|
Login to ZARP
|
|
RP Name The Duck 2 Link to Steam Profile Hoblit SteamID STEAM_0:0:29981691 Current Gametracker Profiles Server 1 - www.gametracker.com/player/Hoblit/94.23.19.200:27015/ Server 2 - www.gametracker.com/player/Hoblit/94.23.19.200:27025/ Old Gametracker Profiles Server 1 - www.gametracker.com/player/Nonoswe/94.23.19.200:27015/ Server 1 - www.gametracker.com/player/Nonoswe/94.23.19.200:27025/ Age 15 Estimated Server Time 1h a day as a minimum, prob over 5h on weekends Languages I speak Swedish, English and a little bit french (the worst kind of french) Explain "Random Death Match" and give an example scenario. Random Death Match or shorter RDM is when you kill someone without a valid reason, i will make a scenario to explain. Player Y kills player X for no valid reason, this is a short scenario of RDM. Explain "New Life Rule" and give an example scenario. New Life Rule or shorter NLR is when you run back to your death location with the NLR timer still running, a scenario would be player Y is being raided and he gets killed by player X, Player Y runs back and kills player X with a active NLR timer. Explain "Metagaming" and give an example scenario. Metagaming is when you talk about IC stuff in the OOC chat, To explain it better i will make a scenario for you! Player Y was raided and is calling for help in OOC, this is a short scenario of metagaming. Explain how you would handle the following situation: Player x accuses player y for RDMing him, the console log shows that player y killed player x. I would ask player Y if there is any proof, if there is none, i will ask player X why he killed player Y, if no valid answer is given, a warning will be issued. If player Y got proof (Screenshot/Video) that's valid, a warning will also be issued, if there is a valid reason to kill player Y and there is no proof, to keep it fair no actions will be made. Explain how you would handle the following situation: Player x accuses player y for breaking NLR, the kills are pretty close together in console (a few lines apart) at a peak time. First i will ask for proof from player X, after that i will ask player Y why he killed player X after he was killed by him. If the reason was like "he killed me before so i killed him" i would be warning him for NLR. Explain how you would handle the following situation: Player x calls for help in the OOC chat because his bank is being raided I would verbally warn player X for metagaming first, if repeated, i would have teleported to him and explained what metagaming is and pasted the rule to him and i would have warned him for metagaming. Why I should be chosen. Why you should choose me? becuase i'm a duck, jokes aside, I'm a calm person that can turn crazy while roleplaying (wont go nuts in admin sit I know that the last part was mostly just crap i wrote togheter. I have no new warnings since my last applications, thats a good sign i guess, and i have also made my profile look more funky If i have recent warnings, they will never be repeated again! Regards, The Duck 2 |
|
|
Edited 11 years 4 months ago by Hoblit.
The topic has been locked.
|
|
LEL
|
|
|
Edited 11 years 4 months ago by .Ryan.
The topic has been locked.
|
|
2mouths am I missing something or is it a spelling mistake?
|
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
[F] Zax Harper wrote:
2mouths am I missing something or is it a spelling mistake? Stick to the topic Zax |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Application is nicely made.
Gametime/activity overall needs to improve. -Server 1 -Server 2 Player x accuses player y for RDMing him, the console log shows that player y killed player x. -You got player X & Y mixed up in the paragraph. Please expand on the following: Player x accuses player y for breaking NLR, the kills are pretty close together in console (a few lines apart) at a peak time. I cannot check your warnings. |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
First and foremost, we'd like to thank you for making the effort to apply for a rank on the ZARP Semi Serious DarkRP. Your application has been discussed at an administrative meeting, and from there it has been voted on.
Unfortunately as more staff members voted 'no' than 'yes', the application has been denied. The meeting host has taken some criticisms made by the admins and provided you with this feedback: Recent warnings.You are welcome to apply again at any point. |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|

