APD Handbook Update 3/31/2020

[Millennium 5322]

49 minutes ago, ThatNerdyGuy said:

This is mainly for a person who wants to take them in but wont put their hands up. Example, Dead gang on s2

fixed it for you

[Claysive 1464]

2 hours ago, decla said:

cuz you guys are hella ratty when it come to those revives. and will try to get any way to rev a person

Not saying you, but some of the people who make this same statement or something along the same lines, are the ones who throw the biggest fit when they are denied by third party. Everyone likes to throw shade at medics until they need them! 

[TheHeroNoob 386]

7 hours ago, Mr GOAT said:

Officer sees a wanted individual.

Does this mean we can now search peoples vehicles if they are wanted for anything since we now have PC to search a vehicle when people are wanted and are driving them or does this just mean the player themselves, even if its just a simple non PC charge on the ticket guide such as driving without headlights? Or do we still need to follow the ticket guide PC when it comes to vehicles?

[DeadPool 4376]

7 hours ago, Mr GOAT said:

If the situation calls for it, you may restrain a suspect or civilian if given prior warning.

So back in 2017 you allowed us to restrain unarmed civs who enter the HQ. Peter came along and said no and pulled admin power to remove that. Can we still do that if we are processing and think they might interfere?

[Christoph 159]

10 minutes ago, DeadPool said:

So back in 2017 you allowed us to restrain unarmed civs who enter the HQ. Peter came along and said no and pulled admin power to remove that. Can we still do that if we are processing and think they might interfere?

SO the main reason as to why this rule is now here is exactly that. 

Many time unarmed civs are being aids etc and you have to TASE them cuz of rules. However this rule was implemented. Previously before the coup with sandman i asked about it and he said

"as long as you have given them many warning/prior warning as well as they are infact unarmed/not a threat toward the officers life then you may restrain that player"

WHich basically means give them a few warning if they don't listen you tell them they will be restrained now and then you restrain them. Do note they have to not be a threat towards the officer/bearing a weapon

[DeadPool 4376]

4 minutes ago, decla said:

SO the main reason as to why this rule is now here is exactly that. 

Many time unarmed civs are being aids etc and you have to TASE them cuz of rules. However this rule was implemented. Previously before the coup with sandman i asked about it and he said

"as long as you have given them many warning/prior warning as well as they are infact unarmed/not a threat toward the officers life then you may restrain that player"

WHich basically means give them a few warning if they don't listen you tell them they will be restrained now and then you restrain them. Do note they have to not be a threat towards the officer/bearing a weapon

thats not my question. 

I want to know if Goat will allow us to do it again. Also I dont trust Sandman plus hes not the chief.

 

 

Back in 2017 we could straight up say im restraining you for my safety and your safety at this time. only if they were un armed. This way you dont have to shoot causing everyone to stop processing. It was stopped because Peter long didnt like it.

[Christoph 159]

4 minutes ago, DeadPool said:

thats not my question. 

I want to know if Goat will allow us to do it again. Also I dont trust Sandman plus hes not the chief.

 

 

Back in 2017 we could straight up say im restraining you for my safety and your safety at this time. only if they were un armed. This way you dont have to shoot causing everyone to stop processing. It was stopped because Peter long didnt like it.

yes i understand thats the question. What im saying is its allowed at discretion. i was giving you some examples and many others cuz people like to try and bend the rule to a stupid extent. Goat has clearly added the rule for a reason allowing us to do that again. he has just re-worded certain aspects of the handbook

[Mr GOAT 2081]

1 hour ago, DeadPool said:

thats not my question. 

I want to know if Goat will allow us to do it again. Also I dont trust Sandman plus hes not the chief.

 

 

Back in 2017 we could straight up say im restraining you for my safety and your safety at this time. only if they were un armed. This way you dont have to shoot causing everyone to stop processing. It was stopped because Peter long didnt like it.

You’re referring to when someone got revived. This update does allow you to “tackle” unarmed civs

[JuanDeaged 1434]

sooo we can bench snipe ppl now right

[Christoph 159]

2 minutes ago, JuanDeaged said:

sooo we can bench snipe ppl now right

always use to be a thing. literally have a dep and the civ exchange fire and boom snipe the shit out off them

[destruct 1308]

A+ on formatting jklol

[Dicky 65]

Thank you for the 3 to 1 clarification!!!!!

/Tactical advantage

[Fraali 1262]

Spoiler

If the suspect is on a roof inaccessible by means other than a ladder.

There seems to be a bit of confusion around this from the people I've asked.

Does it mean that you can lethal someone on top of an office building that only has a ladder? And does being a corp with a heli make it so you can't lethal at that point?

[Soulz 370]

2 hours ago, Fraali said:

  Reveal hidden contents

If the suspect is on a roof inaccessible by means other than a ladder.

There seems to be a bit of confusion around this from the people I've asked.

Does it mean that you can lethal someone on top of an office building that only has a ladder? And does being a corp with a heli make it so you can't lethal at that point?

And does being a corp with a heli make it so you can't lethal at that point? YES... you have a heli so u can reach them.

[Hatchbacks 4106]

21 hours ago, Mr GOAT said:

Illegal Vehicles

1. Any armed vehicle, Ifrit, Strider, Hunter, Taru Bench, Pharmaceutical vehicles and any variant of the Blackfish.

so you can go guns hot on the pharma seems to good to be true

[Mako 3328]

On 3/31/2020 at 8:50 PM, Fraali said:

  Hide contents

If the suspect is on a roof inaccessible by means other than a ladder.

There seems to be a bit of confusion around this from the people I've asked.

Does it mean that you can lethal someone on top of an office building that only has a ladder? And does being a corp with a heli make it so you can't lethal at that point?

Its meant more so for banks which you would engage via ground, if you have a helicopter you have means to accessing the roof and therefore would not be lethaling them unless the 2 prior non-lethal attempts. 

On 3/31/2020 at 5:53 PM, Dicky said:

Thank you for the 3 to 1 clarification!!!!!

/Tactical advantage

yw

On 3/31/2020 at 2:08 PM, JuanDeaged said:

sooo we can bench snipe ppl now right

always a thing

[i win 1096]

13 minutes ago, Mako said:

Its meant more so for banks which you would engage via ground, if you have a helicopter you have means to accessing the roof and therefore would not be lethaling them unless the 2 prior non-lethal attempts. 

Just for banks? There are other office buildings, this could easily have been worded to only include banks if that was your intention. Was there something up with bank balance that you would like to correct?