Pseudonym

I mean, idk how the current chief system works, but if you are locked in for 1 year once voted in, you can kind of just do whatever you want cuz sure all APD might have an uprising against you, but what is that gonna do? your locked in for an entire year. You need some sort of system to remove the chief after they become bad, but if you have that system, then maybe that's the only one you need and you don't really need the voted in terms and 2 years max stuff, if you system for getting rid of a bad chief is good enough.

honestly yeah that would be an interesting change. forcing actual use of flashlights

Pseudonym here 1 month later to provide peak commentary on this issue after the fact: A few times, I've seen a guy landing a blackfish at like kav square or whatever. Then I text him: "Store your blackfish or die". Then he flies off, and text back calling me a dick for preventing him from storing his blackfish. If he stored it, I don't think any admin would ban or punish or warn him or anything. And I wasn't going to report him for it anyway. But there was something in his mind where he was like "I'm initiated against, therefore I can't store", even though the initiation is explicitly telling him to store. I think a relevant problem to this is the text based engagement system. Rather than being a more gamified engagement system. A gamified engagement system would be something like: Imagine if whenever -A- initiates on -B-, all -A- and -B- were notified, so that everyone gets the message like: "-A- Adam initiated on -B- Bob", and then maybe tell -B- how far away Bob is from them when he got initiated on. The current text based system is more based around roleplay. You can use the text messages to talk back and forth with people, or to engage on them. And when you think about it from a roleplay perspective, those are the same thing. IRL, if someone says to you: "Give me your money" then shoots you, you don't get to say "ahah u forgot to add or die retard comp 250k or ban". But with Olympus engagement, you generally have to use a demand + consequence structure, which is almost always power gamed to a simple "hands up or die". And that leads people to assume that any demand + consequence message would entail some of the same implications of a standard "hands up or die" message, which I believe is incorrect. If I tell someone in Kav square "if you pull out a minigun qilin i'm going to kill you", depending on the context of that situation, that doesn't meant they shouldn't be allowed to store their hatchback, but If it was a more generalized total engagement like "hands up or die" then yeah they shouldn't store their hatchback at all. All of this is basically to say: I think the standard "hands up or die" text, and maybe a few other common ones, should be gamified into another system on the server, that notifies all relevant parties about the engagement, and that the text system should be left for more specific demand + consequences. So if you send a medic the general initiation through this new game mechanic, then yeah that medic can't redeploy or store vehicles. But if you send a more limited engagement just telling them to leave or die, then more implicitly as long as they are following that, they are fine doing anything else as they are complying.

Sounds good ye i like the changes generally, i am kind of w orrired that this would almost obsolete illegal runs with how much more you get to do with WPL. and also this puts more emphasize on getting more accounts for doing different things. E.g: gotta get you WPL account, your rebel account, your vigi account, your swap to whatever license out of convenience account. In a game like wow, you can just swap to your druid character, or your priest, or your warrior. In battlefield, you change class with a click of a button, and in Olympus, you either swap to an entirely different steam account, or lose a large amount of wealth/progress when deciding to switch roles.

Ok I have to be 100% honest the Charlie Kirk thread should not have been deleted that is horrible. It was the first open discussion this server has ever had, and I was holding off reading all of it until a later date so I am extremely disappointed and saddened. @ Toretto plz bring it back!

LMAO bro you get it! we need more creative solutions like this to solve Pseudonym shenanigans

That is a good point, and something I think should be fixed, and after talking to Rexo about it he had a good and reasonable opinion on that. But my message was specifically responding to someone saying I favor the sAPD, so I showed him counterproof of me attacking the sAPD.

My most recent IAs: Kaotic IA #241630 Wong/Cash False Impound IA #241453 (Weak case) Abraham IA. #241274 Oleg IA #241405 Oleg IA #241407 I also have a rexo IA in the works for refusing my Kaotic IA, and refusing my False Impound IA.

"Civ council voted years ago to have a notification tell cops theres items in a vehicle so they don't accidentally impound legal stuff. Guess that took a back seat to all of aegis' priorities. "