TheK

Resetting only makes sense after the underlying problems with economy have been fixed, or else just like bone said when you pump more money into an already damaged system, this (resetting) will also work out negatively. To fix the system, Bone and others were already working on getting a concept for civilian jobs and criminal pay-outs, in addition to inventing new money drains (reasons to let the cash flow). But we gotta be patient because that's a very delicate task.. economy plays a big role in proper RPG (yes, it works on the human brain; fullfill the reward chain and have a reason to keep playing because it satisfies) and it requires more thinking and planning rather than just changing a few values here and there. Just like in real life, tampering with an economy has all kind of (side) effects. The problem is deeper than what you see at the surface, economy is structurally flawed. So basically, the system has to be changed for this issue (money devaluation) not to re-appear in a couple of years, prompting another reset to 'fix' it. The economy should be able to regulate itself (remain in balance) after intervention. Do it properly, or don't do it. I hope ppl understand why fixing the problems isn't an easy or quick task now..

As you can probably read from Kain's reply already, this is a lost battle. There is no way to make (s)HQ realize what is going on and take responsibility with some radical steps. I didn't review your code, but I am pretty sure that it's no coincidence that people have similar feelings as other devs did while interacting with Nano about development. I was alerted about this topic and reflected my opinion which you can read here; (the situation is still not limited to this, its a brief description and i had proper case examples, better than Silence) I censored the name of my chat partner to protect him (he wouldn't make friends with Nanobob for his words otherwise). As you can see I initially didn't want to empathasize on the issues towards the public, but the course this topic is running and some responses made me rethink that. I also really don't care about this whole matter anymore, these are just my 2 cents, this whole complaint all sounds too familiar not to support its essentials. Although there's a chance that HQ will consider censoring my post because it may painfully expose some problems.

@odorian said in July Updates: Wish one of the devs would no longer be continuing his job in SAES Clan I completely agree, and I would probably return (sooner) if what has to happen, does happen.

I don't really know how to start off with this post, you may have noticed the "Inactive/retired" tag on me but instead of going inactive, I decided to "retire" from the SAES clan knowingly. Things are just broken beyond repair in some regards and I was in pain to remain part of it, I am not the kind of person to run for problems or consider it as causing too much stress that easily, instead I put alot of effort in turning things around and steering SAES into better days, to which I succeeded in some lenghts. With that said, it was my pleasure to save the day for those considering alot has changed for the better, but now it's my turn to leave the continuation of that up to the rest of the clan. I've had my shot and I made a fair impact, now certain frustrations that I won't really elaborate on have gotten the upper hand on me and torn down my motivation to continue doing what I was doing, and I regret that. It's been a great time overall and I will never forget how I enjoyed being around y'all.

Maybe we can look into adding this with a toggle ability, which means the default setting in "M" panel would be the original GTA SA siren, and once you change it into the custom siren you're suggesting, the siren you hear on your client will be replaced. This would make it opt-in, so only players who like the custom siren will be hearing it, both while using it (driving a police vehicle) and being chased. This would implement a way to avoid the GTA siren "giving you a headache" as you said, but not unnecesarily force it upon players who are indifferent or don't like it. Although the option to toggle it already helps a bunch, also keeping it opt-in instead of opt-out is a conscious decision. I will look into it soon..

Sorted!

Bottom line: just 1 out of 7 screenshots contained evidence of a rulebreak, and he will only be punished for this single rulebreak. Thanks for reporting

