very satisfied if I then went to make a forum thread or went on an existing one and said "I imagine it was [random name] that made the call to shoot", that person then tells me it's not the case, and I say "haha, you're focusing on an accusation I directed at a very specific person and correcting me, this is what is wrong with criminals". If you didn't want the focus to be on the misinformation that you decided to spread publicly, then you should have fact-checked before posting. Someone defending themselves and correcting incorrect information that you have shared painting them in a bad light are not ignoring the problem at hand, and it is most certainly not representative of the entire faction. The fact that you're willing to throw such broad-brush statements around with a lack of self-awareness shows me that there would be no proper debate and only finger-pointing with an added flavor of "PD bad" here. I'm very open to feedback on my faction. I can't speak for Osborn, but I'm certain he's very open to feedback on his faction. Yes, we enforce strict realism internally as far as internal portrayal goes, but I'm not going to make an enormous statement that we're "the highest standard". We establish and maintain standards and impose these on all members, but there are also criminal groups that do this. I firmly believe everyone has room for improvement, PD included, but as far as I'm concerned, I'll only listen to anyone who has the decency to care for both sides and does not just want to point fingers or brush a group of 100 players as "bad" because of someone defending themselves, and anyone who isn't being plain libelous. It's frustrating that there may be people with solid and properly presented and substantiated concerns, arguments, and/or feedback that get buried in topics taken over by others who want to point fingers and call others bad instead of having a healthy debate, or even bury their own contributive points by going off the deep end. My mother asked me how come I'm starting to get gray hairs, I ought to tell her it may be because of the seventeen "PD bad" topics every day. I have a new episode of Ahsoka to watch, ta x

With that comparison in mind, it'd still require the faction handlers and server management to have access to the page and whatever moderation and logging features come with it, similar to the access of legal faction management and an abundance of senior staff members and management to the singular IC notice channel of legal factions.

Seems fine to me, but there's a difference between closed groups and public pages that require active moderation. For what it's worth, the "LSPD can access LifeInvader stuff for what it is" is a bit misleading, jumping through the hoops of evidence gathering, proceeding to submit said evidence for review by a judge, getting a search warrant signed, then reach out to high-ranking staff members to assist with RP only to get the name of the person who created a public page because of impersonation is not really comparable to that of entirely closed-off pages used for (organized) crime entirely inaccessible to law enforcement (there's no feasible, reasonable way to gain access; you can't make throwaway accounts because they're bound to characters, and "snitching" besides people who value roleplay isn't something that can just be done either, because of how it affects players' standing OOC with friends), they're just not the same, and that context seems very relevant to me when you're using it as the entire foundation of the "if they can, why can't we" argument. I'm not opposed to LifeInvader use for criminal activity, even with the argument of being able to access it outside of the game and away from a computer, the entire mantra of "flying out of the city" is ridiculous, no one is "flying out of the city" every 6-12 hours, no matter the always traveling billionaire persona they want to portray. It can reasonably be assumed that characters are in their homes when players aren't actively on the server, so that'd be that as far as using the platform while away from the game. Moderation is an issue, which is why there is no chat feature or anything else. I don't know about the logs accessible to accounts with admin status on LifeInvader, but if they're not great, then you can do whatever you want on the website, mixing, metagaming, anything, delete it, and face no repercussions. That means that every single closed, private page needs to be extensively moderated which feels unreasonable to the staff team. It just shouldn't take away from the opportunities for all groups, legal and illegal, in the game itself. If a balance can be found between staff and rule enforcement, illegal activity, and law enforcement, I'm all for it.

this is so cool! bala please it has been 84 years please fix the invisible box you guys put in the back entrance of mission row causing everyone to hit invisible walls and cruiser spawns to break please i'm begging you its been so long please please please

