Ruleplay and Faction Toxicity

[Bala]

I want to start by saying that these views are my own, and don't represent either of the faction I'm currently involved with.

Now that being said, very recently returned to criminal role-play by joining Alex's WCA faction. The reasoning isn't important but what has become obvious to me is that there is something very, very wrong with the criminal set-up and also, how certain rules operate in regards to that. Rules that have been introduced to supposedly bring more, higher quality role-play to the server. 

Yet playing my WCA character today, I was concerned. I wasn't concerned that i'd be caught by the cops or that WCA's enemies would kill me because in all honesty, that all a part of the game and it's all role-play. What I felt concerned about was breaking a rule. Shooting someone when I don't quite have the permission to. Driving off when I'm not supposed to. Hell even using my radio or doing something as simple as going to the Bank. The consequence of breaking a rule would not just impact my WCA character, but also my PD character as well. If I ended up being judged to have death-matched in two situations, I'd be permanently banned if I'm correct in understanding that right.

I'll be honest with you, being in PD is a bit of a safety blanket when it comes to the rules. It's a lot more straightforward and easy to keep yourself from trouble because it's like, if it's ICly justifiable then you probably did a good job. Someone attacking, you put them down. Someone doing something they shouldn't, you punish them. Playing criminal is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay different.

WCA and NLA are currently locked in a feud right now. A feud that has seen quite a few deaths on both sides but is ultimately a tool for keeping activity in both factions going. WCA are hopeful of getting official status, NLA don't seem to have faction handlers anymore and it seems like they're not going to be considered to be official. Maybe an admin can tell me different, but that seems like a no win situation to me. You have one faction trying to do everything it can to get official and the other has literally nothing to lose but they are both in the same conflict with very different prospects.

The problem is that once you take away someone's ability to do something, there is a strong urge to say fuck it and just do whatever you want. So then instead of it just being an IC war, it spills into the reports section. To be clear also, this is not a WCA/NLA issue. This happened when the Russian conflict was happening, this happened when the Wanted conflict happened. Shit you could probably go all the way back to the days of Vice and Los Calaveras and there would evidence of it.

It is DRUMMED into us to respect other factions always and to keep things in-character and yet it is so blatantly obvious that the forums, the report section and worst of all, the rules are used as an OOC method of conflict in this community. You report my friend, I report yours. People pick sides, people get divided and things get toxic.

Some of the rules that we have set-up in this community such as the Fear Roleplay rule and the Deathmatch rules were installed to create roleplay but they've unfortunately and unintentionally created a culture of ruleplay. People don't exploit them to win IC anymore either, they exploit them to win OOC. 

A rival faction comes to YOUR hood and is clearly trying to lure you to attack them so they can ambush you but you can't engage because it's not past a certain point. Where is the roleplay in that?
A rival faction hiding out inside a No Crime Zone all the time they are on, because you're killing them. Where is the roleplay in that?
Gangs calling the police or flagging down cops to protect them. Where is the realism or the role-play in that?
If i aim my gun at someone in a car with an engine on and they then flee, I can't shoot that car to try and stop it. Where is the roleplay in that?
If someone has tried to kill me or is my mortal enemy, why do I have to give demands before I kill them? That is limiting the possibilities of what actions I can perform through roleplay justified means.

- - -

So what could help?

In terms of factions that the Faction Management team see no future in, they should be force-ably disbanded. A certain SA:MP server used to employ something similar back in the day where a collection of people couldn't congregate anymore or they'd be banned once the decision was made they weren't going to get official. We have some good factions in this server but interacting with bad people unfortunately brings you down to their level. Plus those with nothing to lose, they don't have to consider how their actions effect others.

 

In terms of engaging rival factions, I think designating certain areas of the map as conflict zones would be a good start. Drug labs, chop shops, gang headquarters, gun pickup areas, drug dropoffs are all illegal off the grid places and I personally believe there should be a different rule of engagement for rival factions in those areas.  All it takes is for someone to make a map of those areas, post it up and then everyone that plays the criminal game knows how it is.

Imagine I'm a zeta, I'm roleplaying with my gang at my HQ and a rival gang comes to my hood to HQ and starts trying to start shit. I should be able to engage those people at will because I'm defending what is mine. There doesn't need to be a demand, you came here to start something so I'll make it something. There is a key difference between fucking someone up at a drug lab and fucking someone up at a clothing store. Keep the existing rules if you want around public places but if you going into gang hoods or you're at illegal spots, all bets should be off.

At the same time, gang colours should mean something too. If you are in a gang and you are sporting your usual gang clothes in public places, that's sending a signal and looking for a fight. If you're looking to be passive so you aren't constantly at war, wear some civilian clothes and drive a civilian car. A clear IC distinction should be made between people who are wanting a fight and not wanting a fight, gang colours is an excellent way to achieve that.

 

In terms of the violence, conflict in moderation is actually healthy. Just as much role-play comes from fighting as it does from any other source. How boring would those Council meetings be if they just talked about paying tax and the weather. You discuss your enemies or the events that have transpired.