I reviewed your screenshots one by one, most of them are invalid; the first screen doesnt show what happened (evidence) altho I can imagine he used 'map bug' and its possible but unlikely your SS is staged, so no absolute evidence for that i will question n0visory to see if he gives in and admits the second screen only shows maybe something related to first one, to sketch the situation and explain a bit what he allegedly did in first SS the third screen shows a nade kill, but no evidence of any rulebreak, as he didnt suicide but just killed you. There is no indication he wasnt wanted and you werent chasing him as there's no prohibition for CC members to use violence against cops (while wanted?) this cannot be used in any way without further evidence the fourth screenshot is the same story as third one, no visibility of his wanted level and not clear whether or not you were chasing him additionally, a dildo kill is lame, but under the right circumstances (wanted, and being actively chased) not a specific violation of any rule. who knows you were low HP and he just saw it as a suitable and funny way to finish off the cop who was trying to get him. No evidence or clues to show otherwise or any adverse situation context. -- In the fourth screenshot, he even claimed (in chat) that the situation that would totally excuse his attack (him being wanted, and you trying to arrest) so this creates further doubt re-enforcing your need to prove otherwise, to show a rulebreak situation was the case when he killed/attacked you. The accusation is a rulebreak, so obviously the proof burden to back up your claims is with you (the reporting party). I can't detect any signs of a rulebreak in the fifth screenshot the sixth screenshot shows a runover kill, which on itself isn't a rulebreak (only park-killing is, which isn't shown to be the case). Because runover isn't a rulebreak, the driver (novisory) was wanted and the player who he decided to kill was a cop, it is also considered a basic kill, which under the circumstances as far your evidence lacks to show otherwise (like whether or not you guys were trying to get/arrest them), is permitted. there even isn't a runover kill message (feed), and the exact wanted level of novisory is obfuscated by the nametags, altho it looks rather low, and running over (killing) a cop would result in a bit more wanted stars I figure. Thus, it's even possible there was no parkkill at that moment, making the sixth screenshot possibly another SS without any signs of a rulebreak (relevance to report). the seventh screenshot also contains no visibile signs of any rulebreak on itself, because it shows a wanted novisory shooting at a cop trying to get to him. You just got one success with this report; the eighth screenshot shows basically the same as first SS, but this time his CC color blip is shown on the minimap to be positioned right into the "map bug" building. Additionally, there is a MOTD bar (up your screen) output saying "Successfully shot with rubber bullets" shortly before the screenshot was taken. In this case of the last screenshot in your album, its pretty clear what has happened, n0visory used a map bug to climb into that building, while you guys were chasing him. This also makes it likely the first screenshot had the same happen. I will not need to 'question' him about that, as I initially listed for SS #1, and he will only be punished for unfair avoiding of arrest, by using a map bug while being chased on foot.

@gengar said in Share your opinion: GM idea of "gang wars": I believe there is no need for this as all gangs can already enter in rivalry mode between them on agreement by leadership of concerned gangs. Everything suggested in this idea can already be done ingame, there are no rules, or anything that prevents players Most of the points suggested in the basic write-up do lift some boundaries/limitations that gangs/squads would otherwise have to follow as ordinarily. We're not saying that due to this implementation, we want to forbid gangs going the old fashioned, informal (non approval) 'rivalry', this just brings extended and mandated possibilities and more safeguards from unforeseen consequences of what comes and goes from what is permitted by a formally active war under GM. I'm not sure if you really did read it all well enough..

@riseagain said in Share your opinion: GM idea of "gang wars": Nah, all players of the server will suffer from it and all server will be in chaos if someone will start the war. @tut-greco said in Share your opinion: GM idea of "gang wars": Random acts of violence aimed at members of the opposite gang (unpredecented attacks on gang base or properties, shooting at the opposite gang on sight, arson/attacks on their real estate) anything with the exception of shooting at sight (i assume it means shooting at any location in map) sounds decent to me. Both of you mentioned the most sensitive point and understandably. I got an idea, to meet you halfway, we could make it mandatory to have some sort of 'foreplay' that comes before any shots are fired. That means like I described at one part; displaying weapons to the opposite gang, trying to provoke (or warn for) a physical standoff by certain actions which are to be RPed at the scene. In the case where violence (after a sufficiently RPed standoff or intrusion of honour) does happen, it can however be pardonned by the fact there's an active war. For example an intrusion of honour that i mentioned would be when a (bunch of) gang members goes to stand near to a rival gang, who obviously cannot appreciate the presence of a gang they are in a fiercy war with, in their direct vinicity. A (vehicle of) enemy gang members can also 'stalk' the other gang to intimidate them, prompting a standoff. This change in plans would mean, 'shooting on sight' will not be the case, and thus it won't really look and feel like legalised straight DM. Does this sound reasonable to you guys?

