Plan B
General => Suggestions => Closed => Topic started by: Altus_Demens on November 03, 2017, 06:54:57 am
-
Hi there,
there is another thing I wish to suggest.
We've got a rule stating that:
You are not allowed to help the opposing team in any way.
This is quite simple and unambigious before it comes to civilians.
At the same time, civilians are able to attack any other player ingame and get into any other player's car. Sometimes it leads to the situation when a civilian easily kills a member of a team (for example, terrorists) and then escapes with another terrorist, his "friend", getting in his vehicle; other terrorists are not able to do anything with it, because they can't stop the car (by shooting/popping tyres) nor kill the civilian, because the passengers of some vehicles (the simplest example is NRG) are invulnerable.
I find it unfair and annoying at some particular situations, and there is an easy solution:
If a civilian, during his lifetime, dealt damage to a member of one of the teams (good or bad), he shouldn't be able to get in the car of a member of this team (just like members of the opposing team) before he respawns. Very simple, and should be as effective.
It seems to be a good idea to add polls to the suggestions, so here is another one. Please, vote and explain your position. :)
-
Everyone is vulnerable in some way. This might not be fair with all but we can still hit the passenger on nrg with Sniper/Chainsaw easily but from neutral point of view, Yes it is unfair a terrorist helping a civilian to kill another terrorist. While looking at it differently, Civilians are not hard to kill when against any other team. So, it should stay as it is because you can get in that car too or just run. Normal shotgun is not hard to avoid nor OP like the Spas-12.
-
-1
Civilian is not a class. He or she can do whatever he/she wants except breaking rules.
-
Civilians don't have a recommendation from above on how to play, they can help each class in following their gameplay. The advantage of this class is that their duty is fluid, which means that within a minute they can change their mind about who they help. This is a compensation for a weak set of weapons (as it was already said, they’re easy targets) and, in my opinion, it should not change.
-
Cmon man... Civil can kill terrorist and terrorist can kill civil so no issue
-100
-
According to the replies, my topic has not been read carefully. Let me give an example.
Skittles, Quido and Altus_Demens are terrorists. Mia is a civilian. Skittles teams up with Quido and they engage a fight with cops. In the meantime, Altus_Demens teams up with Mia and Mia kills Quido. Skittles is willing to revenge by killing Mia, but Mia gets on Altus_Demens' NRG as a passenger, becomes invulnerable, waves her hand to Skitt and gets driven away. Skittles is unable to kill Mia, his enemy, because she abused the anti-teamkilling system: Skittles cannot kill Altus_Demens and stop the bike; Skittles cannot pop the tyres of Altus_Demens' bike because Altus_Demens is Skittles' teammate, Skittles cannot harm Mia because a passenger on an NRG is immortal. I find it unfair. Mia shouldn't be able to become immortal with the help of Altus_Demens, because they belong to different teams. She can still jump on Altus_Demens' bike so Skittles could snipe her; she can try to run away. But she shouldn't be able to use the help of her friend from the other team to become invulnerable.
Please, read the example above and understand what I am talking about... (@Piu)
-
-1
Wont solve the problem because Mia (example) can jump on your bike you will be faster .and she can kill they by sniper.
They can shot her with combat but still one bullet of here sniper on wheel will make them slow....
Not good suggestion.
-
According to the replies, my topic has not been read carefully. Let me give an example.
Skittles, Quido and Altus_Demens are terrorists. Mia is a civilian. Skittles teams up with Quido and they engage a fight with cops. In the meantime, Altus_Demens teams up with Mia and Mia kills Quido. Skittles is willing to revenge by killing Mia, but Mia gets on Altus_Demens' NRG as a passenger, becomes invulnerable, waves her hand to Skitt and gets driven away. Skittles is unable to kill Mia, his enemy, because she abused the anti-teamkilling system: Skittles cannot kill Altus_Demens and stop the bike; Skittles cannot pop the tyres of Altus_Demens' bike because Altus_Demens is Skittles' teammate, Skittles cannot harm Mia because a passenger on an NRG is immortal. I find it unfair. Mia shouldn't be able to become immortal with the help of Altus_Demens, because they belong to different teams. She can still jump on Altus_Demens' bike so Skittles could snipe her; she can try to run away. But she shouldn't be able to use the help of her friend from the other team to become invulnerable.