The only thing a wiki should exist for on this server should be for server features and command explanations. Character, faction, and general showcases are sort of an opt-in on the forums and that seems sufficient to me. NoPixel is a content server that serves the purpose of entertaining thousands of people watching from the sidelines with several storylines from their favorite streamers that intertwine in one way or another. A wiki and subreddits are necessary for every invested watcher to keep up with the developments of these storylines. Our server by comparison, while on the lighter side of roleplay, focuses on the day-to-day aspects of life and operates in a manner that is more roleplay-based than content creation. I personally don't think a wiki page would serve the intended or maybe expected purpose here. I also think that creativity is a big factor that the current medium, that being the forum, allows while a wiki wouldn't. A wiki is pretty streamlined, especially a fandom wiki. You have fields for specific character information such as age, status, relationships, and so forth, and then text fields to write a story, maybe include a picture or two, and then that's it. On the forum, you're only really limited by what your imagination (or your wallet, if you're paying people to be creative for you) allows. Players can make their topics, whether that be for their faction, character, or just roleplay showcases, as chaotic, pretty, or ugly as they want, they can provide a theme, they can stylize their future replies in a specific thematic way, they can attach songs that fit. Then, there's also the control a player has over their character. I decide whether I make a forum topic about my character, faction, or roleplay, whereas a wiki allowed to be edited by everyone and seen by everyone leaves me with little choice, because someone else may decide that my character should be on there, when I very well may not want any of my characters displayed that way, for whatever reason I or anyone else may have. Moderation can handle this, yes, but that adds another responsibility for the staff team to ensure that the wiki isn't also abused. Contributors on wiki pages can add, remove, and reverse, but heavy moderation would be required to ensure that this is not abused, especially not in a toxic manner. Personally, I think the forum suits these needs sufficiently at this point in time.

what

(this is sensationalized. no roleplayers were (excessively) harmed in the making. well, besides the dude that tried to swing at police 17 times)

this is the moment ive been waiting for

Mostly, my reaction is because I personally have a heavy dislike for any "find out IC" or "pursue this IC" remarks. Funnily enough, I did mention this exact thing at the start of this post, but that is mainly because, unfortunately, it is tough for these sorts of threads to stay civilized and productive, and while it is beneficial to gather opinions through a public forum, if it were suggested to SASG, whether IC or OOC, it'd be reviewed by some pretty fair and reasonable people. Osborn, for example, might portray his character in SD in a particular way, but I find him to be a very reasonable and levelheaded individual with consideration for most parties when reviewing something. I can't comment on his personal views, but I'd know that ample consideration and thought would be given to the topic if it came to him, and if he were to decide that it was to become a thing, then I'd likely be more accommodating than "PD bad" on the forums. Admittedly, that's why I've stopped replying but I'm still addressing your reply because I think that even if there was a disagreement or whatever, there's still sensibility and civility. To be candid, I'm not a fan of the idea of Governors. I have no issue with any of them as people, just to clarify, but I don't like that being at the top of the staff team while playing a legal character is practically a free ticket to unlimited power with little to no accountability or worry and without any qualifications per se. If I do something to the LSPD or the LSEMS Chief does something to the LSEMS that is entirely negative, we have to worry about whether our position is still tenable in the eyes of LFM and Governors/head administrators, Governors lack this oversight. The truth is, if the community, IC or OOC, turns heavily against any faction leader (especially non-staff) for valid reasons, there's a high chance they'll be replaced. If a Governor pisses off the player base, there's little to be done besides maybe a reversal of the decision. I've always been a very strong proponent of some form of consequences, whether monetary or otherwise when a vehicle gets damaged and respawned or someone with spawned equipment dies. Contrary to popular belief, if this were to happen, it would have some impact, because finances for GOV factions aren't as easy as people think. We're capped, salaries are often a total sum of 8 figures, and sometimes leave very little funds left. Cash injections do not happen at all. There's enough wiggle room to function still since cruiser spawns do cost money (albeit a very insignificant amount and the funds are returned if the GPS/map are still present when parked) and a while ago I had our IA implement a baseline payout policy, but increasing the numbers of vehicle costs and changing how much is returned based on vehicle health instead of present items (or, alternatively, rework vehicle spawns entirely) would help in that regard. Killing cops in retaliation, I don't really know what to say to that, I'm not sure there's much we can do as faction leaders besides ensuring that with the PK comes the end of whatever conflict there was with NLR and whatnot. As for addressing issues from the side of the LSPD, I may be stubborn in some of my beliefs, but I take pride in for the most part being approachable and reasonable. There's always room for improvement but I strongly believe in two-way streets. Protests shouldn't be squashed within mere minutes, riots should be; water trucks shouldn't be rolled out, or at least used, immediately when a riot begins, but there should not be an expectation that there won't be an adequate response to jumping on police vehicles, harassing officers and others, and doing property damage. Generally, I hold the belief that we can do better, others can do better, and the environment for this to happen could be better. I do stand firm in my belief that there should always be a two-way street. Legal factions, especially LEOs, shouldn't be held to an unfair standard. Higher, maybe yeah, but there always seems to be this expectation that everyone can act like they're playing a video game and act like, for lack of better words, goons, and LEOs should aim to be entirely realistic. If the standard is players climbing police vehicles shouting severe profanities only under the guise of it being IC (not everyone, but, unfortunately, largely), then there should not be an expectation of severe professionalism and realism only from one side. They'll get tazed and dragged off because when they're told to get lost, they'll just start screaming louder. From a realistic perspective, there's a lot more de-escalation to do, from a gameplay perspective, none of that will really work on the player. In the same vein of "find out IC" and "pursue this IC" is an easy and often unfair copout, players calling this "character portrayal" and an "IC issue" is the same kind of copout and unwillingness to look at their own actions and how they fit into a roleplay environment. I'm not sure how to untwine the twisted sense of what is claimed to be 'character portrayal" and subsequent "roleplay" actions that plague the environment we play in. All that said, yes, I do aim to over time make strides to improve the PD experience, inward and outward, but I can't justify a blanket expectation on all of my members when this isn't enforced to a similar (not the same) level on others. What I can do is review and listen to people and see where we may be able to generally do a little better, because even the smallest things can have a big effect. I believe this is a very good point that is spoken of time and time again but is never taken further than a forum post. DM rules are restrictive for illegal players. It is not at all uncommon for eg. a drive-by to happen on officers that have a reason to be retaliated against by a gang, street gang, or otherwise, or for a vehicle to drive through the block of another gang, drop some members, and dip, but the ECRP ruleset does not allow for this. It significantly hinders any sort of retaliation that may come unexpectedly.