Hello everyone, Some thinkers within GM recently came with the following idea; war declarations between gangs. This would mean that there'll be a possibility to request (and get approved) a formal gang war, which mandates (random) acts of violence or malcompetition between gangs, without it being considered as DM or provoking. We want to ask you, the community, for your opinion on the idea in general, and most of all we'd appreciate some input & suggestions on the regulatory and limiting measures that would accompany the implementation (policies to keep it all reasonable and not let it derail into hate games). Currently this is what we envision (subject to change after suggestions): A major incident (or a buildup of frustration or competition) happens between atleast 2 gangs, that lead to tensions severe enough to create rivalry. Gang leadership face eachother at "the table" of a gang coalition (this is a fun RP aspect and building these coalitions between gangs will likely be prompted by the new possibilities) including intermediation, as it is in all gang's interests not to let wars erupt If the conflict cannot be solved peacefully, gang leaderships sign a "declaration of war" The backstory of the situation (conflict, incident, exactly what happened and how it should reasonably lead to tensions severe enough to permit a war, realistically) is submitted to GM, and constitutes the "war approval request". GM will then review if there's a good enough RP backstory to the war request, based on the events that unfolded between the gangs. If there is, we will approve the war, after which it is officially permitted. An ongoing war permits the following to be carried out; Random acts of violence aimed at members of the opposite gang (unpredecented attacks on gang base or properties, shooting at the opposite gang on sight, arson/attacks on their real estate) Removing the cap on the amount or interval of Gang robberies (of their base's safe) Allowing one gang to interrupt another gang's activities, such as Bankrobs headed by the gang (entering the bank to attack the robbers belonging to that gang, possibly foiling it) altho this point is still up for serious discussion and evaluation Allowing corruption (for example, squads will be made aware they can accept bribery from gang 1 involved in a war with another gang, being PAID to bump up the amount of Base raids the bribed squad will want to carry out on the victim gang) Alright, so that's that. What we as GM will want to make sure, is that gang leadership makes everyone inside affected gangs aware that the ongoing war means no DM accusations are to be made, and that if they get shot they know the origin of the attack. We will also make sure all server staff and admins are aware of the active gang wars so no DM will be considered for the permittable attacks. What we would like to encourage however, is that random acts of violence be carried out in a RP way. For example: gang 1 enters gang 2's territory or where they are hanging out.. gang 2 RP's yelling "Ey vatos.." and raises their shirts off their waistbands, showing their guns. After a short moment of eyeballing they won't fall back, and shots ring. Or you have incidents where there's staredowns and a threathening athmosphere very often, and at one breaking point gang 1 decides to organise a drive-by shooting on a group of gang 2's members hanging out in their territory, or whenever they see a group of them anywhere. What we also do not want is continuous DM battles, like it were a TDM with respawning; do not turn hospitals into DM zones, we don't like handing out permits to farm kill-stats, it is not intended so; if you have a shooting once and your gang kills all rival gang members, then there's silence as soon the final opponent dies, and it's done with; dont re-locate eachother to bring it on, just consider a new attack only when you randomly meet a bunch of rival gang members again, under the right circumstances so it be. If anything goes out war by the last-mentioned criteria, GM can decide to prematurely withdraw the GANG WAR permission, after which it will be forced to end. These are our basic ideas of how this should be implemented. Please leave both your impression on whether or not the idea of GANG WARS in general are a good idea, if you think it brings a valuable addition to SAES, but also your opinion on the regulations that we wrote up in the concept. Notes for fair-play: Allies or coalitions between gangs can be formed between gangs (even beyond the negotiations table), but not so much that 10 gangs are against 1, forcing that one to die out or be safe nowhere. Common sense. It has to remain fun. If the leadership of one gang feels they are under unreasonable pressure or violence, they can decide (one-sided) to request GM to force the war to an end. A declaration of war can be one-sided, but the safeguard for this approach is that the second gang can object & request cancellation as soon they took notice of the declaration of war which had previously been approved by GM after being submitted by the aggressor gang. Gangs may get a tactical advantage from not giving another gang time to prepare, so in some situations (as far the backstory of the incident/intra-gang tensions supports it) a declaration of war can just be handed out without deliberations on the "round table" of negotiations between the 2 gang's leaderships.

