skeletee

should've kept you in the trunk so you missed your flight @Dlugi

Regardless of any plausible change that anyone suggests, the player base will stay, and this is where the problem lies. FM can be more involved in who our allies are, who we are on joint frequency with - you can even give criminal RPers what they want and add more "script" things to do in the server to steer them away from gang-to-gang conflict, and so on.. but nothing will change when people create gangs that have a core purpose of being more powerful than the other or running other people out of the server for whatever reason. Using turfs as an example, it gave more members things to do, but it also - at one point - caused factions to turf-bomb loads of turfs just because they can, even when it made no sense to their lore to do so. Every gang has the potential to offer something different and unique to the server, and the sooner we realise this, the better, the faster everyone can enjoy their time on the server. The server is simply too large for one alliance to run all of it. I'm not saying that every gang has to be friends with one another, we are RPing criminals after all and every story of each faction is different. For example, due to Daichead Gadai being an Irish faction based on the development of Irish independence through working with the IRA, it would make zero sense for us to be close with a British faction due to the British-inflicted mass starvation in the 1800s and the nation itself being separated into two due to Britain's ruling. However, the culture of the server has to change and factions need to work towards being able to bounce off of one another to promote RP opportunities all around. There needs to be a focus on making even negatively-impacting RP situations one that is enjoyable for everyone. For example, we fought Lost MC at Stab City and filmed a “call-out video”, to which the leader later PMd me to let me know that he found it hilarious. I don't believe that any of this responsibility lies in FM, but rather faction leaders and high-command. Faction leaders are responsible to lead by example. If the faction leaders themselves wish to only fight and escalate conflict, so will the rest of their members. It is that simple. FM cannot change the player base. They can listen to factions' concerns and generate a general understanding of the current in-game affairs and how it's affecting the faction, but if the problem is in the player base, there is not much else they can do.

The problem begins within the player base. When people stop prioritising gang-to-gang conflict as the most exciting thing to do on the server, then things will begin to improve.

You are ugly @Thomas Beaulieu

HUUUUUUUUUUUUGE. GOOD LUCK, BOYS!

+1, but only for injuries inflicted by gunshots/explosions. It doesn't make sense for people to RP sprained ankles and scraped knees/road rashes (for example as a result of a bike crash) to forcibly whisper or /low in text chat. * Edit: I also wanted to add that radio use while injured and forcible whisper and /low should go hand-in-hand.. you shouldn't be able to do one and not do the other. I understand that people should not be on their radios when they're injured in the middle of a shoot-out.. but if we're going to talk about responsibility here, then it should also be the players' responsibility to gauge when it's appropriate to use their radio the same way they should gauge when they should use /low or whisper. That being said, if we are forced to not talk over the radio and forced to whisper through VOIP, then we should also be forced to /low in text. Not doing so otherwise is script abuse because both ways of speaking in-game should have the same radius. Contrarily, if we want to make it up to the player's discretion/responsibility, then people should be able to use the radio, speak through VOIP, and use text how they think best fits, which means removing all forcible radio/VOIP/text communications. There should be some consistency.

For the purpose of my suggestion, I'm specifically talking about larger-scaled RP*. I think - from what you're saying - smoke grenades through windows sounds more like an on-the-spot request rather than large-scaled RP. However, I won't disagree, I think the use of it definitely has great, immersive RP potential. For example, if I put in an alt RP request to raid an aircraft carrier, myself and the PD/SWAT in lead would agree that smoke grenades can be used as a pivotal moment in the RP. For example, the LEO in lead may decide that the use of a smoke grenade would be used to deceive the force's location, and therefore might separate my gang into two - one getting away, and the other getting captured. This is just a quick idea. *I'm defining larger-scaled RP in this context as RP that requires long-term planning backed by strong RP motive that eventually leads to a large-scaled event/situation that has major implications on the faction (such as major changes/developments). Again, I do think more clarification is needed.. Some RP may just require alt RP approval through /report or direct PMs.. but I think it can be unanimously agreed that the line has to be drawn somewhere to prevent people from doing really simplistic RP for an action that can change a whole RP outcome/story/development. Is this making sense? Maybe a new suggestion for more flexibility for alternative RP that is on-the-spot would be good.. perhaps an added /report 5 (brief description of alternative RP request) e.g. /report 5 "There is a hostage inside this building, can we request the use of a smoke bomb to cloud/disorient the aggressor to get the hostage out?".

