Jump to content

What do you want to see out of the Los Santos Police Department?


Recommended Posts

You’re all talking about reporting but do you realize how hard it is to prove metagaming ?

There are lot of people who record all the time while playing, but there are also a lot who cant do this because of their computer. 
You can’t just allow anything and everything then tell people who fear misuse to "just report it"

It’s like allowing all players access to LSPD weapons then saying "it’s forbidden for players to use LSPD weapon, report anyone doing so" 

 

Clearly no one wants to recognize that this rule (voice chat allowed for LSPD/SD, but not for other factions) is unfair, advantageous for some and disadvantageous for others. 
Give me one reason to justify why LSPD/SD deserves this advantage and not others. 
ICly voice chat est justified for both, as now in 2021 there are phones and wireless devices. So why OOCly only one deserves it??

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MissGTA said:

You’re all talking about reporting but do you realize how hard it is to prove metagaming ?

There are lot of people who record all the time while playing, but there are also a lot who cant do this because of their computer. 
You can’t just allow anything and everything then tell people who fear misuse to "just report it"

It’s like allowing all players access to LSPD weapons then saying "it’s forbidden for players to use LSPD weapon, report anyone doing so" 

 

Clearly no one wants to recognize that this rule (voice chat allowed for LSPD/SD, but not for other factions) is unfair, advantageous for some and disadvantageous for others. 
Give me one reason to justify why LSPD/SD deserves this advantage and not others. 
ICly voice chat est justified for both, as now in 2021 there are phones and wireless devices. So why OOCly only one deserves it??

 

 

1. Illegal role-players use radio lines, phones, etc that CAN be traced. Though there's no absolute way we as PD can go into someone's discord channel to see what they're talking about even if we tap their phones or "wireless devices" of any sort. What's your fix to that?
 

2. The usage of VoIP can not be monitored like it can be monitored for LSPD/LSSD. There are no staff members (mostly admins) who can dedicate time to go into 50 VoIP channels to avoid unnecessary meta-game over these comms, but there are members of PD who have the authority to punish anyone misusing VoIP for meta-game.

 

3. What would your view be on fourteen year old characters from a gang going around with radios or "discord" on their phone just chatting and killing people? Would it be realistic? Would you want to be a target of a VoIP used hit by an illegal faction? 

 

4. Also, considering you'll probably put an counter argument for number one, Police used radio lines are encrypted and HARD, but not impossible to trace, so if there happens to be something like a police monitor scripted for illegal roleplayers, use it. But there's no way it can be scripted to get VoIP into the game for people to hear it and we can not let people in voice channels just because there's too much things that go through it already. (Maybe there is a way, but @Kane or any other developer can explain you why it would not work with sync etc)

 

5. So, if we allow a CRIMINAL to use radios, what prohibits them from doing exactly what you assume police are doing? Criminals using VoIP will be a much bigger issue, because of the simple fact that if rule-breaking occurs, how can we get the proof of it? That's just putting an counter argument against your own argument in your response. We can not enable VoIP for other factions because it'll simply be impossible to trace it.

 

6. If VoIP is DISABLED for every single faction, what do you think are the chances of EVERY ILLEGAL ROLEPLAYER creating a second discord channel secluded from their main discord channel to meta-game on? I think it's quite high. That gives ILLEGAL role-players another advantage over any LEO faction. We have rules besides the in-game rules of the server to abide to and what does it benefit if you remove LEO faction's only real way to have an edge over illegal role-players (besides all the tactical advantages and all that sort of stuff, which in most cases is just zeroed anyway because criminals use their own methods to level their playing ground in that already)?

 

7. I don't know what exactly you mean by "allowing people to use LSPD weapons" and then saying "Report anyone that uses LSPD weapons." Isn't it already that the criminals CAN have much better firepower than the PD in a long run? PD has extreme rules set for usage of rifles and quite hard rules set for using a shotgun. Criminals DO not have any rules besides the mandatory role-play lines that come with them and THOSE apply to PD as well. What kind of an weapon advantage do you think PD really has that bothers you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing usage of VOIP between illegal factions and LEO factions is like comparing day and night, they are not the same for many reasons that have been pointed out.

 

Our faction and LSSD have nerfed themselves continuously to strike balance between illegal factions. Usage of VOIP is the least of your concerns if our factions actually used LAPD/LASD’s equipment in situations (even without VOIP).

 

Each side have their own advantages and disadvantages. For example, you can shoot someone in the middle of the street and get away with it if there’s no players around, regardless if there would be CCTVs, witnesses and an instant 911 call.