That being said, understandably, you don't want people constantly killing each other so much so that people stop playing. That being said, there is no reason why the admin teams can't call timeouts for faction conflict if it gets to a point. Having that down time would allow passive roleplay between your faction, as well as not having to be on alert constantly. That is the sort of measure that prevents roleplay.

 

Finally in terms of the rules, I think that the admin team should look at some of the rules and consider how some of them are being implemented. Are they preventing old negative behaviours or encouraging new ones? Faction Warfare should stay in game, it should not be on our Discords or our forums.

[SamuelGunn]

I think that certain situations should be viewed diffrently, not all situations are the same and not all rules being breached on purpouse, but this server is based on play = punish. What do I mean by that?

Police just looks to punish criminals but not to RP for fun, it's aint fun for criminals when if they lose rp battle they get jailed for atleast 2 hours and lose loads of cash so there is already a focus for criminals to try win every rp situations since their stakes are high and police lose nothing and most of the time police gets salty when they get shot at.

Admins looks to punish people who didn't mean to break the rules but did in in a heated situation without trying to abuse someone. Just because you made a mistake in a heated situation that doesn't mean you deserve to be banned just because something happened rather they should focus on people who actually try to abuse rules and do that on purpouse.
 

And last but not least people are trigger friendly here just because someone talks shit doesnt mean you should pull a gun out and rob him instantly. But as I said this server is not working for fun but rather people are having fun by trying to punish everyone else.

As an example if you look at streamer server (not advertising it's just massive on twitch) they're there for fun, litteraly the most likable character now is news reporter there who snitches on people and everyone loves him even criminals that get snitched on, since they're there for fun, not to win situations not to ruin other people day, they're there for fun and sadly but this server is nothing like that. 

Imagine doing something like this in eclipse, how many reports or ooc insults you would get from both sides? They didn't even robbed that guy.

I'm not trying to shit on Eclipse in no way, but rather to make people open their eyes that you don't to hate on people and try to punish them but rather to have fun. This is a game at the end of the day where everyone just wants to have fun... but people takes this game too seriously...

Edited January 6, 2020 by SamuelGunn

[JoeyPoppins]

Huge +1 i've recently been permanently banned for picking up a dead body in a shootout only because i didn't type /me picks the dead man up.

And some people got mad and reported me for it.

Point is that people can't have fun anymore and this would be a really good change in my opinion.

Edited January 6, 2020 by JoeyPoppins

[alexalex303]

40 minutes ago, JoeyPoppins said:

Huge +1 i've recently been permanently banned for picking up a dead body in a shootout only because i didn't type /me picks the dead man up.

And some people got mad and reported me for it.

Point is that people can't have fun anymore and this would be a really good change in my opinion.

This isn't really about your personal situation, however since you wish to make it about it, I'd say, that in my opinion, you're part of the problem, not the victim of it. In the week prior to your NonRP #6 ban, you made a total of three reports for very minor things and/or containing far flung accusations. All three of them were rejected. Take a hard look at your own conduct, and your contributions to the current illegal faction environment.

 

Edited January 6, 2020 by alexalex303

[OBESE]

46 minutes ago, alexalex303 said:

This isn't really about your personal situation, however since you wish to make it about it, I'd say, that in my opinion, you're part of the problem, not the victim of it. In the week prior to your NonRP #6 ban, you made a total of three reports for very minor things and/or containing far flung accusations. All three of them were rejected. Take a hard look at your own conduct, and your contributions to the current illegal faction environment.

 

You have weird understanding of what is making something a personal situation. Didn't the OP talk about people getting banned or punished for stuff that happened in heat of the moment and was not really a purposeful rule break? Im pretty sure he did, so how is sharing your experience about a situation that OP mentioned, making it about himself? It seems like you're just salty and looking for any way how to pick on people from NLA. That's why you did that report on him when your faction members where breaking the same rule in the same fight. Did they got punished for it? No. Did you report them? No. So dont sit here all innocent and point fingers. But as you pointed out those three reports then look at them again. First was not denied per say as admin decided to give warning this time and agreed that the rule was broken, which technically counts as passed report. The second report he decoded to drop, so there was no ruling anyway, so saying it was denied is like claiming credit for something you did not do. The third one is the only one that was denied and rightfully so.

Now to the OP. I totally agree with most of the things you said and there have been several attempts to deal with the conflict between our two exact organisations via IC and OOC. Sadly it just felt that OOC and IC one side wants to keep it going for some reason...guess which one. 

The points I do not agree with is the mention of if someone cannot get official they should be disbanded. Disbanded how? Not being able to post their side of the rp or rp in general? Have you asked a question what lead to why someone is refused to be official? Is it anything to do with the rp they bring to the server or there are other reasons? I think that your first line, the disclaimer that it is only from your pov is very much explenaining why you think or see some things as you do. Because you have no idea what is happening on the other side which leads to a question - are you willing or even interested to figure it out?

Although this is not suppose to be just about WCA and NLA situation, we all know that it is. All I can say that we never asked for it, yet we were the ones trying to stop it several times, but all we were met with was "must win everything" attitude.

[kris giggs]

Quote

In terms of factions that the Faction Management team see no future in, they should be force-ably disbanded.

