Only allowed to raid with your own Organisation

[TinySlayer]

The aim of this post is to collect ideas from the community about a change to who you are allowed to perform criminal activity with.

This is to elaborate on the original discussion here: https://perpheads.com/threads/rule-addition-5-7-organisations.34558/

The wording is far from finalised. Currently we just want to explore the concept. Here are the suggested wordings:

• Draft wording #1: Players may only criminally assist other members of their organisation against raids and bank robberies.
• Draft wording #2: Players may only violently assist other members of their organisation against raids and bank robberies.
• Draft wording #3: Players may only criminally assist other members of their organisation against raids.
• Draft wording #4: Players may only violently assist other members of their organisation against raids.

The other thing to consider, is would players be allowed to base with other organisations or not?


We are open to all thoughts, but please only provide feedback if you have something constructive to say about the suggestion. If you just want to express your preference, please only vote on the poll.

 

[rat]

How would this idea work with org alliances? It seems it would kind of ruin the potential for dynamic organisation interaction.

 

[Tilin]

If this gets added, shouldn't officer get limited in the same update?

This rule might force people to team together more. Meaning you'll get one single big zerg. I suggest limiting the ORG size to 20.
And cops should get lowered to regular 6-8 and max. 12-14

 

[Atomic]

Well im assuming that they will be allowed to help. If they are not allowed to help then this is pretty much the staff team telling us that cops are always winning raid once this gets added.

 

[rat]

Then how would you regulate alliances and if the answer is not at all how would it be any different from what it is currently?

 

[Atomic]

Especially when you raid someone else with your org and there is a stupid ass 30 min timer on flanking...

 

[Atomic]

Well, surely tiny this is absolutely pointless. If this becomes a thing and I can't have someone who is an alliance to my org help then cops will an extremely increased chance of winning raids. If alliances can help an org in a cop raid then the rule is pointless as that is what it is at the moment as exrobite said. I think you should make a decision on which it's going to be now then you will know whether this is a pointless idea or not.

 

[BooingBison]

I think a change of the rule into this direction would work against the good of the server.
A fun thing about PERP is that you do a lot of different stuff with a lot of different people, changing this rule would take that away.
Another thing that I find a negative aspect is that you will create organisations with only the strongest and best players, leaving other, small organisations no chance at all, since they will be torn apart by the best groups. Another way would be that you will create giant zergs, so people can still base together.
If I have a friend in organisation A, but I am in organisation B, I could never criminal roleplay with that person again, which would be very unfortunate.
I also find the idea of changing this rule very not-new-player-friendly. If I invite Sammy to the server and I want to guide him around, a change of this rule would mean that he has to be invited to the organisation I am in (which will most likely not happen since he is a noob) or I should have to leave the organisation (which I am also not going to do).

The PLPD will greatly benefit from this though, as other organisations flanking would be non-existent.
If this change happens, we should change the gamemode from PERP to police-roleplay, since this would be another reason where PLPD is again stronger than the regular players.

I voted "Do not change this rule", because I like it the way it is.

 

[Atomic]

Also if you don't keep it as it is and I can't have alliances help then you will do the opposite of what you are trying to do and you will just end up killing off people raiding each other because of the 30 min nlr.

 

[Deleted member 6228]

The problem with organisations has always been that they cannot fight each other realistically like gangs would irl without punishment from the rules.
You need to change how organisations interact with each other not themselves

 

[Slayerduck]

Everybody is teaming up and are buddy's and thus find nobody to raid besides some small groups, its the players that have to make it competitive. A rule change will only work short term, it would be better to form competitive groups instead of massive alliances.

 

[Tilin]

Everybody is teaming up and are buddy's and thus find nobody to raid besides some small groups, its the players that have to make it competitive. A rule change will only work short term, it would be better to form competitive groups instead of massive alliances.

Today what happened was us showing what it's like when there's 16 officers. You may argue about the pistols, but pistols can be just as lethal as rifles.
We don't wanna do this again in the near future it seems, but it was great acting like a big terrorist org.

The issue is civilians are unable to competitive when cops are the biggest competition against them. Cops are supposed to be an obstruction in any game, but no the competition, because criminals always waste money on their own equipment. The cops get that equipment.

In addition. Let me remind you of how @Dom_ can take down 8 officers at once and yet he complains about the current state.

 

[R-Flex]

Maybe with this and a org member limit to 15 people will actually fight each other since only the best players will be in 1 or and the others will have to form smaller orgs than just all being friends as it is right now. What we need is 1 powerful org and many other not so powerful orgs to battle each other.

 

[Deleted member 4116]

Maybe accept this? @John Daymon
https://perpheads.com/threads/org-wars-in-general.33586/#post-216467

 

[Tilin]

Maybe accept this? @John Daymon
https://perpheads.com/threads/org-wars-in-general.33586/#post-216467

No. People would just wait until you'd get a weapon from storage and shoot you.
This rule would cause major issues. Besides rule 2.5 right now is stated as excessive negativity taken towards a player, which ruins their gameplay. If all parties agree this can technically take place.

 

[rat]

this is excessively negative tho by the other definitions of the rule

 

[Jimmy]

If you're too scared to die then don't take part.

 

[Deleted member 4116]

You ever thought about green zones? Placed where you can’t kill for example CH, PD ect?

 

[Walker]

This seems counter productive, if you cannot help other orgs in bank robberies etc (Which at this point is all people do to get a shootout) then instead of smaller orgs that occasionally work together you will end up with one or two giant orgs because everyone wants to help eachother.

 

[Creepis]

so you wanna turn this into PvP safezones like Minecraft??