Jump to content
Experience the Altis Life
keyboard_arrow_right
ALTIS LIFE 1
...
ALTIS LIFE 2
...
DAYZ UK 0.63
...
TEAMSPEAK
...
...

We are currently undergoing maintenance

The forums are available for use, yet please do not expect full functionality.

Wilco

Rules Feedback

Recommended Posts

Philup
8 hours ago, Nabster said:

+1

I fully agree with this and would like to see ARAC being able to do more roleplay as I had an encounter where Mr Tobbz was on ARAC duty and came across many crashed Vehicles on Devil's bend, he asked me if He could lock pick it and I unfortunately had to decline as it is against the law (Illegal)

This was a good roleplay opportunity for him and his friend that was doing arac with him at the time, however they were extremely limited to it.

I myself would much rather use ARAC if they are down the street and let them deal with it than stand there exposed impounding a Vehicle

The way I see it , if a police officer grants permission it's no longer an illegal activity. If I find a locked  vehicle blocking the road I contact the police and more times than not they respond given permission to "break the window" to release handbrake. 

+1 from me tho . As I feel it's a missed opportunity for some great RP . 

I would suggest change the rule to something like 

"ARAC are permitted to lockpick abandoned vehicles if deemed a risk to road safety (i.e blocking the road). A police dispatch must be sent to inform the police of your actions including where you plan to take the vehicle. The vehicle MUST be towed to the nearest police station or impound lot (if impound lots become a thing )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Willy

Reword the rules to remove the word initiate entirely from our community.

(2.1) Vehicle Deathmatch (also known as VDM) - Using any vehicle as a weapon (e.g running people over, causing explosions including while sling loading, ramming, etc), will result in you receiving a ban. Three vehicles are excluded from this, MRAPS (Ifrits, Hunters and Striders) can ram other MRAPS in order to disable them, yet not to kill the passengers. This is allowed as these vehicles are the only vehicles ingame that can withstand being rammed. Please note that you need to initiate roleplay before attempting to ram an MRAP. (Please note - MRAPS don't need to be initiated on in the redzone) This is to prevent random ramming on site. (Three minutes of chasing also constitutes initiation of MRAP and MRAP ramming).

to:

(2.1) Vehicle Deathmatch (also known as VDM) - Using any vehicle as a weapon (e.g running people over, causing explosions including while sling loading, ramming, etc), will result in you receiving a ban. Three vehicles are excluded from this, MRAPS (Ifrits, Hunters and Striders) can ram other MRAPS in order to disable them, yet not to kill the passengers. This is allowed as these vehicles are the only vehicles ingame that can withstand being rammed. Please note that you need to begin hostile roleplay before attempting to ram an MRAP. (Please note - MRAPS don't need to be hostile roleplay on in the redzone) This is to prevent random ramming on site. (Three minutes of chasing also authorises MRAP to MRAP ramming).

 

(7.1.5) Police Sirens - When the Police put on their sirens lights to pull you over to attend to a scene this does not mean RP has been initiated on their point, if you shoot without engaging in RP then this is classed as RDM.

to:

(7.1.5) Police Sirens - When the Police put on their sirens lights to pull you over to attend to a scene this does not mean RP has been started on their point, if you shoot without engaging in RP then this is classed as RDM.

Pros:

No more use of the word initiate, to describe situations.

Less confusion of whether a "classic initiation" is needed.

Will encourage players not to do a "classic initiation" and will develop more rp like it should be.

Cons:

Everyones used to saying initiate.

Staff opinions may be needed more

Makes the rules a bit more wordier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KingGodDiabloZ
On 25/09/2018 at 17:37, tobbz said:

I know that ARAC should not do illegal things. But sometimes it would help a lot, both in our work as ARAC, as well as in roleplay to be able to lockpick vehicles to tow them. So my question is if it is possible to change the rules about lockpicking for ARAC? I would think it's ok if there are limitations. Just as long as we can, in a easier way tow vehicles.

Even though we have access to a new nice Tow truck, there's not much we can do more than repairing vehicles. Very often, vehicles that are in the middle of the road or vehicles crashed in police chases or the like are locked. And since there are no specific rules about it, most often the police will say they handle it, and impound the car. I myself feel like police events is our biggest chance of roleplay. But when we turn up, most often there is not much we can do.

The problem is that if the individual is capable of unlocking their car, they are often also able to drive the car. So no towing needed. When towing is needed, it is when the owner of a car can't drive it, for example the person is dead, or being transported to the police station. And then it's often locked, or the police will just impound it.

So as it is now we are loosing a lot of roleplay because of this, and the fact that we are not that helpful.

The above has been discussed at the staff meeting today and we came to the following conclusion:

We will not be making any amendments to the rule because of it opening the opportunity for people to abuse it. Also a few months back there was already an opinion given by the staff team on this matter.

The opinion then was the following: "As an ARAC member there is a simple way to make something illegal, legal. It's called a police dispatch. As an ARAC member you are free to send a police dispatch asking if you can lockpick a vehicle to get it out of the road. If you get permission it technically isn't illegal anymore and you are free to lockpick the vehicle". 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

@A Willy This will not be changing because of the reason that it's not meant in the way that you are thinking it is. "Initiating" simply means to begin a proces. So what is said in the rule is simply to "Start a roleplay situation" and it's not referring to what people think "initiating" means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DJ Triton
13 minutes ago, KingGodDiabloZ said:

The above has been discussed at the staff meeting today and we came to the following conclusion:

We will not be making any amendments to the rule because of it opening the opportunity for people to abuse it. Also a few months back there was already an opinion given by the staff team on this matter.

