Jump to content
amazezzz

MASS NRP/DM AZTECAS & LFM

Recommended Posts

Player(s) being reported: ID 230 135 243 80 78 187 45 146
Date of interaction reported: 12/12/2020
Unix time stamp from HUD:  1607831128

Your characters name: Roland MacFadden

Other player(s) involved: Aztecas, LFM

Specific rule(s) broken:

9. Non-Roleplay (NRP)

  • Actions that are unrealistic or promote poor quality roleplay are considered as non-roleplay.

  • Players are required to remain IC at all times. RP can only be paused or voided by admins.

  • If a crash / disconnect occurs, players must post in the crash reports discord channel and contact all parties to resume. Players reconnecting must be given all opportunities held prior.

  • Players should not instigate situations they do not have time to play through. If a player is chased they must wait 15 minutes before they can log out of the game.

  • Players can’t depict their character with real images or game images not possible on ECRP.

  • Examples: Ignoring RP, baiting government services without proper IC reason, asking to be killed or forcing your own death, unrealistic stunt jumping, misusing expensive vehicles, using script work vehicles for other purpose, submerging any vehicle in water intentionally, swimming for an unrealistic amount of time in a chase, or stealing from / tampering with an OOC F4 menu.

  • Non-off road vehicles may not drive up mountains or steep hills. LSEMS & Mechanics are exempt. 

  • 14. Deathmatch (DM)

  • Deathmatching is the act of attacking a player without a proper IC motive and interaction.

  • Prior interaction should include escalation such as a robbery or a report to the police.

  • Players may not kill victims who have complied with a plausible demand in reasonable time unless involved in severe hostile activity against them or an ally within 3 hours.

  • Players on foot should only be attempted to be hit with a vehicle once with valid motive.

  • Vehicles cannot be used as weapons in active shootouts unless where unavoidable.

  • Players must be able to explain their reason and provide proof of prior reasoning if requested.

  • If a player informs you that your VOIP isn’t working, you must either fix your VOIP using appropriate commands or use text to deliver your demand.

How did the player break the rule(s)?

I'd like to start off by thanking any staff member that is going take this player report because I know it is going to be a struggle because of the amount of players being reported, Basically we began being chased because we were chopping a rapid gt at a chop shop (which is 100% cool)  no problem with that, first it was a rebla rapid gt and bifta, as the chase went on more and more and more vehicles got onto it, which started to make it unrealistic as there a was a whole mini army convoy chasing me, I then stopped to speak to one of them asking why they are chasing realizing more back up showed up I quickly speeded out, tried flipping a U-turn to lose most the vehicles when I mistakely hit and knocked off one of them off their bikes which was mostly (DESYNC) quickly after that they began to Gunship me down with multiple micros and .50s in one of the most populated streets of Los Santos, right next to Police, they eventually blew up the car and killed us. (I attempted to solve it with the parties being reported they declined, I also attempted to solve it in game with staff, but Aieos recommended to take it to forums because of the mass amount of people involved)

Evidence of rule breach:

https://streamable.com/cjiauc

 

Edited by amazezzz
  • Like 1
  • NAY 14
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for making the report, For the staff member taking the report, Here is parts of the video that @amazezzz seem to leave out. Below is a video of Roland running 4 people over including 3 of our own allies, In the Video at 0:08 seconds you can see that Roland had plenty of room but still ran over Kane injuring him (look at the tyre tracks in the snow directly for him),  We still did not shoot at him and gave him the benefit of the doubt, Up until he runs over ID 194, The 4th person he has ran over, It looks intentional and after seeing him run over 3 other people its hard to believe it could be classed as desync or not intentional when it looks so clear to us, He was then shot at for the action.

Again I love the fact that your only telling half the story and trying to get people punished intentionally without giving the full details of what happen. 

