Jump to content

Pablo Martinez

Members
  • Content Count

    141
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Pablo Martinez last won the day on January 27

Pablo Martinez had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

89 Excellent

2 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

451 profile views
  1. Pablo Martinez

    If we want to be less controversial we could just rename it to rebel/insurgents/anarchists if terrorist is out of bounds or keep it as terrorists but just regulate which types of political rp will be allowed eg: No Nazism, No ISIS inspired etc keep it to communist, generic islamic, far-left, specific issue, christian conservative, monarchist or other types of terrorism etc. Also theres an entire gmod gamemode called trouble in terrorist town so it's not like terrorist is such a no-go word. Personally I don't really mind the more controversial themes like ISIS or racism because i've seen similar roleplay take place frequently without issue in my previous community on the Arma 2 Takistan life server but then again it was a different time, different community & probably a different age group so maybe the players in this community aren't responsible enough for those types of "controversial roleplays"? Either way I agree with you, I like the idea of a more politically oriented gang that provides an increased sense of danger to government offiicals & innocent civilians caught up in the cross-fire.
  2. Pablo Martinez

    On a related note if removing Fear RP wins can we go back to the old raiding rules(at least for the PD or for engaging cops only)? It's only just that any unarmed cops within the PD are fair game for criminals seeing as though they could pull out a concealed weapon at anytime. Police shouldn't throw hissy fits about being killed in the PD when they are unarmed if we remove fear rp, they already have a defender's advantage, extra health, strength in numbers usually as well as easy access to kev & weapons which is more than enough stuff to deter raiders & re-equip themselves after death. The current combat engagement rules favor the cops too much when it comes to PD raids which is wrong as I said before cops are well equipped with dealing with raids already. We need to make the gangs more popular not a pain to play as which is why I think the combat engagement rules should be watered down regardless of whether fear rp is removed(but if it is removed it should definitely be watered down). Some people might like a little RP in pd raids but honestly at this stage we are artificially forced into sparing every single unarmed cop by gunpoint from the MOTD even when it would be logical to kill an unarmed cop if they are nothing but an obstacle in our way(I wouldn't be too bugged if there was some sort of alternative system like tieing down surrendering cops). Getting unarmed cops to comply with orders in the middle of a hostile situation like a PD raid is very difficult & the raiders will usually end up being gunned down by surprise. I just think that PD raids should return to what they use to be - a largely cops vs robbers relaxed team deathmatch where occasionally people may force cops to open up the doors but raiders aren't forced at gunpoint by staff to always do this. It worked for a very long time, I really did not see why we had to change this. All the new combat engagement rules do is create more work for staff, less incentive to raid the PD due to an increased risk of failure & in turn reduce the amount of players willing to join gangs due to the risk of either failing the PD raid or getting punished by staff for engaging unarmed cops within the PD who probably would've pulled out a gun regardless or hindered the raid somehow. Just my opinion but whenever staff increase their intervention in an RP situation or gameplay event things get sort of stale or artificial, it just feels more right in my view to let players in a PD raid particularly criminals handle the engagement of cops however they see fit without being pressured to act in a certain way.
  3. Unintelligent? https://www.xe.com/currencyconverter/convert/?Amount=7%2C508%2C868&From=VEF&To=AUD He stole a million dollars worth of goods & somehow got away with it.
  4. Pablo from Venezuela.
  5. 1. Your DarkRP Name: Anastasia Komanov, Pablo Martinez 2. Suggestion: Revoke the third default law which outlaws money printers/all drugs by default. I'm not really in favour of legalising money printers or cocaine by default so one possibility could be changing the third law to "3. money printers/cocaine is illegal" etc but I don't really mind either way. 3. Description of suggestion: Simply revoke or alter the third default law & allow the mayor to legislate on their own how drugs(maybe printers and cocaine as well) are handled in terms of the law. 4. How it will benefit the server: I believe that this suggestion will benefit rp mostly as this will open up more opportunities for mayors specifically in terms of realistically legalising certain drugs for example weed & vapes while outlawing others like gunslinger & haemophage. It pretty much just gives mayors more flexibility in terms of law creations regarding certain items that are locked into illegality by default which is more realistic seeing as though some nations irl have moderated views on drugs such as weed or vapes. If the mayor has power over gun laws, free speech laws & a host of unrealistic powers for a mayor(power to install a communist, royalist, dictatorial regime etc) why not drug laws as well?
  6. Pablo Martinez

    Neutral The accused should be able to kill people in rare or unique circumstances where it's reasonable & not an attempt to break out or rdm everyone at the court case eg: Trial by combat if a monarchist or similar type of government is being rped actively.
  7. Pablo Martinez

    -1 Agree with the above post, it is annoying to arrest someone or take part in a raid only for the laws to suddenly change in the process of said actions. Keeping the laws the same after a dictator or controversial mayor also encourages more people to become a mayor in order to change said laws made by the previous mayor rather than leave the role unfilled. The bloke in your example imo should of just disguised his gunstore as something else or been a bit more sneaky or discreet about selling guns without a license if he was being targeted by the cops on a regular basis.
  8. Pablo Martinez

