Cyrus Raven

Week 2: The 3 Winners As we moved on to the second week, Luke and Cyrus decided to change things up and pick out not 1, not 2 but 3 winners for Week 2 of Raven Lottery. The Prize would be a cash amount of $200.000 split by the 3 winners, 1st place being rewarded with $100.000 while 2nd and 3rd place would each get $50.000, a strategy people seemed to approve of as ticket sales increased on the second week. Both Luke and Cyrus spent the week working on setting up ads with Weazel News and going around town informing people of this week's prizzes and how to acquire their tickets. As Sunday came, the day of the draw, they began talking and thinking about what they would do for next week, both of them agreed they would like to do something unprecedented and have the biggest reward this city has seen from RavenLottery... The 2nd Draw: For this week's draw it had been decided that Cyrus would take care of the recording of the draw along with setting everything up while Luke would handle the ads. Once the clock pointed to 9PM, Cyrus started the process of drawing the names using a random number generator and gave the names to Luke so he could make ads announcing this week's winners and contact them via text. As the 2nd Week draws to a close and they plan their biggest and best prize, it's fair to say things are looking good for the Ravens.

Week 1: The Draw First week came to an end on Sunday 9pm as Luke sat in his apartment, setting up the livestream and recording the draw. At the same time Cyrus was downstairs with a few Weazel News employees, getting the winner advertisement ready to be broadcast as soon as he got the results. As the clock handle slowly turned to the top, indicating a new hour, Luke clicked a button on his laptop, initiating the random process of picking a winner. The process took slightly longer than expected given that the first roll landed on a vacant number. Raven Lottery runs a guaranteed winner scheme most of the times, so we rolled again until the wheel slowly came to a halt, having spun round a few dozen times. Eventually, the winning number that creeped up ever so slowly was 73, the number chosen by a gentleman named ''Haji Siphiwa'' As the winner was chosen a few tasks were still left. Soon after the information was transmitted downstairs to Cyrus, he published the broadcast with Weazel News, informing the citizens of Los Santos about the winner of Week 1's 2G apartment. The recording of the draw for transparency sake was also saved and posted onto social media and other public outlets, allowing our customers to observe first hand the process of drawing a winner, something we strive to do every week to show the legitimacy of our business. Lastly, the winner of the draw was contacted, detailing the ways that he can claim his prize. As the dust settles the two partners find themselves content with the results of the first week and start planning the second week immediately after, such is the life of a new business trying to grow. Stay Tuned for Week 2...

The Return First week had already proven to be a challenge for Luke and Cyrus. We started out by picking our company vehicle. After a browse through LSC catalogue we noticed an interesting livery available for the Landstalker XL. Although slightly out there it seemed to encapsulate our vision for the company, not to mention the attention we got and people complimenting the car! With a car ready, we moved onto this week's prize, a spacious 2G apartment at Weazel Plaza, one of the most popular apartment complexes. We found that prices for these usually tend to increase after they are all gone, so we thought it would be a good opportunity and a decent grand opening prize. Surely the winner would be happy with such a apartment. We now have a company vehicle and a prize, all we need now is to buy some adverts from Weazel News and we can start our new venture. We went to Weazel News and spoke to Clay Cunningham about getting some bulk adverts set up throughout the week. This would be a crucial part of our strategy for when we weren't around town, this way we can get a wider range of people to buy tickets. Throughout the week Frank Reyes also helped us during non-scheduled times as we requested more ads to be broadcasted. With all the prerequisites met we had only one thing to do, sell! We started out at the usual hot spots. The pier always has a lot of people, although it seems some of the fishermen weren't too happy to see us advertising our exciting new opportunity. Luckily, we did have a few people who wanted to take part and we gladly sold them tickets. We also tried the bank, but found that it wasn't as popular as it used to be back in the day, the exception being opening time when most people come to collect their salary. Other spots included LSC, Bayview and High-End. All in all, the first week had it's ups and downs, but the most exciting part, the draw, is yet to come To be continued…

(Credit to @QuirkyMayhem for the logo and @Luke Raven for the graphic!)