I think everyone should have the freedom of 'showing off' their roleplay at an given time without any interference of the Faction Management team, after all, this is a roleplay server. Regardless of the people, theme or goals, everyone should have a chance of painting their canvas to show off in hopes to make an official faction. If by 'no future' you mean bland and pointless roleplay then you have my vote. I am strongly against constant gun fights and chases because they literally benefit nothing whatsoever but asserting 'dominance' for the next half hour while the opposing gang regroups, gets guns and the fighting continues. The rules have no leniency to them which hurts roleplay and limits roleplaying opportunities. Driving around the city looking for green, white, grey, black, blue cars or whatever the color may be just to shoot them sounds pretty bland to me. I now rarely see (not saying that it isnt around) people 'repping the set' on the block (sitting in the hood, corner dealing, tagging walls, breaking the car windows of the opposition etc) in hopes to get a higher up to see them and get that pep talk to keep the work up. I myself drive a semi-truck and run over everyone that I chase because I have no other options, I can not tag a wall in a designated area that the opposing gang claimed because as soon as they see my car someone will call for backup, get an unnecessary amount of people to mock you while you're on your knees trying to roleplay begging for dear life, most likely to get shot, my head shaved and my mental capacity decreased by whatever unit is used, but we'll say 10. Why don't we enforce stronger rules that prevent this, I absolutely loved when NLA had the old, cheap cars out in their hood, just drinking, barbecuing and resorting to a store robbery every now and then to buy more beer haha. No gangsters, not that I am one, but I am very well sure they don't go on a 4 hour killing spree to steal pistols or a 'heavy' to lock up in their safe. People that are hungry, have no money and no vision often turn to crime, but not this kind, they resort to the kind we see every day, purse stealing, stick ups and selling dope. The server goes something like this (for criminals), make money - buy a gun - go cook - shoot someone - get robbed (die) - lose the gun - repeat, we need more variables in that cycle enforced by rules, or the gang scene has to sit down and rethink what they're doing.

Quote

In terms of engaging rival factions, I think designating certain areas of the map as conflict zones would be a good start. Drug labs, chop shops, gang headquarters, gun pickup areas, drug dropoffs are all illegal off the grid places and I personally believe there should be a different rule of engagement for rival factions in those areas.  All it takes is for someone to make a map of those areas, post it up and then everyone that plays the criminal game knows how it is.

I completely forgot about this, adding turfs would be a great addition to the server and maybe they could bring some benefit if captured? I've mentioned this in the hefty paragraph above, fighting all the time makes no sense, the main goal of any gang, cartel or crime organisation is to profit first and foremost, everything else comes later. Everything else besides gang HQs (or with some leniency) is fine, everyone wants a somewhat safe haven to roleplay in that isnt an NCZ, and a gang HQ is just that. Show off the numbers, the fancy cars, clothes and the bulges of your waist line so everyone knows you are no joke.

Quote

Imagine I'm a zeta, I'm roleplaying with my gang at my HQ and a rival gang comes to my hood to HQ and starts trying to start shit. I should be able to engage those people at will because I'm defending what is mine. There doesn't need to be a demand, you came here to start something so I'll make it something. There is a key difference between fucking someone up at a drug lab and fucking someone up at a clothing store.

Again, leniency needs to be added to the rules, roleplay doesn't consists of yes or no, one or zero, its something we make on the fly, but if you have rules grounding you, its very hard to go outside the box which is enforced by beams that are the rules. The risk of staking a hood of a rival gang that wants your head on a pole is too high, where is the roleplay in that, I've never heard two rival gangs, or cartels (irl) go at it in their own back yard, a good saying goes, you dont shit where you eat. Besides that, we all know what gang wars and violence is limited to 'hands, hands' 'put your hands up dumb bitch' 'on your knees'. To sum it up, bloods dont go in a crip hood wearing red, if you do that, you're most likely dead before you have the chance to reconsider what you did.

Quote

Keep the existing rules if you want around public places but if you going into gang hoods or you're at illegal spots, all bets should be off. At the same time, gang colours should mean something too. If you are in a gang and you are sporting your usual gang clothes in public places, that's sending a signal and looking for a fight. If you're looking to be passive so you aren't constantly at war, wear some civilian clothes and drive a civilian car.

I can somewhat agree, the server has various but common interest points which rival gangs usually come across over. You dont have an east and west side where one gang holds one side and the other one holds the remainder. I wish, this is an example, NLA held the north or east, and WCA held the south or west, and they can somewhat safely wear their colors with the possibility of rival gangs entering their zone with an occasional drive-by, because thats how gangs settle things, loud and sloppy, the importance of sending a message.

Quote

A clear IC distinction should be made between people who are wanting a fight and not wanting a fight, gang colours is an excellent way to achieve that. In terms of the violence, conflict in moderation is actually healthy. Just as much role-play comes from fighting as it does from any other source. How boring would those Council meetings be if they just talked about paying tax and the weather. You discuss your enemies or the events that have transpired. That being said, understandably, you don't want people constantly killing each other so much so that people stop playing. That being said, there is no reason why the admin teams can't call timeouts for faction conflict if it gets to a point. Having that down time would allow passive roleplay between your faction, as well as not having to be on alert constantly. That is the sort of measure that prevents roleplay.

