Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Chuckles

  1. LS:RP was once the gold standard. Now it's just a brand.
  2. The Coonan-Felton and Akuji-Locotes war.
  3. I think this should be at the bottom of the 'to do' list. The very bottom.
  4. I feel like the 'downfall' of LS-RP was because most of the 'elitists' (I say this loosely) left. This became evident by the state of the server pre-closure where the standards fell to an all-time low. There were factions in positions they'd never have been in without the decline and people in influential positions who were there to 'gatekeep'. I feel like we've missed the most quintessential part of a community for quite some time; an engaging community manager who picks up the slack for the developers (who are probably overwhelmed with work) and is articulate and knowledgeable enough to know the brand they represent. There's no real 'bridge' or liaison between the brand and the community right now to engage in these issues of 'transparency' or to create new or build on current relationships.
  5. It depends on what your categorization of 'fun' actually is and where you'd put it between light and heavy roleplay. In your description of 'old LSRP', I'd very much consider it light roleplay. There was no real standard effectuated until probably 2017-2018. This is the timeframe many of us would consider the 'golden age' of LSRP. What nostalgia does is bring you back in time-- to a time where 'roleplay' was a glorified game of cops and robbers. Everything was mediocre pre-2016/2017, the characters, the factions, and the staff. There has been huge growth in the years since and everything else is years gone by. I remember the days you explained like they were yesterday and if we were to go back in time, it'd be good for a few days until the novelty wore off. The sentimentality of the memories is the only reason they're being ennobled and I can guarantee what was 'fun' back then would be much worse than what they claim GTAw is now. At one point in time, LSRP was also in this position and it's to my understanding that they just haven't caught up to what was our 2017-2018 breakthrough point but that day will come and if we don't make our stance on heavy roleplay clear then the window of opportunity will close. Let me break down your last example for emphasis. This isn't realistic. This is someone's interpretation of 'fun' and this is what would plague the server if we didn't enforce a 'realistic' atmosphere. People have different definitions of fun because it's supposed to be something that you enjoy doing. These people obviously enjoy doing this, which is why it's so ruinous. They don't roleplay for 'realism' they roleplay for a release and if you enforce this 'standard' then this is the type of players you will attract by default. So on one hand, you're saying "That server is full of people RPing who they wish they could be" (which falls under the definition of 'fun' but on the other, you're saying "Everyone knows how to RP by now, lets have fun" (which also falls under the definition of 'fun') and what that is, is a double standard. If a server advertises itself as a 'heavy roleplay server' then it can't leave it open to interpretation. People can have 'fun' without being unrealistic. People can have 'fun' while being realistic. It all depends on the enforcement of this. I've been around since 2007 and I've played in every era of the server and going back to the 'old days' would be a step backward. Everyone and everything has evolved since then and it'd go against the grain to go back to a day and age where nobody had a real understanding of what 'heavy rp' actually was. I wouldn't by any means classify the competition as 'super realistic,' in fact, I consider them to be the opposite of that and if I were to categorize, I'd label them a light roleplay server. In terms of 'ultra realism,' I'd say we've always had a good balance. Factions and players have the creative freedom to do what they want as long as they can justify their actions or plans with logic. This is something I have been pushing for since I've returned and will continue to push for. What we need (more than anything) is clarity on where we 'stand' on these subjects from the administration. I think we all know where we'd like to stand, we'd just like reassurance.