 

We do not care about winning situations, VOIP is used to maintain a realistic effectiveness in character. We have done everything possible as a faction to strike a good balance: removal of boxing, heavy restrictions of assault rifles being used (there’s a member cap and you have to apply to have access to a rifle), continuously hold our faction members to a higher standard than everyone else, disallow any ramming or unrealistic vehicle interceptions, restrict the use of the less lethal shotgun, heavily encouraging officers to let small time offenders off, disengage any vehicle pursuit that includes players having a high speed vehicle rather than allowing a wild goose chase in the city, regulate the utilisation of gang injunctions heavily as it kills role-play, disallow faction takedowns, and so on.

 

VOIP was used for everything a few years ago, now it is used during active shooting situations or vehicle pursuits (updating). Our faction supervisors are quick with telling faction members to stop talking, regardless if those people would take it personal or not, as we take this very serious. I have went into detail about moderation a few posts back.

 

It is very easy to spot abuse, if you are aiming at someone and suddenly back up appears without anything being said in character, report it and it will be taken care of. There are logs on TeamSpeak that allow us to see who made a voice backup request globally. Just ensure the report is instant upon conclusion of the situation if there’s no admin response, rather than waiting for the next day.

 

We do not require video evidence for everything, if you send a report we instantly jump on it and investigate it. I assume logs will be easier to access now, so game admins will be contacted if a faction member claims they used the in-game radio when in fact they used TeamSpeak. If a faction member’s story doesn’t add up and they aren’t able to explain themselves properly, we do not hesitate to issue punishments.

 

That being said, I will kindly ask you all to move on from the VOIP discussion. An answer has been given and there is a clear difference of opinion between all parties. You are more than welcome to suggest a removal of VOIP for LEO factions to Server Management.

 

We are interested in hearing any new ideas or suggestions that may benefit the faction and the role-play quality of the server.

  • Bigsmoke 1
  • Thumbs 3
  • OK 1
  • Love 1

114

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, True Neutral said:

I'd love to see Blue Knights MC which is a LEMC. Or something similar. 

 

blue-knights-intl-logojpg-9596739b2fd4d5

 

This, like any other faction that LSPD members would create on the side would come down to if people were interested in doing so. It's not up to staff or anyone just to create something like this. It's hard to keep track of numerous things, but a good leisure time activity when off the job. Surely could be done if anyone with MC experience would have time to lead it out. I'd love to see it myself, especially with active dedicated members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Florida said:

Law Enforcement Voice comms is bad. You can ask us to move on but it's straight metagaming. 

 

The only people defending it are career role-play cops who used it to their benefit for years.

 

As someone who's role played both sides of the spectrum for years, I do agree it's bad (as a general thing) and I've always hated it as I personally feel it ruins immersion. It's a harsh reality that LEO factions do actually need it though, otherwise typing and trying to do things becomes an impossible task and ultimately wouldn't work. 

 

I understand your issue but I reassure you this faction (and SD) have come leaps and bounds to avoid abusing it over the last five years. Internally there are extreme restrictions on when they can use it — we don't live in a perfect world and it can/has been abused in the past and will be in the future, but as long as the faction from an internal standpoint continues to punish those severely who do it, we will make progress.

Edited by owen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, F0r3v3r said:

 

Leaders, supervisors and occasionally regular members moderate the usage of VoIP. If someone is transmitting unnecessary information over the TAC channel, such as "going for spikes" or something as such, they're told to direct it to the radio channels, not over the TAC channel, as it disrupts the radio traffic for the pursuing unit updating. 

 

. I assume there were no staff members, supervisors w/e in the situation, therefore, some members might not "snitch" on their own, but it's what you can do with the right evidence. (Think about it. If you catch your friend or faction member breaching any rule that is not SEEN by anyone else. DO you report it?)

 

 

To the first paragraph I quoted - that's good to hear, because from what I saw at the start of 2020, and what I was being told and shown videos of during my time away - this was not the case. 

 

To the second paragraph - they should report it, yeah. You can't as a faction claim to be better than in the past but not have members showing integrity - doing what's right when nobody's watching. 

 

 

On another subject - is the stance previously held about live streams going to carry over? Are they going to be reviewed/monitored for faction image and rule following?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, F0r3v3r said:

 

This, like any other faction that LSPD members would create on the side would come down to if people were interested in doing so. It's not up to staff or anyone just to create something like this. It's hard to keep track of numerous things, but a good leisure time activity when off the job. Surely could be done if anyone with MC experience would have time to lead it out. I'd love to see it myself, especially with active dedicated members.

There was one briefly some time ago combined of SD/PD members, but it's something someone should come about IC tbh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, F0r3v3r said:

 

This, like any other faction that LSPD members would create on the side would come down to if people were interested in doing so. It's not up to staff or anyone just to create something like this. It's hard to keep track of numerous things, but a good leisure time activity when off the job. Surely could be done if anyone with MC experience would have time to lead it out. I'd love to see it myself, especially with active dedicated members.