As most of you have read here: There have been significant rule changes made, not only that, but further clarifications on what the staff team want to see roleplay wise from the community! All of this is great so far, but (yeah I know, there is always a but ) I couldn't help but notice the following statement ''You need to mix your gameplay up - you need to add creativity to your gameplay and create roleplay. Not everything can or will be scripted.'' I personally, 100% agree with this statement. At the end of the day this is a roleplay server and roleplay opportunities are mainly player driven. Developers can't script every little thing. However, I do wish that in the near future basic script support to further enable these player created RP opportunities are added. Whether it is the new bank system devs are working on or a completely new overhaul to the current businesses/factions script. Giving players the ability to scriptly create and manage businesses and then having the IC element of recruitment, paying whatever fees are necessary (through the business bureau), etc... is vital and contributes to a fun roleplay environment. All this to say, yes, not EVERYTHING will be scripted, I think it's naïve to expect this to be the case. However, this community and the developers in specific should strive to create basic scripts that more easily allow player ran roleplay opportunities. I won't mention other communities considering the advertisement rule, but whether it is competitors within RageMP/FiveM or old SAMP servers where a lot of us come from, we all know these basic scripts are possible, they exist and they do provide an easier path for a better, player ran, roleplay experience. I might even go far enough to insinuate that perhaps the reason why the state of the server got worse over time and became more ''cops vs robbers'' style is due to the lack player tools to create their own roleplay. Saying ''create roleplay'' is all well and good (and as stated before, totally agree), BUT I believe this should be accompanied by base line script support that enables this. New rules means new opportunities to mold the community into an experience that puts roleplay above all, let's make sure the necessary tools to support this goal are also added. Right now ALL civilian jobs are boring as all hell, businesses should be easier to create and manage (Example: not having city hall ask people to spend MILLIONS of dollars on an ''office'' otherwise they can't create businesses) and criminal players should rightly be given more avenues to explore besides driving from chop shop to chop shop, so give them more to do, don't put all the burden of good roleplay on the player, equally support it with meaningful updates where the focus is allowing players to create their own roleplay.

I would +1, although I think this should be down the line after much needed improvement in businesses scripts and other jobs. Having a super car dealership when every player has easy and comprehensive tools to own, operate and mange virtually any business they want (Tow truck, DCC competitor, Security, Bar/Restaurant, Mechanic Shops, 24/7, etc...) would be better in my mind, considering there would be no restrictions besides time/work/effort into obtaining these things. Right now, it feels like the only way a civilian player can make money is grinding unbelievably BORING jobs and then either get a government subsidised job or continue farming and maybe buying/selling assets on the side (which is hard considering there is almost perfect information out there on average prices of vehicles, etc...) For a server that is trying to champion civ RP, they need to focus on these key aspects before anything else IMO, otherwise the recent changes to crim RP will have been all for nothing.

I believe the server and it's staff members obviously don't condone any homophobic and transphobic behaviour. However, this is a gaming community with young people, which sadly means that sometimes they will IC'ly scream out slurs. From my experience, there seems to be a culture of calling people who RP as presenting female characters and have a deeper voice as ''Traps''. I would imagine and hope anyone seen doing this if reported would be punished, but by then the damage might be done. These players can get punished if they are reported on the forums with evidence. Furthermore, there is no explicit rule banning the usage of these words, something I have spoken out against in the past. They do however prevent these words from being said, if it is blatantly obvious they are being used to illicit an OOC reaction and it falls outside of the realistic actions their character would portray. The following is an image about an announcement made by a Head Admin on the matter Hopefully this clarifies some of the points. I would love to have written this reply with open arms saying ''Most slurs are banned, NO exceptions allowed'', but sadly that isn't the case just yet, hopefully it will change in the future. I do hope you give the server a shot and see how you enjoy it, there are a bunch of really cool and accepting people who RP on the server and I am sure they would love to RP with you given the chance. TL;DR - If someone wants to use the N-word (and I would assume this applies to other just as offensive words) specifically to offend a player and/or cause ''shock value'' OOC'ly then you MUST gain OOC permission to do so, according to Rule 8 someone linked in another reply. This does still mean you might hear certain words used in passing though assuming they aren't being used to directly offend anyone. However, you then have the ability to ask the person to stop using it.

