Jump to content
Taedolf

Nerfing PD is NOT the answer

Recommended Posts

So, continuing from a different thread, I thought it better to post a separate suggestion for this.

Recently criminals are leaning towards the unfairness of PD vs. Criminal factions and calling for further nerfs to PD.  Personally, I don't think that's the answer and think it stems from a feeling of unfairness due to some key issues.  This is a hot topic and something I feel should be resolved as it is causing a fracture between different sides of the community.  I'm trying to approach this as neutrally as I possibly can.  If anyone thinks I've missed something, please say so.

 

#1, PD has access to things that criminals logically should but do not.  Namely, body armor and weapons.

#2, communications.  TeamSpeak is something utilized by the LSPD inRP while for everyone else it is considered out of RP.

 

Firstly, equipment access.  There is zero logical reason in-RP for both criminals AND lawful civilians to have no access to body armor.  It is completely legal and readily available IRL from many, many sources.  I could have a set of Kevlar body-armor shipped to my door overnight.  For weapons, why are criminals only allowed access to a few of them?  The black-market does not only issue uzi's, AK's and shotguns.  All weapons and armor should be available to criminals that are available to PD, with economic balancing in mind.  That is the key thing here.  Rather than obstructing access, access is allowed but put behind a pay-wall.  Risk is an inherent part of criminal gameplay.  Equipping yourself for the job but putting yourself into a loss that hurts if you lose encourages more intelligent and less trigger-happy gameplay.  One thing I'm iffy on is sniper rifles.  If they are added, they should be prohibitively expensive as they are rarely used by even SWAT.  They are extremely powerful.  Tazers, cruisers and uniforms were suggested as the exception to this by someone else and I'm in agreement with that.

Secondly, communications. Here is my viewpoint on this.  Either a medium is considered RP, or it is not.  There should be no exceptions.  Admins cannot monitor the teamspeak 24/7 in every channel, rules can be broken.  Criminals have just as many if not more people online as PD/MD, why are they not allowed to use this medium in roleplay with the same rule of talking in-game at the same time?  Double standards are only ever conducive to an unfair environment that breeds a feeling of anger and also causes conflict between one another.  Reasonings that the LSPD give for why they use TeamSpeak are just as valid for criminal factions as they are for the LSPD, yet the LSPD is given special treatment on something that would be considered metagaming for anyone else.  A proposed solution I give for this is giving it to the trustworthy criminal factions.  Namely, those who become official with the freshly christened official faction system for criminals.

 

tl;dr add everything to criminals that PD have minus tazers, cruiser, uniforms with economic balancing behind them to encourage risk v. reward gameplay.  Remove the double standard that exists on the TeamSpeak issue.  Add body-armor for civilians AS WELL as criminals with economic balancing.  High price for more armor, lower price for less armor, etc.

 

note: I only want constructive discussion here.  If anyone has the urge to make sweeping generalizations and accusations against either side, refrain from posting.  I will not appreciate that, staff will not appreciate that.  It will not lead anywhere, so I highly doubt the community will appreciate that either.  Please do not bring up RP from either side, this is not a thread on quality of RP or lack thereof from either side.

Edited by Taedolf
#2 cleared up.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Taedolf said:

#2, communications.  I've heard a few different things regarding the usage of TS by PD/MD.  Things such as: it's not utilized in RP, it is but it's monitored by admins, it is but there are rules to using in-game chat while talking on it, etc.  I'm going to go under the assumption that it is used in RP and there are rules since I've seen it used by streamers.  I ask and encourage staff to correct me if this is not the case with a more concrete answer.

 

Secondly, communications.  This may very well change in relevance depending on if I get a concrete answer in here, I will edit this if/when that happens.  Here is my viewpoint on this.  Either a medium is considered RP, or it is not.  There should be no exceptions.  Admins cannot monitor the teamspeak 24/7 in every channel, rules can be broken.  Criminals have just as many if not more people online as PD/MD, why are they not allowed to use this medium in roleplay with the same rule of talking in-game at the same time?  Double standards are only ever conducive to an unfair environment that breeds a feeling of anger and also causes conflict between one another.

 

tl;dr add everything to criminals that PD have minus tazers, cruiser, uniforms with economic balancing behind them to encourage risk v. reward gameplay.  Remove the double standard that exists on the TeamSpeak issue if it DOES exist.  Add body-armor for civilians AS WELL as criminals with economic balancing.  High price for more armor, lower price for less armor, etc.

 

To clarify once and for all about the LSPD teamspeak server;

YES, we have a teamspeak, HOWEVER it is mostly used for OOC communication apart from THREE different channels called "Tactical channels" (TAC1, TAC2 & TAC3).

These are used as an IC medium during situations where we need to communicate in a quick and easy way such as pursuits or hostage sitations or w/e.
This is used as an IC communication radio and we are therefore REQUIRED to speak over ingame VOIP when we use it to make it fair for anyone who'd be in our near vicinity ingame as its RPed as a secondary radio channel.

