"I AM THE FACTION LEADER AND I MAKE THE CHOICES!!!" "IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM GO TO DAVID MILLER!!" "ANOTHER ADMIN WITH NO RULE KNOWLEDGE"

[Pseudonym 253]

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.