Requiem

+1 because @Quietthecutie didn't oppose the suggestion in any way, so it must be good.

I can understand and agree with some of the intent of this suggestion, but I feel the overall implementation or execution of this would not work out well. I have two primary concerns: natural flow of roleplay scenarios and enforcement of this rule. To expand on the natural flow of roleplay portion, I believe that forcing individuals to act a certain way or perform certain actions In-Character feels forced and can create immersion breaking or less fun situations for certain players. Yes, some people will probably enjoy the outcome of this and would be happy with more negotiations and the type of roleplay this would force into situations, but others would not like this as much. An example might be that one gang has one of their members kidnapped and taken hostage by another gang as retaliation for some previous hostile actions. The other gang now moves to rescue their ally and they go into a standoff trying to get their ally back. Lets say in this scenario that the gang that had their member taken hostage actually has found out the kidnapped ally was a snitch or betrayed them, so they no longer actually care about that person and were planning on getting rid of them anyways later on. Now they are forced to roleplay a negotiation situation that unnatural and are forced to "care" about this person that they don't actually care about. Alternatively, take that same scenario where one gang member has been kidnapped by another gang, but the kidnapping was simply a tactic used to bait the other gang in and they already have hostile intentions. They aren't interested in negotiating in the first place, but now the rules dictate that they have to. Again, this forces an unnatural situation that people don't want to be involved in, just to give some examples. As for the enforcement issue I mentioned, how do staff members or players involved in the IC hostage situation know where the line is drawn where its clear that no side is willing to come to an agreement, or one side purposely doesn't want to agree to the negotiations in the interest of "checking some boxes" so they are allowed to shoot. One set of players in that situation will likely be fine with the result of the shooting, the other side will likely say "wtf you didn't negotiate as long as we wanted" and will likely report the other players immediately. Overall, I do not feel that adding additional rules to force direction on IC scenarios is good for the server or its players. I also believe that if someone is going into a scenario and doing something unrealistic such as putting their own ally at risk by immediately shooting or degrading the quality of RP in a situation by instantly shooting, this would either fall under the DM rules or NRP rules for poor RP. I also feel this kind of rule expansion could lead to ruleplaying, where the players that have the hostage will make unrealistic demands or feel they are essentially invincible to any threat because if someone shoots at them regardless of their unrealistic demands, they will just report for it.

I will be closing this discussion as it's not productive and the comments being made are not positive. The server forums are not the place for making complaints about a faction or having back and forth arguments about decisions such as this. If you disagree with the methods used by a faction or their actions, you can reach out to that faction's leadership or Legal Faction Management and make a complaint, request, or suggestion for legal factions. Alternatively, if you feel that certain players broke server rules in relation to a situation, post a forum report with the relevant evidence. The contact information can be found here for the proper server staff members:

I would not count on anything drug related done inside private properties being added back into the server as others have mentioned. Growing weed plants inside a private property is printing money in a private instance. Yes, you might need to still go sell the plants to other players or go make them into drugs yourself, but you are still creating an object that has value. If its something others put value on or would purchase from you, you are generating wealth for yourself without much risk, which is not healthy for the server and takes a current potential player interaction out of the server. The solution here is as others have said - just allow seeds to be planted anywhere.

If this is still an issue, please update your bug report with the proper format and include evidence.

I believe this might be a settings problem for you and not a server bug. I play on 4K resolution and I know others do as well and don't have this issue. I would recommend submitting a discord ticket for assistance if you still have this problem.

Archiving as requested.

Bug reports are not the place for back and forth comments. Keep it to evidence and helpful information to add to the bug report only. We also don't need multiple people saying the same thing multiple times either.

The suggestion seems to infer that the only option to progress and get to those higher faction tiers is to fight against the larger gangs and compete with them. That doesn't need to be the case at all. You have options as a smaller/newer faction to lay low and find other RP avenues to progress your faction, make money needed and do what's necessary to progress to higher tiers to have access to import your own weapons and armor. Brute forcing it and "finding the biggest guy around" and trying to show force as a smaller group isn't going to do anything for you but make life harder. To address the suggestion itself, there would be other problems introduced if body armor was made available to civilians. Law enforcement currently have to regulate all the sales of firearms through gun stores through their own documentation of weapon's licenses and server scripts for it, along with dealing with firearms that go missing or are lost/stolen. Someone that shows a clear pattern of "losing" their firearms is likely to lose their gun license. If body armor were introduced, you act as though criminals could just go and buy as much of it as they like and use it for criminal activity, but the fact you would be obtaining it through "legal avenues" means that you would face the scrutiny of the law and probably either have police investigating you and your group for purchasing as much body armor as you do and/or simply get cut off from purchasing the armor since you are clearly abusing it or using it for illegal activities. You may ask, "why does law enforcement need to track the purchase of body armor from gun stores?" Same reason law enforcement track guns currently - the purchase of these items can be abused.

