The Rules

[Korab_Bagadovic]

Some of the rules are in need for a change, because this is just ridiculous at this point. Mostly the DM rules need a change or a polish.

Rules that I don't agree with:

• A player cannot kill their victim if the victim is in compliance with the demands.

This rule is such bad RP, i'm suggesting that this should be deleted or re-wrote. One of the reasons that I don't agree with this rule is that if a person complies with my demands he cannot be killed, where is the logic in that? I get it, it's supposed to show that I value his life, but what if I don't value his life? What if my character has developed in to a psychopath and just wants to kill the player, it conflicts with this rule and i'll be punished for DM.

Deathmatching is the act of attacking a player or their property without a proper roleplay reason.

I agree with this rule, but it needs to be changed a little bit. The reason I don't agree with this rules is because as a player who is not in any gang, I get robbed by the other gangs quite a lot and the fact of the matter is that I can't shoot all of them on sight when I see them after they've robbed me. In my eyes this should be changed to where if I get robbed multiple times by the same gang I should be able to kill them on sight next time I see them. Lets say a big gang robs me like 2-3 times in one day, it's obvious that I will have hatred towards them and will seek revenge, knowing where their hangout spot is I should be able to come to them with a gun and shoot all of them on sight, without saying anything, even if some of the gang members that are there were not involved in the scenario where I got robbed, because I want all of their gang dead no matter what. Now if I did something like this lets say at a triads meeting where 3-4 of us pull up and unleash our weapons upon them and kill them all, we'd all get punished for DM or Mass DM (i don't know), which would result in a ban and that's just ridiculous because some of these gangs are too entitled to the rules and I think that ruins some of the roleplay situations because after they lose a fight or do anything that doesn't benefit them at all they all turn to Forum Wars instead of sucking it up and moving on. So my suggestion is that this rule would be changed to benefit the smaller gangs. I know that by changing this rule it would mean that the Police would be at a disadvantage and always targeted, but that's now for the gangs and the police to roleplay and find an agreement so they don't shoot each other all the time.

Unrealistic stunt jumping or the use of an expensive vehicle to ram into other vehicles.

This is another rule who needs to be changed, I'm talking about the "use of an expensive vehicle to ram into other vehicles". This is complete non-sense and here's why: first of all when a gang or a group of people are chasing me and I know that their intentions are to hurt me or even kill me I'd be more happy to, to ram them off the road using whatever car I have, especially when they are on their bikes. This happened recently where 2 guys from WCA were chasing me on their bikes and I told them that I will ram them off their bikes if they don't fuck off in which case they did not fuck off and I tried to ram them of their bike with my Seven-70, then they started to cry about me ramming them with a sports car in which I replied with: "I value my life more than this car". Which should be true if you think about it happening in real life. So my suggestion is, is to change the vehicle ramming other vehicle rule to where you can ram cars that are similar to yours in size and you should be able to ram bikes if your life is in danger.

That's all for now, I'll edit if anything else comes up.

P.S. Sorry for the poor english vocabulary, not my native language, if some of the statements are hard to understand reply and i'll try to explain them better.

[Sineye]

1. You take away basically the on big limitation on killing people and it just turns into a DM fest. Everyone will kill to rob encouraging 0 role playing and just gunfights. If you want that just go play regular online. 

2. Orange man steal my stuff. Every orange man die now. It just doesn't make sense. Why would killing someone based on clothes color be a valid reason for going around and DMing everyone.

3. In the end this would just end in a ton of people being DMed by playing bumper cars and smashing people into walls at 200 kmph.

[Korab_Bagadovic]

2 minutes ago, Sineye said:

1. You take away basically the on big limitation on killing people and it just turns into a DM fest. Everyone will kill to rob encouraging 0 role playing and just gunfights. If you want that just go play regular online. 

2. Orange man steal my stuff. Every orange man die now. It just doesn't make sense. Why would killing someone based on clothes color be a valid reason for going around and DMing everyone.

3. In the end this would just end in a ton of people being DMed by playing bumper cars and smashing people into walls at 200 kmph.

1. Roleplay is poor anyway when it comes to gangs robbing people. You missed the entire point of my statement. The rule should be that you would be able to kill the player the player after all of the roleplay that took part in that situation. 

2. I wasnt talking about shooting random people who wear the same colors as the gang who robbed me, im talking about a more thought out process of figuring out where their HQ is and hitting them there when they are all there. 

3. I'm againt people ramming a guy on a bike thats stood still at 200km/h. I'm talking about when people are following you and are obviously there to hurt or kill you in which case you should be allowed to ram the motorist whos either on a bike or on a similar sized car. 