it's the only one I've got

I'm fairly sure this has been actively worked on many months ago and is part of the whole "clothing and customization" update that is (supposedly) coming when all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed on the gun update, though even that has seen delays, again.

All of the proposed ideas are valuable changes. Well, some more than others, I could do without the customization, but it is shocking that we're lacking something as simple as clear notifications of unread texts. Honestly, the updated phone we have now feels a little... half-assed, in the sense that while it is great that it was upgraded from having a single screen with multiple texts from various individuals to person-specific chats that can be opened, it wasn't deemed important enough to dedicate a little more time to actually making it a quality update by adding the finishing touches. Which is weird, because as Bala mentioned, the phone is an integral part of the server. In fact, it feels like we have gone a little backward over time when it comes to the updates to the phone. The first phone was introduced in 2017 and was entirely text-based, but it would inform you of text messages that you received while offline upon login. Texts would also tell you when they were sent, not with a date, but stating "X hours ago". The fact that this existed but wasn't carried over to a phone that is supposed to be "better" is a strange decision. So-called "upgrades" really shouldn't come at the expense of being user-friendly. I really don't think it's that difficult to add a little red dot to the texts app and conversations with unread messages.

panel.eclipse-rp.net

As a 5XX badge number around since 2017, I agree.

A "short" suspension is typically still longer than the average sentence served for murdering an officer or another player, as well as further crimes. If such realistic penalties were to be imposed, then it needs to be a two-way street, not a burden on a specific group of roleplayers. If LEOs should be getting fired when they realistically would as opposed to a commonly issued 24-48 hour suspension, then there have to be consequences of the same severity across the board. You cannot reasonably place such "realism" expectations on a specific group and not on others. Admittedly, imprisonment isn't very exciting, but for argument's sake, it is restrictive in the sense that it restricts roleplay from acting as a criminal all around the map to between four walls and further financial loss through citations (though, with the laundry, I'm not so sure about that). In that same vein, a 24-48 hour suspension from LEO factions restricts them from roleplaying their character in the sense of an LEO, translating to further loss of monetary income through salary. Compare these two timeframes to each other, and there's a significant discrepancy in expectations and consequences. Not to mention the fact that if someone were to be a hardened murderer, for argument's sake, capital murder, it makes no difference to the consequences whether or not they've been doing it consistently for a day, a week, or two years, but then there's the expectation to fire someone who has spent a year, two years, to get to the position they are. These consequences don't quite seem to be on par with each other. A non-biased third-party entity being implemented and them taking a heavier stance on firing an LEO would not eliminate that discrepancy, regardless of who it is ruled in favor of, it will only create further imbalance. I don't see the increase in "fairness" of removing people from factions because it is considered to be a more appropriate response that is on par with a 5-hour prison sentence and $40,000 in fines. Unless, of course, it is a completely in-character removal and they can simply return on another character. After all, it wouldn't be fair to have to throw away 2 years of work, that wouldn't be positive for the fairness on the server, right?

