CIT Forum Index

Ingame Community => News and Updates => Topic started by: StevieFTW on 06 10, 2013, 05:39:53 pm

Title: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: StevieFTW on 06 10, 2013, 05:39:53 pm
Before I start, I'm going to tell you why I suggested this idea:

Here goes my idea:
Firstly, the violent status for a criminal should NOT wear off for an infinite amount of time until the criminal is jailed.
Secondly, cops should be able to KILL a criminal that is holding a gun because it's a threat.

I don't think any criminals should have problem with this because they can still kill cops like usual, unless they don't realize that they're way in the upper hands. Anyone with 1 minute gameplay could even figure that out.

I hope this suggestion can get feed-backs from you guys and get accepted.

Thank you for reading this.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Physcopath on 06 10, 2013, 05:46:25 pm
Firstly, the violent status for a criminal should NOT wear off for an infinite amount of time until the criminal is jailed.

I think you have a point about this and I think cops deserve this.

Secondly, cops should be able to KILL a criminal that is holding a gun because it's a threat.

I however do not agree with this one.  Maybe if criminal were to aim at a police then the cop would be able to kill them but I don't agree for killing them if they just hold a gun.


Also I think that if it does get added and cops get to kill arrest whenever then the tazer and baton should be removed and it should be combat fighting only. Neutral for now.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: StevieFTW on 06 10, 2013, 05:52:11 pm
I don't think there's an MTA check to know if someone aims at someone. That's why I suggested for holding a gun instead.

Dude, you're a hardcore criminal and you think every criminal enjoys only combat with cops?
There would still be a criminal that is just robbing using other skills, I for one enjoy running around from cops in a car after robbing ATMs. That's why for some criminals' sake, I suggested this with thinking that maybe some criminals want to remain unviolent and go for good ol' chasing. Tazer and nightstick should stay for the special occasion like the good ol' chasing, but I'm pretty sure most cops nowadays don't even have tazer on them.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: mrbrutus1456 on 06 10, 2013, 06:04:22 pm
@Physcopath Both the tazer and the nightstick are still useful in situations where the criminal surrender or is bugged in any way which seems to happen pretty often, even with this added I´m pretty shore that we would have to arrest a couple of criminals the old way as usual. Secondly why would you hold a gun unless if you are trying to kill someone? obviously only if you are wanted it would trigger the violent state maybe but unwanted players need some kind of trigger as well.

And StevieFTW, there are a couple of ways to detect if someone is aiming in MTA, In this case all we need is a trigger once that either activate the violent state (boolean value), make someone wanted (let an unwanted player become wanted for aiming for example) or both. What about become wanted and violent for aiming while being unwanted and become violent for holding a gun while already wanted? Could that work maybe.

Here are the functions that may be used:
Code: Lua
  1. -- Detect what the player target/aim at
  2. element getPlayerTarget ( player thePlayer )
  3.  
  4. -- Event trigger for player target (client)
  5. addEventHandler ( "onClientPlayerTarget", getRootElement(), targetingActivated )
And ofc some basic standard "if else" statements inside to detect if the player are holding a gun, what team the victim are in, if any vehicles are involved etc...

Anyway Upvoted.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Jamie on 06 10, 2013, 06:06:46 pm
I suggested nearly the exact same thing when the new DM rule was implemented.
It didn't recieve enough support.

So yes you have my +1
...
Criminals seriously, lets make things balanced. At the moment cit's cnr is completely out of balance..
Cops can't kill criminals who pose a threat and they should.
With this suggestion implemented a new sense of RP will be brought to the server. Criminals would need to sheath their weapons at all times inorder to avoid having a police officer chase after you.

my previous unsupported  suggestion:http://cit2.net/index.php?topic=92533
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Physcopath on 06 10, 2013, 06:13:21 pm
Quote
Criminals seriously, lets make things balanced. At the moment cit's cnr is completely out of balance..

CITS cnr has always been unbalanced not just from when the rule #1 was changed, before it was always in the favour of cops and now its in the favour of criminals. Its really hard to get a complete balance and for everyone to be happy about it.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: StevieFTW on 06 10, 2013, 06:17:05 pm
Ah I see that there's a function of it, thanks for your input, mrbrutus. Anyways, I still think that by having a gun on hand in public is already a crime in a lot of countries. It's just logical that here, where criminals can sneak up on cops anytime, cops can kill criminals with guns at any given time.