bruh, we are a police force, our job includes running into danger, we don't have the luxury to choose to hit labs, rob people, have gang wars, etc... We get a call and we go to it, no matter if it's some guy that lost a fishing rod at pier or if it's a gang shootout at grove. Criminals do have a choice, you aren't forced to do anything, you can plan before hand and decide to take the fight or not, as you have done before. Why would you charge PD for equipment when we don't have a choice on what we respond to? Not to mention that we are a government service, hand waving that seems a bit odd considering it's the core argument for PD not having to pay for equipment.

lol

I feel like we've moved past the questions asked and into more of conspiracy theory arguments. To clarify Using blue barriers (as it stands right now) is not considered Non-RP or Powergaming, thus the difference in outcomes. Furthermore: You have to realize that the bar to be in PD/SD is already higher than most factions on the server. Now this isn't to say that members are unpunishable, but the chances that they have an extensive record or multiple warnings/punishments/bans is reduced. At the same time, this is not at all to say that criminals are more likely to have punishments/bans. My point is that warnings are usually given for situations that are not very black and white and/OR for people who have little to no punishments on record, meaning they are more likely to learn and not repeat their mistakes. Accepting your world view would mean accepting that staff has a notable bias for PD/SD, which I don't think is the case. I just think it might look that way due to certain factors. Depends on their record, how extensive it is, if they have been warned before, situation etc... I feel like I gave you my opinion with my reasoning behind the barrier ordeal, whether you think it is reasonable or not is obviously up to you and it is a convo I am willing to continue, but I won't respond to any more replies that involve giving my opinion on staff related issues, especially without any credible information to support this.

I have no idea if the anti-cheat has had issues or not, like most here, I don't have access to the details and I don't imagine we will, for good reason. When someone cheats on CS and gets VAC banned, Valve does not, under any circumstance, reveal the details of the ban, this is to prevent people from bypassing the AC, making it harder to cheat, you can try and appeal, but likely it will be rejected. Same applies here, a few people have access to details and they have determined to that someone was hacking or had access to hacking software. You (or your friend in this case) can appeal if they wish and wait for a resolution. ECRP is not a US court of law, it is a private entity and as such they can moderate and enforce their laws as they see fit, this isn't to say they shouldn't have an appeal process, but just letting you know the whole ''court of law'' thing will lead you nowhere. This is what he claimed: ''Furthermore, all the players banned in the recent wave, have all been banned for active unauthorized software, which is dedicated to cheating on FiveM and RAGE Multiplayer and which has been used a lot lately on our server. No player has been banned for Counter-Strike cheats, inactive cheats on their PC (which had not been injected or otherwise activated on RAGE) or other irrelevant software.'' Given this, of course the logical avenue will be ''Hey, we need you to give us some sort of evidence of lack of cheats'', since their AC flagged it and with the info they have people did hack. Not saying it is flawless and I am curious to know if the ban wave was done due to a new AC update or if it triggered randomly out of nowhere, but more than that would compromise the entire point of an Anti-Cheat which is not knowing how it works besides a few specific people to avoid creation and usage of cheats.

