Fuck Zergs [Actual Suggestions]

[Husky]

Main idea: Limiting organizations to a MAXIMUM of 10 MEMBERS

Description: Only 10 member slots in organizations at any given time, in addition multiple organizations will not be allowed to team together in an ongoing raid if the members taking place >10 this includes but is not limited to: Flankers, initial contact and late game players (people arriving 10 minutes after the raid has started).
Pros: Stops the whole server being one team.

Cons: Last part could be hard to enforce however I believe its worth the time. @Slayerduck has a point, 1 team of 40 is getting incredibly boring and it leads to the only shootouts being one sided as fuck.

 

[Deleted member 4116]

Have you seen the players in the zerg? they are fucking far from experienced, they've been hibernating and powergrowing for the last 4 months to get new cars. You seriously have no idea clearly

It's so easy for them to get supercars nobody raids them they can get in like 1/2 weeks growing. I remember back in the day it look longer because people actually raided you.

 

[Husky]

It's so easy for them to get supercars nobody raids them they can get in like 1/2 weeks growing. I remember back in the day it look longer because people actually raided you.

imagine a guy saying you are experienced but whenever I'm in teamspeak you guys have fucking ALT TABBED AND STARTED PLAYING FORTNITE WHILST GROWING.

LOTS OF XP BRO, I HOPE YOU PRESTIGE SOON

hope you get to 10th prestige very fast with all this xp

 

[Super_]

Funnily enough, this type of idea was discussed about at the recent staff meeting about putting a limit on the maximum number of players in an organisation and limiting number of players in a raid because like you and @Slayerduck said, it is quite boring and one-sided when it's usually a team of 40 people in a shootout. However, the other factor that needs to be considered here is to what extent the community would whine about PERP becoming "too restrictive" with organisations being forced to limit their number of members allowed in and can only take a certain amount of people in to raid a property. Furthermore, with recent rule changes such as 5.3 to prevent people who died in the raid flanking or assisting in any way until 30 mins since they respawned has passed, it probably would seem to some that PERP would be "too restrictive".

Personally, I'm quite open to the idea of implementing this change and to see how this would play out when organisations are raiding as it could bring back the good old times where org wars were decent and lasted for good while as well as there being a variety of organisations competing with one another or co-operating to a certain extent. Although from a staff member's point-of-view, I don't see the last option as viable unless there is a work-around because all raids would require a staff member to be spectating and ensuring additional people don't join in on a raid and if there's a limited number of staff where multiple raids are going on at the same time, or no staff on, etc there's no way to enforce this unless people resort to ARs, etc.

Best of luck with your suggestion.

 

[Husky]

Funnily enough, this type of idea was discussed about at the recent staff meeting about putting a limit on the maximum number of players in an organisation and limiting number of players in a raid because like you and @Slayerduck said, it is quite boring and one-sided when it's usually a team of 40 people in a shootout. However, the other factor that needs to be considered here is to what extent the community would whine about PERP becoming "too restrictive" with organisations being forced to limit their number of members allowed in and can only take a certain amount of people in to raid a property. Furthermore, with recent rule changes such as 5.3 to prevent people who died in the raid flanking or assisting in any way until 30 mins since they respawned has passed, it probably would seem to some that PERP would be "too restrictive".

Personally, I'm quite open to the idea of implementing this change and to see how this would play out when organisations are raiding as it could bring back the good old times where org wars were decent and lasted for good while as well as there being a variety of organisations competing with one another or co-operating to a certain extent. Although from a staff member's point-of-view, I don't see the last option as viable unless there is a work-around because all raids would require a staff member to be spectating and ensuring additional people don't join in on a raid and if there's a limited number of staff where multiple raids are going on at the same time, or no staff on, etc there's no way to enforce this unless people resort to ARs, etc.

Best of luck with your suggestion.