Please, read the example above and understand what I am talking about... (@Piu)
I've understood it altus..
What I want to say is -1
Wont solve the problem because Mia (example) can jump on your bike you will be faster .and she can kill they by sniper.
They can shot her with combat but still one bullet of here sniper on wheel will make them slow....
Not good suggestion.
-
According to the replies, my topic has not been read carefully. Let me give an example.
Skittles, Quido and Altus_Demens are terrorists. Mia is a civilian. Skittles teams up with Quido and they engage a fight with cops. In the meantime, Altus_Demens teams up with Mia and Mia kills Quido. Skittles is willing to revenge by killing Mia, but Mia gets on Altus_Demens' NRG as a passenger, becomes invulnerable, waves her hand to Skitt and gets driven away. Skittles is unable to kill Mia, his enemy, because she abused the anti-teamkilling system: Skittles cannot kill Altus_Demens and stop the bike; Skittles cannot pop the tyres of Altus_Demens' bike because Altus_Demens is Skittles' teammate, Skittles cannot harm Mia because a passenger on an NRG is immortal. I find it unfair. Mia shouldn't be able to become immortal with the help of Altus_Demens, because they belong to different teams. She can still jump on Altus_Demens' bike so Skittles could snipe her; she can try to run away. But she shouldn't be able to use the help of her friend from the other team to become invulnerable.
Yes, Altus, I understood the problem you’ve described. I suspect that this topic is caused by a similar case which took place some time ago with me, Mia and some Vice President, who I decided to team up after killing Mia’s (security) team mate.
I’ll say the same as I already said here and I’ve said back then. Because civilians’ duty is fluid, their support for one or another class can be modified during the game, considering various factors. They don’t have clearly defined opposite and ally teams, so it depends on them who they help. As for a restriction to allow them taking a side only once for one ‘spawn life’, I’m against it, since it’s their privilege to amend the way they play the game mode during the gameplay.
-
I think you're looking at this the wrong way. Civilians aren't a team and they can do whatever they want. The civilians aren't the problem- it's the person who is protecting the civilians when they kill other members of their team who is the problem. If you look at it this way, the terrorist who abuses their anti-teamkilling measures to protect someone who is opposing their team is already breaking the rule you mentioned:
You are not allowed to help the opposing team in any way.
In another more common example, take a bunch of civilians and cops riding together, and the cop driving goes near the president, at which point the civilians shoot at the president from their car that can't be destroyed by protectors. The cop should either make it impossible for the civilians to hit the president or he should sacrifice himself and kill the offenders. If he's not doing either and helping the civilians by chasing after the president with them, then he's breaking the aforementioned rule- he's functionally equivalent to a VHH-ing civilian. I agree with you that this is unfair- it's really wonderful to encounter a posse with sniper rifles doing this while you're president. There's nothing you can do about it with no admins around and people seem to have no shame.
In another example, take the presidents and protectors who inexplicably let their civilian (or sometimes terrorist) friends kill every security who they aren't friends with when they could easily stop it and not doing so puts the president at risk. I've never understood why this one is not a bigger deal, except that Lacerta used to do it.
Sure, the civilians are not being loyal to either side, but they can do that. It's the people who help them or allow them to hurt their team who are the real problems and can and should be punished under the existing rules.
-
2YoMama: yes, you are right in what you're saying.
But I am suggesting a script which would completely prevent it. There would be no need to punish anyone for it; it would just be impossible to "abuse" this way. Why are you against adding such a script?
-
-1, no need
-
-1
Wont solve the problem because Mia (example) can jump on your bike you will be faster .and she can kill they by sniper.
But in that case she is VULNERABLE. If she's a passenger, she's NOT. That's the difference.
I like the suggestion, seems logical to me. +1
-
Civilians don't have a recommendation from above on how to play, they can help each class in following their gameplay. The advantage of this class is that their duty is fluid, which means that within a minute they can change their mind about who they help. This is a compensation for a weak set of weapons (as it was already said, they’re easy targets) and, in my opinion, it should not change.