 

 

 

Edited by Dylan Ortiz
  • Like 16
Link to post
Share on other sites

How you doing, Ricky Brasco here. I think Carlos' response covered everything. Frankly I normally would have shot the moment he rammed over my ally the first time but as Carlos said, we gave him the benefit of the doubt. After him running over the member of LFM head on and injuring him, I decided to open fire. 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your patience as we are reviewing the report. Prior to concluding this report, we would like to hear statements from the following people in order to get a full understanding of the situation:

For everyone listed I ask that the following please share your unedited POV as well as your side of the story and any evidence you would like to be reviewed in this case. Additionally the following questions

  • Do you feel that it was realistic to have a convoy this prominent in a public area directly up the street from police enforcement officers? What was the purpose for this convoy? Do you feel it was within ordinance of our servers rules? Why or why not?  
    • Flint_Lockward [230]
    • Dimitri_Misha [243]
    • Ricky_Brasco [80]
    • Tony_Torrero [45]
    • Donald_Tate [146]
    • Axel_Hurtado[194]
    • Kane_Mysterio[81] - In addition to the question above please answer
      • You can be heard saying over voIP “save bodycam” multiple times. What bodycam are you referencing? Do you feel that this is appropriate to say over voIP?
    • Kon_Garcia- In addition to the question above please answer
      • You can be heard saying over voIP “saved for my next bodycam montage” multiple times. What bodycam are you referencing? Do you feel that this is appropriate to say over voIP?
  • In addition to the above question: The reporting parties received damage from these parties so to them I ask the following in order to get a wide picture of the reported situation: What was your reason for shooting at the reporting party? Do you feel that you had DM rights on the occupants? Do you feel that the collision of the red bike and the bifta as shown in the reporting parties evidence was sufficient enough to grant DM rights? Why or why not?
    • Gabriel_Barr
    • Dan_Falcon
    • Josh_Wealthmeer [187]
    • Ahmed_Abraham [135]
    • Carlos_Rodrigueez [78]
    • Tyrone_Shakur
  • Carlos, Do you have the full unedited version of the chase which shows the entirety of the chase leading up to the reported situation? If so that would be very much appreciated for our review.
  • Roland, Do you have the full unedited version of the chase which shows the entirety of the chase leading up to the reported situation including the rams alleged? If so that would be very much appreciated for our review.

The above mentioned players will be notified in game as appropriate and will receive 24 hours to provide their side of the story. We look forward to hearing back from you!

  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dylan Ortiz said:

Accident or not, you did not once say anything OOC about desync, We can only go off what we see and what happens IC, like you running 4 people over

Yeah I did not get the chance to as it happened you screamed over your frequency " SHOOOOOTT SHOOOT SHOOOT HIM "

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Krooks, I do not have the unedited footage of the chase however I do have small clips of some of the times where I "intentionally" ran them over, but I can explain for the ones that I did not have footage of, basically, the first person at upper pillbox, I was simply looking behind me and when I looked back it was too late however it was a total random, when we talk about the Kamacho person, the same happened as for desync as well, I was simply looking behind me I then saw him and quickly turned a bit towards the left but it was once again too late.

https://streamable.com/tr4k63 https://streamable.com/hqx8km https://streamable.com/cjiauc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, ID 194[Axel_Hurtado] here.
I heard calls on radio wanting less cars convoying to chase a bifta that had run over an Ally and another person, So i proceeded to follow calls with my BF, I caught up with the chase which was repeatedly taken to ridiculous Non-RP extremes (Using a bifta to go up flights of stairs or drive through legion square center (which would be as the reporter puts it one of the "most populated streets of Los Santos"), when the Bifta finally pulls over to apparently "ask why we were chasing" (Which according to their own footage they never even asked) they say "Was good Vatooooooos" and continue to drive in circles. During the U-Turn ID 88 Proceeds to hit me off my bike which nearly every other time would have killed me but luckily looked bad but did very little damage, This was 110% NOT even close to desync but (ONLY AFTER WATCHING ROLANDS POV) i do believe it was accidental, None the less this is a IC Accident with IC Consequences and was not the first, Second, Or even third time that a vehicle attack had happened in the span of a few minutes, under the circumstance that i was nearly the 4th person to die to a single bifta which too my allies and myself looked to be repeatedly VDMing, I believe they had DM rights to shoot. After i had been collided with i lost the chase and had no further interaction or RP.