Come on, don't you ever see a cop with low health, suddenly comes from nowhere a criminal holding a gun while being unwanted. It was a certain death for the cop, we need to give them at least a chance to protect themselves.

I think after this update, the general CnR should be a little bit more balanced.
Yes, Physcopath, previously the balance was only slightly off, nowadays, it's greatly unbalanced in general.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: mrbrutus1456 on 06 10, 2013, 06:32:48 pm
Yep, there are many good functions that might be used here, and I still agree with "holding a gun" since it´s pretty obvious that they will kill you. Real noon violent criminals doesn´t run around with guns, aim or shoot right next to everything they see.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Claire on 06 10, 2013, 08:49:22 pm
I somehow neutral for this (generally). Because criminal has this particular disadvantage: Once they die, they will get jailed. Cops can go back to the criminal location to try to jail them again whenever they want to. That also means that cops have more times to plan strategies. But criminals don't.

Firstly, the violent status for a criminal should NOT wear off for an infinite amount of time until the criminal is jailed.

But.. I completely agree with this. For a comparison to realism, when someone murdered another one in real life, does their violent status automatically removed after any particular time? No, except if they get a court or jailed.

Secondly, cops should be able to KILL a criminal that is holding a gun because it's a threat.

Disagree with this. Because there is also civilian. Well, it may be possible to just apply the script for criminal only as civilian can't hurt anybody. But it just doesn't make sense that if criminal holding a gun is a threat, but civilian doesn't. I mean, of course, in term of realism.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: mrbrutus1456 on 06 10, 2013, 09:50:59 pm
I somehow neutral for this (generally). Because criminal has this particular disadvantage: Once they die, they will get jailed. Cops can go back to the criminal location to try to jail them again whenever they want to. That also means that cops have more times to plan strategies. But criminals don't.
There are two types of crimes you can commit, either to earn money or drugs or just killing cops. The first type doesn´t give you long time in jail at all, often not more than 2 minutes witch give you much time to plan your strategies, go afk or just relax. Getting randomly killed as a cop isn´t nice either, it actually cost money to die if you don´t know that. As long you are unwanted you can always plan your strategies while cops can´t due to the risk of getting randomly killed all the time.

Disagree with this. Because there is also civilian. Well, it may be possible to just apply the script for criminal only as civilian can't hurt anybody. But it just doesn't make sense that if criminal holding a gun is a threat, but civilian doesn't. I mean, of course, in term of realism.
The most logic here is ofc to apply for all, why would anyone run around with gun unless if you actually want to hurt or troll anyone? If you are unwanted then maybe aiming could be the trigger to prevent that you get wanted by mistake but otherwise I ´just don´t see any reason why anyone should be able to get away with violent behavior with guns.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: beerman123 on 06 10, 2013, 10:23:14 pm
Yes, it's straight out unfair that cops have to "wait" for a criminal to actually start shooting when he's threatening you. It only makes sense to allow cops to kill criminals aswell, BUT if the criminal doesn't shoot back (didn't do any damage before he died) the cop should get wanted. This prevents cops from going on killing sprees, which isn't very cop-like.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: mrbrutus1456 on 06 10, 2013, 10:36:43 pm
Yes, it's straight out unfair that cops have to "wait" for a criminal to actually start shooting when he's threatening you. It only makes sense to allow cops to kill criminals aswell, BUT if the criminal doesn't shoot back (didn't do any damage before he died) the cop should get wanted. This prevents cops from going on killing sprees, which isn't very cop-like.
Not shore about that since it might get abused for trolling, for example if a criminal pick up a minigun and start to aim the cop know that he must respond quick or get killed but even then the criminal might shoot right next to the cop which might look like an attack even when it´s just trolling, the script should be able to handle all this without possibility of getting abused.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Claire on 07 10, 2013, 09:17:23 am

There are two types of crimes you can commit, either to earn money or drugs or just killing cops. The first type doesn´t give you long time in jail at all, often not more than 2 minutes witch give you much time to plan your strategies, go afk or just relax. Getting randomly killed as a cop isn´t nice either, it actually cost money to die if you don´t know that. As long you are unwanted you can always plan your strategies while cops can´t due to the risk of getting randomly killed all the time.
Well, to me criminal has only one kind of objective: Earn money or jailed, earn drug or jailed, and killing cops or jailed. Jailed equal to failed to criminals. When cop only have absolute one objective: Arrest criminal, no matter how. When they die, come back anytime to try it again.

