Multiple changes within the RC:RP rules

[B!shop]

Love the new rules. Make RC-RP great again indeed.

 

[Rawson]

really like the driving rules. sick of all the Brian O'Connors in the game, act like some driving God, running 2 reds drifting at 40 around a corner in their Clover in central fucking Montgomery.

Okay, mate. Noted. [/quote]
my god i wasnt shading your faction why do you think i'm so bad

 

[B!shop]

really like the driving rules. sick of all the Brian O'Connors in the game, act like some driving God, running 2 reds drifting at 40 around a corner in their Clover in central fucking Montgomery.

Okay, mate. Noted.

my god i wasnt shading your faction why do you think i'm so bad [/quote]
i know, why did you assume it was shading our faction?

 

[Rawson]

really like the driving rules. sick of all the Brian O'Connors in the game, act like some driving God, running 2 reds drifting at 40 around a corner in their Clover in central fucking Montgomery.

Okay, mate. Noted.

my god i wasnt shading your faction why do you think i'm so bad

i know, why did you assume it was shading our faction? [/quote]
i don't know, because i made dumb comments on it ages ago? lmao

i actually love your faction, don't listen to shit I say. streetracing done right

 

[B!shop]

really like the driving rules. sick of all the Brian O'Connors in the game, act like some driving God, running 2 reds drifting at 40 around a corner in their Clover in central fucking Montgomery.

Okay, mate. Noted.

my god i wasnt shading your faction why do you think i'm so bad

i know, why did you assume it was shading our faction?

i don't know, because i made dumb comments on it ages ago? lmao

i actually love your faction, don't listen to shit I say. streetracing done right [/quote]
bruuuh

 

[Lee]

If you're found driving recklessly for no IC reason - you might be questioned and punished.

"You might be punished?" If they're found breaking the rules, surely they will be punished. This rules doesn't sound as authoritative as it should. Apart from that, appreciate the updates from the admin team.

Another thing,

You might also be punished if you're found to be assisting someone in breaking the rules. This could be anything from sharing a bug with them to sharing your account to let them abuse your's faction commands.

I feel this in itself should be a rule, and not a sub below the ban evading rule.

 

[Earl]

If you're found driving recklessly for no IC reason - you might be questioned and punished.

"You might be punished?" If they're found breaking the rules, surely they will be punished. This rules doesn't sound as authoritative as it should. Apart from that, appreciate the updates from the admin team.

I wrote it that way on purpose, because unrealistic driving might not warrant a punishment in every case. It can be more severe or less severe, the player might have a reason that is not found to be good enough, they can be apologetic or moan about it, etc etc. Basically - there's a chance that the confrontation with an admin will not end up with a punishment.

Another thing,

You might also be punished if you're found to be assisting someone in breaking the rules. This could be anything from sharing a bug with them to sharing your account to let them abuse your's faction commands.

I feel this in itself should be a rule, and not a sub below the ban evading rule.

The rules as they are right now are kind of messy, I agree. However, their strength is the same no matter if they're written as one of the main rules or under one of them. Reorganising the rules thread to place every rule where it belongs is something that I'm hoping to get done in the future.

 

[Lee]

If you're found driving recklessly for no IC reason - you might be questioned and punished.

"You might be punished?" If they're found breaking the rules, surely they will be punished. This rules doesn't sound as authoritative as it should. Apart from that, appreciate the updates from the admin team.

I wrote it that way on purpose, because unrealistic driving might not warrant a punishment in every case. It can be more severe or less severe, the player might have a reason that is not found to be good enough, they can be apologetic or moan about it, etc etc. Basically - there's a chance that the confrontation with an admin will not end up with a punishment.

Another thing,

You might also be punished if you're found to be assisting someone in breaking the rules. This could be anything from sharing a bug with them to sharing your account to let them abuse your's faction commands.

I feel this in itself should be a rule, and not a sub below the ban evading rule.

The rules as they are right now are kind of messy, I agree. However, their strength is the same no matter if they're written as one of the main rules or under one of them. Reorganising the rules thread to place every rule where it belongs is something that I'm hoping to get done in the future.

Thanks for clearing it up. My personal opinion however, the rules should be authoritative and written in a declarative manner, but the admin taking charge of the situation should be able decide not to/give punishments on the severity of the case. That way people won't think they have a chance of getting away with it.

 

[BiggieDogg]

Places that fall under this rule:
Police Departments (Dillimore, Montgomery, Fort Carson, El Quebrados)
Townhalls (Palomino Creek, Fort Carson, Angel Pine)
Station 49 (SACFD headquarters)
Hospitals (Montgomery, Fort Carson, El Quebrados)
Aperture base

I don't understand why AP Base is here, if we get near it we get killed so there is no possible way to commit a crime there xD

 

[Bauer]

Re: RE: Re: Multiple changes within the RC:RP rules

Places that fall under this rule:
Police Departments (Dillimore, Montgomery, Fort Carson, El Quebrados)
Townhalls (Palomino Creek, Fort Carson, Angel Pine)
Station 49 (SACFD headquarters)
Hospitals (Montgomery, Fort Carson, El Quebrados)
Aperture base

I don't understand why AP Base is here, if we get near it we get killed so there is no possible way to commit a crime there xD

I guess this is true to some extend. Sometimes there won't be anyone online, so it would be stupid if players were to rob someone near the base or something. But on the other hand Aperture is perfectly capable of handling this themselves.

The only reason Aperture is in this rule is because of the old aper-sp wars from back in the days. Personally I wouldn't mind to see Aperture base removed from this list. I don't know how Jboi feels about this though.