 

My POV of Ram:

https://streamable.com/vjrc5v (Apologies for Ratio, I play on a UltraWide so clips are clunky for some people)

 

Thanks and apologies to the admin that has to take this report. Can't imagine its much fun for anyone.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

hello!, Kon here, thanks for taking such a big report first of all Krooks.

'Kon_Garcia- In addition to the question above please answer

  • You can be heard saying over voIP “saved for my next bodycam montage” multiple times. What bodycam are you referencing? Do you feel that this is appropriate to say over voIP?'

Kane [ID81] was spamming in voIP 'save bodycam, save bodycam, save bodycam'

knowing full well none of us RP actual bodycam and he's very clearly referencing shadowplay or another ooc recording, i made a single dumb comment about saving it for the use in a montage which is purely ooc and i 100% mixed. we had been getting chased by 10+ people from 4+ gangs for about 20 mins and i was kinda heated and i slipped and said some dumb shit, but i fully own up to it and i'm sorry.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, Josh wealthmeer here. I would like to say I was one of the first 4 initiating parties. We found them at garbage cop chop and when we went after they they pointed guns at one of our members and we got into a chase. This ended quickly because they had a "problem" they said their car just poofed so we literally helped them by reviving them so we can restart the chase from where it ended.

Video from chop ((If blury give time to process)) -



Us helping them because of the "bug" they said they had - ZJ9UQss.png

After we let them deal with the admins and we "reset" we started the chase again which would lead to them running over 3 people in front of me, 2 being ally and after giving the benefit of the doubt on the first one with the second one being on purpose, with from their prospective not being de sync and seeing my other ally's starting to shoot I shot as well.

First ally hit - https://streamable.com/arbfby

Second ally hit that was alot more intentional - https://streamable.com/f06lu2

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, it's yah boy Kane here !

Thanks for the report @amazezzz and thanks to @krooks365 for the use of your time with handling this.

 

Kane_Mysterio[81] - In addition to the question above please answer

  • You can be heard saying over voIP “save bodycam” multiple times. What bodycam are you referencing? Do you feel that this is appropriate to say over voIP.

 

I literally say 'save bodycam' which is an IC term, if I were to truly be mixing I would say in VOIP 'save POV'. I was not expecting him to RPly activate his bodycam then and there as the scenario was hostile, however ICly I wouldn't have known whether or not he was already recording using his 'bodycam' it was to ensure his 'bodycam' is recording from then on in the scenario; to also make sure if he were recording ICly to keep the footage.
 

Quote

knowing full well none of us RP actual bodycam and he's very clearly referencing shadowplay or another ooc recording,

How the hell do I know what you do?

So thank you to @charles mcwhiliker with your attempts to throw me under the bus, you're a true gangsta!

 

You ask 'what bodycam are you referencing?' I am referencing with IC intentions, it's not difficult to /pm someone to 'save POV' if I wanted to do so.
To also add to this, this was also in a humorous manor which can clearly be heard through the use of my VOIP with continuous repetition and laughs. This being said the 'save bodycam' I am referring to can then be used at a later date to evolve the current state of RP between the groups ICly.
 

 

Edited by KaneMyst
  • Upvote 13
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, krooks365 said:

Do you feel that it was realistic to have a convoy this prominent in a public area directly up the street from police enforcement officers? What was the purpose for this convoy? Do you feel it was within ordinance of our servers rules? Why or why not?  

Define realistic. Heavily armed, extremely dangerous gang members chasing hostile opposing gang members and opening fire on them after they ran over an ally for the second time? Yes, absolutely I find that realistic. It's a risk we take being criminals and unlike police officers us criminals don't care if civilians are around as witnesses and we absolutely dont care if a single cop is behind us. If our enemy assaulted our ally, we will take action. Just like if we ran over a cop, even by accident, we would get lit up like a christmas tree. It's an IC action that has IC consequences, I dont know why IC issues are so heavily disregarded for criminals but for PD it's literally their moto. 

