/checkcrime and forced ic consequences

[Man Blue Trousers]

At around 10:00 CST 1/26/24. During the server's dead hours. Context is Myself and around three other units were the only ones online (With me acting as the only Command unit)


One of these Rebels chose to walk into the plaza during dead hours with a pistol and once we responded. Essentially abused our low pop with having us forced to intercept with them. Upon entering CZ both non Command Units got schwacked by these two rebels and one of them kidnapped instantaneously. Which isn't allowed because of the /checkcrime didn't meet the required CP pop in the first place which was only realized after the encounter.

Both of them were promptly banned for being alts for a banned account, therefore. In my mind should of been voided. But somehow it wasn't and that's why I'm here complaining.

What I'm asking for is that this should of been voided because not only were they alts. Which was a permanent ban, they also forgot to /checkcrime in the first place which means they shouldn't of been able to goad us into attacking them.

Don't force IC consequences to us when it should of been 100% voided after the fact.

I understand the IC consequences if it were not completely wrong off the shot with the /checkcrime failure and alt accounts. This just sets a precedent that even "allegedly voided" ic incidents have IC consequences when they never should of occurred in the first place.

 

[Man Blue Trousers]

 

[rey.jazzy]

Hi, I'm one of the units involved.

Basically everything he's claimed is true, but I'll reiterate for the sake of vouching for him and recounting the events as I recall them. The only units online at the time of this incident were myself, a recruit (Vadim, 87) and 2 other firearm-carrying units (24 and 97). From my understanding, the requirements for petty crimes currently sits in the ballpark of 3-4 units, whereas more serious crimes require upwards of 6.

We'd received an alert of someone discharging a weapon somewhere within the CZ, and immediately deployed to form PT-1 before injecting into the right entrance of the construction site from PCS-3. Upon entering and passing by the dumpster, our squad was immediately subjected to pistol fire (presumably delivered by a USP-45) by 2 individuals.

Myself and 97 were downed, leading to a decision being made to evacuate the immediate area, an order issued by 24 (or Dispatch, can't reliably determine). Seeing as 2 of the 3 units equipped with firearms were down for the count, we didn't have much of a choice but to cut our losses. Unfortunately 97 was kidnapped during the crossfire after having been gunned down (no /me was conducted by the player), and eventually presumed dead as Dispatch was unsuccessful in their attempts to establish contact via radio.

It was around this time that in-game staff distributed permanent bans to both players as it was determined they were both playing on alternate accounts, at which point discussion began about the possibility of voiding the encounter, as being dealt in-character punishments seemed unfair. Besides the fact both players were banned on the spot, there weren't nearly enough units online to warrant a firefight, much less a kidnapping which resulted in a character being NLR'd (97).

Long story short, we* are of the belief that it's unfair to all parties involved to receive IC consequences for actions that shouldn't have otherwise been feasible as a result of 2 players whom, for all intents and purposes, shouldn't have been on the server because of their prior infractions. This also includes the server's /checkcrime rules.

*I personally don't care about this whole thing, but I felt it necessary to at least provide my input seeing as I was involved. Hope this helps.

 

[ultima]

i hereby void this situation