This is not a PK appeal but a complaint

[Vittani]

Steam Name: AngelicPenguin
SteamID: STEAM_0:1:127190078
Character Name that was PK'ed: Giorgio Zetticci

Who/what were you killed by?: Civil Protection
Is this a Manual or AutoPK? (Manual: Carried out by staff shortly after death, Auto: Carried out the moment you died.): Manual
Reasons why said person may have killed you (Only answer this if your death was by another player):
I was fighting with Civil Protection after burning the refinery.
Why do you think your character should have its PK reversed?: I don't wish to have the PK Appeal reversed as I am not petty but I do, however, wish to set a standard.

Have you deleted the character?: Yes
Evidence to support your reasons:

Here are a few examples of /mes used as to why this is poor roleplay and power gaming. I said let's do P2L because it's more fun, this is not P2L.

"still had the grasp of the man's leg. As he saw the pipe going at him, he let go of the leg and went to block the swing with his arms. The force of the pipe threw him off of the man, to the officer's left. As he falls to the ground, he spots the stunstick that was knocked out from his hands at the beginning of the fight. He grips it, turns it on, and swings it at the pipe-welding maniac." - Here he manges to let go of my leg, block a strike to the head, roll away, pick up a weapon, and try to strike me all in one turn. Seems a bit powergamey.

"let go of the man's leg and now grabbed the flying pipe going at him. The speed of the pipe surely dealt damage to his hand, but as it hit his hands, he grabbed the pipe, ripped out of of his hands and threw it away. He then placed his hands on the man's throat, beginning to choke him down." - To be fair this was voided, but it was consistent of this quality the whole time.

"still has sight of what was happening infront, and while he was holding the leg, he instantly dashed left, making him miss the head, but still part of the officer's body. While the officer still held onto the man's leg, and since he dashed to the side, it sure would cause some pain to the receiving party."- While grappling with me on the ground, somehow manages to "DASH" and dodge out of the way so he wouldn't be hurt then uses this to injure me further.

"notices in the last second the pipe swing, and hoists his stunstick up to block the swing. The force of the pipe knocks his stunstick out of his hand, and charges towards the man with his shoulder, with an attempt to knock him off his feet." - I mean, manages to see, block and counter a surprise attack all in one. I mean... Come ON.

Every attack I dished out was inconsequential, either blocked, dodged or generally ignored. Every attack applied to me hit soundly, I did not dodge, did not block because it was p2l. I can see why rebels no longer wish to do anything on the surface. It feels unrewarding, useless and boring. Actions like these were carried out by a RANK LEADER and an i5. It is clear to see this is an issue prevalent within CPs as a whole.



Names of witnesses which may be able to support your Appeal or give their opinions: I'm not sure if it matters, the general consensus of those watching was that this was not powergaming and this concerns me heavily.

 

[Vittani]

PS. I fully acknowledge the PK, do not care for it to be repealed. I only want people to look into this and try and change the state of CP RP.

 

[JakaSmith]

I was Ozawa, the guy who was involved in a workshift with your bombing of the refinery. I found your roleplay to be very fun, the fire you caused made an extremely boring workshift into a memorable roleplay scenario. You are a Joestar if I ever knew one, worthy of your name JoJo.

The roleplay and attitude of the Civil Protection these past few weeks has been abysmal, and it saddens me that you of all people got to be the blunt of that. I was there at the beginning of the fight but had to leave for OOC reasons, and I saw you roleplaying really well for the little fight I saw between you and the CP's.

Unfortunately, I do not know the best course of action to take against the Civil Protection roleplay standards that have been in place here. I think CP's need to be taught how to lose, as they always want to be winning robocop style. But how to apply this mindset to Civil Protection seems to be an impossible task.

 

[Gr4Ss]

As this is not a PK appeal... I have moved it out of the PK appeals sub-forum and into the Civil Protection CCC section (rather than marking your 'appeal' as denied and closing the thread). I have always been very adamant that the PK appeals section is not for complaints or pointing fingers.

If you wish to make an actual appeal then you of course are still free to do so, but otherwise PK appeals isn't the right section for this to happen in.

 

[toby]

Fake We All Wished Him To Die

 

[RealGamer]

I think I see the problem here. Looks like you're doing p2l, which just means powergame as much as you can get away with.

 

[Garratz]

Hi. I was the unit involved in the fight. Need I remind you that you were the one to agreebto p2l? I asked myself if you want to roll, but you said, and I quote, "rolling is cringe"

 

[Rat King]

I think that if you arent completely trusting of the person you are roleplaying with /rolls are always a better and more coherent way of managing rp.

The /mes you posted definitely show the player who wrote them put too many actions into one /me, in a few seperate instances. I can see how that would have been frustrating and unrewarding.

It is clear to see this is an issue prevalent within CPs as a whole.

I dunno, I don't think it's fair to tar all the players in the faction with the same brush because of a fight you had with two of them

 

[Lost Coast Chanties]

I wasn't involved in the fight per say, but that doesn't mean I don't get to give my two cents on it since I'm in the faction.