All in all this is the main problem with the server in regards to criminal rp. The bifta is literally taunting by going "eyy vatosss" like a couple of lil gangsters who want smoke but the moment  its brought to them we end up here, on forums, once again. Nothing we did falls under a rule breach according to server rules. We chased them from a chop shop, our convo was kept relatively small for the most part, we only opened fire after they ran over not 1 ally but 2, and we did so down the street from a traffic stop which on it's own is an IC risk.

unknown.png?width=831&height=464

Finally I need to ask, why is Krooks handling a report where her allies are the reporting party and her enemies are the reported? I want to make it clear that Krooks has always been fair but I feel like this may be a little too personal therefore I request another moderator takeover this report to ensure no COI is broken. I attached this picture to prove that FSO and TRRC are allied up chasing an Azteca kamacho as evidence of the hostility between the groups. 

Edited by Rickyriggz
  • Like 22
  • Confused 3
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to the above question: The reporting parties received damage from these parties so to them I ask the following in order to get a wide picture of the reported situation: What was your reason for shooting at the reporting party? Do you feel that you had DM rights on the occupants? Do you feel that the collision of the red bike and the bifta as shown in the reporting parties evidence was sufficient enough to grant DM rights? Why or why not?

Yes I do, I feel like we had more then enough reason's to open fire at Roland after seeing him not only run 2 of our own allies over but then spin around and do it to a 3rd ally. He was given benefit of the doubt not once, but twice until the 3rd time of him doing it to the point of it being very clear in our eyes it was intentional and no longer an accident.

 After running over 4 people not once did he try to say anything OOC, He ran  over 4 people and is only Now claiming for it to be desync, He was Holding back crucial information on a forum report attempting to get people punished by withholding the information. 

I do not believe once was there a point where it was considered a "convoy", The most was 3 Vehicles and a BF, I hardly see this as a convoy in terms of realism and IC risk we already face IC.

As Ricky said, If we run a cop over, Desync or not, we would be lit up on the first time ran them over and it would be deemed IC, We let this happen 3 times, Until that was enough and we were well within our rights to open fire.

  • Like 15
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

ID 135 here,

Here's the POV that influenced my decision to shoot at the reporting party -> https://streamable.com/y37l3y

As stated in previous responses, he had ran over 2/3 people already with Kane being the first I believe. The reason why I didn't just shoot him straight after running over Kane when we re-joined the chase was because I gave him the benefit of the doubt and I also didn't witness the 2nd person being ran over, but literally a few seconds after him telling us it was an accident, he runs the 3rd person over. Therefore, I was within my rights to shoot.

Unfortunately I couldn't save POV since I crashed shortly after shooting at the reporting party which can be confirmed by checking eclipse crash reports -> cd2f1c259f30df5b0ee81116c50a8fa5.png

To sum up, yes I believe I had DM rights to shoot the reporting party as I witnessed him run over Kane, heard he ran over another person and also witnessed him running over the third and final person, the LFM on the bike.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Tyrone Shakur here 
regarding this below
-In addition to the above question: The reporting parties received damage from these parties so to them I ask the following in order to get a wide picture of the reported situation: What was your reason for shooting at the reporting party? Do you feel that you had DM rights on the occupants? Do you feel that the collision of the red bike and the bifta as shown in the reporting parties evidence was sufficient enough to grant DM rights? Why or why not?


The reporting party rammed 4 of our people and when we started shooting he started shooting back granting me DM rights. Didn't save any POV of the incident because i wasn't notified. And regarding what ricky is saying I request another mod or an admin to take this report ensuring no COI is broken.
unknown.png


unknown.png

Edited by Driqz
  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no conflict of interest. My faction is not reported and is not involved in the reported situation in any way. I was given the staff position that I retain because Head Administrators trust me to remain impartial in all reports. Furthermore I run most of my reports past several levels of senior staff before concluding it's not as if I just pull decisions out of nowhere with no input from other staff. After I have concluded the report if you disagree with my conclusion then feel free to appeal. We will be reviewing and closing this report once all responses have had 24 hours to respond.