The opinion then was the following: "As an ARAC member there is a simple way to make something illegal, legal. It's called a police dispatch. As an ARAC member you are free to send a police dispatch asking if you can lockpick a vehicle to get it out of the road. If you get permission it technically isn't illegal anymore and you are free to lockpick the vehicle". 

 

 

Amount of times I and others I have spoken to have sent a dispatch to the cops and heard nothing back 1 in every 10 you might hear back! Depends if @Ronald Strauss and @Sonder are on as they are the only ones who have roleplayed it! Cops are usually too busy or think oh it's only a car I don't have to deal with that! Still, think it should be allowed to lockpick a car and then if people abuse it! they then fall under common sense and just being an idiot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alfred Wilson

Add rule regarding VPNs to https://www.roleplay.co.uk/rules as it is against the rules.

This isn't mentioned anywhere on the rules page but is apparently a rule on the server which is being enforced actively. I found out about this as my friend randomly got banned from both the TS and A3 Server.

But it wasn't a normal ban, the standard ban message template wasn't used and there was no information regarding who banned him in the message either. All he got was a message that said something about 1.6, and that was it. It said nothing about a VPN, the way he found that out was through the TS ban message which mentioned him using a VPN/Proxy.

When he disabled the VPN he automatically got unbanned and Staff Member @MadassRubberduck explained that VPNs are not allowed.

The problem here is that there is no information regarding the rule and when you get banned there is very limited information about what has happened and what you can do about it. 1.6 is a very vague rule and you wouldn't guess it was a VPN that triggered the ban unless you use the TS server.

My suggestion

  • Add rule stating that VPNs are not allowed, there is none currently
  • Change automatic ban message to better explain the situation and what you can do about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jaffa

4.3 Should be clarified to apply to any out of game communication channel (i.e. Discord), technically scouting Discord isn't covered by a rule currently.

Quote

(4.3) Scouting teamspeak - Searching through Teamspeak to see what police/rebels are doing (e.g. Seeing police are in Bank/Hostage operation room, then acting on this information)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NotMattch
On 04/10/2018 at 14:51, Alfred Wilson said:

Add rule regarding VPNs to https://www.roleplay.co.uk/rules as it is against the rules.

This isn't mentioned anywhere on the rules page but is apparently a rule on the server which is being enforced actively. I found out about this as my friend randomly got banned from both the TS and A3 Server.

But it wasn't a normal ban, the standard ban message template wasn't used and there was no information regarding who banned him in the message either. All he got was a message that said something about 1.6, and that was it. It said nothing about a VPN, the way he found that out was through the TS ban message which mentioned him using a VPN/Proxy.

When he disabled the VPN he automatically got unbanned and Staff Member @MadassRubberduck explained that VPNs are not allowed.

The problem here is that there is no information regarding the rule and when you get banned there is very limited information about what has happened and what you can do about it. 1.6 is a very vague rule and you wouldn't guess it was a VPN that triggered the ban unless you use the TS server.

My suggestion

  • Add rule stating that VPNs are not allowed, there is none currently
  • Change automatic ban message to better explain the situation and what you can do about it

The teamspeak ban is likely being picked up from someone else who used the same VPN and IP Address and got banned on it. Your friend ended up getting given the same IP from the VPN provider which would then match the ban rule and would show as "banned" even though he himself isn't.

The game servers will automatically kick anyone who attempts to connect with a VPN with the error message Player using a VPN/Proxy.  Again, they are not banned however VPN connections are not permitted to the game servers.

VPN Connections are permitted to the TS server, however, we do not provide additional support for them and if you end up getting a recycled IP that someone else previously managed to get banned then there isn't any support for that, either turn it off, recycle the IP address or get a decent VPN.

So no, he never got automatically banned or unbanned.

Personally, I use a VPN to connect to TS daily and have never had an issue where an IP has been previously banned (it tends to only occur when your using free ones).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alfred Wilson
45 minutes ago, NotMattch said:

The game servers will automatically kick anyone who attempts to connect with a VPN with the error message Player using a VPN/Proxy.

 

Thanks for the clarification. It would still be great if you added it to the rules as it doesn't say anywhere that VPNs are not allowed on the game server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
McCree

(4.7) When joining the server, you cannot involve yourself in any ongoing gunfights involving your group/faction for 15 minutes.

 

I feel like this rule should be changed to:

 

(4.7) When joining the server, you cannot involve yourself in any ongoing SITUATIONS involving your group/faction for 15 minutes. (A situation is anything from when the police make contact with the rebels. I.e. negotiations.)

The reason for this being is that over the past few weeks a lot of people have ruleplayed the fact that it's a gunfight rather then a situation.

Say for example, 5 of our gang went and do a HM and the Police rock up doing all the correct proceedures, but since the gunfight has no started but the situation has, about 10/15 of our gang come on the server to play, but then here there is a bank going on, and go and set up as well? Is this fair?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ant Arni
57 minutes ago, McCree said:

Say for example, 5 of our gang went and do a HM and the Police rock up doing all the correct proceedures, but since the gunfight has no started but the situation has, about 10/15 of our gang come on the server to play, but then here there is a bank going on, and go and set up as well? Is this fair?

I mean, I would personally say that's fair as long as their intention wasn't to log on for that fight? If say a football match just finished and a bunch of your mates logged on after it was done, don't see why they should exclude themselves from any situations except for on-going fights. Them turning up might even change the tide of certain events to not turn them into a fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×