I will addon to what I mentioned above by saying I am not necessarily in support of or against this suggestion...I will abstain from that. I will say though I see both sides of this. I think it would be foolish/ignorant to believe that some players don't report purely due to losing their assets or trying to get opposing factions/groups punished when they are upset due to a loss. But this is not always the case, as there are also many situations where players did in fact experience a rulebreak and may have reported the situation regardless. Is our current report system perfect? Absolutely not. Has it worked for the most part for the past few years? Sure, most of the time, at least in regards to how staff review rulebreaks, and I think it would be hard to find a better solution given the systems and processes available. The current solution to the issue of players reporting for poor reasons is allow the current system of punishing for petty reports to work as designed to minimize these issues. But there may be other solutions that could also be put in place to combat some of the "report culture" we sometimes see.

I think this is the extreme edge case of the suggestion, and I don't believe the intent of the suggestion would apply to this kind of situation. I am sure cheaters/exploits would be an exception to allow a refund request. I believe what the OP is trying to say is the situations where player(s) lose a gunfight and report the situation under the guise of several rulebreaks (DM, FRP, NRP, etc)...basically throwing all of it at the wall and see what sticks in hopes of getting a refund request rather than due to the fact that there was or was not actual rule breaks. Basically those situations where people wouldn't have bothered reporting had they won the gunfight, but they only reported because they lost due to losing assets.

I would prefer to have all players online when a raid is conducted as well, as it would make the situation much more interesting, but trying to align schedules between players to make this happen is difficult enough and then if Law enforcement did reach out OOCly to schedule this, you already know it would get meta gamed and abused and the person that was going to get raided could potentially just move their stash to avoid loss.

This is not true in the slightest. The administration team does not rule on something like this and make a blanket statement saying helicopters are never subject to FearRP. There may be specific situations where something was or was not ruled as a rule break, but each situation is unique. All server rules apply to ALL players, regardless of faction. If you feel a rule was broken in relation to a situation, you are allowed to submit a report for the situation and the staff team will review accordingly. If you disagree with a decision made by a staff member, you are welcome to submit a decision appeal to have it re-reviewed by a more senior administrator.

Please provide video evidence of this occurring to show repeatable steps to reproduce this issue.

This is a Rage MP issue where your character's arms will be frozen following an animation. Normally pressing "B" to point will correct this.

I don't believe this is a bug. Many players don't realize this, but when you spark a blunt and then use the /flick command, I believe there is an associated animation with /flick. Because you started lock picking prior to allowing the /flick animation to finish, it interrupted your lockpicking causing it to fail. Try doing the lockpicking again, but wait for the /flick animation to finish before beginning lockpicking. If you have evidence to prove otherwise and still believe there is a bug, please show that new evidence here so the bug can be reproduced and fixed.

To clarify from a server rules perspective when it comes to Fear RP, the rules exist as they do so they are applied consistently across the board for ALL players, regardless of what faction you are in or what the roleplay scenario is, or even what your character is roleplaying as. This makes the rule easy to understand and easy for players to follow, as well as allow for the server administration team to enforce the rule justly to everyone.

My personal concern here is not regarding the power of it as much. I think it makes a lot of sense for it to be a stronger effect than pain killers, and I am all for that. You have to put in effort to make blunts and have the added risk of carrying them around with you. My primary concern is how unrealistic they are in their current state. It makes no sense from a roleplay perspective to get the effects you do from it without even properly smoking it. People literally click use and then do /flick less than a second later. Perhaps some people may forget, but this is a roleplay server at the end of the day and we should be looking for ways to improve the quality of RP, and this interaction does not currently add to that.

I agree with this. It is the meta for a reason...its just too strong with literally no action timer what-so-ever. I feel it should either have an action timer or the positive effect should only be received (such as healing) while the player is actively smoking. It is incredibly unrealistic to smoke and immediately /flick without actually giving it any time to be used.

I think the point some people missed in my suggestion for the /checkdoor portion was this part: If people continue to go around spamming the command rather than checking the UI, they would put themselves at risk of the cops coming and you catching charges for trespassing and likely firearm possession if you were planning on robbing someone. If concerns are quite high that people would be spamming the command that much, could just set the percentage quite high that cops get called to something like 80% chance and the criminals who are spamming the command would not get notified cops were called either.

Only issue with flares is they have a sync issue, where if you are outside of the render range of them when they are initially thrown down, they most often don't show up for people that come into their render range afterwards. For the suggestion, the lights and cones make sense to add, not sure about the bed tho. +1 for mechanics getting some cones and arrows. Would be nice also if /removeblockade worked for ANYONE in your own faction, and not just the person that placed them, so that if someone forgets to pick their stuff up and run the command, someone else can do it for them. How it works now is if someone forgets to remove their blockades, we have to go in faction chat or PM them and to remove their stuff....

No, I am not talking about credit store stuff. This would strictly be for the 1 of 1 raffle/auction cars. The person who owned it should of course get some, if not all of the money from that as well in case they return.

If Mods are being gifted supers, sign me up cuz I sure haven't gotten one, and I am not aware of any other mods getting one either. Seriously though, I don't believe supers should be regularly available. I do however think that there should be a way to account for the inactive players that have one thats just sat in parking never to be pulled out again. Should have similar rules where it gets auctioned/raffled off after the 90 days of inactivity.

I am not opposed to your suggestion if it would incentivize people to RP and not just sit AFK in prison, but if stamps are not worth trading in for time reduction, is it not worth doing the job for the extra money at least?

I think the negatives of this outweigh the positives in terms of impacting mechanic RP.