People literally admitted to having hacks, but ok

So the short and sweet of it is, I think what was seen in the video is totally fine, taking into account current rules and IC protocols. The blue blockades as Alex mentioned in a previous post are now (since a while now) used instead of the orange barriers. These barriers are used for two things mainly. 1 - Block off sidewalks and other crime scenes so civilians do not cross them. 2 - Used as roadblocks. As the name implies these are used to block roads, either partially or in it's entirety. Criminals have been known to evade these quite often. They do this in two ways, they randomize their direction of travel quite often, making it a lot harder to predict their path and they avoid areas that vehicles can be ''funnelled'' into making roadblocks likely successful. One such example of this is DOC bridge, the one in your video. I can speak from personal experience, when we know a vehicle is coming to DOC bridge and we have someone around the area we have blocked the road in the past, the goal with this isn't to make the car ram itself into the blockade at 240km/h (sadly might happen due to rendering distance for objects), I usually call out the following ''The bridge is blocked, get ready to block his back with your vehicles when he stops'', the goal here is to get the vehicle to stop and either force the suspect to make a U-Turn and/or surrender. At this point the suspect has a decision to make, they can stop (or try to stop) or they can choose to ram through the barrier, higher speeds will stall the vehicle most likely, although lower speeds will allow you to break the barrier with little to no damage. All of the above is how things work right now, there is no rules against it, several senior members of staff know PD/SD use these blockades and what seems to be the general agreement is that as long as we use the blue destructible ones then it is ok. However, I doubt you wrote your reply wanting to hear what is and isn't allowed right now, but instead how I can defend or justify it. I do agree with you that these barriers probably wouldn't stop an average sized vehicle going through it at 240km/h the way it does in GTA, but I would point out that at that speed, a collision with any object no matter how week it is, is going to have severe consequences on the vehicle, either engine damage or perhaps even a stall. This is the process known as Kinetic Energy. If you placed a massive car sized sponge on a highway and collided with it at 240km/h your car wouldn't just go through it without a scratch or push it away, you would most likely wreck your vehicle. I think the same applies here, the barriers should technically break as it does most times and it probably should allow your car to continue, but the damage should be quite severe at those speeds since you are essentially ramming into either one or several wooden planks. Having said this, the solution then becomes complicated in my eyes. We can script and program ways to allow vehicles to go through these easily but then add a significant amount of damage depending on the speed the vehicle goes through it or we can continue using the same system now and take the slight L on realism for the sake of gameplay and saving devs the pain in the ass. It is my opinion that the usage of blockades right now isn't NRP or PG, criminals have ways to avoid these and honestly, more often than not they do avoid them. The reason you might see an increase in their usage is because PD/SD has to come up with new ways to counter the so called ''240 cars'' which present a challenge for every vehicle we own, including HSIU and XRAY. This isn't shooting on sight with megaphone demands or PITing, it's calculated and planned team effort to predict where you are going to end up and attempt to use resources to stop you, which I believe is a sign of good RP. I do not believe that because these blockades don't act 100% like they would IRL is enough of a justification to call it PG/NRP, given that these barriers are a substitute for bigger and more bulky ones that we used to have and the game engine is somewhat limited. To address some of the other questions: - These barriers, just like other items in the game, probably shouldn't all fit in the vehicle, but to look at this would mean a revision of every other item used, including the example you gave. If a dev wishes to take a further look into this as part of an effort to increase realism in terms of what objects can go where, etc.. I am for it. - Double Layer of barriers given the way they work should probably be avoided, but this is my opinion. As far as I'm concerned there isn't any rule against it. I have personally done it, although I will most likely avoid it from now on. The reason I did before was because there have been several instances where vehicles warp through my barriers as they don't load in time given the speed of the vehicle and the time it takes to stream objects, so double stacking them was a way to minimize that, not sure if that's why the Deputy did it, but that's why I do it. I urge you to report any instance that you find NRP/PG, even if it leads to nothing it might give you a satisfactory answer from a staff member, which I am not.