I've seen all the time criminals always lose eventually. Whether in events (even if they succeed, cop would wait on entrance door(s) to hunt them to die) or just killing cops in particular place. Let's exclude if they're pro or newbie, but the reason why they always lose to me is mainly because once criminal win, cops will just re-spawn and re-think of strategies, but when criminals die, they can only wait in jail or spend much money for jail fine if they are rich. That means Law include more players because they have less spending and no punishment after died.

And anyway, when criminal die, it costs them money too and jail afterwards. So they get double things here.

The most logic here is ofc to apply for all, why would anyone run around with gun unless if you actually want to hurt or troll anyone? If you are unwanted then maybe aiming could be the trigger to prevent that you get wanted by mistake but otherwise I ´just don´t see any reason why anyone should be able to get away with violent behavior with guns.
You're right. I just personally thought that outside of server rules, "trolling" isn't equal to "violent". Realistically, when criminal aim at cop, yes that's a threat. But when civilian aim at others, why is that a threat? They can't hurt you anyway, and it's their own disadvantage if they shoot you as they would just waste their ammo for doing that for nothing. But in other side, triggering wanted level for criminal when they aim at cop, while civilian is again, excluded, simply doesn't make sense. At least to me, not sure.

But anyway, back to Stevie's point here I'm disagree about:

Well, it would be disadvantage for cop if this rule added. The reason why rule #1 was changed was too help law side to get more quantity of worthy wanted players. So instead of making cop being able to kill criminal just because they hold a gun *which is very inhumanly wrong thing to do as a cop. Why don't rollback the rule #1?

And anyway, cop would get less income if this applied. For example: Criminal hold a gun, aim at you, they got one star, and you kill them. How much you spend for killing him? Minimal example is 7 bullets of SPAZ which cost $280 less or more. And also you may lose your armor and need to buy one, or your health and need medkits/heal, or chance to die and more money to re-spawn. And how much you would get for killing that criminal who hold a gun? Well, maybe $700 is the maximum number.

And again, there will be less worthy criminal to chase if this applied. For the moment, you can really make being a cop as your main job as the earning is very little, and this would hurt them more.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: mrbrutus1456 on 07 10, 2013, 01:08:58 pm
@Claire I don´t think that the community want the old rule #1 back, tried to suggest that not long time ago and it got -10 votes, the main reason isn´t just money obviously because it was possible to abuse. Actually most of the rules that you can be adminjailed for are possible to provoke another player to break in order to get him punished when that player actually didn´t wanted to break the rule, just some examples, when an unwanted criminal attacked killed a cop with rifle (DM and against the rules before) it was completely impossible for the cop to prove that since you couldn´t see the name, as well as a coup could try to arrest a group of criminals but as soon the criminal started to shoot the cop could just stop, remove his gun and then report the criminal for DM, something that turned out to be valid in many cases.

However you can´t abuse that anymore with the new rule which is really good, but the consequences remain, who get´s benefits from the new rule? Well in most cases it´s criminals who like to troll or grief cops by randomly killing or similar, criminal gangs was allowed to help each other with the old rule as well so they havn´t get any benefits from the new rule either as well as it is a real disadvantage for cops that you might get killed at anytime, fine if I´m at the wrong place at the wrong time and actually are involved in the activity by trying to arrest someone or similar but I still don´t see why anyone need the ability to grief by aiming at me for a long time and then just kill me as soon I´m not ready for it, could be anything basically like if another player comes just to have a conversation in localchat and so on. Ending shift isn´t an option either now since many crack cops abused that feature to get cheap arrests just like many criminals abuse the new rule to get cheap wanted points.