Fair enough. I agree with that. It came across as a bit dismissive of roleplay experience in a position which I personally strongly feel is also a must with regard to taking on a position of leadership or oversight re. this topic, but in general, yeah, no, I agree.

The Internal Affairs Divisions of both the LSPD and LSSD have arrested people, pressed charges, fired Officers, and taken various other actions, such as reprimands, suspensions, and demotions. The allegation that none of these things have happened is factually incorrect and, I assume, is based on nothing but personal experiences and subsequently made assumptions. Since realism was brought up, San Andreas is supposed to be California, and Los Santos is supposed to be Los Angeles. In that same vein, the Los Santos Police Department and the Los Santos County Sheriff's Department portray the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department respectively. In these "places" and agencies, internal affairs most certainly are not Officers employed with Internal Affairs in mind. They were beat cops and became Detectives. Now they're Internal Affairs. So, yes, they are Detectives. Internal Affairs of any faction answers firstly to its appointed Commanding Officer. Depending on the faction hierarchy, it is possible that this CO then answers to their Bureau/Area CO or Office Director, who then answers to the faction leader. Commonly, it goes straight from IA CO to faction leader. The faction leader then answers to the Governors. Governors are Head Administrators. Lewis is also head of legal faction management. Meaning, IA answers to the faction leader and (the leader of) legal faction management. I see no harm in suggestions on establishing things like the Inspector General into the existing structure should there be a necessity for it, but I think that if you want to throw around such allegations based on nothing but assumptions to achieve it, you might be missing the mark and it is best to take a step back and educate yourself on how these parts of the government factions actually operate. It is easy to throw this around, but I'm certain that if I were to put out a guide and announcement to the LSPD en masse on how to base their actions true to their IRL counterparts, not a single person would be happy as a result of this "realism", a term thrown around far too frequently only when it is beneficial to the person making the argument. Roleplay experience in positions means more than zero, regardless of basing actions on real-life counterparts. One of the most important factors of moving a faction forward is realistic portrayal while ensuring what you're trying to portray also fits into the game environment and community you're trying to push it to. The LSPD, from a leadership perspective, strives to provide a realistic portrayal and in doing so maintains structure based entirely on its real-life counterparts, while making minor changes allowing it to be suitable for the game environment that exists today. Policies are based on accessible LAPD documents and material, with changes made allowing for it to be suitable in today's game environment. Blindly basing everything on real-life counterparts is counteractive on a server where it is expected that law enforcement operates as realistically as possible with civilian oversight, the Inspector General, probably a mayor electing the Chief if it were up to people, but it is also encouraged to be a seventeen-times convicted cop killer dancing on the hood of a police vehicle. I respect your take even if I disagree with it, particularly because I personally value true portrayal, but it is easy to try and discredit roleplay experience in positions, which is necessary to steer something in a direction suitable for both the server and a roleplay environment in general, on a forum thread. It is not so easy to find the balance between realism, and gamification for the current server environment, while also keeping players, faction members, and faction management happy. You'll want someone with roleplay experience on your server specifically for that, regardless of whether they want to accurately portray the LAPD or the UK's metropolitan police in a US-setting roleplay server. Blindly throwing a realism or portrayal blanket on factions without considering their suitability and place within the server is not the way to go. I concur with this. Not because I don't think these discussions have no place, but because at the end of the day, this is something that can be discussed on the main forums as a suggestion, sure, but I think it will get more serious consideration from relevant parties, such as server management who act as the head(s) of state if it is pursued as an in-character suggestion.