(Jul 15, 2019, 04:06 PM)Judge Rage Wrote: [ -> ] (Jul 15, 2019, 01:39 PM)Markus Wrote: [ -> ]-SNIPPITY SNIP-
I think that Evo has to be the best option.
Every time we've did a map change, we've experienced a decline in population, right up to what we're looking at right now.
Evo attracts players from all across Garry's Mod as a well-known and respected map throughout the wider community. Truenorth is practically unheard of, hence why nobody has it and nobody joins if they see it on the serverlist.
>Players want evo back, server is empty
>Staff say map isn't a big issue
#TeamEvo
Community event - "Map is not the biggest issue"
Half way through the month, just under £60 in donations.
If you want this community to survive, we need V4B1 to save us.
#TeamEvo
(Jul 8, 2019, 05:31 AM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ]The Rules: They are VERY restrictive to RP. The fact that a good RP with consenting parties can be ended because a rule was broken is the reason I don't play anymore. Along with Criminal RP and Cop RP under constant scrutiny, it is impossible to play without the worry of being suspended or blacklisted. What we COULD do (And hear me out, this is a hard one to follow) we split the rules between GUIDELINES and RULES like successful communities have done in the past. For Example: Fearp, FailRP, things that NEED to be followed are under RULES. GUIDELINES would be things such as base styles for certain factions or LEO Corrupt activities. These GUIDELINES can be judged by staff accordingly, but if it seems to provide a Good RP that benefits more than the individual, it can be exempt from the GUIDELINES.
Another thing for rules is to follow through with past punishments. I didn't do this when I was staff and I understand now why it is important to do so. I get it, not every situation is the same, however, the punishments should have some uniformity. This should be enforced by HR strictly as this requires staff members to communicate better with each other and come to a reasonable understanding of everyone's stance.
Events: We shouldn't need scheduled events. These events should be extremely rare if started by staff. There should be no red tape that players need to go through. We should ENCOURAGE players to ask staff questions and for advice, but not for permission for a Good RP. Whether it's a Good RP or not should be left to the players online.
I think these are very good points. I can't comment too much on the rules as I only code/manage now due to time, but when this is raised in staff there is always a lot of pushback. I think part of the problem is it is easy to add something to the GM/community, but very hard to remove something damaging.
This holds true for a lot. New map? There's always a lot of resistance to changing back or going to an older option, even if setup is easy.
Potentially damaging in-game features? We're doing the best we can to optimise, but we have limits on what we can reasonably achieve with our GM (despite many improvements), and having some seriously taxing extra features such as Photon. Removing them never seems to be an option that would ever get approval, though.
And rules? We have 72, I think. To me, this is absurd. I've never seen another game - except FL - with such a large amount of rules. I may not play now, but I imagine it's stifling to RP and intimidating for new players. There are many other games - even RP ones - that manage with a much smaller ruleset, maybe 10 max and some guidelines. Or at least, admin guidelines to follow.
Most attempts at reducing them meet heavy resistance, though, whether it's replacing with dev features or simply reducing and putting more emphasis on staff following guidelines and allowing more freedom. One good argument is it's hard to enforce equally without strict rules, but this could easily become internal guidelines and rely on speaking first/long-term notes systems instead.
More events would be great though. Stuff is being worked on to allow players/teachers to do more to host them. Likewise, MESKA & crafting continues, especially now that uni is over. We have to be careful with scope creep, though - same problem with removing features applies even just to planned ones.
(Jul 16, 2019, 10:07 AM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ] One good argument is it's hard to enforce equally without strict rules, but this could easily become internal guidelines and rely on speaking first/long-term notes systems instead.
I'm not 100% sure this falls into the good argument category anymore, as it was explained during the last community meeting that its impossible for staff to enforce policy equally and uniformly.
To me this would be a direct result of having so many rules: The inability of staff to remain consistent in their enforcement.
A good example of a rule list, on a game that has FAR more RP possibilities,people, scenarios and just horrible things that can happen: Paradise Station in SS13
https://nanotrasen.se/rules/
They have 12 rules and a Rule 0: Don't be a dick
Practice common sense while consulting these rules. The general idea counts, not the exact wording. The rules are guidelines for the server and should be interpreted to suit the situation at hand, not manipulated to suit your needs.