hi

I feel that there are ways for certain alt RP scenarios to be carried out organically. If I want to RP out bombs being compromised by PD, I'd imagine myself from my faction would anticipate it to happen, plus one PD lead. Say 9 members of my faction decide to join without knowing what is going to happen and neither would the rest of the SWAT/PD team. To make sure it runs as organically as possible, we would ask someone - potentially the SA+ that has been delegated to the request - to RP as the shipman and ring PD to call in suspicious behaviour. To the rest of LEO, this would come in as a normal 911 phone call. The RP would therefore be organic for the majority of the members involved. This is just one of the examples. I believe that just because larger-scaled RP opportunities are planned to an extent, doesn't make it any less fun of RP to be involved in. I have improvised a lot of RP that doesn't involve script, or even admin approval, because it doesn't break any rules or have any major implications on any other faction's RP. You're saying that it's not possible, but I feel like it absolutely is. I personally don't agree with this. In my opinion, requesting for alternative RP approval is basically about requesting for rules to be broken for RP (particularly PG) purposes and bypassing script. Therefore, I think it's reasonable that the rulebook states when people can request for this approval. What's needed is more clarification on what alt RP is and when people need/do not need to request approval for it.

I agree to an extent.. I think there definitely needs to be some written clarity on alternative RP to explain to what extent RP can be limited without the approval of staff member. For example, I've tried RPing hiding my briefcase under a house at a lab while picking marijuana plants - a staff member told me that this would be fine and RPd appropriately since it's realistic, but the regular community player told me I needed approval for this from a SA+ because it doesn't follow script. I feel like there are discrepancies and people are generally just unsure what alt RP is and where exactly they are limited. So, I generally agree that this should be revised and possibly incorporated into the rulebook. However, I do think that alternative RP should remain somewhat strict, especially for requests for large-scaled RP. If, for example, my faction decided to raid a rival enemy's property and RP bombing it using Semtex-C4s, this would require serious deliberation and approval. I can come up with three main reasons for this: 1. We need to consider the repercussions and outcome of the RP. They have just had their property destroyed, so any business or storage in that property is also gone or at a hold. Script-wise, admins may have to tear down all furniture from the inside, which will set back the rival faction by a lot - money and time-wise (to rebuild it back up again). 2. We need to consider the reasons that back this type of RP that we want to do. We need to consider if the escalation leading up to that moment really equivalates to the need for the rival faction having their property blown up. Such an action realistically would require days, if not weeks of constant fighting that takes account of the NLR rule. That being said, I would imagine such an action would only be acceptable in an official war. 3. With the two points in mind, I imagine it's also important to ensure that everyone involved - including the rival faction - is going to be happy/satisfied with the RP. At the end of the day, everyone is trying to have a good time on the server. This isn't impossible if people don't foster a win-mentality. Using the same example that I mentioned in the first post, if approval is given to our bombs being compromised at the docks by PD, our members would have to suffer fines and jailtime, and potentially the raid of our bomb workshop. At the end, we are taking the loss, but the possible RP that follows it makes it worthwhile (interrogations, future shipment plans, bomb replacements, a change in the dynamics between PD and the Irish, and change in faction developments such as our storyline with the IRA). Or, using the above example of us raiding a rival gang property during a war for example, would give the rival gang that much of a reason to plan the same to us, and therefore both factions can benefit and exercise different RP opportunities. TLDR; more rules should be incorporated about minor alternative RP, but approval for large-scaled RP should definitely be treated to much higher calibres and continue as less frequent - at least for now. This suggestion is simply a suggestion to make requesting it more accessible and orderly.