First off, the issue of metagame. As I've seen above, you specifically disagreed to using the roll system, which is pretty much de facto S2RP way in Civil Protection. We barely, if ever, get S2RP with someone who is clearly P2L'ing. In this case, the units involved probably didn't think to make the fight necessarily fair, since the other party clearly agreed to end up defeated. I'm also unsure if any feedback was provided in the fight to make the units know that you wanted them to give you some leeway, but if it was, it should've been followed. Basically, I think this may have been caused by some kind of miscommunication. You wanted a fair fight that would end it P2L, and the units thought you wanted to P2L for the entire encounter. If I'm wrong, feel free to tell me.

Now, I can't judge the "Bad Roleplay" aspect from these /me's alone, or what you mean by it, be it Bad Roleplay generally or entirely through perceived metagame.

I can however give my opinion on the last piece, which I personally just find in poor taste.

I can see why rebels no longer wish to do anything on the surface. It feels unrewarding, useless and boring. Actions like these were carried out by a RANK LEADER and an i5. It is clear to see this is an issue prevalent within CPs as a whole.

I don't see how in any way an S2RP, P2L, No-Roll fight with a person who threw a molotov at an oil refinery in the CWU warehouse would apply to Rebel RP. What reward were you expecting from doing that? And why are you judging an entire faction over a single P2L S2RP encounter with two units? As I said, this just feels like it was made in poor taste. I apologize if it wasn't, just giving my opinion.

Overall, I think this is just a case of miscommunication. S2RP without rolls is messy, simple as. Despite being entirely tied to RNG, they make the encounters more cohesive through "One /me = One action", with a margin of failure depending on said RNG. Without them, the whole thing turned into an unregulated fight, which definitely could be perceived as metagame.

 

[Vittani]

I wasn't involved in the fight per say, but that doesn't mean I don't get to give my two cents on it since I'm in the faction.

First off, the issue of metagame. As I've seen above, you specifically disagreed to using the roll system, which is pretty much de facto S2RP way in Civil Protection. We barely, if ever, get S2RP with someone who is clearly P2L'ing. In this case, the units involved probably didn't think to make the fight necessarily fair, since the other party clearly agreed to end up defeated. I'm also unsure if any feedback was provided in the fight to make the units know that you wanted them to give you some leeway, but if it was, it should've been followed. Basically, I think this may have been caused by some kind of miscommunication. You wanted a fair fight that would end it P2L, and the units thought you wanted to P2L for the entire encounter. If I'm wrong, feel free to tell me.

Now, I can't judge the "Bad Roleplay" aspect from these /me's alone, or what you mean by it, be it Bad Roleplay generally or entirely through perceived metagame.

I can however give my opinion on the last piece, which I personally just find in poor taste.



I don't see how in any way an S2RP, P2L, No-Roll fight with a person who threw a molotov at an oil refinery in the CWU warehouse would apply to Rebel RP. What reward were you expecting from doing that? And why are you judging an entire faction over a single P2L S2RP encounter with two units? As I said, this just feels like it was made in poor taste. I apologize if it wasn't, just giving my opinion.

Overall, I think this is just a case of miscommunication. S2RP without rolls is messy, simple as. Despite being entirely tied to RNG, they make the encounters more cohesive through "One /me = One action", with a margin of failure depending on said RNG. Without them, the whole thing turned into an unregulated fight, which definitely could be perceived as metagame.

The general idea of p2l is a two way street where both parties partake in the action of "playing to lose". I like this as it allows the two parties to feel special when their attacks work, if the attacks are planned, hit a certain way or roleplayed out well then it could give you an advantage. It is not the idea of being in a losing position, but allowing your roleplay partner to throw you around a bit until you can garner an advantage. For example, in this fight: The part where the Civil Protection Officer is caught by surprise by me attacking him with a lead pipe, a proper p2l scenario would dictate that since it was by surprise the Officer would be knocked off his feet, stunned or even coldly knocked out. If they were stunned and then tackle me, p2l would dictate I would be taken to the ground with the wind knocked out of me.

Perhaps there should be a better p2l/s2rp system. Like One attack, movement option and a bonus action for something like unsheathing a weapon. It's not clunky and relatively easy to understand.

Perhaps I have generalised this over the whole faction, and for that I think I was a bit bitter over the whole situation.

 

[Vittani]

I think that if you arent completely trusting of the person you are roleplaying with /rolls are always a better and more coherent way of managing rp.

The /mes you posted definitely show the player who wrote them put too many actions into one /me, in a few seperate instances. I can see how that would have been frustrating and unrewarding.


I dunno, I don't think it's fair to tar all the players in the faction with the same brush because of a fight you had with two of them

Yeah I think I may have generalised a bit strongly there, but I think you might be right. I just hate rolling for stuff as it gives people who have poor roleplay but more stats an advantage.