 

I didn't word it right, I made this proposal as a way of saying I'd like to see more off duty roleplay but thank you for pointing some things out. At least when I played, the members only did onduty roleplay.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Fiendfyre said:

On another subject - is the stance previously held about live streams going to carry over? Are they going to be reviewed/monitored for faction image and rule following?

 

People will be allowed to stream and create highlights and let's play video. I actually want as many people as possible to do that to advertise both the server and the LSPD. We might have a rule that the broadcaster needs to have around 1 minute delay when streaming to avoid stream sniping or MetaGaming. Also, if someone does stream snipe or MetaGame from watching the stream, they will of course be reported.

 

I'm pretty sure that if you wanted to stream, you would use common sense and behave properly on the stream and not mess around. There's always the clips feature on Twitch that can be used if the broadcaster breaks a rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you guys use injunctions more, I know some people find gang injunctions unpopular because they feel like it restricts RP, injunctions are a big part of gang life nowadays and most gangs out there have permanent injunctions on them.

 

Aslong as they're enforced well, i have no problem with them and would welcome an injunction on my gang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, La Tweaker said:

I hope you guys use injunctions more, I know some people find gang injunctions unpopular because they feel like it restricts RP, injunctions are a big part of gang life nowadays and most gangs out there have permanent injunctions on them.

 

Aslong as they're enforced well, i have no problem with them and would welcome an injunction on my gang.

We've always tried to keep it as realistic as possible when it came to rping injunctions however the roleplay surrounding them lacked severely which at some points resulted in us not even wanting to push for them. But I'm sure that will change in the future for both sides of the fence. 

  • Thumbs 1

FORMER LSRP SENIOR ADMIN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Redz said:

We've always tried to keep it as realistic as possible when it came to rping injunctions however the roleplay surrounding them lacked severely which at some points resulted in us not even wanting to push for them.

The main issue I saw with you guys and injunctions is you usually tried to enforce the injunction on the entire faction, instead of just on people they knew for sure are gang members. Usually when an injunction is filed, there's a specific list of individuals that it pertains to, and not just a whole neighborhood in general.

  • Clap 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, La Tweaker said:

The main issue I saw with you guys and injunctions is you usually tried to enforce the injunction on the entire faction, instead of just on people they knew for sure are gang members. Usually when an injunction is filed, there's a specific list of individuals that it pertains to, and not just a whole neighborhood in general.

 

True. I think one thing LEO factions have to put more effort in is creating the injunction for people who are certainly members and people who are with them. Say it's a group of people, two of five are in the injunction list and three of them are not. They'd still be arrested for breaking the injunction terms, because people are not to hang around with the ones on the list. I think a list of that sort was in-deed created for 38ST injunction, but I could be wrong. 


I do see where you are coming from though. Injunctions shouldn't be on absolutely any black person or mexican in the territory, just known gang members and people who associate with them.

  • Thumbs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, F0r3v3r said:

 

True. I think one thing LEO factions have to put more effort in is creating the injunction for people who are certainly members and people who are with them. Say it's a group of people, two of five are in the injunction list and three of them are not. They'd still be arrested for breaking the injunction terms, because people are not to hang around with the ones on the list. I think a list of that sort was in-deed created for 38ST injunction, but I could be wrong. 


I do see where you are coming from though. Injunctions shouldn't be on absolutely any black person or mexican in the territory, just known gang members and people who associate with them.

We did have a general idea of who was in the gang and it wasn't really our goal to arrest as much people as some people would think we wanted to, having been apart of it myself we honestly moved away from it because of how unrealistic the RP surrounding it became. Especially coming from some of the 'teen' rpers who really would have some sense of fear considering they not even a gang member would try to stand clear. They tend to get involved and ultimately suffered those consequences. 

 

And personally I don't think the injunctions were enjoyable because again the lack of fear or the quality of RP surrounding the injunction was just awful. Killing cops pointlessly, if you knew you got an injunction on you'll probably try to keep things on the low which was the opposite of what was happening. 

 

But I stand with the cops and the illegal roleplayers and keeping my fingers crossed that both side of the spectrum could improve significantly in that aspect and the RP surrounding such. 

 

11 hours ago, La Tweaker said:

The main issue I saw with you guys and injunctions is you usually tried to enforce the injunction on the entire faction, instead of just on people they knew for sure are gang members. Usually when an injunction is filed, there's a specific list of individuals that it pertains to, and not just a whole neighborhood in general.

As a supervisor within GND, I can attest that in most cases we rarely arrested unless we knew you were confirmed or tatted, but most of the time if you were caught with a known gang member. You being frisked and ID'ed was all for documenting purposes. But like I said previously, our goal with most injuctions were to create positive interactions and hopefully a realistic environment under those circumstances. But most importantly when they were issue, specific guidelines were asked to be followed as our main purpose for them weren't solely to get arrest.  