They enforce less by direct wording but by situational context, and they have on average 70-120 players on the server at a time with on average 2-4 administrators on at once, and they pull it off quite well.
So why cant LL with at most 30 players, over 70 rules, and at times 4-6 staff?
(Jul 16, 2019, 05:41 PM)BlackDog Wrote: [ -> ] (Jul 16, 2019, 10:07 AM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ] One good argument is it's hard to enforce equally without strict rules, but this could easily become internal guidelines and rely on speaking first/long-term notes systems instead.
I'm not 100% sure this falls into the good argument category anymore, as it was explained during the last community meeting that its impossible for staff to enforce policy equally and uniformly.
To me this would be a direct result of having so many rules: The inability of staff to remain consistent in their enforcement.
A good example of a rule list, on a game that has FAR more RP possibilities,people, scenarios and just horrible things that can happen: Paradise Station in SS13 https://nanotrasen.se/rules/
They have 12 rules and a Rule 0: Don't be a dick Practice common sense while consulting these rules. The general idea counts, not the exact wording. The rules are guidelines for the server and should be interpreted to suit the situation at hand, not manipulated to suit your needs.
They enforce less by direct wording but by situational context, and they have on average 70-120 players on the server at a time with on average 2-4 administrators on at once, and they pull it off quite well.
So why cant LL with at most 30 players, over 70 rules, and at times 4-6 staff?
I believe LL can't pull it off because of one thing: expectations. The rules are structured in a way that causes people to behave a certain way and for people to expect such behaviour. This creates an endless loop of frustration.
Take FearRP for example: If I point a gun at you then I expect and you are expected to act afraid and be my bitch. If you deviate from this and subvert my expectations, that is when players get frustrated and call an admin for FearRP breakage. This ultimately causes frustration on both sides because the player with the gun had their game ruined by "someone who doesn't know how to RP" and the person who broke FearRP is frustrated because they feel a rule is dictating how they should organically react to a gun in their face and now have to behave in a robotic way when under FearRP.
This frustration is continued when the roles are reversed. Eventually when that person who "broke FearRP" in the previous analogy puts someone under FearRP themself, they now have the expectation for that other person to behave in that inorganic and robotic way because that's how they were taught to behave. And when the person now under FearRP breaks it and acts out of line, the cycle continues.
The problem with the LL rules is not that they are open to abuse or are outwardly frustrating, it's that they are in many ways oppressive. Behaviour isn't organic on LL in many ways, when you first join the server and even through your first hundred or so hours, you need to learn how to behave in the way the server wants you to. Act like a bitch when under fearRP (unless swat van or very subjective distance away), build a good base but not TOO good of a base, steal a car only if you have what we designated to be a good reason, drive fast but not in certain areas or else that's cop baiting. Getting the picture?
The rules are oppressive and frustrating not because of one particular rule but because a broad, overarching issue of the expectations and inorganic actions they create. If you want people to be afraid of death then give them a reason to be afraid: losing a P90 and Kevlar is more favourable than being hostaged or going to prison because it's less of a waste of time. I, personally, try to get myself killed before any cop or criminal can get me under FearRP or any other bullshit. I'm not afraid to die, do something to make me. Do or change something to promote those organic, natural feelings of fear or excitement. Those moments are what create great roleplay.
I tried to be as cohesive as possible with this, you'll have to excuse me a bit since I'm running on 4 hours of sleep and just got off an equally long plane flight.
(Jul 16, 2019, 07:51 PM)Theo Wrote: [ -> ] (Jul 16, 2019, 05:41 PM)BlackDog Wrote: [ -> ] (Jul 16, 2019, 10:07 AM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ] One good argument is it's hard to enforce equally without strict rules, but this could easily become internal guidelines and rely on speaking first/long-term notes systems instead.
I'm not 100% sure this falls into the good argument category anymore, as it was explained during the last community meeting that its impossible for staff to enforce policy equally and uniformly.
To me this would be a direct result of having so many rules: The inability of staff to remain consistent in their enforcement.
A good example of a rule list, on a game that has FAR more RP possibilities,people, scenarios and just horrible things that can happen: Paradise Station in SS13 https://nanotrasen.se/rules/
They have 12 rules and a Rule 0: Don't be a dick Practice common sense while consulting these rules. The general idea counts, not the exact wording. The rules are guidelines for the server and should be interpreted to suit the situation at hand, not manipulated to suit your needs.
