TOPIC: [SSRP] New rule

Server Name: SSRP #1 and # 2

Suggestion Title: adding a new rule to the cop job:
How would it benefit the server: More RP to weapon checks, atm you just know you're going to be shot. It would also give more of a danger to carrying big guns around, which is how it's supposed to be.

Potential Issues/Exploits: nah lad

Additional notes: Hi

I don't think its needed and i don't agree with you with this new rule.



Good luck with the suggestion bud!

Holly Banker wrote:
Well are you going to add a justifiable reason? Right now you just sound like you're against proper cop RP.

Gr8 suggestion would make sense. Atleast add it to "PERP"


P.S FUK HOLLY

Holly, what exactly would be the reason not to add this? Let me guess ''to much RP''

Anyway great suggestion and actually makes sense!

yes please, playing cop is boring cos a guy can just pull out a dragunov and 1 tap you

This rule has been brought up
In the past and got denied its nearly impossible to
Check if some
One is fail rping when you preform
The check

The only way to check this is with video
Proof. This will give a lot of admins a hard time trying to
Figure out if some one fail rpee
Or
Not.
As barely any one records
These days

Typed from
Phone

Talking about RP: What about do something likeand then use theto see if you would handcuff him or not. Or you get another officer who holds the guy who is gonna be weapon checked at gun point.

WaLK3r wrote: you would instantly get shot in the face zarp in not strict enough people would rather take the risk of being warned then losing something as they know they'll get a warn at max.
whereas on perp if you failrp you would end up with a week ban or something

ParaMontana wrote:
Are you writing a sonnet mate?

I think there is more issues to do this... There is people that random weapon check every 2 seconds.. And what if he does it to you and you have a gun? What should you do, just stand there and look at the cop and wait for him to arrest you?


This should not be added. You are not even at a gun point while being checked

Holly Banker wrote: I think your reasoning would be the common it's semi serious Rp. And i agree I don't think its needed especially as this is the first time someone has complained publicly (that I know of) and also you role play as a cop generally and maybe you are making thisfor personal benefits? I'm neutral it can be fun but this is semi serious Rp.

Keith Cozart wrote:
Maybe not have a large, illegal weapon on your person at all time?

Your second reason is nonsensical and the exact scenario is reciprocated in the mugging rule. Many people mug you, but what do you do, just wait until he kills you? Pull out a gun? Of course you give him the money, because the rules state you must.

So what if you don't have a gun out? It's stupid that such a crucial tool for cops is ruined by something so trivial. Weapon checking requires a point blank range, which means that you're entirely vulnerable to the exact thing that this rule prevents, an RP ruining factor that should be prohibited.
Gmod Troller wrote:
Your opinion is invalid and your reasoning is stupid.

Exrobite wrote: So is yours. Either way I'm not the only one that had used this reasoning for thinking a suggestion isn't worth while and also what Paramontana and kept Cozart said, it will cause trouble and be harder for Admins. As I said it's semi serious it doesn't all meed to be exactly how it would in real life when we have hand cannons that we can fly with and unlimited fuel and health upgrades.

Gmod Troller wrote:
So under the pretense of semi serious RP we disregard rules that encourage even the slightest inclination of RP? Sounds like a Gang wars server to me.

I didn't think I would have to address such a trivial issue such as the way proof could be provided for the rule, but I guess that the fallacy that has been reiterated copious times needs to be explained:

How do you get proof of RDM if the user doesn't admit it?

How do you get proof of a mug victim going against fearRP if the user doesn't admit it?

Ah, I think I found the answer in the argument itself:
"paramontana wrote:
So many rules already have a limited way of proving them with the theory of 100% certainty. Many of which can only be totally proved using video proof. So don't give me the bullshit about video proof being the only proof, because there are many situations already in the game that are identical to this, meaning the staff are already well versed in dealing with this sort of scenario.

And as for the "it's only SSRP argument:"
This shouldn't be used as an excuse to throw out ideas that bring something to a job. I'm not going to lie, the entire weapon checking ruleset needs to be adjusted, it's really bad at the minute because it's just cops going around to everyone in an area, and weaponchecking them while spamming their bind. That provides little RP, and little fun, but I suppose it's ok because it's "only SSRP."

A better way to structure this system would involve incorporating more RP to the job, only being able to weapon check in designated official buildings, or at police - designated zones. This would add more RP to both gangster and cop, the gangsters looking to avoid these areas due to the inherent danger of their inhabitants, and the cops actually patrolling areas with RP. This would be more fun, but again, I suppose it's not good because "it's only SSRP."

Additionally, if you don't trust the staff team with new rule additions, I don't see why bother giving them power. They are easily capable of adapting to new rules, if they can deal with random weapon checks, they can easily deal with an updated ruleset, and if even the CMs are doubting this, they need to rethink their acceptance policies.

Exrobite wrote: Not that we can't trust the staff using their powers correctly it's that you already have said that we have a lot of rules that you can only get video proof for, we don't need another if thats the case of us having a lot. What would make you think we don't trust them because of adding a new rule? warning without proof? as stated before it's harder to get proof for this then it's worth and there are already rules that you have limited types of proof what is the current point in adding something with "limited" proof that can get someone in trouble for and cause a bunch more of F1's that nothing happens with because they don't have good enough proof such as a video as Para stated would probably be one of the only few that could do something.

Gmod Troller wrote:
So whats the point in having a fear rp at all? for the "little" rp that it adds and apparent monumental strain on the staff team that it entails.

Exrobite wrote: FearRP is so it's fair not just inclining RP. As I stated it's unneeded and will cause extra F1's that cannot be dealt with properly due to lack of suffiecient evidence of only the FEW piece of evidence that can be classified as sufficient.

Gmod Troller wrote:
Applying similar logic that you have just used, no rule is suitable for change or being added because the updated rule will require proof to deal with, meaning it would be too much trouble for the staff team.