Exactly this ^
-
Adding a new script to stop this kind of abuses is not really needed.. I think this happens very rare. Also who uses them are regular players and they have to be punished. Not the only civillian getting punishment, the team player who lets civil abuse the anti teamshoot needs to get punished too.
But as I said, there is no need for any rule since civillians are free to do everything. There is a rule already and admins can punish anyone based on proofs. No need to make a script, no need to add a new rule. Because it will bring here more reports, more complicated stuff instead of solving the issue. Ofcourse those are my personal opinion.
-
Since no significant chane has occured in the past, I'll rather go +1
As Cobra said.
-
Civilians don't have a recommendation from above on how to play, they can help each class in following their gameplay. The advantage of this class is that their duty is fluid, which means that within a minute they can change their mind about who they help. This is a compensation for a weak set of weapons (as it was already said, they’re easy targets) and, in my opinion, it should not change.
Exactly this ^
-
Civilians don't have a recommendation from above on how to play, they can help each class in following their gameplay. The advantage of this class is that their duty is fluid, which means that within a minute they can change their mind about who they help. This is a compensation for a weak set of weapons (as it was already said, they’re easy targets) and, in my opinion, it should not change.
Exactly this ^
Civilians(trustable) can be used as agents(about which a lot of suggestions have been made)
Civilian is new Swat imo
-
No need to make a script, no need to add a new rule. Because it will bring here more reports, more complicated stuff instead of solving the issue.
COBRA, but the point of my suggestion is, in turn, to decrease the amount of reports and rulebreakings. Look, the script would prevent the abusive situation, it would make the related 'crime' impossible, thus there won't be no complicated stuff, confusion or unnecessary punishments. Considering this, I don't understand your argumentation.
Since no significant chane has occured in the past, I'll rather go +1
As Cobra said.
I didn't understand it either. You wrote +1 - to what? To the suggestion? But COBRA seems to be against it. Or did you support his words this way:?
Civilians(trustable) can be used as agents(about which a lot of suggestions have been made)
Civilian is new Swat imo
So he'd ask himself the question out loud: "Can you secure Christmas with an approximation only eighteen million seconds left of the original old red chimney?"
"Sure," says Japhy laughing.
-
I wrote +1 because there has to be an update (major)
But i was against it and Supporting Cobra's Views
And Yes The Civilians are new SWAT
-
I don't think this is a good idea for reasons already stated above.
-1.
-
Quick three questions for the ones who voted no:
1. Do you think the anti teamkill system was made so you can help civilians escape or harm your team mates?
2a. If your answer was 'no', what would you do to prevent the anti teamkill system from being exploited like that?
2b. If your answer was 'yes', don't you think helping someone to attack your team is, indirectly, the exact opposite thing the anti teamkill is supposed to prevent?
Of course civilians can pick any side at any time, I don't know why you guys are saying that like it had been questioned. They can pick any side because any side can confront them. And this is not possible while a member of one of those sides carries the civilian in their vehicle.
-
Quick three questions for the ones who voted no:
1. Do you think the anti teamkill system was made so you can help civilians escape or harm your team mates?
2a. If your answer was 'no', what would you do to prevent the anti teamkill system from being exploited like that?
2b. If your answer was 'yes', don't you think helping someone to attack your team is, indirectly, the exact opposite thing the anti teamkill is supposed to prevent?
Of course civilians can pick any side at any time, I don't know why you guys are saying that like it had been questioned. They can pick any side because any side can confront them. And this is not possible while a member of one of those sides carries the civilian in their vehicle.
How about just add a command that allows or disable civilans to enter ur car like /lock and /unlock [only for civ class] if allow it than make it possible that their vehicle can be damage by team member when a civ is in there and a terror or police is driving , ofc civ can still be jack the car they just can sit in it when its locked to prevent this Situations. no big scripting needed
-
...what would you do to prevent the anti teamkill system from being exploited like that?
A rule against people doing this already exists. Limiting civilians is not the solution nor is it addressing the root of the problem: the teammates who protect them.
...I am suggesting a script which would completely prevent it. There would be no need to punish anyone for it; it would just be impossible to "abuse" this way. Why are you against adding such a script?
