I think that the way of handling authorizations in the days of the last HL2RP era was one of the reasons resulting in it's extinction.

To keep the server alive, you need new players and you need to make them stay.
They want their characters to go in action and you don't let them because:

• Write a million words backstory about:
  
  • How you broke a window with a random object and took the glass shard to use it as a makeshift knife, or how you found a rusty piece of wire or a little square of metal with sharp edges that would serve the same purpose.
  • How you managed to smuggle an old t-shirt, a pair of shoes or a hat of yours from the pre-war era in your suitcase, because the UU is perfect and there's absolutely no way your suitcase wouldn't get searched in it's entirety.
  • How your character used to take martial arts lessons for a few months and gained some basic self-defense abilities. Don't forget to include the same, generic backstory already seen before.
• Make up a handful of fake perks and disadvantages of you having the item. Please refrain from telling us you want to look cool and have fun because that's not what we're aiming for.
• Wait a few days for the administration team to review your application. Reapply twice because your grammar isn't the best and because the ability to write a sentence or two in a form of /me definitely isn't sufficient to RP.

Take what I said above with a grain of salt, but think of it.
Like, of course there'd be metal detectors and probably x-ray scans utilized on the suitcases, but there's this factor named human error and the fact that t-shirts and books aren't made of metal.

What is the risk of letting a player gain an IC item like a t-shirt or shoes they can brag with, or even a knife? There's the risk of roleplay. What if you had the units roleplaying confiscate your items on sight and detain you for a little while? No way we can allow that to happen, right?

Even if you get a knife, so what? You go and mug someone. There's roleplay in the mugging itself, there's roleplay in them reporting you, in the units going after you, in your detainment or execution, in the victim seeking medical attention (even if it only went as far as purchasing a bandage from a player-seller, it's still better than "sit in p3 and repeat indefinitely").
Of course, when you give a player a perk there's a high chance they'll abuse it sometime. So what? Even if you go and stab everyone around with your IC knife, given a decent administration team who won't instantly physgun you, ban you and void everything, you will cause some roleplay (again! woah!). The victim will probably cause it too as they might seek medical attention again.

The requirements put in place were stupid and are the cause of why the server died. The influx of new players literally died out and I believe this is the cause of it. The administration acts more like "fun police" than "administration and roleplay assistance".

You don't let new players have fun, they leave, simple as that.
"No guns in plaza" and "no guns outside of p3". No fun allowed. Worst case - unit is headshot and drops their weapons.  Admins have to spend fifteen minutes looking up who all got the guns, what a disaster. They have to work. Shame. (hint, there can be systems put in place to allow for easier logging/tracing of weapons)
"No rogue units without owner approval" - rogue units should be allowed, given the character has a valid reason. Agreement of a handful of administrators / SA should be enough. If they cannot be trusted then they shouldn't be administrators. What are the risks of a rogue unit anyways? Dropping weapons? See the previous point. Other than that, it's just the risk of roleplay, again.


typical khub you just point out whats wrong and i dont agree with you because xxx
I voiced my opinion, feel free to disagree. Provide counter-arguments and I will try to react.

you're dumb it wasn't like this go away you're just wrong we don't want your opinion stick it up your ass
ok

ok so you pointed out whats wrong but how to fix??

My suggestions:

• Instruct administration not to act like fun police.
• Stop making tons of rules that will prevent roleplay just because there's a chance of it resulting in a breach of the server rules.
• Demote administrators who intervene in roleplay only because it might eventually sometime possibly result in someone breaking a rule.
• Demote administrators who intervene in/void roleplay because a rule was broken, as long as it's not massive RDM and as long as the situation can be dealt with ICly.

Most of the requirements and restrictions currently in effect serve two purposes:
1. remove player fun
2. make admins' jobs easier

That's wrong.
There obviously need to be some rules and restrictions put in place but not like this.

In-spot authorizations are a good idea, but I cannot see them working well due to the already mentioned problem of admin bias.

There should also be a system that allows for easier applications on both sides (players and admins).
Imagine a part of the TAB menu called "Authorizations", synchronized with the forum. That way, you can fill up the application ingame if it's something minor and it's posted to the forums for you. Administration members vote on the application, even from in-game. Given enough votes or a SA's approval, the application is accepted. People can use a command like '/Auths' while looking at you, you select authorizations granted to your current character that you'd like to show them. Administrators can use this command to instantly revoke an authorization or to tweak it.

Edit: While I guess I can understand the reasons behind postponing certain things (outlands, OTA, vortigaunts) until the server is running well, it can get a little counter-productive. I believe you should set everything up before the server is launched. You keep players by providing them fun/entertainment/roleplay, not by saying "this thing you like won't come until we are 128/128 populated for two weeks in a row, you have to wait bored meanwhile".

this young man is correct.

Quote from: Grand Master Kronos-MRL on January 12, 2014, 02:10:57 AM

shouldn't that be the case for all faction lead positions?

Would make sense, however a lot of the more competent faction leaders are still here or coming back, so in a way it would make sense to simply give them the lead if they accept it.

True.

Quote from: Grand Master Kronos-MRL on January 11, 2014, 11:22:15 PM

This is honestly a question that should be answered by professionals, not people who obtain their information from either general knowledge of High School/College Courses or the internet.

No one would actually know what they're talking about other than what they were taught.

If knowledge attained from a college is "unreliable" from the way you put it, then what knowledge is? On the internet there are websites such as http://harvardmagazine.com/ , AP, or the gale database? What knowledge is reliable to you then? Do people have to do the "experiments" themselves or something? Colleges teach things that have evidence behind them/therories, and so those are instantly fake? What about a doctor at some hospital? He doesn't know what he's talking about when he takes a look at an x-ray and the arm is "broken"? Your logic makes no sense at all, besides, we're getting offtopic.

