On The Topic Of Tazing APD

[DashTonic 797]

7 hours ago, reno walkins said:

we need less cops playing tho, lately there has been 13 cops playing when only 50 players were on. hard to do anything illegal when a squad of 8 pulls up.

Thats the point to stop y'all bad habits

[TheRandomOne 477]

2 minutes ago, G.O.A.T. said:

Listen, your argument is that cops should have better tactics, not zerg rush, etc. How do you expect cops to be able to get their officers back when the majority of the time, if 2 cops gets tased that is literally 20%+ of the force available GONE. It's a snowball effect. I've said for awhile, it makes complete sense that cops should be tased. But not that they should be able to be restrained by some random with a rook+. The majority of the staff AND community recognize this is a bad change for Olympus.  

I think the statistics were provided in the best way possible. 

42%.

P.S. @TheRandomOne throw another jab, I'll hit you with the left hook fam. Don't think for a second that this Chief tag makes me immune from laying down wood.

 

That's one of my arguments,yes. You see this behavior especially come out during federal events when if there's a corp+ on quite a few officers try to go through the first 2 waves quickly and recklessly so the corp+ can get to lethals.  I also would understand the removal of the 5.56 spar. Hell, I even think the increased resistance to tazers was a decent idea. I believe there are changes that can be made without reverting it back to not being able to restrain cops.

 

Also, I don't know where the "tough guy" act comes from,but am I supposed to feel intimidated? Because I think that's adorable. You're not intimidating or threatening and if I wanted to throw a jab I would.

 

 

[Arigato 433]

3 hours ago, Snare said:

I mean to me the big thing with the whole change is you can't just rob a civ if you taze them. Why should you be able to do it to cops?

+100

Make it so they don't have to drop gear, but you can use them in a hostage situation to possibly get a more substantial request fulfilled. 

[Sociopathic 717]

2 minutes ago, TheRandomOne said:

That's one of my arguments,yes. You see this behavior especially come out during federal events when if there's a corp+ on quite a few officers try to go through the first 2 waves quickly and recklessly so the corp+ can get to lethals.  I also would understand the removal of the 5.56 spar. Hell, I even think the increased resistance to tazers was a decent idea. I believe there are changes that can be made without reverting it back to not being able to restrain cops.

 

Also, I don't know where the "tough guy" act comes from,but am I supposed to feel intimidated? Because I think that's adorable. You're not intimidating or threatening and if I wanted to throw a jab I would.

 

 

I question if you are actually for cops being able to be tazed and restrained or if you just stand against the tide to troll, because you very much seem like a troll.

You just talk in circle and ignore anything that doesn't prove your point...

Just now, Domo Arigato said:

+100

Make it so they don't have to drop gear, but you can use them in a hostage situation to possibly get a more substantial request fulfilled. 

They'd have to change hostage rules as well then.

[Arigato 433]

8 minutes ago, Sociopathic said:

I question if you are actually for cops being able to be tazed and restrained or if you just stand against the tide to troll, because you very much seem like a troll.

You just talk in circle and ignore anything that doesn't prove your point...

They'd have to change hostage rules as well then.

If taze and restrain stays a thing, then rules will have to be changed to accomodate it.

[TheRandomOne 477]

30 minutes ago, Sociopathic said:

I question if you are actually for cops being able to be tazed and restrained or if you just stand against the tide to troll, because you very much seem like a troll.

You just talk in circle and ignore anything that doesn't prove your point...

What FACTS have I ignored? That people don't like being tazed/restrained/robbed? I know I don't like having that happen to me,but that doesn't make it wrong. Personal feelings are irrelevant to the discussion, so I have ignored those,sure. What FACTS have been shared that I've ignored? If I wanted to troll I wouldn't be arguing with logic. 

 

Also, no one seems to tell me how I'm allegedly talking in circles. People have claimed it, still waiting on proof. The irony of being told I'm on a high horse yet plenty of others speak down about/to me without providing proof of anything.

 

EXTRA NOTE: You want me to tell you one of the best possible ways to argue your side? 