 

  • Thumbs 1

FORMER LSRP SENIOR ADMIN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming OCG's and gangs will be investigated and attempted to be taken down via a RICO case like in the past, I would like to see the following; 

 

1. Everything that is investigated and submitted as evidence against a faction of any kind, needs to have OOC proof of how it was attained IC. Screenshots is specifically what I am referring to as OOC evidence. 

 

2. Any evidence brought forth during a take-down should be made OOCly available to an illegal factions

management for review to see if they wish to report anything. This would obviously happen after the police initiate the take-down IC. 

 

The reason I am hoping to see stronger regulations/rules around take-downs is because my only real notable bad experience with LSPD in LSRP was during take-downs and evidence gathering. The amount of metagaming we found throughout our casefile was frustrating. We asked to see evidence of how LSPD knew who people where, what their "rank" was. LSPD couldn't provide any proof, just that "they knew". That's not good enough, LSPD is a very important faction and I would hope the administration, a long with LSPD leadership take a stance that if evidence gathered is not documented properly and able to be shared OOCly, I mean every single thing, then it should not count. 

 

 

Edited by Anthony_Laurino
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Redz said:

As a supervisor within GND, I can attest that in most cases we rarely arrested unless we knew you were confirmed or tatted, but most of the time if you were caught with a known gang member. You being frisked and ID'ed was all for documenting purposes. But like I said previously, our goal with most injuctions were to create positive interactions and hopefully a realistic environment under those circumstances. But most importantly when they were issue, specific guidelines were asked to be followed as our main purpose for them weren't solely to get arrest.  

This must have been the more recent injunctions, because unfortunately the ones I experienced happened how I described, good to hear that things have changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/31/2021 at 3:06 PM, Anthony_Laurino said:

1. Everything that is investigated and submitted as evidence against a faction of any kind, needs to have OOC proof of how it was attained IC. Screenshots is specifically what I am referring to as OOC evidence. 

 

2. Any evidence brought forth during a take-down should be made OOCly available to an illegal factions

management for review to see if they wish to report anything. This would obviously happen after the police initiate the take-down IC. 

 

Definitely agreeing with the first one. 

 

The second one could maybe be handled before the IC take down. Let's say the LSPD wants to take down a faction, they apply to Faction Management with the evidence and reasons. If FM gives a go they can take them down ICly? In the end, it is FM who prevails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Less robotic attitude, more realistic characters, no OOC rules for minor corruption such as beating someone up or ignoring someone's  few grams of Marijuana or unpaid ticket. 

 

And yes, if it's a TEXT BASED ROLE-PLAY GAME then I want everyone to be equals and LSPD should not be able to use TEAM SPEAK  for IC duties.  It was horribly unfair back in SAMP and most of the cops PG'd with it. 

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dzgapaan said:

Less robotic attitude, more realistic characters, no OOC rules for minor corruption such as beating someone up or ignoring someone's  few grams of Marijuana or unpaid ticket. 

 

And yes, if it's a TEXT BASED ROLE-PLAY GAME then I want everyone to be equals and LSPD should not be able to use TEAM SPEAK  for IC duties.  It was horrible unfair back in SAMP and most of the cops PG'd with it. 

How are they going to communicate during a pursuit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Sheffield said:

 

Definitely agreeing with the first one. 

 

The second one could maybe be handled before the IC take down. Let's say the LSPD wants to take down a faction, they apply to Faction Management with the evidence and reasons. If FM gives a go they can take them down ICly? In the end, it is FM who prevails.

As long as after it's reviewed OOC for any MG, it's done through courts procedures yeah. I know way back in the day, the injunction made on MV ..listed us IC with a gang name that was only on our thread. We didn't use it IC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Fiendfyre said:

As long as after it's reviewed OOC for any MG, it's done through courts procedures yeah. I know way back in the day, the injunction made on MV ..listed us IC with a gang name that was only on our thread. We didn't use it IC. 

Not sure if the court procedure is possible in game. You'd need judges etc. I think FM should be the one to give a verdict OOCly and ICly. An ALT that's a judge if they've got time for that, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Sheffield said:

How are they going to communicate during a pursuit?

Typing, like others do when being chased or in shoot out despite of having phones, walkie talkies or radios IC. Most of the time, there are two cops in a car and the second one can always type.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dzgapaan said:

Typing, like others do when being chased or in shoot out despite of having phones, walkie talkies or radios IC. Most of the time, there are two cops in a car and the second one can always type.  

How are you going to type and drive at the exact same time during a pursuit? It's just not going to work, unfortunately. I do understand what you are saying, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.