Totally agree, but not everyone wants to have two sets of clothes that they want to swap out and a spare car that is beige so they don't get shot. I just don't understand how the admin team hasn't noticed the trend of complaints between gangs and refused to take action, there is obviously something wrong or faulty with the way we do things.

[Bala]

1 hour ago, OBESE said:

Now to the OP. I totally agree with most of the things you said and there have been several attempts to deal with the conflict between our two exact organisations via IC and OOC. Sadly it just felt that OOC and IC one side wants to keep it going for some reason...guess which one. 

The points I do not agree with is the mention of if someone cannot get official they should be disbanded. Disbanded how? Not being able to post their side of the rp or rp in general? Have you asked a question what lead to why someone is refused to be official? Is it anything to do with the rp they bring to the server or there are other reasons? I think that your first line, the disclaimer that it is only from your pov is very much explenaining why you think or see some things as you do. Because you have no idea what is happening on the other side which leads to a question - are you willing or even interested to figure it out?

Although this is not suppose to be just about WCA and NLA situation, we all know that it is. All I can say that we never asked for it, yet we were the ones trying to stop it several times, but all we were met with was "must win everything" attitude.

It's not necessarily reserved for NLA, but in general. I'm not sure what the criteria for pulling support for a faction from the faction management team is, but I'd assume that it's when the issues aren't resolvable. My personal opinion on NLA is limited to be honest, i've not had many interactions with them personally, good or bad. 

When I had my mafia for two weeks, I was approached by Faction Management to start setting things up and I politely declined because I didn't want my faction to get official. There is a clear difference between not wanting it and not being able to get it.

My concern is that continuing to have factions in the server that don't have any future, could potentially effect those that do. In the case of NLA/WCA, it would actually be better for both factions AND the server if both factions were both on track for that official status because ultimately they are always going to want to show the best of themselves. If your faction is told that they aren't going any further, there is going to be some bitterness and resentment towards factions that are and ultimately, it comes out of game onto the forums and discord.

The entire point of my post is that sadly, the community has created a culture where you HAVE to record your gameplay to prove your innocence and if you have enemies, they are not just fighting you in game, they are fighting you in the reports section. Doesn't matter what faction, whether you are a Zeta or LSPD or NLA or whatever.

It's really fucking sad that there are people in this community that want to fuck you over in the reports section but don't want to fight or roleplay with you in game. @FatherOsborn made a post in PD I believe talking about playing your character, not ruleplaying and it's like.. this is literally how people play. We're at a point now where the rules don't just encourage roleplay, they encourage ruleplay too. 

Roleplay is about continuing your own personal story, as a part of the bigger picture. People win, people lose. There are actions, there are consequences. But some of our rules in my view don't account for where the roleplay can lead and that is a problem.

[Skumm]

@kris giggs i really like your reply and can agree with most of it. There is always going to be some level of saltiness after lost fights and reports, it's sad that this war has caused so many problems for both groups, as you pointed out neither group has the opportunity to engage in any real RP as if either trys there gonna get jumped by the other group. It's a constant chase or be chased, if someone makes the slightest mistake they are reported and then the other side report back. Both sides are guilty. I hope we can all come to an IC resoultion that at the least ends the back and forth on reports and allows both groups to show off their RP, style and factions character.

Im glad to hear you miss seeing us chilling in el burro with the lowriders and tequila, we miss it too, we are all here for the RP at the end of the day, we can all go play GTA:O of we want a DM fest. 

Also who ever the WCA guy was at impound yesterday, that was great fun with the white guy and racist cops

[Drizzy.]

Some of the points above touched the reasons why I am reluctant to log in to my criminal alt from as much as I would of like to. Of which @alexalex303 keeps reminding me

 

[MissDeeds]

40 minutes ago, DrizzyDre said:

Some of the points above touched the reasons why I am reluctant to log in to my criminal alt from as much as I would of like to. Of which @alexalex303 keeps reminding me

 

Same - But I do it everyday; I log in and just try my best to do nothing wrong and record everything, while being worried about losing the people I have become friends with OOC and worried what if I did something I wasn't supposed to and didn't mean to. I am happy to own up to my mistakes and should I ever receive a punishment then that's on me but it's a genuine concern that I will get in potentially more trouble because of what is going on around me. I have had the pleasure of sorting out the only issue I have had (and hopefully ever) with the person OOC and I cannot remember the persons name I apologise, but I would like to resolve it that way wherever possible. Thanks all for taking the time you have been to give good RP and there have been some epic battles on both sides. You all put the time and efforts in, as much as I or anyone else - and we have to recognise this from everyone. 

 

So to all you RPers - thank you. 

[OBESE]

@kris giggs after reading your responses I am 100% agreeing with everything you say. When it comes to NLA and WCA relationships then for me it is a mystery. At least from my POV and from all the attempts we have done, it seems like there is no wish from the WCA leadership to stop what is happening. I can guarantee 100% that none of the NLA people wants this forum war or the war in general as it serves no purpose.