 

Bring up the fact that the amount of rule changes and potential Dev work that would need to take place to balance it out and if it's worth doing all that work for one rule, especially with the fact we recently lost a Dev. Bring up the fact that the man hours that would go into that are probably not worth it when they could be spent improving the servers in other ways.  The crazy thing is no one has brought this up. You're all too busy trying to demonstrate how big your e-dick is by attacking me, or talking about how you don't like getting robbed. And yet if someone brought this up, I'd totally agree with them. @Sociopathic and @Domo Arigato finally started to touch on that.

@Snare @DeadPool1337 @G.O.A.T. @Lucki the paragraph above your names is for you guys and anyone else I've argued with.

 

If you've gotten this far and are wondering why I've been arguing so much it's because I believe if you're going to do something it should be for the right reasons. And yes I understand this is going to piss people off,so be it.

[Sociopathic 717]

15 minutes ago, TheRandomOne said:

What FACTS have I ignored? That people don't like being tazed/restrained/robbed? I know I don't like having that happen to me,but that doesn't make it wrong. Personal feelings are irrelevant to the discussion, so I have ignored those,sure. What FACTS have been shared that I've ignored? If I wanted to troll I wouldn't be arguing with logic. 

 

Also, no one seems to tell me how I'm allegedly talking in circles. People have claimed it, still waiting on proof. The irony of being told I'm on a high horse yet plenty of others speak down about/to me without providing proof of anything.

 

EXTRA NOTE: You want me to tell you one of the best possible ways to argue your side? 

 

Bring up the fact that the amount of rule changes and potential Dev work that would need to take place to balance it out and if it's worth doing all that work for one rule, especially with the fact we recently lost a Dev. Bring up the fact that the man hours that would go into that are probably not worth it when they could be spent improving the servers in other ways.  The crazy thing is no one has brought this up. You're all too busy trying to demonstrate how big your e-dick is by attacking me, or talking about how you don't like getting robbed. And yet if someone brought this up, I'd totally agree with them.

 

If you've gotten this far and are wondering why I've been arguing so much it's because I believe if you're going to do something it should be for the right reasons. And yes I understand this is going to piss people off,so be it.

Tasing and restraining cops won't be a thing, it's the most illogical change I've ever seen on this server, I'm curious on how you convince yourself that it's ok, that it's balanced for cops to be tased and restrained, that it's the cops fault if they do get tased.

Civilians outnumber and outgun cops on a multitude of levels.

Better body armor and better weapons, your average vigi will outshoot a PO and Deputy in a fight strictly on the count of better body armor, the more experience players will outshoot anyone Deputy-CPLs because they will have better body armor, more manpower, and will almost certainly carry CPL+ taser weapons, and how many cops don't play or don't play as much because they know they are gonna get tased and restrained if they play?

You can eliminate more of the police force by tasing and restraining them ontop of the fact that less cops play because of that.

send a few guys to tase and restrain cops and you can have them for 15 minutes, if you are smart enough to plant a bomb on the fed at the same time, they will have 5 minutes to stop you by the time they have to be released, and you can take them to the middle of no where before you release them and abandone them there, they can't log off because of the fed, they can't get to the fed because their stranded, they would have to wait for other cops to get on or for the bomb to blow so one can log off and the rest to respawn since that cop was tired of the bullshit that is tasing and restraining.

[TheRandomOne 477]

1 minute ago, Sociopathic said:

-stuff-

I feel like you didn't read all the way through my post.

[Sociopathic 717]

Just now, TheRandomOne said:

I feel like you didn't read all the way through my post.

I did, what's your point?

[User_0000 62]

What's up wid da long essays

[Snare 2687]

37 minutes ago, TheRandomOne said:

-dev work-

Dev work is only a side point it's more about the issue at hand then the difficulty we could have balancing it.

As I said in an early post we could try different rules/ things like the tazer debuff to see how it works.

But the main issue is really just the concept as a whole not dev work. 

that's just beating around the bush. IMO

like I also said previously I'm somewhat neutral except that so many people (who know what their talking about) are making complaints about it I have to go with what their saying. I'm not trying to say you don't know what your talking about or are not entitled to your opinion but overwhelming majority yaknow?

[Rusty 1673]

apd sucks bunch of clueless mongs running round now.

[TheRandomOne 477]

Just now, Sociopathic said:

I did, what's your point?

