+- Limelight Forums (https://limelightgaming.net/forums)
+-- Forum: Feedback (https://limelightgaming.net/forums/forum-612.html)
+--- Forum: Suggestions (https://limelightgaming.net/forums/forum-239.html)
+---- Forum: Finished (https://limelightgaming.net/forums/forum-242.html)
+---- Thread: Define the S.W.A.T van rule (/thread-11964.html)
Define the S.W.A.T van rule - XGallagher98X - Aug 23, 2016
Suggestion for <in-game/forum/teamspeak etc.>
In detail, explain your suggestion: The rules on the swat van, the biggest one fear rp
Why should this be implemented?
so I was playing today, I was in the swat van supposed to be bullet proof, lock pick proof, the lot, and someone walked in the back of the truck, because another swat guy just left the back of it so, in an rp situation the doors where still open. but at the front of the van where the driver is situated, their are iron bars, where their fore no one can kill the driver, but as someone walked in the back of it I was under "Fear Rp"
I think that some rules should be added about the swat van, is it fear rp proof or not, if it isn't why isn't it if its bullet proof, we need rules so people who have it cant get in trouble when driving it
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Markus - Aug 23, 2016
+Support
It needs redefining.
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Zambie ^‿^ - Aug 24, 2016
This was an incident on Fēarless one time with a Fēarless teacher whom got banned for it.
Eventually the UBR was approved, as it was a 'accident' or something.
Personally, what that user did was completely normal, and in real life you would be under fear that you'd die as the bars have little shooty holes to kill you.
Common sense allows you to realise you'd be under FearRP there
I personally think his rule doesn't need to be redefined, as it makes complete sense, as it would be classed as FearRP, as it's the only place where you could get shot and killed.
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Markus - Aug 24, 2016
(Aug 24, 2016, 12:08 AM)Zambie ^‿^ Wrote: This was an incident on Fēarless one time with a Fēarless teacher whom got banned for it.
Eventually the UBR was approved, as it was a 'accident' or something.
Personally, what that user did was completely normal, and in real life you would be under fear that you'd die as the bars have little shooty holes to kill you.
Common sense allows you to realise you'd be under FearRP there
I personally think his rule doesn't need to be redefined, as it makes complete sense, as it would be classed as FearRP, as it's the only place where you could get shot and killed.
Thing is, at the time the van was added the staff and dev team has said that FearRP doesn't apply for the front of the van.
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - XGallagher98X - Aug 24, 2016
As it stands many admins, say many things about fear Rp and the swat van, but if everyone says different things which one is right?
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Cooli - Aug 26, 2016
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Zambie ^‿^ - Aug 26, 2016
What he is pointing out though is the railings at the back, where you can get in and point a firearm in that trailing where you would beable to kill that user
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Brynn - Aug 26, 2016
There was a staff discussion. Which lead to the conclusion of that PR.
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Taylor - Aug 26, 2016
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Project - Aug 26, 2016
It is simple. If you have hostiles outside of your SWAT Van and you are in it, FearRP does NOT apply. Incase one of the hostiles manages to get on the back of the SWAT Van FearRP applies for anyone in the back of the car. Incase there is somebody in the back you should be following FearRP if they have gotten other SWAT unit under FearRP. If you are alone or only the front of the car is occupied FearRP should not apply.
That's what I think should be set us.
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Markus - Aug 26, 2016
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Taylor - Aug 26, 2016
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Nudel - Aug 26, 2016
(Aug 23, 2016, 11:30 PM)Markus Wrote: +Support
It needs redefining.
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - The Rock - Dec 15, 2016
Approved.
RE: Define the S.W.A.T van rule - Burnett - Dec 17, 2016
Moving to "High priority"