Quote
But anyway, back to Stevie's point here I'm disagree about:
  • cops should be able to KILL a criminal that is holding a gun because it's a threat.
There is no reason to disagree with that, as Stevie said it is a threat, why would you hold a gun near a cop in the first place unless if you actually want to attack the cop? just don´t run around with guns and you will be just fine. Just because something is allowed doesn´t mean that everyone will do that, if that where the case then you would always see 2-3 criminals hunting for each single cop which you doesn´t see, there aren´t many % of the criminals who hunt for cops compared to the total amount of criminals and the same will apply for the law side as well, only a few cops would actually kill you for holding a gun. First of all the wanted level for that doesn´t even need to be high, lowest possible so you can use /fine as well if you pick up a gun by mistake for example as well as it would give you a short amount of time in jail since it´s not a big crime compared to if you actually killed the cop and you actually mentioned the reason by yourself why not many cops would kill criminals for holding a gun, it would cost more money than you make of it so the feature would obviously only be used for self-defense.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Evil4N on 07 10, 2013, 01:19:33 pm
I agree, why are criminals allowed to go out of violent-status anyway ? Are they cowards by natural ? They can kill cops whenever they want and then they get protection from bullets too ? Lmfao CNR is made for criminals purposes. We cops are the bait and our job is to die.

Everytime when a criminal gets out of violent-status means he can have free 2 shots at a cop before the cop switched back to gun. This is what Arran calls "fair-gunfight"  ? Lmfao. Fair for criminals propably.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Claire on 07 10, 2013, 05:19:58 pm
@Claire I don´t think that the community want the old rule #1 back, tried to suggest that not long time ago and it got -10 votes

Hmm.. I don't agree either to make rule #1 back. It should stay the way it is now. I was just stating that instead of making cops able to kill people who are just holding/aiming a gun, even rolling back #1 is more inhumanly good thing to do. *But it should not

who get's benefits from the new rule? Well in most cases it´s criminals who like to troll or grief cops by randomly killing or similar.
Whenever I'm employed as a cop, I simply go AFK when I don't want to involve with such activities. Even when I want to, and they aim at me, shot me, and I die. I'll just go come back and think.. Wow, now that person has worthy wanted level to chase. Well, I don't care about money either, but at least it worth more arrest points.

For the rest, I leave it for the community. Even though I don't really bother if all these applied as I play civilian most of time, but I already stated my opinions and how it would also be a disadvantage to the law side (in terms of profit and less worthy wanted criminals to chase) if Stevie's suggestion about cops should be able to kill a criminal that is just holding a gun applied.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: mrbrutus1456 on 07 10, 2013, 07:09:23 pm
@Claire all new features can´t be made only to benefit crack players, that just wouldn´t work. CIT is so much more than just being selfish, hunt for stats and cash without any respect for other players. It´s not like you would enjoy getting randomly killed so you can get pack and arrest a 3* criminal and earn +-0$ after 5 minutes of hard work when you just wanted to relax with your friends or whatever. If cops doesn´t make enough money on the work then increase the payment instead of giving criminals more benefits to act like trolls all the time just so it becomes more wanted players, it was always possible to find wanted players even with the old rule, the main difference back then was that you didn´t needed to get randomly killed all the time.

And complainging about /afk isn´t a good idea either, sure you get protection but at what cost, the dimension is empty, you can´t move, you can´t have a conversation with other players or do anything. /afk is usefull when you need to go away from your computer irl not as protection from angry criminals while being a cop. Quit job isn´t an option either because then you have to go the whole way back in order to get the job again. /afk is even worse than jail so I don´t see any reason why criminals should be allowed to troll and grief as much as they do.

And btw you don´t need to abuse the word "inhumanly", are you running around with guns irl and aim at random people/cops there too or why is it inhumanly? It´s just a game and the gun is still a trigger, remember that you can get killed at any time as a cop without doing anything while criminals still need to do something in order to get arrested or killed.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Evil4N on 07 10, 2013, 07:38:05 pm
The only reason rule 1 was changed into "free kills against cops" is because Arran wanted to have fun as criminal. For the rest its all lack of common sense.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: jpleite on 07 10, 2013, 07:43:18 pm
I agree with the first suggestion where the violent time of a criminal doesn't run off. Because it's really annoying have to chase down a guy that 2 mins before killed 3 cops and while you're chasing him in the middle of nowhere he turns and kills you when you lest expected

But for the Second suggestion I agree with  physycopath  we should only be able to kill a criminal when they aim at us not when they're just holding a gun. Maybe a better solution would be a criminal gets 1 star with they aim at a cop and they are killable.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Claire on 07 10, 2013, 11:35:34 pm
I don´t see any reason why criminals should be allowed to troll and grief as much as they do.
Hmm.. Simply because they are criminals? Well, troll and grief are such excessive words. Criminals are suppose to commit bad things, because they are criminals. And also, isn't it because it's just a game just like you have stated before?