When it comes to gang relationships it is very important, at least for me, what do you do with your faction thread. I personally love a good story. I love when you follow a character and organisations development. What I mean is that like drake said "We started from the bottom, now we are here" not "We started...oh we already here!". I also do not like dishonest information and when a faction is trying to show false image. Maybe not 100% false, but at least to some level that misleads whoever is reading in thinking in a specific way about the group.

You mentioned the good old times when NLA was actually acting like a street gang. Lowriders, taco's, tequila, block etc. That changed with the conflicts. I mean we were forced to change to be able to survive and fight back. I did a nice, brief update on everything on our faction thread called "voice mail to Doza" you can listen to it if you havent to see our side at least. We honestly want to go back to as it was and we have tried and I hope that no one will say we havent, because you will not see no WCA leadership ridiculed by NLA after they have reached out, while you will see that from WCA's side.

I know I am focusing a lot on WCA vs NLA because that is the main war right now and the reason this topic was made. I've been through 4 big wars and I know first hand that all of those wars have been always OOC wars to a big extent and mainly were won OOC not ICly. Knowing that I dont want this one to end or go the same way, but for that to change we need two sides to agree to stop it and we are half way there...

[dawpi]

Since late July I have been thinking of creating a second character where I could play as a criminal and see what the criminal life is in the server, however, I have been reluctant and literally this topic and the discussion within are the reasons why. This is a really good discussion topic so I can read up before even considering again if it's worth my time in creating a second character.

[JayGamble]

@GOAT Great thread, something that this side of the spectrum has struggled with for some time now.
 

2 hours ago, OBESE said:

I've been through 4 big wars and I know first hand that all of those wars have been always OOC wars to a big extent and mainly were won OOC not ICly.

This cannot be farther from the truth; every major war has had issues on both sides to some extent, but those who stick out as consistent rule breakers tend not to have any "long term life", as they perpetually break rules, even after appeal after appeal. Other than the Vice war and the most recent Council vs Wanted war, (which I believe is probably the most respectful war I've been apart of) most of the opposition tends to get "fed up" of losing, and sorta tend to stop paying attention to rules, either trying to bait reports.. or ultimately getting in trouble themselves. Any war that has ended with people being removed from the server over major rule breaks is likely due to their inability reasonably follow rules and use proper IC means as the rules were not quite as strict as they are now. I think its a bit interesting you made this claim, considering your former gang was a huge perpetrator of this reporting culture. I can recall from those days, that gang purposefully used target reports on opposing groups in hopes to get people in trouble and had zero issues with making it known that it was ultimately the intent to "forum war". The rules do, in fact work, but at times, punishments are a bit extreme, not necessarily due to circumstance but due to how "on the rails" punishments can be; Appeals exist for this reason, if you cannot fade repeating the same mistakes after being severely punished for it multiple times.. it sorta doesn't seem like much of a server issue anymore.

@OBESEthis is in no way a personal attack towards you, we've had great interaction ICly; Just something I wanted to give my opinion on.

Edited January 7, 2020 by JayGamble

[TonyRizzo]

Literally every single thing you said is perfect imo, especially the part about one side having nothing to lose. Disbanding a group that isn't trying to be official *might* be a bit excessive, but only because the current official faction system is geared towards large gangs, and I can see some people wanting to have a small, tight-knit group of people for their gang. If they were able to be given something like a half-official status, then I'd be all for disbanding people who clearly just wanna stir ooc shit

I literally just the other day had a shootout where I actually just decided I was gonna run away from it instead of continuing because I wasn't 100% sure I wasn't gonna get reported

I guarantee every crim player has had that moment where a rival is driving really slowly near you, trying to get you to follow them. You could maybe outnumber them 10:1, but they'll still keep driving really slowly to make sure you follow them to wherever their friends are waiting to "ambush." There's no fear of getting shot for doing half the speed limit with rivals nearby, and you get left with the choice to either A. follow them into what is clearly an ambush (literally zero value for your life) or B. drive away and ignore them as they talk shit and try to bait you (non rp, why are you letting your enemies get away?), and clearly neither option is at all satisfying.

Edited January 7, 2020 by TonyRizzo

[murda]

+1 well said @GOAT . My opinion is that something like turfs should be brought back. I would say that each official faction should have a spot/turf Approved by faction handlers team where the rules would Be like it was for turfs( if somebody is capturing your turf points you can straight up shoot them). Many times i seen gangs like NLA or a newer crew going around WCA hood and just tryna start shit, even going quickly inside the motel perimeter and looking around for a few seconds. At that point we should be able to straight up shoot if we feel it like a threat. Should be our decision who we allow around our crib and who we do not.

Same thing should play for the illegal spots as druglabs/chop/etc. Who ever got there first and claimed it , should be able to attack anyone that enters its area . Rival gangs/ gang / civils / pd. Its up to them who is allowed to get in.

As for people that  think gangs will just camp at their certain agreed HQ . Don t worry you can keep calling the cops as many times as you want , to try and get us out of there , you know who you are.