If something like this isn't implemented and orgs aren't forced to split and go to war you can ensure the player count stays in the shitter, goodluck with the staff meeting, hopefully you make the CORRECT choice. = )

 

[Knoxy82]

Hey!Husky! i think thatt this idea god, but it seems a bit borink, because if i want to join org and its full and everyone are sad

who wants you in an org XD. i kid i kid love you cody

 

[Knoxy82]

Funnily enough, this type of idea was discussed about at the recent staff meeting about putting a limit on the maximum number of players in an organisation and limiting number of players in a raid because like you and @Slayerduck said, it is quite boring and one-sided when it's usually a team of 40 people in a shootout. However, the other factor that needs to be considered here is to what extent the community would whine about PERP becoming "too restrictive" with organisations being forced to limit their number of members allowed in and can only take a certain amount of people in to raid a property. Furthermore, with recent rule changes such as 5.3 to prevent people who died in the raid flanking or assisting in any way until 30 mins since they respawned has passed, it probably would seem to some that PERP would be "too restrictive".

Personally, I'm quite open to the idea of implementing this change and to see how this would play out when organisations are raiding as it could bring back the good old times where org wars were decent and lasted for good while as well as there being a variety of organisations competing with one another or co-operating to a certain extent. Although from a staff member's point-of-view, I don't see the last option as viable unless there is a work-around because all raids would require a staff member to be spectating and ensuring additional people don't join in on a raid and if there's a limited number of staff where multiple raids are going on at the same time, or no staff on, etc there's no way to enforce this unless people resort to ARs, etc.

Best of luck with your suggestion.

restricting the amount of people in a raid is kinda annoying when you can have 16 cops on duty, if something like this was to be implemented the cap on the amount of players during a raid must atleast be like 20 so on occasion you still outnumber the cops making chance of survival a little higher otherwise people just wouldn't risk raiding since the risk ain't as good as the reward.

 

[Husky]

restricting the amount of people in a raid is kinda annoying when you can have 16 cops on duty, if something like this was to be implemented the cap on the amount of players during a raid must atleast be like 20 so on occasion you still outnumber the cops making chance of survival a little higher otherwise people just wouldn't risk raiding since the risk ain't as good as the reward.

No, no and no. You have more equipment than them 95% of the time. Don't understand why this issue has suddenly become a thing, PD aren't OP and they never have been. They've been getting stomped on for years they are just slowly closing the gap. I like how hard gunfights are now and 20 fucking people in 1 raid? no thanks. Skill>Numbers.

 

[Deleted member 5920]

The most fun I remember on PERP was when 2 smaller orgs were having wars with actual RP such as sit downs and spies ect. So I think the idea of maybe limiting orgs could go well and maybe have it a bit higher such as 12-15?

 

[Husky]

The most fun I remember on PERP was when 2 smaller orgs were having wars with actual RP such as sit downs and spies ect. So I think the idea of maybe limiting orgs could go well and maybe have it a bit higher such as 12-15?

I'd like a maximum of 20 members in each org but a maximum of 10 within a raid... would be difficult to setup and finalize but the staff team have enough time to do so

 

[Deleted member 5920]

I'd like a maximum of 20 members in each org but a maximum of 10 within a raid... would be difficult to setup and finalize but the staff team have enough time to do so

Ah, I misunderstood you, my bad But I agree 100% with this suggestion then.

 

[andreW]

It's so easy for them to get supercars nobody raids them they can get in like 1/2 weeks growing. I remember back in the day it look longer because people actually raided you.

arnt u in a zerg?

 

[Deleted member 4116]

arnt u in a zerg?

No? I'm not?

 

[andreW]

No? I'm not?

i swear u were in that glitch gang shit with like 20 other people

 

[Deleted member 4116]

i swear u were in that glitch gang shit with like 20 other people

No

 

[JackHilton123]

i swear u were in that glitch gang shit with like 20 other people

20 people is nothing tho? have u seen vault of memes

 

[Husky]

20 people is nothing tho? have u seen vault of memes

thats like saying Ebola isn't bad because cancer exists. wtf is wrong with you

 

[JackHilton123]

thats like saying Ebola isn't bad because cancer exists. wtf is wrong with you

woah sorry boss

 

[andreW]

20 people is nothing tho? have u seen vault of memes

vault of memes is a meme tho

 

[ICEKILLER_99]

Yet you always fail to raid us with 2/3 bombs and grenades and shit smh

also quite a dumb post since you used like 4 grenades LOL

 

[Deleted member 4116]

also quite a dumb post since you used like 4 grenades LOL

Nah Max was yeeting grenades like Curry shooting 3s. I only threw 1 and that killed you.