Sorted, thanks for reporting.

There is no evidence of the trainee camping on hospital, which is the only thing possibly a rulebreak in this whole situation (F1 states they can only arrest when passing by coincidentally instead of actively camping the hospital). Once the anti-arrest timer, giving you 20 seconds to spawn your car and get the hell out of there, was added for hospitals, the "hospital arrest" rule was removed and turned into the camping rule. Besides that, when he opened fire you had already left the hospital area; even before the hospital arrest rule changed into hospital camping rule, if this would happen back then, it would already no longer be seen as hospital arrest/attacking by the cop. Conclusion: his claim that you 'had no grounds to stand on' is right in all aspects of this situation. If you only brought forward some evidence that he was camping the hospital, it would be different.. altho I understand that's nearly impossible with the timing and speed of your respawn. Anyone who has dealt with him shortly before could have helped you out and report with additional evidence, so ask for that next time maybe.

@luppo said in New MTA server: SAES:PUBG is now a thing!: What is the player peak? @laza said in New MTA server: SAES:PUBG is now a thing!: Brophy You're playing with yourself? :thinking_face: Don't forget we still gotta do some promotion but that will come after further script improvements. Our PUBG gamemode is more basic than any of the russian ones and we don't want to extensively promote something to non-SAES players that cannot really compete with them yet. The playercount of daily peaks of 30 is still much better than RvB, and it will probably grow in popularity after the aforementioned improvements.

*Re-post from http://archive.saesrpg.uk/news/articles/saesrpg-pubg-mta-server/ We'rehappy to present you with the results of our pre-alpha project which has been on and off last week: SAES:PUBG! We have decided to launch a new MTA server besides RvB, running the popular Battle Royale/PUBG gamemode genre. As of right now, the gamemode has exited pre-alpha stage and the server has opened up to the public. server details; SAES:PUBG - Battlegrounds / Battle Royale | saesrpg.uk mtasa://151.80.207.96:7999 Let me give you some first impressions of PUBG MTA (screenshots of SAES:PUBG): Looting system Gameplay: I assume most of you will be known with the PUBG concept, it's a trend which found its way from the original game to MTA, hoping to recreate it exactly. The game centers on being the last man standing after being dropped by plane into a widespread county, having to constantly move as the zone closes in on you. Loot (weapons and items) to combat other playerscan be found anywhere, and vehicles will be spawned on the streets. The zone will get smaller and smaller, staying outside of the zone as it compresses will shrink your HP and eventually kill you, which forces all players to retreat into the same zones, in turn making it more likely to come across eachother. So it's really natural selection, playing style and tactical decisions are smarter than "engage, engage engage!", in the end it's about survival. Short instructions for item/loot interaction: Press TAB when you're standing near (on) loot, which will appear like a single or multiple packages on the ground. Rightclick common items to move then to your inventory. Weapons should be dragged into the greater weapon slots to the right on your inventory (make sure to) which you can recognize as they light up when you lift the item. Items, like bulletproof vests (armor), helmets and backpacks, will only work if you equip them correctly, which means moving them to the right item or weapon slot, instead of general inventory. These "short instructions" will soon be replaced by a topic containing full guides and gameplay instruction for those who can't figure everything out instantly. The SAES:PUBG server can handle infinite amount of games at the same time, which means you can wait until enough pending players joined the lobby you're in, which makes your lobby "Lobby 1" and the game will then start. You're not in the same world as other matches running at the same time. Please note that while the gamemode exited pre-alpha stage and most bugs have been weeded out recently, it's still beta. Any bugs that you will inevitably find, can be reported on our bugtracker or directly to the SAES discord channel #pubg-betatest, thanks. Additional features will be added later on, we're planning on implementing squad (team) matches, a lobby-and team restricted chatbox, voice chat, loot drops, character and rewards system and stats saving.