 

34 minutes ago, TheRandomOne said:

Bring up the fact that the amount of rule changes and potential Dev work that would need to take place to balance it out and if it's worth doing all that work for one rule, especially with the fact we recently lost a Dev. Bring up the fact that the man hours that would go into that are probably not worth it when they could be spent improving the servers in other ways.  The crazy thing is no one has brought this up. You're all too busy trying to demonstrate how big your e-dick is by attacking me, or talking about how you don't like getting robbed. And yet if someone brought this up, I'd totally agree with them

That's my point.

[Danger 729]

58 minutes ago, G.O.A.T. said:

P.S. @TheRandomOne throw another jab, I'll hit you with the left hook fam. Don't think for a second that this Chief tag makes me immune from laying down wood.

SHOTS FIRED!!

[TheRandomOne 477]

5 minutes ago, Snare said:

Dev work is only a side point it's more about the issue at hand then the difficulty we could have balancing it.

As I said in an early post we could try different rules/ things like the tazer debuff to see how it works.

But the main issue is really just the concept as a whole not dev work. 

that's just beating around the bush. IMO

It's a combination of Dev work and staff/senior APD man hours that could be spent potentially/hopefully better in an effort to improve the server in other ways. If someone brought that up, I'd have to agree with them because this rule causes a ripple effect with other rules that would have to be looked at. It's for that reason I'm for reverting back to the old ways. No one brought it up though and I wasn't going to agree with a flawed thought process.

People's personal feelings are irrelevant to the discussion. For instance, I'm still on a personal level all for cops being tazed and restrained and robbed but due to what I stated above I'd definitely agree to having it removed.

[Rusty 1673]

1 hour ago, G.O.A.T. said:

P.S. @TheRandomOne throw another jab, I'll hit you with the left hook fam. Don't think for a second that this Chief tag makes me immune from laying down wood.

Goat ill snap you're jaw clean of you're face fam.

[Guest G.O.A.T.]

34 minutes ago, TheRandomOne said:

What FACTS have I ignored? That people don't like being tazed/restrained/robbed? I know I don't like having that happen to me,but that doesn't make it wrong. Personal feelings are irrelevant to the discussion, so I have ignored those,sure. What FACTS have been shared that I've ignored? If I wanted to troll I wouldn't be arguing with logic. 

 

Also, no one seems to tell me how I'm allegedly talking in circles. People have claimed it, still waiting on proof. The irony of being told I'm on a high horse yet plenty of others speak down about/to me without providing proof of anything.

 

EXTRA NOTE: You want me to tell you one of the best possible ways to argue your side? 

 

Bring up the fact that the amount of rule changes and potential Dev work that would need to take place to balance it out and if it's worth doing all that work for one rule, especially with the fact we recently lost a Dev. Bring up the fact that the man hours that would go into that are probably not worth it when they could be spent improving the servers in other ways.  The crazy thing is no one has brought this up. You're all too busy trying to demonstrate how big your e-dick is by attacking me, or talking about how you don't like getting robbed. And yet if someone brought this up, I'd totally agree with them. @Sociopathic and @Domo Arigato finally started to touch on that.

@Snare @DeadPool1337 @G.O.A.T. @Lucki the paragraph above your names is for you guys and anyone else I've argued with.

 

If you've gotten this far and are wondering why I've been arguing so much it's because I believe if you're going to do something it should be for the right reasons. And yes I understand this is going to piss people off,so be it.

In response to the bolded text, I already voiced my position to the dev team in that specific regard (before and after the implementation of cops being able to be restrained) and they did not see it as an issue at the time. The revert would take significantly less time than you anticipate, IMO. I am sure one of the devs has old code saved somewhere.

I've already provided you proof that you have been and continue to talk in circles. You're missing the point that people: Don't like it, it's not balanced (I.E. still being abused), and that participation in the server from arguably the most important faction has dropped SIGNIFICANTLY. If that isn't cause for concern, then I am not sure what is.

I am completely OK with letting vigi's keep SPAR16's or whatever the hell they have. The problem for us is when A N Y O N E can walk up and restrain a cop. Don't punish the majority of a faction for the actions of the few, the sAPD is more than capable of handling cops who won't comply with the 3-to-1 rule as we always have been in the past.