 

[murda]

Also , i think rival gang leaders official or not should be allowed if they wish , to have an ooc agreement and accepted by a faction handler. So rival gangs would be able to shoot at each other on sight, as it does happen in real life with rival gangs . 
Drive bys were such a great thing to do as a gang member. Also ,this ooc agreement will surely decrease rival gangs forum reports by 75%.

 I hope this will actually get a look from the staff team And be considered. Let s stop the ooc hate and war and have fun IG.

[OBESE]

6 hours ago, JayGamble said:

@GOAT Great thread, something that this side of the spectrum has struggled with for some time now.
 

This cannot be farther from the truth; every major war has had issues on both sides to some extent, but those who stick out as consistent rule breakers tend not to have any "long term life", as they perpetually break rules, even after appeal after appeal. Other than the Vice war and the most recent Council vs Wanted war, (which I believe is probably the most respectful war I've been apart of) most of the opposition tends to get "fed up" of losing, and sorta tend to stop paying attention to rules, either trying to bait reports.. or ultimately getting in trouble themselves. Any war that has ended with people being removed from the server over major rule breaks is likely due to their inability reasonably follow rules and use proper IC means as the rules were not quite as strict as they are now. I think its a bit interesting you made this claim, considering your former gang was a huge perpetrator of this reporting culture. I can recall from those days, that gang purposefully used target reports on opposing groups in hopes to get people in trouble and had zero issues with making it known that it was ultimately the intent to "forum war". The rules do, in fact work, but at times, punishments are a bit extreme, not necessarily due to circumstance but due to how "on the rails" punishments can be; Appeals exist for this reason, if you cannot fade repeating the same mistakes after being severely punished for it multiple times.. it sorta doesn't seem like much of a server issue anymore.

@OBESEthis is in no way a personal attack towards you, we've had great interaction ICly; Just something I wanted to give my opinion on.

None taken. And I totally agree with you. I was just saying that when big wars happens, people get reckless and salty and then the reports fly back and forth and the war ends when plenty of people are already punished and often banned and the numbers are not just there no more, instead it ending icly via diplomacy. Tbf I feel like a lot of people on the server has false understanding of what is a good diplomacy and have that "must win" attitude when it comes to diplomacy. Like there is no other way to end anything as "me the winner" in terms of destroying the other group totally.

I know like 90% of gangs have done it and Im not gonna talk about the fact itself, but I wish that when diplomatic talks would take place, there would be that mutual respect to not touch the other side during it. You know, like back in the old days, two armies would get to the battle place, then the leaders with some other knights would ride in the middle of the battlefield...give their demands or whatever. Agree or disagree and go back to their side and only then start the attack.

Just ruins the rp of diplomacy when you are brave enough to go to meet with the enemy to talk it out, but you know that there is a massive chance you will be ridiculed by the other side. It feels like kids are in charge instead of grownups who understand politics.

All of this is what I dislike and find to be poor rp. Those who have dealt with me when it comes to diplomacy knows that I do talk about the issue if we have. I do try to end it on neutral terms. I do believe there are valid demands and then there are ridiculous demands that are based on god knows what. For me it always has to make sense when it comes to the rp. 

[alexalex303]

17 minutes ago, OBESE said:

I know like 90% of gangs have done it and Im not gonna talk about the fact itself, but I wish that when diplomatic talks would take place, there would be that mutual respect to not touch the other side during it. You know, like back in the old days, two armies would get to the battle place, then the leaders with some other knights would ride in the middle of the battlefield...give their demands or whatever. Agree or disagree and go back to their side and only then start the attack.

Just ruins the rp of diplomacy when you are brave enough to go to meet with the enemy to talk it out, but you know that there is a massive chance you will be ridiculed by the other side. It feels like kids are in charge instead of grownups who understand politics.

That does happen. In fact it happened between our organizations twice, and between VICE and Council when it came back. The council was set to fight a war with us, but they still didn't attack us during the meet.

There are a lot of issues with diplomacy and criminal roleplay, but for the most part, parlays are respected.

[Felcon]

One of the main problems with this ‘ICly’ wars is that gangs start to ruleplay instead of roleplay. That makes it frustrating for all parties including players and moderators.  Maybe moderators should start punishing gangs or people who intentionally start to bait people into rule breaking.

[kris giggs]

1 hour ago, OBESE said:

I know like 90% of gangs have done it and Im not gonna talk about the fact itself, but I wish that when diplomatic talks would take place, there would be that mutual respect to not touch the other side during it. You know, like back in the old days, two armies would get to the battle place, then the leaders with some other knights would ride in the middle of the battlefield...give their demands or whatever. Agree or disagree and go back to their side and only then start the attack.

Just ruins the rp of diplomacy when you are brave enough to go to meet with the enemy to talk it out, but you know that there is a massive chance you will be ridiculed by the other side. It feels like kids are in charge instead of grownups who understand politics.

All of this is what I dislike and find to be poor rp. Those who have dealt with me when it comes to diplomacy knows that I do talk about the issue if we have. I do try to end it on neutral terms. I do believe there are valid demands and then there are ridiculous demands that are based on god knows what. For me it always has to make sense when it comes to the rp. 