  • Like 12
  • Confused 7
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Donald_Tate [146]

Hello, Donald Tate here. This started with me locating them inside the garbage chop shop where I requested backup and had two allies arrive. (One being the Rapid GT and the other the Bifta). The reporting party would then start to leave the area and this is where the chase begins. This would eventually lead to a more prominent convoy than expected which I can't take on board however my personal actions in being the first person to find them I think I have the most strongest grounds to be there.

My POV does not have the full chase nor do I have the part where my allies start to shoot. I only have the last two (2) minutes of the chase. (I believe my passenger Josh has his POV from where this started). My POV can be seen here

I do want to point something out on the reporting parties side, why did they not leave when they had the chance? They were able to shake us following them due to us slowing down for cops in the area and the Rapid GT who got pulled over by the police officer. I believe they came to taunt/bait the Kamacho seen in their POV to provoke us to do something/chase them again. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi tony here, the rest of them have pretty much summed it up, I feel like we had death match rights on them after watching them run over 3 of our allies. I do not feel like there was once a convoy, HC said over radio multiple times not to convoy to avoid the chase from becoming a convoy and they were only shot after the 3rd time of running an ally over.

Edited by Tony Sloan
.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hola! I was involved from the start of the chase as we chased him from a chopshop where he was chopping a rapid gt, I was on and off the chase due to being pulled over and stalling but witnessed him run over multiple of my allies and continue to taunt and mock us while being chased. Yes I believe I had DM rights on him as he ran over multiple of my allies. I only shot ID 88 after he was injured from his bifta blowing and finished him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, at this point guys, can you only reply if you have additional evidence not submitted or you are yet to give your side of things.

Obviously a lot to sort through here, so we'd appreciate some time and patience.

- Bala.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PLAYER REPORT ACCEPTED

Thank you for your patience while this report was under review.

After reviewing this report and evidence attached to it, I've decided to accept this report however I will not be issuing punishments to individuals in regard to this report, instead I offer the following notes to all that were involved:    

  • NRP Convoy & Behavior Concerns - I do want to advise against having an unrealistic pursuit when at all possible. 2 Kamachos, 1 Rebla (or whatever it is), and a couple bikes is a bit of overkill for 1 bifta. Also driving through the whole city blasting people away with automatic heavy weaponry is a bit dubious as well. I understand it is hard to control a situation in which you are following and not leading. However it would be wiser to hold off on firing until you are in less populated areas of the city if at all possible. If someone is abusing that by just circling legion square then obviously you are left without choices but generally there is the ability to be a little more aware of the part of the city you are in. Just because you have more people and more heavies is not a good mindset nor is it within the ordinance of the rules to justify nrp behavior just because you can. If Los Santos was set in Mexico you would be 100% correct. But it's not. It's set in the US in which if gangs were just rolling around blasting automatic heavy weapons in the street that are close to police officers there would be DIRE consequences. However this is not a server rule breach and rather a question of roleplay quality over rule ordinance. Therefore I will not be giving any punishments regarding this.
  • DM Concerns - I am dropping the allegations of DM. It is for this reason: The rams, although the reporting party state were accidental, gave the reported parties DM rights in order to open fire on them. Although it is likely these rams were accidental - there is no way that the other side could have known this. From their POV they watched you ram and injure multiple of their allies and therefore this granted them DM rights. I do want to point that the hit to the red bf400 from Rolands POV is not significant enough to grant DM rights- but that when added to the additional rams it does.
  • Use of term “bodycam” - The use of the term bodycam ICly is unacceptable UNLESS it is referring to an actual IC item that was roleplayed. Shadowplay, recording software, etc should never be referred to icly. To do so is mixing. In the future should behavior like this be observed, It will be punished so take this as your warning to cease all sorts of behavior such as this.

I am disheartened that established role players that I have known for as long as I have feel that IC situations would affect my integrity as a staff member, nevertheless if you disagree with our conclusion feel free to file a punishment appeal following the punishment appeal guidelines and format. 

Regards,

Senior Moderator Krooks & Senior Support Bala

  • Like 11
  • NAY 4
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
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.