Alright, i'll explain my meaning. Basically, people would hear one thing from a professor/teacher and repeat it word for word or even worse, misinterpreted.

Reliable knowledge is knowledge that comes from experience in the field of Astrobiology and extra-terrestrial studies.

I did not say Colleges do not provide adequate teachings, its how the student interprets them and displays their knowledge of it.

The internet is not a fully trustworthy place to gain the full amount of experience and knowledgeon a subject.

damn now i'm too tired to care.

You win the "intelligence battle" I guess.

This is honestly a question that should be answered by professionals, not people who obtain their information from either general knowledge of High School/College Courses or the internet.

No one would actually know what they're talking about other than what they were taught.

Here's an idea...

Why not merge CWU and CAB. Now, before you bash me, hear me out.

Think of the generic office environment of a politician or even a business like say...the president or walmart or something i dunno. There's the head honcho man which is the guy/girl in charge (President or Chairman), being the head Civil Administrator or Consul. Then from that point is goes down in the structure to Vice President (or CEO), so on and so forth. So my proposal is that you bring the two together (especially considering the fact that they worked hand in hand almost all the time before anyway) so that way they hold more relevance to one another and build up the hierarchy of both.



As you can see in the diagram above, it could essentially work like that. All the important positions filled by those of the CAB like Chairman, CEO and General Manager and then the sub-branches being primarily made up of the CWU. Personally, I think this make the system cleaner and gives them both more to do. So instead of just straight speeches for the CAB, they also have a hand in the affairs of the CWU and can go about to manage them in various ways much like general employees and where the CWU would just have retail, they also have a hand in politics in the city (in conjunction with the various reforms people were talking about like making CWU have a hand in R&D). Overall, I think this will add a more fluid and dynamic system for both that isn't so...one tracked as they have been in the past.

that
is
the
plan.

Quote from: Grand Master Kronos-MRL on January 10, 2014, 11:46:17 PM

Quote from: Cow ??¦? ???°??? ???? ???°???¤ on January 10, 2014, 08:10:44 PM

Quote from: thomas mason on January 10, 2014, 07:26:54 PM

if an admin intervened i'd rather it be for rule breaking issues like "you need a valid reason to kill somebody" than "you're not allowed a weapon in p1"

what if a drug dealer decided to go into p1 for business and he gets sprung and he goes for his pistol as a last defence and an admin sits there going "no you cant do that"

I believe their was one scenario were KMP tried to kill my Kyle Brown character in plaza, but due to the circumstances it was ok for me to use my MP7 in plaza(it was kinda by the D6 gate thingy on the old C45 map).

I think guns should be allowed in plaza, BUT ONLY if the gun holder is in a life or death situation/CP's are banging on his apartment door because they know whats up and yea.

Quote from: smt on January 10, 2014, 04:52:49 PM

well i mean, i'd rather an admin physgunned someone away who wants to pull out a gun and start randomly killing everyone in the plaza, but i'd not like an admin to do the same if it was properly rp'd, my point is more that knowing combine technology how/why would a gun even find its way into p1 and right outside the nexus, thats pretty unrealistic to begin with

RDM is against server rules so he'd get banned if he started randomly killing people, that simple.

When I mean no restrictions, I mean no restrictions. No on one condition bullshit. Let them take it out and get gunned down for being dumbasses. If they decide to RDM, they'll get banned. Simple. You never know if someone asked for the death of another and that other is in Plaza, thus bringing probable cause for their death.

As long as a strict "No ruining PassiveRP" rule is put into place, so you can't just walk up to some guy selling books at his shop and kill him, then I suppose it would be ok...I dunno, I still don't like it.

Life or death situations, or with admin approval in other instances, is where I stand on the situation with guns in P1 and that's all I have to say further about the matter.

the only rule that should be involving guns is no rdm imo. how they use it, is how they use it. passive rp can be interrupted due to an assassination, that's part of the point of an assassination, it all depends on how desperate the person is.

Quote from: thomas mason on January 10, 2014, 07:26:54 PM

if an admin intervened i'd rather it be for rule breaking issues like "you need a valid reason to kill somebody" than "you're not allowed a weapon in p1"

what if a drug dealer decided to go into p1 for business and he gets sprung and he goes for his pistol as a last defence and an admin sits there going "no you cant do that"

I believe their was one scenario were KMP tried to kill my Kyle Brown character in plaza, but due to the circumstances it was ok for me to use my MP7 in plaza(it was kinda by the D6 gate thingy on the old C45 map).

I think guns should be allowed in plaza, BUT ONLY if the gun holder is in a life or death situation/CP's are banging on his apartment door because they know whats up and yea.

Quote from: smt on January 10, 2014, 04:52:49 PM

well i mean, i'd rather an admin physgunned someone away who wants to pull out a gun and start randomly killing everyone in the plaza, but i'd not like an admin to do the same if it was properly rp'd, my point is more that knowing combine technology how/why would a gun even find its way into p1 and right outside the nexus, thats pretty unrealistic to begin with

RDM is against server rules so he'd get banned if he started randomly killing people, that simple.

When I mean no restrictions, I mean no restrictions. No on one condition bullshit. Let them take it out and get gunned down for being dumbasses. If they decide to RDM, they'll get banned. Simple. You never know if someone asked for the death of another and that other is in Plaza, thus bringing probable cause for their death.

I think CWU and CA should be integrated similarity as to how a commissioner irl would report to their appropriate minister. Not all CA's should have relations with the CWU but at least one should be designated specifically to oversee their progress and to allocate funds/grants/etc

Civil Workers Union Affairs

that's the plan.