  6. Key points for management to consider: San Andreas replaces California as a state in the United States and Los Santos replaces Los Angeles as a city within it. Liberty and Vice City don't exist, New York and Miami do in their place. San Fierro/Las Venturas vs San Francisco/San Fierro is trivial and not too important in comparison, but the news/events of each city's real life equivalent can be acknowledged (granted that it doesn't clash with ours) Los Santos, SA replaces Los Angeles, CA San Andreas, USA replaces California, USA Paleto Bay, Blaine County no replacement, loosely based on areas north of the Bay Area (doesn't go that far North, e.g towards Oregon) because of the environment/name i.e redwood forest and "Pelato Bay" (Pelican Bay State Prison) Grapeseed, Blaine County no replacement, loosely based on more 'central' northern areas like the Salinas Valley and other farming towns like this. Sandy Shores, Blaine County, no replacement, loosely based on Inland Empire area to the east/southeast of LA. It remains part of SoSan. San Fierro can (if absolutely necessary or if unaware of lore) exist in name alone, it inhabits everything else from San Francisco Las Venturas can (see above) exist in name alone, it inhabits everything else from Las Vegas Vice City does not exist Liberty City does not exist The Alamo Sea is the traditional north/south diving line. If you're south of it, you're in SoSan. If you're north of it, you're in NorSan. The two communities on either side (Sandy Shores and Grapeseed) can therefore be considered both 'central' and 'north/south' respectively, depending on context, as the communities around Bakersfield, Fresno etc. are irl. Blaine County will represent California's Kern County (Bakersfield area). Sandy Shores, Paleto Bay and Grapeseed are all within Blaine County. Blaine County is a central area which can be considered both northern San Andreas and Southern Andreas, depending on where you are within it. E.g. Sandy Shores is considered more southern, Paleto Bay is considered northern. Los Santos County will replace Los Angeles County Illegal or legal factions may use real-life events and history, using San Andreas as California's replacement, for their backgrounds up until the 2019 cut-off point. This means anything after 2019 (in your background or threads) must be fictional, unless roleplaying real-time events our own world doesn't cover. Paleto Bay/Grapeseed is in northern San Andreas and is part of Blaine County. Sandy Shores is part of southern San Andreas and is part of Los Santos County San Andreas occupies the same space in the southwest corner of the US. It is connected to the mainland. The only time these coastal waters really come up is in police pursuits or exercises. It's not exactly hard to, other than that, imagine you're on the continental mainland. As a result, companies, factions and players and businesses can use this information to construct routes, faction stories, character backgrounds and business modules. As can designated strawmen. Anything else proposed in this thread is trivial and can be deliberated on by management. These are what I want to personally see ruled on. Again, three are not official. These are some things we hope to have influence on, and management will rule based on everything, not just this. Thanks for the debate. @Kane feel free to forward this for deliberation. GOV/LSSD can forward theirs separately. This is FT's end of the proposal.
  7. I don't think it's that much of a problem. Anything applicable to LSC can be applicable to BC too, it's not really a stalemate. The laws, jurisdiction and everything else can be universal. The only thing this suggestion was brought forward for was immersion and acknowledgement. Everything else is just a workaround. Whatever you come up with we'll gladly edit it in to the thread before we forward our draft. We've reached out to the SD a few days ago for the same reason.
  8. None of our suggestions compromise anything geographically. Blaine County has always existed, it's not something we've implemented ourselves. We haven't done anything to change that, other than the fact we're acknowledging Blaine County's real life equivalent as something else. Paleto and Grapeseed are not part of Los Santos, they're in Blaine County both geographically and principally. Were the government planning on ignoring the existence of Blaine County or? Are they still adopting the "it's an island" approach? @Maxim
  9. For the northern cali/ southern cali differential to work, realistically we can't have one county. Initially we were going to implement a fictional county but instead opted to replace Blaine County's equivalent. This blueprint has much more pros than it has cons and it'd be a shame to abandon it because one agency has modelled their factions around one county, which doesn't even make sense to begin with. Both counties already exist. One thing I will say is that the same laws and models can still exist for law enforcement agencies, they'd just have to tailor and word it around our lore. This is essentially no different than the "we're an island" mentality. I have faith the SD's leadership can figure this out. It adds more depth to their history and more jurisdiction to them. We haven't added anything that wasn't already here. We've just replaced its real life equivalent to fit our thesis. As far as California existing goes, I think it's safe to say we've taken care of that and the management should see sense from this thread upon review. As far as the existence of SF/LV, I'm one of those who'd agree with using their real life names but again, this is trivial. For those of us who wish to reference it by their real life equivalent, this won't really affect us because we'll continue using our interpretations. This was more for a ease of access to stop new/unacknowledged players from being bombarded. It will be more of a consensual guideline. As far as Liberty City and Vice City goes, I see no reason why these cities should even be acknowledged. It's a ball and chain.
  10. Can I have a breathmint for @Mac please, bro?
  11. Closing comments now. This will be forwarded to management for review tomorrow.
  12. Your breath stinks!
  13. Chuckles


    The only ones I've got saved I'll post the rest and my new ones when or if I take more.
  14. Chuckles


    My hand and neck was alright. The ribs were more uncomfortable than they were sore and my arms got really scorching around the elbows. No real deterrents though. Some cool ink here.
  15. Again, just to emphasize: Anyone is able to propose an edit or a change under this thread. All you have to do is quote what I have proposed with your own interpretations and we'll deliberate. This is nothing official, it's just a proposal and we want to have as much public input as possible.
