Jump to content
Zanit

LOWER THE GANG CAP.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Hi,

Just going to go straight to the point on this topic. The criminal side of the server is lacking on players and from what I've seen most gangs cannot recruit a lot of people because of it. If the gang cap were lowered to say 25 this would benefit the criminal side an outstanding amount. Not only will it motivate people to make more gangs it will eliminate zergs. Because of this however some gangs will have to split which is worth it in the long run. There will be more gangs, more RP, and more conflict between people. Because as of right now I've been in the biggest gang and the criminal side of it is lacking severely, you cannot find other gangs. A lot of people wont like this because of time zones, but that's a downside that is heavily outweighed by the positives. Every decision like this will have its negatives + positives. In my opinion however the positives are A LOT BETTER THAN THE NEGATIVES FOR THIS SERVER. I've seen this implemented in other servers and it greatly benefited them.

Edited by Zanit
  • Like 7
  • Upvote 11
Posted (edited)

big +1

 

15-20 would be perfect imo, it would open up gang diversity alot.

I also believe people would put more effort into their faction since the spot in a gang would become more valuable which in turn could mean we get more faction posts/different crim RP. 

As well as make the spots in the more popular gangs higher valued (which I believe would promote better RP from their members), it also would open up gang life to people that might not have wanted to in the past for fear of being zerged/wiped out by gangs that can outnumber them 5 to 1, limiting what criminal RP or criminal scripted activities they can do, heavily. 

 

rule of 6 as mentioned by @drain & @Phantas would also solve alot of the current problems.

 

Edited by Kon
  • Like 3
Posted (edited)

HUGE +1 there’s no criminals on the server besides the people in huge gangs this would allow more gangs to be created meaning more conflict 

Edited by Jawn
Posted

+/-

this will put a bandage on a gunshot wound,

the issue is their isn't many crims in general and most are banned, so general polulation of banned people are crims, I believe considering some sort of mass unban to punishment that didn't cause a lot of damage (Ex. DM or NON RP) to people who geniuenly show signs of improvement and by willing to contribute positively to the server.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

+1 good idea but it would only be a temporary fix to a bigger issue, it would spilt up some of the huge gangs on the server to create more gangs and rp , more active factions more turf control since there is tons of empty turfs.

Edited by Vez
Posted

+1 but Jesus don’t cap it to anything below 25.
 

Yes it would bring a lot of positives but do gangs really wanna be waking up to check on freq and find like 3 checks back? That’s what will happen if u do rule of 6 lmao. And that causes a lack of motivation to do things. 
 

secondly it would help the server a lot due to it ridding the big gangs that run everything on the server, and would make it more fair for newer gangs. If u had a 30-40 man clap crew for a gang ain’t no one doing shit, and that ruins rp.

Posted (edited)

This would not be an issue if criminal's where accommodated more on this server and also if the population of criminal's was not non existent. If gang's where to be capped then so should SD and PD, PD/SD already have the biggest advantage in the server (I was personally in PD/SD for 2 years and saw this), lowering the gang cap would make this advantage bigger unless similar restrictions where put into place for them.

It would be unfortunate to not be able to have good friends in the same gang as yourself due to a cap and I believe that instead of lowering the gang cap the server should look at being more open to criminal roleplay and spend more time and effort on bringing in new players or bringing returning players back.

Edited by LucasJHughes
  • Like 7
Posted (edited)

I personally believe a rule of engagement (ROE) rule would work pretty well.   

Half the problem is people think it is good roleplay to go around steamrolling the map with numbers. A rule of six or eight as a party to instigate an engagement as a cap would be a good idea to prevent people just running around and thinning out rival competition. That being said, seemingly with the decline of numbers, I don't right now see a need for this. This situation is a lose-lose. Yes, there is a problem with the number of criminals and yes it needs solving. If you cap the limit of certain gangs then "friends can't play together" so more people leave and if you keep it the same there will be no action, so people leave. 25 people if we are to cap numbers seems a good, fair number if a cap is to be implemented. For realism purposes that would be good too but, let's face it, no one cares about realism here. 

At the end of the day, the elephant in the room is there are months of development promises we are all still waiting to see fulfilled, countless times this community is promised updates that have not evolved in any way and a community that thrives on grinding assets rather than roleplaying. My thoughts? Have faction management enforcing roleplay standards SERVER WIDE TO ALL than the lack luster enforcement that is current and let us see these updates come to fruition (I say with baited breath).   

Edited by Beet
Posted (edited)

There's been a suggestion for this recently, and my opinion is still -1. 

There is absolutely nothing stopping people from diversifying the gangs they have now and creating more varied groups with smaller numbers besides their own laziness.  For a very long time now, none of the larger factions on the server have posed the sort of threat/mentality of 'steam-rolling' enemy factions with simple numbers advantages.  Many people on the server reminisce of the 2018-2019 days of the server, often stating that was the most fun period for criminal and overall roleplay on Eclipse.  Since then, there have been a few major changes that have seemingly killed off a large portion of the criminal RP player base.

1) The faction member cap was reduced from 60 members to 40 members, which only truly affected two factions at the time, but was a big source of demotivation for said larger factions.

2) NonRP standards were heightened, disallowing 'random' robberies.  At the surface level, this was a great change, however at points this rule has been misinterpreted by staff and players alike, causing a mess of confusion as to what is or isn't allowed based on matter of opinion of interpretation of what is and isn't escalation and reasoning.  The same sort of thing has also happened with the DM rule changes.

3) Faction war status/rules were implemented.  I don't think I have heard from a single person that liked the implementation of this rule, and it has since been completely ignored by the entirety of the player base after directly affecting an active gang war at the time.

Obviously, there are plenty of other glaring issues that do and have affected the crim population on the server, but these were the big shifts that changed the way Eclipse operated past its 'golden age'.  Any time further restrictions have been placed upon factions on the criminal RP side of the server, they have been met with negativity and a decreasing active player base.  In my opinion, the approach that Eclipse should take to revitalize criminal RP is to loosen restrictions, not tighten them, and give a little more agency back to the players themselves.  If we were to introduce a lower faction member cap again, all it would do is force players out of factions that may not have the time to spend 4+ hours a day on the server, and would promote an even heavier win mentality IMO.

Edit: Also, I think the 'rule of 6' would only work in an environment built around that sort of system.  There would need to be a large overhaul of various aspects of the server for the rule of 6 to viably work out on Eclipse.

Edited by ShawnsBeard
  • Like 2
  • YAY 1
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.