[Sineye]

4 minutes ago, Korab_Bagadovic said:

1. Roleplay is poor anyway when it comes to gangs robbing people. You missed the entire point of my statement. The rule should be that you would be able to kill the player the player after all of the roleplay that took part in that situation. 

2. I wasnt talking about shooting random people who wear the same colors as the gang who robbed me, im talking about a more thought out process of figuring out where their HQ is and hitting them there when they are all there. 

3. I'm againt people ramming a guy on a bike thats stood still at 200km/h. I'm talking about when people are following you and are obviously there to hurt or kill you in which case you should be allowed to ram the motorist whos either on a bike or on a similar sized car. 

1. If someone has 100% complied with everything you have asked them of and offered no interference what is your excuse for killing them. They have just been nothing but compliant with you so now it is hey thanks for the compliance your now dead. You have now discouraged any compliance you might get whatsoever.

2. Now all people have do do is claim they though they found the "HQ" and they are justified for mass DM. Second if they just robbed you it would not make sense to run headlong into that group when they already had you outnumbered and out powered enough to rob you.

3. Now based on my opinion on whether or not you are going to hurt me I will pit you into a guardrail at high speeds which will likely involve me hurting myself as well as them. Now it is just a free for all of bumper cars and who has the car that will take the most damage before becoming inoperable. 

[Korab_Bagadovic]

2 minutes ago, Sineye said:

1. If someone has 100% complied with everything you have asked them of and offered no interference what is your excuse for killing them. They have just been nothing but compliant with you so now it is hey thanks for the compliance your now dead. You have now discouraged any compliance you might get whatsoever.

2. Now all people have do do is claim they though they found the "HQ" and they are justified for mass DM. Second if they just robbed you it would not make sense to run headlong into that group when they already had you outnumbered and out powered enough to rob you.

3. Now based on my opinion on whether or not you are going to hurt me I will pit you into a guardrail at high speeds which will likely involve me hurting myself as well as them. Now it is just a free for all of bumper cars and who has the car that will take the most damage before becoming inoperable. 

1. No one ever asks or offers "no interference" after getting robbed or robbing someone. 

2. You are now replying to the my first reply and not considerinh the fact that I already said in the post that I would come with more people. And whats wrong with a gun fight of 5v10? If well coordinated you can easily come out on top. And about the HQ.. This statement is just funny.. It would be obvious that its their HQ if the people sitting outside of it would all have the same outfits... 

3. Wouldn't you rather get hurt then get killed? I mean it's possible that you can die too, but i'd rather risk my chances to ram someone for my life than drive around the whole map until i run out of gas or crash somewhere and end up still getting hurt. And if you're gonna mention contacting the cops, they all turn a blind eye. During a chase I drove up to 3 different officers and they did nothing. They sat there im their car and basically ignored any calls for help. What am I supposed to do then? 

[Sineye]

We could keep debating the logistics but I think I'll just leave it to my core belief on the issue. There is enough issues with people following the current rules. Making those even more relaxed in my opinion will only encourage less rp more DM and less following of the rules.

Edit: Sorry if you feel I have attempted to derail your post at all. Should have been more concise.

Edited November 20, 2019 by Sineye

[Nightranger]

The Vehicle rule I agree with, Same as changing that if someone is stood in front of your car pointing a gun, You should be allowed to run them over, Let's face it, Regardless of my car, In RL If someones stood in front of my car aiming a gun at me, depending how close they are, I'm hitting the accelerator and ducking below the dashboard - I'm running that person over, It's unrealistic to think you would just get out and go "Hey, feel free to rob me, and potentially kill me" - Whats mroe realistic here?

From what I understand, If someone robs you, you have upto 3 IRL hours to be able to retaliate, I may be wrong, but that seems to be how it works - So the DM rule change I dont feel would be valid.

And, yes if someone is in compliance, You should still be able to kill them, depending on the situation, a normal street robbery, would be pointless to kill someone, but if they are identifiably in a gang, sure you should be able to shoot em up after, because you can bet yourself they are going to find you later otherwise.

For what it's worth, I robbed someone once, and killed them, they did everything I asked, but I still killed them, why? Because he told me I was making a mistake, he was in a big gang, and he would get me later... The guy threatened me while I had him at gunpoint... So I killed him  

[SamuelGunn]

delete

Edited November 20, 2019 by SamuelGunn

[BallinByNature]

"what if my character developed in to a psychopath and just wants to kill the player, it conflicts with this rule and i'll be punished for DM."

Yes, RPing a serial killer or psychopath who kills for no reason is against the DM rules. 

Thanks for the suggestion.