Even in your initial scenario shooting is viable. Your initial premise that shooting only begins because ''it's taking too long'' isn't true or at the very least it is a very bad representation of the majority of cases. I will pose a scenario to you in which I believe if the vehicle is shot that would be (in my opinion) Non-RP. A 10-55 occurs where someone is stopped for speeding, for whatever reason they decide to evade, they do this without constantly going on the wrong side of the road, on the sidewalk, past busy intersections at high-speeds (think bank road/legion square/pier) and generally not endangering the public, but still using the full potential of the vehicle. If this chase lasted a long-time where the vehicle is still sticking to obscure unpopulated roads, off-road, highways or generally not showing extreme neglect for other's lives then I think the decision to shoot tires would be unjustified. Again, this is assuming that the evading vehicle really hasn't done anything to justify getting shot. I don't think in the case above the vehicle should be shot, pursuit should continue, roadblocks should be set if possible and whatever appropriate measures taken. (Air support, specialized units, etc...) However, there can and is situations where use of lethal force is absolutely justified and in my opinion it happens to be one of the most common types of pursuits, especially involving known criminals/gangs. A 10-55 occurs where a vehicle is stopped for speeding, for whatever reason they decide to evade, they do this by constantly taking advantage of the wrong side of the road, speeding at max speed with no regard whatsoever for the public and their safety and they make no effort to slow down when passing populated areas (whether that is by cars or pedestrians). They eventually head to the highway and once again are seen changing lanes on the wrong side of the road and continue to generally show no regard for other commuter's lives. In other words, felony public endangerment. It is my opinion that in this latter example PD should absolutely be able to make the decision to open fire on these vehicles, this doesn't automatically mean we won't try other techniques first or that we are doing it because it is ''taking too long''. The decision is made given the actions the evading car took, not our actions. To address the shooting on highway clause, PD has a special set of circumstances because the high-way in Los Santos and other non-urbanized areas is the only areas that would have less vehicles, compared to the packed nature of downtown LS. If criminals that are actively evading show negligent behaviour in there driving, putting people's lives at risk then a decision from a utilitarian point of view must be made. Do we continue to allow this behaviour that can lead to serious bodily injury/death of both the occupants and other civilians or do we attempt to stop the vehicle, even if it involves shooting on a highway (keeping in mind to do this you have to be RP'ly trained and certified for this type of manoeuvre). To me the decision seems obvious. The difference, which I think is the point of this thread, is that PD aren't criminals, as such the decisions we make aren't because of a rivalry with a gang or for some sort of personal gain, which is where the majority of player theft rules are crafted from. A criminal who decides to engage in a shootout over some rivalry on the public highway is not acting realistically given the location, the risk they are taking by engaging in conflict in a busy area vs the reward they receive. Meanwhile, the reward vs risk PD gets when deciding to shoot should absolutely be judged as being RP'ly ok or Non-RP. However, given the intent behind their actions and why they choose to take action can not be compared at all to the reasoning for criminals doing the same thing since these are two very different groups with very different motivations and powers, I believe this distinction is where the nuance and line are drawn. Having said all of this, I am for more PD accountability. If you do get shot and you don't think it was warranted given your actions then you should be able to report for non-RP, I just hope it doesn't turn into a report war, which is what we see with the player robbery rules.

Not once did I claim my thoughts were the ultimate truth, I gave my opinion based on what examples people post. All I'm saying is, don't use the majority of people claiming something as being representative of the truth. Just because 10 people say the sky is red in a room with 11 people,, doesn't mean they are right, same applies here.

I think players got used to a certain way of playing when they arguably had more freedom and now are unsatisfied with the increase in regulation to their RP via rule changes. In fact, from the original thread you can induce this given the topic is portrayed as wanting to ''Hold PD accountable to the same rules''. The implication here is that criminals feel that PD is not playing by the same rules as they are held to, some of which they feel is unfair and drains the fun from the server. As I said, I do believe good points have been made to improve PD RP, but just because a lot of players on one side claim something doesn't make it true. Which is my point. To answer your question then, I think a lot of people have valid feelings on the issue, I don't think the majority of ''examples'' given in this is valid.