Currently, I feel that there is no formal way to request approval for alternative RP for larger-scaled RP*. To my understanding, any requests for alternative RP needs to be asked through /report 1 requesting a SA+ or directly to a SA+ staff member themselves. Myself and the faction I'm in currently carry out RP that doesn't rely on any script, but there are instances where we want RP to be more exciting but would require the bypass of certain rules. Even though the current way to request alternative RP is decent and sustainable, I feel that it could be better, and even encourage people to be more open and creative with their RP knowing that requesting it is more accessible. I understand that alternative RP should be something that is accepted rarely, so I also propose such requests to have two phases; the first phase would be the filling out of the primary form (as below), and the second phase would be a series of follow-up questions plus a meeting with relevant HC and the SA+ delegated to ensure that the alternative RP goes as planned. For example, if my faction decided to request alternative RP of their bombs being compromised one day at the docks, this would require the approval of a lead in PD to confirm that they want to be involved in addition to SA+'s approval, followed by an in-depth conversation about how the RP should be carried out to ensure that it happens organically for all other members involved. In this suggestion, I'm just proposing that alternative RP requests that require larger-scaled planning should go through a google form with its fundamental questions, such as: 1. In detail, please explain what RP you would like to carry out. 2. What rules do you want or think you need to bypass to carry out this RP? 3. What RP, if any, have you done leading up to this plan? Feel free to link forum posts, UNIX time stamps of past RP and involved members, or other relevant evidence to support your answer. 4. When do you plan to carry out this RP. (date and time (UTC)) 5. What, if any, are you requesting in return for the alternative RP? (i.e. what amount of money or materials). 6. Why do you want to carry out this RP? To reduce major influxes of RP requests, I would also suggest that this form should be only available to official factions. I suggest this because factions that have developed to the point of official have implicated trust that they RP for the sake of RP and not for the sake of gain alone (such as RP'ing a bank heist for money would not solely be for the money, but also for faction/story development). This would also reduce the work of staff members and ensure that a lot of care and consideration is taken into each larger-scaled RP event. *I'm defining larger-scaled RP in this context as RP that requires long-term planning backed by strong RP motive that eventually leads to a large-scaled event/situation that has major implications on the faction (such as major changes/developments). I understand that there are many loopholes and many things that would need further clarification.. but this is merely a suggestion! Feel free to share your thoughts and previous experiences requesting alternative RP approval. It would be good to hear from different perspectives.

this faction never fails to impress and their rp standards are always high no matter the occasion. thank you for being open with us and setting up unique opps all around.

Interactions with this faction have so far been positive and their backstory has clearly been thought out. I look forward to see how they decide to progress and to future RP interactions! Keep it up.

The toxicity begins from within the actual player base where expressions of frustration through toxicity will ripple towards surrounding members. It's easier to blame other people, but I think everyone needs to make sure that they, themselves, are on the server for the right reason. The only way toxicity can be reduced is if people can begin reinforcing an attitude that is led with the sole intention to develop characters and stories (within themselves or fellow members of their respective factions). Towards the beginning of the Daichead Gadai and Azteca conflict, I remember thinking that should a conflict arise, it would be really good for story development since gangs should not expect to grow at an extrapolate trend. I was personally looking forward to "losing", since Aztecas have objectively been around for longer. I was looking forward to the meetings, and the opportunity to develop relations over time (whether positive or negative). Gangs should prove themselves to be able to stand on their own and should experience their own individual challenges specific to their developments. As the conflict continued, I think people started fostering a win-mentality - fights became unfair due to uneven numbers, escalations were poor following NLR, and the sole reason for the fights became unclear. But I digress, for the most part I hope that the new rules will encourage people to lead their gameplay during the time on the server with the intention to RP, rather than fight to win. There are countless opportunities to RP when the script is not there to develop stories.. and I think when people search for these ideas, participating in conflict will become the second-best thing to do, which will optimally reduce toxicity overall. This is just my opinion based on my own experience.

best of luck, laurie!

TO READ FOUR SEAS ORDER'S SIDE TO THIS RP, CLICK HERE

I used to strongly agree with what you're saying 1-2 months ago, until I realised that most of the time that I was getting arrested for my illegal firearm was because I was being careless and was always equipped with one, so it was always visible. I got arrested enough times until I eventually had to be more tactical and careful with when I decided to have a gun equipped, which I think is how crims should approach every situation anyway. Nowadays, I agree more with @alexalex303, especially now that the server's made it easier to hide weapons by putting it into the vehicle inventory. +1 on less powerful pistols going back to being script'ly hidden.