To end, the 3-to-1 rule was very balanced, you didn't see people waiting outside of Pyrgos HQ (or any HQ for that matter) for any cop to spawn in so they could taze/restrain/rob gear. It's simply broken. Take a minute to think about that. You know what the equivalent of that would be for cops? That would be us camping outside of rebel waiting to lethal/taze you once you geared. Should we eliminate the red zone camping clause to show you what it's like, because I know a lot of APD members that would have NO PROBLEM AT ALL camping the rebels to show you what it's like.

The majority of the staff even recognize how broken this feature is. When people are quitting a faction, or the server as a whole for that matter due to an issue with a feature...that is a MAJOR cause for concern. If you can't recognize that, then I don't know what to tell you.

2 minutes ago, Rusty said:

Goat ill snap you're jaw clean of you're face fam.

You'd have to get unblacklisted to that first xd

[TheRandomOne 477]

10 minutes ago, G.O.A.T. said:

In response to the bolded text, I already voiced my position to the dev team in that specific regard (before and after the implementation of cops being able to be restrained) and they did not see it as an issue at the time. The revert would take significantly less time than you anticipate, IMO. I am sure one of the devs has old code saved somewhere

 

The part that you bolded is me agreeing there should be a revert. What I'm saying there is the ripple effect this change causes and the man hours could be spent elsewhere in a hopefully more productive way. In all this time spent arguing no one brought this up. They constantly brought up the fact that they don't LIKE it,that's not proof of anything though. People even brought up ways to balance it more, no one talked about the time it would take or the grander scheme in that regard.

In the most simple terms I can say: I'M AGREEING WITH YOU THAT THERE SHOULD BE A REVERT. I just think it should be for the right reasons, which is why I've argued against many people's reasons.

@G.O.A.T. also if I had known you voiced that concern to staff or had thought about that, I'd be with you from the get go. I like the idea of being able to be tazed and restrained,buUT personal feelings aside, I feel that's the most logical argument and you're right for making that point.

[Rusty 1673]

16 hours ago, So Doubtful (Brent) said:

fucking please.

i became a cop for fun rp but its gotten to the point where it is pointless to get on. its not fun anymore because i can just be tazed and restrained at any moment then left naked in the middle of nowhere. ive already been kidnapped a large number of times and its ridiculous.

Ok if you can role around on you're ones then fuck off.  

[Panda :) 1882]

I don't play cop and even Ik this is a bs rule I have done it once to plumber and he got pretty mad #removeitnow

[Sociopathic 717]

21 minutes ago, Danger said:

SHOTS FIRED!!

[Bubbaloo - Reusable P Cup 2911]

33 minutes ago, Rusty said:

Ok if you can role around on you're ones then fuck off.  

You are definately my favorite toxic shitter  

[Snare 2687]

3 hours ago, Bubbaloo Burrito said:

You are definately my favorite toxic shitter  

definitely* wow learn to spell mong!!!!

 

[Peter Long 4345]

In a fight between @G.O.A.T. and @TheRandomOne . . . . 

 

 

 

 

I pick me. Nobody can throw down wood like me. Cut the shit. 

[Krisskross 97]

As a person who plays cop for the rp this is my perspective. I always agreed with the idea that the apd on Olympus is supposed to be a faction that protects the interests of an individuals' experience. When a terror is called we load up and our first goal is to push the rebels out of the city so that regular civilians don't keep getting shot on sight. When a civilian says they are getting robbed at platinum we load up and stop the robbers and maybe even provide an armed escort. The apd is here to show solo/small groups of players that they are technically never alone when doing legal activities. BUT when the entire apd force is tazed and restrained in kavala square everyone loses faith in the apd especially apd players. I hate the idea of having to be on guard 100% of the time. I like shooting the shit with new players in the square or rping with someone who has a ridiculous story explaining their charges. If I am processing someone and I get shot in the back I still have the opportunity to respawn and chase that fucker down, but when I get tazed and restrained I am now helpless. Clearly the community is split in regards to whether cops should be able to be restrained. So if restraining cops is going to stay I expect the overall experience of all players to change as a result and in my opinion not for the better. Expect rping with someone so long that the rest of the cops go out to find more criminals to disappear. Expect the cops in the square to worry more about themselves instead of the civilians. Expect big gangs to continue making exuberant amounts of money selling drugs because cops are to busy dealing with hostage situations. And finally expect less players playing/applying to be on the apd.