We use this BECAUSE there's no easy way to quickly change between ingame radio frequencies, and we can't use our normal radio frequency for tactical situations because it is being used for general patrol communications, and it would become extremely cluttered.

YES this is a privilige that's been given to the PD and to keep our TAC channels IC at all times is strictly enforced by both admins and regular members of PD, aswell as the strict enforcement of keeping our OOC channels OOC, making sure there's no metagaming occuring.

Hope this clears it up.

Edited by Bear Baldwin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bear Baldwin said:

To clarify once and for all about the LSPD teamspeak server;

YES, we have a teamspeak, HOWEVER it is mostly used for OOC communication apart from THREE different channels called "Tactical channels" (TAC1, TAC2 & TAC3).

These are used as an IC medium during situations where we need to communicate in a quick and easy way such as pursuits or hostage sitations or w/e.
This is used as an IC communication radio and we are therefore REQUIRED to speak over ingame VOIP when we use it to make it fair for anyone who'd be in our near vicinity ingame as its RPed as a secondary radio channel.

We use this BECAUSE there's no easy way to quickly change between ingame radio frequencies, and we can't use our normal radio frequency for tactical situations because it is being used for general patrol communications, and it would become extremely cluttered.

YES this is a privilige that's been given to the PD and to keep our TAC channels IC at all times is strictly enforced by both admins and regular members of PD, aswell as the strict enforcement of keeping our OOC channels OOC, making sure there's no metagaming occuring.

Hope this clears it up.

I disagree with this but I thank you for clearing it up nonetheless.  Criminals run into the same issue and it is equally frustrating for them as it is for the LSPD.  The presence of admins in the LSPD TeamSpeak should not grant special privileges, as there are admins in criminal factions as well as rule-abiding members that could enforce it.

 

Perhaps a compromise could tie in to the newly-minted official faction system, granting official criminal factions the ability to use a teamspeak in the same manner?

Edited by Taedolf
suggestion
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nateX said:

One of the reasons we use teamspeak is because in game radio is not enough and will fill up with chatter when 3 different situations are going on, a hostage situation, a pursuit and a shootout. All this will just fill the in-game radio up with chatter.

I'm well aware of that issue, criminal factions face the same issue.  Not everyone is doing the same thing at once and toggling your radio to a different channel means missing emergency calls and other needed communications just like with the PD.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue with police using TS is that if a criminal gang used TS, had separate channels for the different things they do (e.g. one for drug labs, shop robberies, etc) and it was "enforced by an admin and members" and used the reasoning of "theres lots of people in the gang and if we all go on the radio it gets full of chatter" they would all get done for metagaming.

 

+1 to giving criminals more abilities rather than nerfing the police. The police seem fine how they are with their armour and guns, but criminals should also have access to these things by illegally importing it

Edited by Shannon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Criminal factions do not face the same communication issues at all, since criminals factions don't have stand radio communication procedures or multiple server wide situations going on at anyone time. 

We utilise TS for the simple reason that the in game radio does not yet allow for tactical channels. 

Secondly TS is considered OOC. There is only three channels within the TS that are considered IC and those are the three TAC channels. Anytime there is a hostage situation or a pursuit we switch to those channels to remove the communication from the IG radio. When we are in TAC channels we must use voip at the same time so anybody nearby knows we're talking on a TAC channel, secondly TAC channels are monitored by admins and moderators and people have been punished for misusing the TAC channel in the past. 

The thing is, we don't use TS because we want to use TS, we use it because of the IG radio limitations and the demands that PD have to serve. So, no, it'd be a terrible idea to allow criminals to use TS, because monitoring one faction is already hard enough, they can't monitor all the other criminal factions for meta gaming as well. There is also no reason for criminals to use TS, because they don't have the communication demands that PD have and I say this as somebody that used share a radio frequency with free separate gangs that all had 40+ members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Aldari_Tagril said:

 So, no, it'd be a terrible idea to allow criminals to use TS, because monitoring one faction is already hard enough, they can't monitor all the other criminal factions for meta gaming as well.

Lenx already said what needed to be said for everything else so I'll just comment on this.

If the current system doesn't allow for equality, it's a broken system and nobody should be allowed to use it. This is not that hard. Nowhere else have I seen something like this where a third party program is considered ooRP for EVERYONE but one group. It is entirely unfair and shows an inherent level of bias placing the LSPD above every other group in the server.

I say this even as someone that isn't all that serious about criminal RP but from a moral and logical standpoint. The LSPD is not special. The LSPD is a different type of roleplay, and one that has a good amount of staff in it, but that should not affect it in the roleplay environment. Teamspeak utilization being allowed for LSPD and not anyone else is a direct benefit towards the LSPD that should not exist.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.