And btw you don´t need to abuse the word "inhumanly", are you running around with guns irl and aim at random people/cops there too or why is it inhumanly? It´s just a game and the gun is still a trigger, remember that you can get killed at any time as a cop without doing anything while criminals still need to do something in order to get arrested or killed.
Inhumanly = Lacking kindness, pity, or compassion; cruel. Well, if you want to compare it with real life: In any kind of law, unfortunately, in any country, any department, their law officers aren't allowed to kill anyone except if that one person committed murder or anything equal to, within particular regulations, of course. When someone just aiming cop with gun, the proper allowed response is whether to aim back and request them for surrender, or shot their hands or legs. But again, yeah, it's just a game.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: mrbrutus1456 on 08 10, 2013, 12:13:07 am
Hmm.. Simply because they are criminals? Well, troll and grief are such excessive words. Criminals are suppose to commit bad things, because they are criminals. And also, isn't it because it's just a game just like you have stated before?
Ofc they are supposed, but not without any consequences, there's the point of this. An argument as well is the fact that it is a game, no matter who you are or when you get killed you always respawn soon or later. The question where rather why the ability to aim, shoot right next to or in other ways grief should be given to criminals due to the massive abuse of it. Criminals in CIT are much harder than irl, therefore the cops must be harder as well.

Inhumanly = Lacking kindness, pity, or compassion; cruel. Well, if you want to compare it with real life: In any kind of law, unfortunately, in any country, any department, their law officers aren't allowed to kill anyone except if that one person committed murder or anything equal to, within particular regulations, of course. When someone just aiming cop with gun, the proper allowed response is whether to aim back and request them for surrender, or shot their hands or legs. But again, yeah, it's just a game.
Cops irl shoot if someone threat them, not always to kill obviously but still open fire if it´s necessary, just as I said before it´s a game where the risk is much bigger than irl that the criminal actually kill you. And even the most humanly cops in the world would shoot to kill even when it´s "just a provocative person" as you would call it.

Got a sample from irl where 3 rubbers got fake guns and walked into a gold store and robbed it, the store owner didn´t know that the guns where fake, no one did and the robbers abused it just like in CIT, anyway when they tried to escape one of them aimed this fake gun towards the cops, just a second later he got shot in his head when trying to enter the escape car. Same cops doesn´t even shoot when its riots in the hoods where people are running around , burning cars, throwing rocks and other stuff at paramedics, firemen and cops as well. You see the unbalance here since these riots can be compared with CIT as well where cops arrive quick and always shoot. Provoking behavior shouldn´t be accepted, if you like to provoke then you deserve to get killed basically or at least arrested but you get the point.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: MadaFaka on 08 10, 2013, 02:00:21 pm
Totally agree with this. It is so frustating when a group of criminals are in a spot together and you know that the ones who are unwanted are going to attack you and can't do anything about it. Also after criminal events when you lower a criminal to 5% HP and you can no longer shoot at him because of this "shield". It is only fair that your suggestion is implemented to make it more balanced.

+1
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Claire on 08 10, 2013, 06:58:37 pm
Ofc they are supposed, but not without any consequences, there's the point of this.
Of course! Just like I said before. I think that the consequence of criminal doing criminal activities is jail. And that's balanced enough, I think, because cop also has those advantages that I stated on my previous posts.

And my another point is, by letting criminal stays as now, with a lot of possibilities doing their things, it would also be advantages to the law side.
Besides, Laws don't prevent crime, they punish it. More law with less violence is unthinkable, yet if law were able to do more than the violence side, it would not be law at all.

And don't forget that I actually agree with this:
Firstly, the violent status for a criminal should NOT wear off for an infinite amount of time until the criminal is jailed.
But disagree with Stevie's second.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Hamada on 09 10, 2013, 12:43:56 am
I totally agree with this, it's unbalanced for cops and I don't like to talk too much but I will let screenshots speak louder than words, let's see proofs with some notes.

Yesterday there were riot in JFM as always, it's not the problem but see how unwanted criminals threat us when we are fighting tons of criminals.

Screenshots of the situation

Show content
(http://i.imgur.com/JLWjmq5.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/FMxBdke.jpg)

CASE 1  : Look at how unwanted criminal thread us while we are fighting a riot or in streets

Show content
He entered besides because we can't kill unwanted criminal or the criminal who threats you and waited until we got low health then he started to shoot us, do you call this balanced or fairness, so excuse me.