This is an example where roleplay suffers just because of OOC tensions. It's no nuclear physics, when people die to a rival gang member or get a forum report resolved against them they seriously start to change their way of approach and how they think. I've been banned myself for almost 3 weeks now and just now as I am looking back at all the negativity and bad reputation it has given both groups over nothing but loot, this isn't real life where you kill a rival gang member(s) in a fight and they're gone for good, no, they wait 30 minutes, rearm and it keeps repeating itself. OOC tension is guaranteed and we all know how that effects roleplay - largely. A server that 'depends on' gang roleplay has no special rules or guidelines in store for them which makes gangs resort to this type of warfare, playing dirty, IC or OOC.

You are very right when it comes to the diplomacy issue, but I am quite sure that some gangs tend to have a more realistic approach and some not, it really depends on the situation, but for the most part, it's usually a healthy, respectful relationship.

Everyone that replied had a lengthy paragraph and that just shows that this isn't an issue of one person, it should concern the whole server as criminal roleplay largely impacts the roleplay that emergency services have and get. I hope faction management has a glimpse of the topic and can come up with something, if anything, maybe the gang leaders can come to a mutual understanding.

 

[Bala]

10 hours ago, TonyRizzo said:

I literally just the other day had a shootout where I actually just decided I was gonna run away from it instead of continuing because I wasn't 100% sure I wasn't gonna get reported

I guarantee every crim player has had that moment where a rival is driving really slowly near you, trying to get you to follow them. You could maybe outnumber them 10:1, but they'll still keep driving really slowly to make sure you follow them to wherever their friends are waiting to "ambush." There's no fear of getting shot for doing half the speed limit with rivals nearby, and you get left with the choice to either A. follow them into what is clearly an ambush (literally zero value for your life) or B. drive away and ignore them as they talk shit and try to bait you (non rp, why are you letting your enemies get away?), and clearly neither option is at all satisfying.

See this post right here is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. It is not a fear of losing or dying, it's a fear of doing something that is going to get you punished out of character. The rules should act as a safety net, in case someone crosses the line. But some of these rules, it's almost like it raises the bar too much and seems inevitable at some point you will almost be forced into breaking a rule.

That scenario you mentioned, what is realistic about that? If we are talking in role-play terms, either your rival is going to try and engage you or they're going to duck you. We have a cop-baiting rule in this server, because without it, people do stupid unrealistic shit in front of police to try and get them to chase them. It's not specific to law enforcement, people do stupid shit in front of rival gangs right now, safe in the knowledge that unless they do x, they can't be touched.

That's bullshit. If you are my mortal enemy, your gang has killed my gang and I see you, surely the realistic thing is either for me to attack you or to flee. I'm representing my faction, you're representing yours. To quote Rick Astley, you know the rules and so do I. So why wouldn't we fight it out there and then?

5 hours ago, ronyd2k said:

+1 well said @GOAT . My opinion is that something like turfs should be brought back. I would say that each official faction should have a spot/turf Approved by faction handlers team where the rules would Be like it was for turfs( if somebody is capturing your turf points you can straight up shoot them). Many times i seen gangs like NLA or a newer crew going around WCA hood and just tryna start shit, even going quickly inside the motel perimeter and looking around for a few seconds. At that point we should be able to straight up shoot if we feel it like a threat. Should be our decision who we allow around our crib and who we do not.

Same thing should play for the illegal spots as druglabs/chop/etc. Who ever got there first and claimed it , should be able to attack anyone that enters its area . Rival gangs/ gang / civils / pd. Its up to them who is allowed to get in.

As for people that  think gangs will just camp at their certain agreed HQ . Don t worry you can keep calling the cops as many times as you want , to try and get us out of there , you know who you are.

I mean I can draft something up that doesn't require script implementation. Something with my original situation about areas where the rules of engagement would be looser and like a faction HQ area for each faction in the city for example. I don't know if the admins would make changes to things based on a thread but it costs nothing to try I guess.

What you described in your post, does happen. If a gang claims an area as their hood, that area is sacred. If rival gangs don't want the smoke, they should never go in that area. If you are in that area then quite clearly, you're looking for a fight. Once again, it comes back to laws of the street, not laws of the server.

I say this as a member of the Los Santos Police Department, but it's like Zetas new spot. It's secluded and almost like a fortress. If individual cops are going down there with Zetas then to be honest, I think Zetas should be able to handle things a little differently but the rules don't really support that.

There is a no-crime zone at the LSPD because it makes no roleplay sense for people to commit crime next to a building full of cops. By the similar token, a small amount of cops going into what is now a gang fortress without legitimate reason makes no fucking sense either. Zetas aren't a company of philanthropists, they're criminals, sometimes cop killing criminals so you should give them a wide berth. But if Zetas engage cops down there, then they are likely to be punished.

4 hours ago, ronyd2k said:

Also , i think rival gang leaders official or not should be allowed if they wish , to have an ooc agreement and accepted by a faction handler. So rival gangs would be able to shoot at each other on sight, as it does happen in real life with rival gangs . 
Drive bys were such a great thing to do as a gang member. Also ,this ooc agreement will surely decrease rival gangs forum reports by 75%.