Someone telling me they aren't having fun means nothing. These feelings have to be substantiated by something. I'm sure a lot of new players don't have fun when they get banned for breaking some rule, does that mean they should automatically be listened to and validated ? Of course not. Same applies here. I have said it once and I will say it again, there have been points made here that I agree with (for example the .50 Cal incident, which I think shouldn't have happened). However, this doesn't mean that every single situation or point someone brings up is automatically valid (like the blockade example). You seem to have this all or nothing mentality, either you are with us or against us. This isn't grade school, people can have various opinions and defend whichever ones they think are unsubstantiated while still wishing to improve the overall state of RP. As for the report incident, I am 99% you have no insight into what happened or how it came to happen, but anything that remotely looks like a rule break or bad RP from PD side you will use to fit your narrative. How about you let staff do their job, determine whether it was justified or not before using it as fodder for your arguments.

A car has two pedals (three if manual), maybe ease up on the gas and learn what a break pedal is ? I guess this has to be said again in simple terms. PD uses wood barriers because SCRIPTLY the proper barriers are bugged and indestructible. These barriers ARE suppose to slow down/stop cars depending on the speed (as they would in real life if you plow through one at 200km/h). The main purpose would be for players to see them and stop, giving up or attempting a u-turn. Should they have been programmed to act more realistically ? Sure. Are they very unrealistic to the point is is game breaking ? No. You want to avoid them ? Don't be predictable, anticipate what's ahead (i.e Don't yeet yourself off an off-ramp at 200km/h...) or maybe, just stop, you don't need to win every chase, it's ok to stop the car and give up.

Bruh, did you read my initial responses to this thread ? There are absolutely things that can be improved in PD side, this ain't it chief. In fact, it's these types of posts that distract everyone from legitimate points being made since we then have to spend time trying to explain basic stuff that shouldn't even be an issue.

Firstly, I don't need to defend my RP record with you or anyone else, ask around and you'll find out. Secondly, don't give me this ''you can't just admit you play to win and its fine'' BS. Guess what, everyone wants to win, it's human nature and don't consider that a bad thing. Just like I'm sure you wouldn't consider any of your fellow gang members ''playing to win'' when they try their best to win a gun-fight or escape a chase. Where this becomes an issue is when it is done outside of the rules or borders on powergaming. (AKA Me invalidating a bunch of /do questions with shitty excuses to avoid RP and such). So I will ''admit'' it. I do play to win, but I would like to think I do it within the confines of the rules and protocols given to me. P.S. Let me know when you want to answer the sidewalk question, nice job trying to avoid it, I'm sure inconsistencies hurt to think about.

Or option two, use a plethora of tactics (XRAY, Blockades, High-Speed, etc...) to stop a criminal. You know, if all you want is to limit PD to only being able to drive after someone you can just come out and say it, it would be a lot simpler than trying to argue that police shouldn't use roadblocks all because people drive down off-ramps like maniacs at 200km/h+ and are then unable to react in time to prevent a crash. But hey, PD is the one with the realism issues.

...you realize the reason we use these over the other proper ones is because the other ones kill you, right ? In other words, we use these ones because there is no other choice...

Your statement only makes sense if we agree that blockades being hit at high-speeds should have little to no impact on vehicles, that's our point of contention right now.... My offer still stands though: If you are willingly to admit and avoid ever going on a sidewalk while traveling at a reasonable speed due to the realistic effect it would have on your car (namely causing it to crash) then I will concede that barriers shouldn't be placed. Although I'm sure we will gloss over this again

You're right man I must have skipped that Physics 101 class where Professor Bob said water bottles and plants have the same impact as big wooden blockades. My bad g

Let me fix your statement real quick: ''You used a barrier meant to dissuade a driver from going through it to stop a pursuit of a felon'' Yes, that's what police tactics usually consist off, ways to STOP criminals....