  16. This is exactly it, yeah. Our own universe always takes precedence no matter what it is. The LA events can be secondary, but is completely optional. The same goes with news. Anything that contradicts our own news (i.e mentions of government decisions, police decisions and otherwise) is null. This also gives SAN and in game news agencies more resources in addition to what's available to them in game. Such as sports coverage.
  17. I agree. This is why we've installed a cut-off point in terms of what factions and players can use. As far as real life references goes, this just gives players the options to roleplay things that aren't actually available to them in game. Anything we already cover will be unaffected. Key events that come from the likes of the government, police department, sheriff's department and anything that's got the potential to be homegrown will assume precedence. For example, there is no Eric Garcetti, there is a Los Santos' equivalent. Michel Moore isn't the chief of police, our equivalent is. Anything we have control over takes precedence. This will mostly target live events and news that can add substance to our roleplay, substance we don't ordinarily have access to. Sporting games, certain news and generally anything we don't have covered. I think this is why it's important to acknowledge this now.
  18. If implemented, a theoretical map can be constructed too. The OP was constructed on the back of the mass public opinion. The introduction of both southern and northern cali in itself hasn't been done across multiple platforms and multiple communities, and the fact that we're on track to becoming part of the continental mainland and not an island distanced from the rest of the coast is a huge statement on our stance as a heavy roleplaying community. I think it also shows that we're trying to broaden the horizons for all players and concepts, regardless of category.
  19. Offensive, no, immersion breaking? Yes. Most people, if mentioned, will not resort to /b to correct or ridicule someone, that's, again, something that was relative to maybe pre 2015-16. What will happen though is people will acknowledge the aforementioned Liberty or Vice city as New York or Miami respectively. Like any guideline, it's not punishable by offense and any rebuttal will ordinarily be educational. I think too much effort is being focused on the wrong areas here. We'll obviously not, from a map point of view, say you can't drive here, here or here. Nothing will limit or restrict players from doing anything or going anywhere because it's such a rare occurrence that is easily ignored. It, again, misrepresents what we're trying to enforce with literalism. This is why hypothetical acknowledgements of a mainland connection can benefit both arguments. It's nothing more than acknowledgement that "realistically" you can drive in from here, here and here, and drive out from here, here and here. This can only be explorable if we stop treating it as an island. None of it will be a sticking point for new players, who can learn along the way. This rule will predominately affect seasoned roleplayers who are accustomed to change, want change and have been asking for change. The water won't serve as landmass, landmass is what the parts of the water should have been but wasn't and there's no going around that. It's generally agreed that the only reason there is so much water is because they replaced the invisible walls, wanted to shorten the map and wanted its fictional interpretation to be an island, cut off from the rest of the country. This is the only thing practically stopping us from roleplaying a mainland connection. When in theory it should already be there, given the perception of an evolving roleplaying community. I'm not suggesting we replace anything cosmetically, implement restrictions or refuse to acknowledge the water. I suggest we simply abandon the idea of us being an island and roleplay the mainland connection, even if entirely hypothetical. San Andreas should occupy the same space in the southwest corner of the US. The only time these coastal waters really come up is in police pursuits or excersises. It's not exactly hard to, other than that, imagine you're on the continental mainland.
  20. Additionally, we're still looking at a middle ground for this "connection to the mainland" dilemma. Not that it should be as much as an issue as it is, but the vast majority of the server refuse to roleplay it as an island and wish for it to be a state linked to the rest of the United States. I'm not against disallowing factions or players who want to roleplay mainland connections without the need for a boat or plane. This is specifically harmful to motorcycle clubs, straw men and from a legal standpoint, trucking companies who want to broaden their horizon, even if hypothetical. It's nothing more than hypothesis and won't affect anyone, yet will add great depth, reach and justification to both factions and players. What needs to be understood is this "island" approach is a single player mindset. The water replaces what used to be "invisible walls," I assume to stop single players from piloting their planes in to them. I assume the reason is because they've shortened the map and there's no point in having landmass that's essentially unexplorable. However, had roleplay servers been considered, this unexplorable landmass would have been the basis for this exact argument. It would have gave us connection we're advocating for. Adopting single player mindsets goes against what it is to be a heavy roleplay server.
  21. In light of this suggestion, I have made a compromise in what I believe is the most effective, realistic yet player-friendly approach to this situation. San Fierro and Las Venturas exists in name only, its events are inspired by those of its real life counterparts Liberty City and Vice City still do not exist. New York and Miami do. This won't be make or break for new characters, who can be told upon acceptance or denial of their character applications that they're not acknowledged in our world. How many new players do we think write stories centered around ballas, aztecaz, vagos or grove street families? They soon learn and adapt.
  • Create New...