I never said I was against adding a script- the word hadn't even come up in the topic until you wrote it in this post. However, I don't see how you could possibly make one that wouldn't just move the problem somewhere else. How do you even begin to work out making it impossible to abuse? How do you determine if a helping civilian killed a moronic team member in self-defense? How do you handle the case where a civilian is driving a team member, but other team members shoot his car (teamkill)? How do you handle civilians on top of a car? It's just not an easy or worthwhile problem to try to solve with a script. The rule already exists, so it's up to the staff to enforce it.
-
...what would you do to prevent the anti teamkill system from being exploited like that?
A rule against people doing this already exists. Limiting civilians is not the solution nor is it addressing the root of the problem: the teammates who protect them.
It exists but it is never applied to civilians. Skittles, civilian, once got in the vicepresident's bike to escape from me, a cop, after he had attacked me and was about to die. We argued about it for some minutes, he told me civilians and vicepresidents weren't 'opposing teams' as the rule says. I told Altus and Altus said the rule needs clarification. So no, I wouldn't say the rules already prevent this from happening
-
The rules regarding Civilians doing this have to be clarified first.
-
Civilians are weak! Dont change anything!
We can report that terro who is helping civilian for teamkilling if that civilian constantly kills terrorists whith help of his terrorist buddy.
-
The votes are your answer, close the topic because it ain’t happening
-
No need to make a script, no need to add a new rule. Because it will bring here more reports, more complicated stuff instead of solving the issue.
COBRA, but the point of my suggestion is, in turn, to decrease the amount of reports and rulebreakings. Look, the script would prevent the abusive situation, it would make the related 'crime' impossible, thus there won't be no complicated stuff, confusion or unnecessary punishments. Considering this, I don't understand your argumentation.
Oh my words not so clear, so let me tell what I want to mean exactly here then..
I mean there is no need to change anything for the thing which happens so rare. It's not a big deal when some smartass doing it for to gain advantage. We have a rule already:
You are not allowed to help the opposing team in any way.
So whoever helps civilian to kill his teammate, that player will be punished based on this rule. No need to do anything about it. Adding a new script or adding a new rule will make it more complicated stuff just like as the situation we had "no armor shooting" issue in old PTP. Like as more fake reports, more company for staff..
-
No need to make a script, no need to add a new rule. Because it will bring here more reports, more complicated stuff instead of solving the issue.
COBRA, but the point of my suggestion is, in turn, to decrease the amount of reports and rulebreakings. Look, the script would prevent the abusive situation, it would make the related 'crime' impossible, thus there won't be no complicated stuff, confusion or unnecessary punishments. Considering this, I don't understand your argumentation.
Oh my words not so clear, so let me tell what I want to mean exactly here then..
I mean there is no need to change anything for the thing which happens so rare. It's not a big deal when some smartass doing it for to gain advantage. We have a rule already:
You are not allowed to help the opposing team in any way.
So whoever helps civilian to kill his teammate, that player will be punished based on this rule. No need to do anything about it. Adding a new script or adding a new rule will make it more complicated stuff just like as the situation we had "no armor shooting" issue in old PTP. Like as more fake reports, more company for staff..
ah i don't agree with you cobra in punishing the player that is helping a civil :
for example : i'm a civil and i want to help the president but one of the security is shooting me so i hide in another security's car to ivoid getting shoot,its totally fine and this security doesn't have to get punished for this.
Simply you are creating a problem from a none problem thing altus.
the only thing that must be punished for is "teamkilling" means if you tried to kill the player from your own team to help that specific civil by raming him , carparking , spray ( i'm talking just about helping civilians not other class).
-
ah i don't agree with you cobra in punishing the player that is helping a civil :
for example : i'm a civil and i want to help the president but one of the security is shooting me so i hide in another security's car to ivoid getting shoot,its totally fine and this security doesn't have to get punished for this.
Oh yeah man ofcourse that is different situation. But there are some smartasses for example: Mia is civil and Altus is security with you. You trying to kill Mia but she hiding in Altus's vehicle and shooting you from there. In that situation; Altus & Mia needs to be punished. That's my point. But otherwise, you don't need to get punished ofc..