(http://i.imgur.com/HlKprt4.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/4sVqw6L.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/VX8OMxW.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/Q7LuqIv.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/3yQMlZ7.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/CeqD2Pi.jpg)



CASE 2 : Just take a look at the unwanted criminal was there (Red Arrow) and look at he waited until the cop had low health to kill him

Show content
(http://i.imgur.com/f0Tl7wT.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/nREpwTl.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/xi0tMFw.jpg)

Yes, we killed him here because we were to able to kill him but after we lost innocent cop who couldn't to shoot him at first because he wasn't wanted and he was waiting him to be 1 HP to kill him fair huh?



CASE 3 : How can I focus at fighting and we have unwanted criminals aim/thread at us during the gun fight and waiting us to be at low health to kill us ?

Show content
(http://i.imgur.com/vS6o43R.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/kBoafjv.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/oSY21P8.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/teOce3s.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/JGZ4avo.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/xabxgNR.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/dGR18tc.jpg)


(http://i.imgur.com/6sJjLqf.jpg)



CASE 4 : If you didn't call this abuse or trolling or whatever it's called when unwanted criminal use his body as a shield because he can't take damage, so what do you call it, fairness and balanced again? 


Show content
(http://i.imgur.com/74MnoKU.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/Dlslpaf.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/TKKSQkZ.jpg)


I think that's enough for now, I have tons of screenshots but I just highlighted what I wanted to say. Also what happened in JFM, it was just example about what's going around SA against the cops, thanks for reading.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Claire on 09 10, 2013, 02:13:33 am
@Hamada Picture speaks louder than words, because people are too lazy to read. But yea, those are awesome examples.

Let me straighten my point again about "balanced". What's matter is generally about the result. In the end, who won that JFM? I guess cops side, like always been. Because criminals only have one life, and cops could just go back. Also, when criminals kill cops they gain nothing but spend money, but when cops kill criminals they earn money. Well, cop wastes ammo, but at least they get money too.

See the point? I speak generally, not just about these rules, but also cop's advantages and criminal's and vice versa. And summarizing from that, well, I could say it's balanced for now. And adding Stevie's second point is not needed.

I'm okay with those persons, waiting cops to have low-health, and kill them afterwards, it was a strategy. In fact even if they succeed, there were many cops ready to terminate them. Which also a strategy.

CASE 4 : If you didn't call this abuse or trolling or whatever it's called when unwanted criminal use his body as a shield because he can't take damage, so what do you call it, fairness and balanced again?

This is an abuse, and a must-reported action. Not only criminal doing this. Sometimes medic does this too to help whether law or criminal. Just report them if this happen, it's nothing to do with these rules.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: mrbrutus1456 on 10 10, 2013, 06:01:27 pm
Let me straighten my point again about "balanced". What's matter is generally about the result. In the end, who won that JFM? I guess cops side, like always been. Because criminals only have one life, and cops could just go back. Also, when criminals kill cops they gain nothing but spend money, but when cops kill criminals they earn money. Well, cop wastes ammo, but at least they get money too.

See the point? I speak generally, not just about these rules, but also cop's advantages and criminal's and vice versa. And summarizing from that, well, I could say it's balanced for now. And adding Stevie's second point is not needed.
Balanced? Hell no, lets bring up some other images tat tell us more than words: http://i.imgur.com/2SWhAwi.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/2SWhAwi.jpg), getting randomly killed is expensive these days and the chans that you are the one who get your own killer is less than 1 of 100 since other cops will try to get the suspect as well. Healthcare cost around 500$ less or more and then you need like 50-100 M4 bullets (500$ - 1000$) in order to actually kill the suspect while the reward for a 3* criminal is around 1000$ which will decrease during the time if he decide to run away and troll you with his invulnerability. There is no logic that murderers can get invulnerable basically.

Cops also deserve the ability to defend themselfs against trolls who aim or running with guns, sure that would be more expensive but at least you don´t need to get randomly killed every time someone decide to troll and attack you which saves a lot ot time.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: StevieFTW on 10 10, 2013, 07:36:51 pm
I request a lock, since I guess making two suggestion in one topic is rather inefficient and makes it harder to manage. I will re-make the topic.
Title: Re: Balancing Unviolent Status of Criminals
Post by: Arran on 11 10, 2013, 04:11:07 pm
I've added it so they get wanted for aiming gun at cop.