 I hope this will actually get a look from the staff team And be considered. Let s stop the ooc hate and war and have fun IG.

I think on a practical level this makes sense. If both factions are up for it and there is roleplay to support it, then why not. If it gets people in game, keeps them in game and lowers the reports then why would you not? 

Same thing goes with calling a ceasefire or ending a war. I feel like the Council v. Wanted war probably could of been handled a little differently. The reasons for it starting are IC but on reflection, seem valid to an outsider but as a result, we've basically lost an entire faction because of it's nature. That doesn't really benefit anyone because it ends the story of the Wanted and since then, Zetas/Triads have just kinda chilled as well. This also effects the LSPD and the LSSD as there is less obvious crime for us to respond to, it effects DOC because they have less prisoners and it effects MD because there are less people needing medical treatment.

I'm not saying turn Eclipse into a deathmatch server but I think factions being able to set out their own rules of engagement with a faction handler mediating would stop a lot of the toxicity and out of character stuff. It would also give those involved the opportunity to enjoy the action without worrying about whether or not they will get the next punishment.

We talk about roleplay and the rules trying to serve the roleplay, but The Wanted don't roleplay don't RP together no more. Whatever the IC motivations, OOC we've lost a big active faction and that particular story ends. The goal with roleplay in general is to keep things moving and flowing.

3 hours ago, Felcon said:

One of the main problems with this ‘ICly’ wars is that gangs start to ruleplay instead of roleplay. That makes it frustrating for all parties including players and moderators.  Maybe moderators should start punishing gangs or people who intentionally start to bait people into rule breaking.

This. Basically if you aren't hunting someone, you are being baited by someone. There isn't really any passive roleplay going on when you are at war, it's either about the action or the reaction.

[OBESE]

On 1/5/2020 at 11:58 PM, GOAT said:

WCA and NLA are currently locked in a feud right now. A feud that has seen quite a few deaths on both sides but is ultimately a tool for keeping activity in both factions going. WCA are hopeful of getting official status, NLA don't seem to have faction handlers anymore and it seems like they're not going to be considered to be official. Maybe an admin can tell me different, but that seems like a no win situation to me. You have one faction trying to do everything it can to get official and the other has literally nothing to lose but they are both in the same conflict with very different prospects.

The problem is that once you take away someone's ability to do something, there is a strong urge to say fuck it and just do whatever you want. So then instead of it just being an IC war, it spills into the reports section. To be clear also, this is not a WCA/NLA issue. This happened when the Russian conflict was happening, this happened when the Wanted conflict happened. Shit you could probably go all the way back to the days of Vice and Los Calaveras and there would evidence of it.

Considering the fact that in the statement above it was very clearly made that NLA are the bad guys who does not have to care about being official and can just say "fuck it" therefore portrayed as the aggressors of the conflict, even suggesting (directly attacking NLA) that groups like us should be disbanded for no reason and WCA is put as this poor faction that is trying to become official, but so many obstacles are put in the way that they dont want, and the fact that me saying that we are not the ones keeping this conflict alive, as we have approached other side several times and have been denied every single time, I have to post this video as proof what is the actual situation.

@GOAT I dont mind you talking about the issues on the server and all the reports because I have been saying this for long time that sadly, but the server does not support war/rivalry environment. But please, be real and honest about everything you say or mention, even as an example. I think you should look for the issue inside your own group that you represent and maybe make sure they dont want to do stuff that hurts both sides and maybe start understanding diplomacy and that not everything is "must win" and that sometimes it is ok to be "it's a tie". As you put it "WCA and NLA are currently locked in a feud right now" - well we are the prisoners of your doings, because you have the keys to unlock the fued and let it go.

Edited January 8, 2020 by OBESE

[thesilentwrath]

+1 yeah some rules need to change server feels very strict/boring and stale when it comes to criminal game play, you literally make no money spend hours in jail and risk getting in trouble because of forum wars i play this game to have a good time not spend time and get headaches

[alexalex303]

WCA does not have an issue with the IC conflict.

This is where you're confused @OBESE. I told you this IC, and I'll say it OOC for you as well. We started this conflict in 2019, you kept begging us to end it, we're going to carry it not into 2020, but into 2021.

The only issue we've had so far is members of your faction spamming invalid reports. Two members made 12 reports, out of which 11 were rejected. This kind of OOC pressure is what makes you a faction that people are talking about forcefully disbanding.

Edited January 8, 2020 by alexalex303

[Olipro]

I don't have any knowledge of this WCA/NLA feud, so I won't try to address that. Though I'm not sure it's a good look to pre-ordain that you're going to RP a scenario with zero possibility of redemption for an entire year, but you do you.

As far as the IC/OOC toxicity mentioned by OP goes, this is a classic case of supposed IC roleplay actually being a facade for OOC hostilities.

I'm not sure there's a good answer entirely; my approach would be to void the scenario, make asset adjustments where necessary and all justifications that previously lead up to it are considered to have never happened. If someone can't dissociate themselves from their character, perhaps RP just isn't for them.