-
Lock this already. The majority have voted.
(http://dodaj.rs/images/o5lcc.png)
-
Lock this already. The majority have voted.
(http://dodaj.rs/images/o5lcc.png)
don't post just to post,we arn't stuped we all see the vote poll.
iven if the majority said No still need to listen to the ones saying Yes to get a better solution for this .
-
Your suggestion however can end up in many different ways which would be a mess.
If a civilian, during his lifetime, dealt damage to a member of one of the teams (good or bad), he shouldn't be able to get in the car of a member of this team (just like members of the opposing team) before he respawns.
Reasoning:
Let's start off with an highly probable hypothetical situation
>Terros driveby with NRG,You jog infront of them pretending to be retarded and then you jack their vehicle from front, while preparing to gleefully throttle away while smoking them in the face but sadly the rule will either remove you from the vehicle or won't let you in the first place and hence getting you rekt.
The GrandTheftAuto in your GTASA-MP is denied to you.
This will curb the freedom of the civilian while they are supposed to be...free in game.
If this rule get enforced the following situations will happen:
-O The Civilian can't shoot his chasers at all if he wants to jack their vehicle to get away. Giving an improper advantage to terros.
-O Non Civilian teams enter every vehicle in a small area with limited vehicles and you can't jack em back to escape and I am prettty sure unless you make peace with most of the trigger happy peeps you have a high chance to shoot a Non Civilian team.
-O President Friendly Civilian tries to get in a car of his ally to escape the terros from behind. But can't do shit because he just shot a stupid cop who was trying to kill him earlier.
We don't need a specific countermeasure against a variable action which punishes the whole action just because of one slight possibility of it.
Just make alernative rule like this:
"You are not supposed to assist a Civillian who is trying to 'Kill' your teammate. /pk command should be used"
and Proper Video Proof or anything that exposes the whole situation in light, should be of priority and must be counted in while giving judgement so that a more reasonable and rational judgement shall be given.
Why I specified Kill is because on can always pop the retarded Chasers' tires if he is innocent and didn't shoot him to kill and motivation of troubling him or the person he shot before.
Another thing I'd like to add is a 10 second Drive-By disabling when you get in X's car if you shoot X's teammate (X's Class =/= Civilian Class).
This would prevent the civilian to shoot the teammate in haste or fear. (Shotgun lands on the face instead of the tire and damages the chaser).
This would also lead to a more easier evidence as the driver would have to chase the teammate for ten seconds so the other can shoot. Which in turn leads to a direct evidence of team blocking.
or/and
Apply a feature of bullets not damaging Non Civ Driver's teammates and disabling of it when the civilian gets out.
Inb4 random says: "Contradiction jajaja"
No, if the teammate still doesn't follow the teammates instruction of leaving the team friendly civillian and still chases the damn car and messing the whole planned course of action. Then the civilian can retaliate against that moron by shooting his tires and gaining significant distance to go away.
The votes are your answer, close the topic because it ain’t happening
Lock this already. The majority have voted.
(http://dodaj.rs/images/o5lcc.png)
Let's see.
Topic Started: Yesterday
People voted: 27+6= 33.
Forum memberlist: 1205.
Active members: Refer to https://planbserver.com/forum/index.php?action=mlist;sort=posts;start=0;desc
Filter: Posts
(yes it's a generalization maybe and other shit but I can't judge 1205 profiles to see who is more active or not and this much rank will cancel it out and probably give out a lowball)
Pg1-3(30x3) has 90 frequent post participants on this forum.
Ok let's take out like 10 for those inactive doods like Tounsix for now, you still have 80.
So basically you favor the topic's closure which is was made less than 48hrs and you are satisfied with the 27 vote. People who are small compared to the atleast 80 active posters.
Topics should be thoroughly discussed so reopening of it via a new one will be less likely and keeping it more organized and easy can be possible.
So I suggest you to wait and let a reasonable amount of voters vote and give reasonable justifications.