They enforce less by direct wording but by situational context, and they have on average 70-120 players on the server at a time with on average 2-4 administrators on at once, and they pull it off quite well.
So why cant LL with at most 30 players, over 70 rules, and at times 4-6 staff?
I believe LL can't pull it off because of one thing: expectations. The rules are structured in a way that causes people to behave a certain way and for people to expect such behaviour. This creates an endless loop of frustration.
Take FearRP for example: If I point a gun at you then I expect and you are expected to act afraid and be my bitch. If you deviate from this and subvert my expectations, that is when players get frustrated and call an admin for FearRP breakage. This ultimately causes frustration on both sides because the player with the gun had their game ruined by "someone who doesn't know how to RP" and the person who broke FearRP is frustrated because they feel a rule is dictating how they should organically react to a gun in their face and now have to behave in a robotic way when under FearRP.
This frustration is continued when the roles are reversed. Eventually when that person who "broke FearRP" in the previous analogy puts someone under FearRP themself, they now have the expectation for that other person to behave in that inorganic and robotic way because that's how they were taught to behave. And when the person now under FearRP breaks it and acts out of line, the cycle continues.
The problem with the LL rules is not that they are open to abuse or are outwardly frustrating, it's that they are in many ways oppressive. Behaviour isn't organic on LL in many ways, when you first join the server and even through your first hundred or so hours, you need to learn how to behave in the way the server wants you to. Act like a bitch when under fearRP (unless swat van or very subjective distance away), build a good base but not TOO good of a base, steal a car only if you have what we designated to be a good reason, drive fast but not in certain areas or else that's cop baiting. Getting the picture?
The rules are oppressive and frustrating not because of one particular rule but because a broad, overarching issue of the expectations and inorganic actions they create. If you want people to be afraid of death then give them a reason to be afraid: losing a P90 and Kevlar is more favourable than being hostaged or going to prison because it's less of a waste of time. I, personally, try to get myself killed before any cop or criminal can get me under FearRP or any other bullshit. I'm not afraid to die, do something to make me. Do or change something to promote those organic, natural feelings of fear or excitement. Those moments are what create great roleplay.
I tried to be as cohesive as possible with this, you'll have to excuse me a bit since I'm running on 4 hours of sleep and just got off an equally long plane flight.
We've essentially trapped ourselves in a web of tape. It's going to be very hard and overall ineffectual to remove little bits, and likely the only move with any real impact would be to tear out loads at once.
Any change like this is a tough move both for players and staff to adjust to, but I think it could have a lot of benefits.
SS13 was exactly the game I had in mind when thinking of other RP games. Arma, too. Adding a legit reason to fear death would be great but right now there's only monetary consequences we could add, or temporarily reducing skills (and this would only impact fishing). We could perhaps add a recent death state where combat effectiveness etc. but I don't know if that wouldn't have too many negative impacts on players. It's not a question I can answer - this is something only active staff & players can solve. I don't know if this came up in the recent community meeting but perhaps it's worth talking about.
Night asked me whether I'd be interested in a role/group of constructive players who could advise either dev/admin teams and give input into decisions like this. The answer is a definitive yes - I'd be happy to get the ball rolling on this if a couple admins could help to organise it, and it passes staff vote.
What ideas would you have for having a reason to fear your life ? I don't think it'd make sense with the current inventory system to drop any "equipped" inventory items (excluding the items that already drop: weapons and weapon attachments). Perhaps there could be some sort of drawback in relation to the MESKA system, maybe reduces your skill everytime you die? Something along those lines?
I think a hit to combat effectiveness could be useful after death, something that perhaps could be mitigated by visiting and paying for the services of a Doctor which then could add a financial risk element that isn't just a "We'll take a % of your money" button. This would also give some more use to Doctors.
(Jul 16, 2019, 10:42 PM)Cole_ Wrote: [ -> ]What ideas would you have for having a reason to fear your life ? I don't think it'd make sense with the current inventory system to drop any "equipped" inventory items (excluding the items that already drop: weapons and weapon attachments). Perhaps there could be some sort of drawback in relation to the MESKA system, maybe reduces your skill everytime you die? Something along those lines?
Currently:
- Reduced run speed; increased recoil; slower healing; even perhaps forcefully preventing players from equipping heavy rifles under the guise of 'strength recovering' but it kind of shits over NLR. Weird one.