 

[Vittani]

Hi. I was the unit involved in the fight. Need I remind you that you were the one to agreebto p2l? I asked myself if you want to roll, but you said, and I quote, "rolling is cringe"View attachment 17115

I stand by it, rolling is cringe. But p2l is where both parties partake.

 

[Vittani]

I think I see the problem here. Looks like you're doing p2l, which just means powergame as much as you can get away with.

Real

 

[Astro]

I stand by it, rolling is cringe. But p2l is where both parties partake.

P2L, at least in my understanding, does not always have to be something mutual. At least when I engage with playing to lose, usually I don’t expect the other party to share the common courtesy (mostly because I’m on my CP and I’d like it to be fair and realistic). I’ve engaged in many combative scenarios on Willard, both on my CP, OTA, and Civ; and from what I’ve garnered as the general consensus, you’d probably ask the other party if they’re doing P2L as well to avoid a mixup as we’ve seen here.

 

[Lost Coast Chanties]

The general idea of p2l is a two way street where both parties partake in the action of "playing to lose". I like this as it allows the two parties to feel special when their attacks work, if the attacks are planned, hit a certain way or roleplayed out well then it could give you an advantage. It is not the idea of being in a losing position, but allowing your roleplay partner to throw you around a bit until you can garner an advantage. For example, in this fight: The part where the Civil Protection Officer is caught by surprise by me attacking him with a lead pipe, a proper p2l scenario would dictate that since it was by surprise the Officer would be knocked off his feet, stunned or even coldly knocked out. If they were stunned and then tackle me, p2l would dictate I would be taken to the ground with the wind knocked out of me.

Yeah, then it's definitely miscommunication. Both of the units probably thought that you specifically were P2L'ing, as that's how it's usually done on the server. I don't think I ever saw a P2L scenario where both of the parties played to loose, since... that's just a normal S2RP encounter.

P2L is always announced as a way to confirm that one party isn't planning on winning the fight. The most known example are player-controlled headcrabs, which, if I recall correctly, always P2L, meaning that they don't focus on winning and PK'ing people, but rather losing, because they should more-so make interesting encounters than actively go out of their way to kill people off.

 

[Vittani]

P2L, at least in my understanding, does not always have to be something mutual. At least when I engage with playing to lose, usually I don’t expect the other party to share the common courtesy (mostly because I’m on my CP and I’d like it to be fair and realistic). I’ve engaged in many combative scenarios on Willard, both on my CP, OTA, and Civ; and from what I’ve garnered as the general consensus, you’d probably ask the other party if they’re doing P2L as well to avoid a mixup as we’ve seen here.

I don't believe there was a general mix-up, I even called him out on it halfway through saying that it was a bit power gamey. Perhaps I should've made it more clear. One sided p2l does seem rather counterproductive though when it comes to roleplay though.

 

[Wraygun]

here to put in my two cents. you're not be wrong to call the two units out on bad roleplay quality judging by their /me's, but i think this more or less has to do with the fact that it's a misunderstanding.

from what i can tell here, many mistake P2L with S2RP, and i'm fairly sure that this is the case here. P2L usually refers to the system where each and every party is content with the outcome of the roleplay that they find themselves in. with that being said, any form of "/me attempts to dodge" does not fall under P2L anymore, since the parties aren't agreeing on the same outcome.

considering that this devolved into S2RP, this shows that neither of the units know how to tell P2L and S2RP apart from each other (no offense). if someone hits you with a pipe, and you find yourself vulnerable in a P2L fight, then it's just bad taste to try and "dodge" the hit, considering you're actually meant to accept the outcome of the party.

is this a faction wide issue? no, not really. there are some decent units out there who can actually offer a much better experience when it comes down to fights and imo the units should be just let off with a slap on their wrists. some clearer rules under the P2L section might help things out in the future too.

P.S.: also, multiple actions in one /me shouldn't be allowed.

 

[RogueSynapse]

As someone who watched the fight, you all did P2L about as well as you could with ballistics.

Anytime ballistics are involved in P2L it's hard to keep the fight going without making the fight look silly. Especially in your case where you had two officers on you. I think if it were a melee engagement only, it might have worked a bit better.

 

[Vittani]

As someone who watched the fight, you all did P2L about as well as you could with ballistics.

Anytime ballistics are involved in P2L it's hard to keep the fight going without making the fight look silly. Especially in your case where you had two officers on you. I think if it were a melee engagement only, it might have worked a bit better.

I wasn't a huge fan of the ballistic portion, if he was constantly changing his aim to better suit the small scuffle and then was immediately pounced upon then the it should be a bit more difficult to hit despite being in that close of range. In a p2l situation which is what I was trying to propagate then it would have been a lot more reserved since firearms in p2l are essentially just s2rp if handled incorrectly.

 

[rob]

Hi, I was an eyewitness - I know the cops have already been talked about but I'd just like to say that the people watching it weren't acting appropriately either, it was kind of taking me out of the seriousness of the situation.