(Although I doubt it will happen because Altus is a well known Forum poster and an Admin, and the staff is reasonable. But just to get this out there)
TL;DR(I am trying out anchor links so that my short points can get linked to the full explanation):
It will cause problems as there are other variable situations that might lead to ruining of a Civillians gameplay just because of one possibility of an action. Click Here for Full Explanation (#post_clickherefullexplanation)
A more alternative solution is to make it more specific. "You are not supposed to assist a Civillian who is trying to 'Kill' your teammate. /pk command should be used" with the 10 second driveby disablement for the civillian. Click Here for Expansion (#post_clickhereforexpansion)
Crash and Fini you gotta wait and let more votes and opinions come in. Proof n Reasoning here (#post_proofnreasoninghere)
-
This issue is similar to the /duty issue. No scripting should be enforced on players.
Just make alernative rule like this:
"You are not supposed to assist a Civillian who is trying to 'Kill' your teammate. /pk command should be used"
and Proper Video Proof or anything that exposes the whole situation in light, should be of priority and must be counted in while giving judgement so that a more reasonable and rational judgement shall be given.
Something like this will help, in my opinion.
-
Civilians don't have a recommendation from above on how to play, they can help each class in following their gameplay. The advantage of this class is that their duty is fluid, which means that within a minute they can change their mind about who they help. This is a compensation for a weak set of weapons (as it was already said, they’re easy targets) and, in my opinion, it should not change.
Definitely. That's why civilian is not considered as a class and not given powerful weapons. Civilians can do whatever they want to that's what we get when we type /duty. Not needed -1.
-
What type of freedom is this? Changes the way the team works, I like how it's always been -1
-
I believe that, by implementing this rule, we would (in a way) punish players that aren't the real problem in this situation - like Yomama explained. The passenger civilian is not breaking any rules, it's the irresponsible terrorist/police class member that enables him to get away scot-free that causes the issue. Civilians have always been an absolutely unconstrained class and it should stay that way.
Alternatively, I propose that an explicit description be added under the "No Teamshoot" rule about how helping civilians in this way is prohibited. I suspect that some players think/would argue that assisting civilians in this manner is simply a loophole because it is not clearly stated under the "No Teamshoot" rule (only stunning/blocking is mentioned). Adding the aforementioned description would remove all doubts. It would make the players think twice about doing this and it would allow the appropriate punishments to be carried out more swiftly.
-
Alternatively, I propose that an explicit description be added under the "No Teamshoot" rule about how helping civilians in this way is prohibited. I suspect that some players think/would argue that assisting civilians in this manner is simply a loophole because it is not clearly stated under the "No Teamshoot" rule (only stunning/blocking is mentioned). Adding the aforementioned description would remove all doubts. It would make the players think twice about doing this and it would allow the appropriate punishments to be carried out more swiftly.
I agree that it would be better to have it explicitly written, but it should include all classes, not just civilians, since other attacking players can also surf teammates' cars for an advantage (like terrorists on a cop car, for example).
-
Alternatively, I propose that an explicit description be added under the "No Teamshoot" rule about how helping civilians in this way is prohibited. I suspect that some players think/would argue that assisting civilians in this manner is simply a loophole because it is not clearly stated under the "No Teamshoot" rule (only stunning/blocking is mentioned). Adding the aforementioned description would remove all doubts. It would make the players think twice about doing this and it would allow the appropriate punishments to be carried out more swiftly.
I agree that it would be better to have it explicitly written, but it should include all classes, not just civilians, since other attacking players can also surf teammates' cars for an advantage (like terrorists on a cop car, for example).
I thought about that and I believe players are aware that this is a blatant violation of their duty, as they would be shielding players that they are obligated to kill - whereas you can choose whether to kill or team up with civilians. But I suppose a more inclusive description wouldn't do any harm.
-
I think the system that was proposed is a bit too broad, and since this happens rarely, I feel it's more likely to punish people with good intentions than those with bad intentions. This has gotten me thinking about a possible other system though: if you're a civilian, and you're a passenger with a member of either team, and you shoot someone of said team, you will be auto-kicked out of the vehicle. So, for example, if you're a civilian riding with a security, and you're shooting another security or police, you will be kicked from the vehicle. This won't prevent all of the abuse you described, and will still allow people getting away, but I feel it will be more efficient in punishing those with bad intentions.