    So let me just tell you all a little story today about a certain fear rp incident today that all of us cops broke but do not regret. The mafia were simply taking alot of hostages mayor included, so all of us cops naturally surrounded the place where they were held up while I simply tried to stall the kidnappers on /advert with promises of cash. Since the kidnappers were asking for an obscene amount of cash(around 100k total) & we didn't notice any kidnappers at the front of the base keeping watch on us, we decided to rush in guns blazing. We managed to take them all by surprise & save all of the hostages with 0 civilian casualties. Now naturally people started complaining about my risky call to raid the property with the mayor inside as according to them the entire police force was under fear rp. We did infact risk the mayor's life(Fear RP also refers to other people's lives not just your own which opens a whole other can of worms - see below the post for definition) but it was a calculated risk nonetheless as the kidnappers were not watching us at the front & it was pretty much a surprise attack. I get that its a hostage situation but honestly the police should realistically have the power to come charging in if they see an opening or the kidnappers are pushing their luck with unrealistic demands. The current fear rp rules below mean that we should of been at the mercy of the kidnappers according to some of the people who complained which is probably true but it only illustrates how unrealistic fear rp is. Realistically hostage situations can and do go sideways for everyone at times since it's a very volatile situation. Honestly what is wrong with us taking a risk to save the mayor if we see fit, if we stuff up then the mayor is dead simple, why would there need to be some staff to get involved to regulate the whole rp situation why can't we(all parties involved in the rp) just handle the situation and the consequences of it ourselves? Fear Roleplay (FearRP) - Actions taken that risk your own life/somebody else’s. FOR EXAMPLE - Someone has a weapon to you (this includes tasers+knives) and they are giving you an order (drop your wallet, unlock a door, etc)
  9. Pablo Martinez

    BUMP Because gangs really need some improvement in alot of areas since its only fair seeing as though the cops have received so much buffs in terms of increased hp, easy access to kev, weapons & attachments etc & the terrorist job itself is very attractive as it seems to me like theres alot of good potential for a wide range of RP with this role.
  10. Pablo Martinez

    It's great in theory but in reality the majority of people will not follow it no matter what anyone does or says, making it an ineffective rule. I should know because I've been forced to become adept at using a tazer to arrest 8/10 of the criminals I come across & i've arrested alot of people who have went out kicking, spinning, jumping & screaming or playing dumb about a simple face & get on the wall command. But you know what I don't really mind if they break fear rp because I've actually manage to arrest the majority of these guys despite their determined resistance, solely because i've learned how to use the relevant tools(tazer, handcuffs & stun sticks) to effectively subdue these guys rather than relying on fear rp or staff intervention.
  11. Pablo Martinez

    Fear RP could just be watered down as a compromise by allowing for it to be broken or not adhered to in certain situations just so we can limit the amount of potential unneeded staff intervention. For instance criminals should still be allowed to run away from police but if they get tazed then they will immediately have to stop & comply. Victims of kidnappings or muggings should still have to comply with an attacker but only if they themselves are "completely unarmed"(no guns in pockets or on their character) which would mean the victim would not be able to run away like a spastic if they were unarmed but they would still be able to realistically defend themselves if they came prepared with a gun. I've played on an Arma 2 Life Server with the same approach as the "fear rp only applies to people who are actually unarmed" it worked pretty well tbh since it actually forced you to be a bit smarter about who you attempt to rob or kidnap, I mean surely it's more realistic & in-turn more immersive in terms of rp to mug some random "normal" citizen successfully with a pistol than a cop or heavily armed swat officer without any form of resistance. If someone is getting robbed irl(Especially a cop) & they have a gun in their own pocket or side, chances are they might try their luck & try to see if they can get a shot on the criminal.
  12. Pablo Martinez

    +1 Fear RP already strikes me as being unrealistic as it assumes all people will have the same reaction to being mugged or kidnapped or arrested etc. It also limits some good police chase rp which imo is fun because I usually try to go for an arrest even if the criminals are unwilling to be arrested & it's just satisfying to arrest some idiot after a long drawn out police chase. Honestly as a player that plays cop alot I can with confidence say that 8/10 players do not follow fear rp at all since everyone's natural instinct is to run like in the movies/shows rather than be sent to prison for 3 minutes. I'm ok with that since chasing down criminals is part of the job smt. I think it would be best for new tools such as restraints & improved tazers to replace fear RP so you could still be able to engage in successfully kidnappings & arrests. We could also make fear rp non-staff regulated by just making it so that if a unarmed player doesn't follow another armed player's orders they simply can be killed which is what alot of people do anyway without having to go through all of the hassle to get staff involved.
  13. Pablo Martinez

    Isn't S.R.G part of the Australian Federal Police? Which would mean it's a nationwide police unit? We should use the federal unit if the local tactical units are different per state. Hell you could pass it off as more realistic for the rp setting by claiming Triton City is an external territory(some random island city) of Australia which would mean by default they would fall under the jurisdiction of the AFP.
  14. Pablo Martinez

    +1 It fits the setting better.
  15. Pablo Martinez

    Banker's Union sound a bit weird for a criminal gang even if they are highly organized(I mean if they are white collar criminals then realistically they wouldn't really raid properties like the other "blue collar" gangs) & a criminal group basing in the bank is a bit weird. Perhaps we can still keep the mafia since mafia groups contrary to popular belief nowadays are still a realistic & credible organized crime threat to law enforcement even in Australia(Carlton Crew, The Honoured Society & all the non-Italian mafias eg: Serbian, Russian, Albanian etc). That way we can keep an "upper class" criminal group which isn't too high and mighty to get their hands dirty like the "blue collar" gangs. I think some of the restrictions are a bit unneeded like specifically what is wrong with a Cartel taking hostages or extorting their local business? I'm sure heaps of people get kidnapped by a drug cartel irl & ransomed or forced to farm drugs or whatever & cartels probably have extorted businesses irl. Terrorists/rebels shouldn't have to flee if their leader is killed since most of them should be suicidal or ideologically motivated enough to keep the raid/attack on until they have won or have all died like irl. I mean ISIS & Al Qaeda haven't ceased to exist without their leaders as they seem to be motivated more by Ideas than a cult of personality like some other groups. Overall though I'd +1 this suggestion.
×