- Money penalty
- Temporary skills penalty of 50% and permanent 0.1% drop or something. However, this is not going to be effective until crafting (soon™) and other skill groups release.
- Kicked out of current job and cannot return for minimum 10 minutes. This may just stifle RP, however, but perhaps it could be implemented only for criminal and police roles, and then only when killed in combat and not by any other means?
(Jul 16, 2019, 11:50 PM)ForceGhost Wrote: [ -> ]I think a hit to combat effectiveness could be useful after death, something that perhaps could be mitigated by visiting and paying for the services of a Doctor which then could add a financial risk element that isn't just a "We'll take a % of your money" button. This would also give some more use to Doctors.
I like this. Expands really nicely on one or two of the ideas I had above. Would be great to get some feedback on the short list I made above please, even if it's just going through each point and telling me if it's great or wank.
It'll be interesting to see how docs charge for this too. While clans/RP allegiances might seem a little unfair to some if they charge different players differently, and it is slightly OOC, I think this shouldn't be heavily discouraged - adds a really interesting element to building RP relations.
Thing is, I think that we'll struggle to have significant death penalties AND fearRP. Now you have the double whammy of badly not wanting to get killed, but also fearing admin repercussions for defending yourself. These are conflicting aims and I don't think it'll contribute to player enjoyment. If death penalties increase significantly, then player options for defence must be far more free.
I think this would need a 2-week trial or something: short enough it can be reverted if it doesn't work, but long enough that people get over the initial hype and we get a good mix of RP/combat rather than just combat.
I’d still like to see a change to death and NLR. Like GTA, you never REALLY die. You’re just VERY badly injured. This could fix the NLR issue if we had something similar with a setting of permadeath only staff could activate for special events. This way we can see draw backs to constantly “dieing” and if a permadeath happens a player loses some or all of their skill progression.
(Jul 8, 2019, 05:31 AM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ]The Rules: They are VERY restrictive to RP. The fact that a good RP with consenting parties can be ended because a rule was broken is the reason I don't play anymore.
Amen. My biggest gripe with the CityRP has been the reliance on rules to guide RP and how people can't drop a minor rule break in favor of having fun
(Jul 16, 2019, 05:41 PM)BlackDog Wrote: [ -> ]They have 12 rules and a Rule 0: Don't be a dick Practice common sense while consulting these rules. The general idea counts, not the exact wording. The rules are guidelines for the server and should be interpreted to suit the situation at hand, not manipulated to suit your needs.
I don't know how strictly they enforce those rules, but it's a little disingenuous to say "12 rules" when their rules are wordier than LL's and they still have a lot of things mentioning @'ing for permission
LL: 70 rules, 3,250 words
SS13: 12 rules,
3,375 words
Strong agree about manipulating rules to suit needs though.
What if we could add some skills to earn through one life, or game session? Starts at a certain level and will rise with practice. When you die, it resets to that original level, or it can decrease by a certain percentage. It would have to be something meaningful like fire accuracy (could have negative effects with PvP), speed, endurance (stamina), etc. It would create more incentive to not want to die.
(Jul 17, 2019, 02:23 AM)goigle Wrote: [ -> ] (Jul 8, 2019, 05:31 AM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ]The Rules: They are VERY restrictive to RP. The fact that a good RP with consenting parties can be ended because a rule was broken is the reason I don't play anymore.
Amen. My biggest gripe with the CityRP has been the reliance on rules to guide RP and how people can't drop a minor rule break in favor of having fun
(Jul 16, 2019, 05:41 PM)BlackDog Wrote: [ -> ]They have 12 rules and a Rule 0: Don't be a dick Practice common sense while consulting these rules. The general idea counts, not the exact wording. The rules are guidelines for the server and should be interpreted to suit the situation at hand, not manipulated to suit your needs.
I don't know how strictly they enforce those rules, but it's a little disingenuous to say "12 rules" when their rules are wordier than LL's and they still have a lot of things mentioning @'ing for permission
LL: 70 rules, 3,250 words
SS13: 12 rules, 3,375 words
Strong agree about manipulating rules to suit needs though.
SS13 does indeed have 3,375 words needed for the rule set but LL actually has 3,250 words in the rules and another 3,573 words in the Rule Clarification thread, just in the OP. This doesn't include any rule clarifications written further down in the thread that haven't been added to the OP.