Serious unofficial HL2RP² launch feedback thread

[Simman102]

Was the grenade throw roleplayed, and then thrown? And they ran for cover..
Or was it posted in /me, and CPs waited for the response /me of them reacting to it. But none came?

Some of the rebels started sprinting around without roleplay the moment the .357 shot was fired even though it was still s2rp. The grenade was roleplayed and thrown towards the rebels, hitting no one (99% sure). At that point a vort beamed a cop without RP, starting s2k

 

[MaXenzie]

unfortunately until S2RP becomes the standard, the rules allow anyone to opt out of S2RP and immediately force the scenario to become S2K

be the change you want to make etc etc, start enforcing S2RP in more situations

 

[Rabid]

Some of the rebels started sprinting around without roleplay the moment the .357 shot was fired even though it was still s2rp. The grenade was roleplayed and thrown towards the rebels, hitting no one (99% sure). At that point a vort beamed a cop without RP, starting s2k

I think its expected that people would hear a gunshot in the middle of a negotiation and reflexively panic, and by throwing the grenade you force people to move before they can respond unless you want them to, y'know, die on the spot without RP.

I hate to say this but its a well known secret that several RL's think very very little of S2RP and would much rather get back to S2K. One RL in particular who doesn't need naming has pretty consistently fucked up every single S2RP situation they were involved in and tried to default to S2K in multiple situations, including the one that got his whitelist removed and his character PK'd.

If I wanted to be paranoid, given track records, I'd say its the same shit I saw back in 2018 when it came to high ranking cops trying to force things to their preference.

I'm going to be charitable though and just say I don't think "Combines suffer consequences....." should be the takeaway here.

 

[Deleted member 7576]

rules allow anyone to opt out of S2RP and immediately force the scenario to become S2K

False

When engaging people in a situation where roleplay has been already initiated, you must properly roleplay initiating said engagement (readying your weapon, raising it, firing it). This is to prevent people abusing people mid-roleplay acting to quickly take them down.

 

[MaXenzie]

False

that just says you must /me the initiation of S2K, it doesn't say you must continue to S2RP

that's the standard 3 /me rule for initiating S2K that every iteration of HL2RP has had.

 

[Rabid]

You can't 'officially' opt out of S2RP, but sometimes shit happens - like it did on the bridge - and things cascade too quickly for you to stop it with so many people.

 

[MaXenzie]

You can't 'officially' opt out of S2RP, but sometimes shit happens - like it did on the bridge - and things cascade too quickly for you to stop it with so many people.

its easy to force the scenario to become S2K regardless

many engagements between rebels and combine have started as S2RP and then became S2K either because a third party who was otherwise uninvolved wanted to shotcop, or a S2RPer did a mechanical, ingame act (like throwing a grenade) that physically requires immediate reaction

there was also the situation where cody got S2RP'd by 3 assailants and reacted by pulling out a gun and just wordlessly shooting them
the PKs were rescinded but no actual administrative action was taken against cody for pushing the scenario into S2K afaik

 

[TheInnkeeper]

the grenade throw was roleplayed, by the way, and rebels were already running for cover without /mes at that point

*** /// suddenly reached onto his belt buckle. The Unit unclipped a grenade, holding it in his hand.
*** /// ducks behind cover, he pulled his grenade and threw it over the top.

Combine once again suffered the consequences of attempting to s2rp. Moving on I think I'll just change my approach because the current one clearly isn't working

my post about the grenade was about the bomb incident

 

[constantdisplay]

takeway: if u intend to keep something like that s2rp just ask staff to explicitly say that

 

[RedMan]

takeway: if u intend to keep something like that s2rp just ask staff to explicitly say that

I don't believe that is as effective as you would imagine it to be. One time Event Staff had explictly warned everyone that the upcoming combat was going to be S2RP and it still devolved to S2K within seconds of both groups meeting eachother. This was back on Metro when rebels were sabotaging the Combine infrastructure underneath the Bridge. This is not always the case, but it definitely happens without reprecautions.

 

[Tinbe]

At that point a vort beamed a cop without RP, starting s2k

See, I feel like you've said this a lot of times, but I've not seen you act upon it. Rob himself said he doesn't mind if you make a ban request for him, so why not do that instead of repeatedly languishing about the circumstances? Put a button on it.

 

[MaXenzie]

I don't believe that is as effective as you would imagine it to be. One time Event Staff had explictly warned everyone that the upcoming combat was going to be S2RP and it still devolved to S2K within seconds of both groups meeting eachother. This was back on Metro when rebels were sabotaging the Combine infrastructure underneath the Bridge. This is not always the case, but it definitely happens without reprecautions.

unless there's coding done to make weapons deal no actual in-game damage, S2K will always occur
you'd need to physically, by the way of the game mechanics, force players to engage in S2RP

 

[STUCK IN A CAKE]

Personally, I would rather have a roll system in place for 's2rp' (Like an actual clear cut roll - 'you must roll a 60 or higher to hit this shot' type deal) and then a method to find out how damaging that shot would have been. Then let the players roleplay out what they do and say based on those rolls.

because I don't really trust most players to play to lose properly.

In small events, it's fine. But with so many people doing so many actions, it's annoying to either be straight up ignored or someone just doing /me gets hit, but it glanced off their armor or /me dodges

 

[RedMan]

Personally, I would rather have a roll system in place for 's2rp' (Like an actual clear cut roll - 'you must roll a 60 or higher to hit this shot' type deal) and then a method to find out how damaging that shot would have been. Then let the players roleplay out what they do and say based on those rolls.

** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 9 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 1 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 4 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 0 out of 100.

Yeah, no thanks.
I would prefer to simply enforce a 'Play to Lose' rule, and the conditions surrounding whether you have a leverage or not outlined through a set of clauses. With the turn of action alternating between the players.

In small events, it's fine. But with so many people doing so many actions, it's annoying to either be straight up ignored or someone just doing /me gets hit, but it glanced off their armor or /me dodges

The etiquette and communication in S2RP scenarios most certainly needs to improve. The visibility in regards to who is doing what is also a pain in the ass.

 

[Komchan]

** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 9 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 1 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 4 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 0 out of 100.

Yeah, no thanks.
I would prefer to simply enforce a 'Play to Lose' rule, and the conditions surrounding whether you have a leverage or not outlined through a set of clauses. With the turn of action alternating between the players.


The etiquette and communication in S2RP scenarios most certainly needs to improve. The visibility in regards to who is doing what is also a pain in the ass.

that sounds overcomplicated and annoying

rolls sidestep the problem and you are unable to claim someone is powergaming / cheating, as it's a clear role. Maybe just state the 'boundaries' of success. Eg, 0-10 critical failure, 90-100 major success

 

[MaXenzie]

I would prefer to simply enforce a 'Play to Lose' rule, and the conditions surrounding whether you have a leverage or not outlined through a set of clauses. With the turn of action alternating between the players.

a fully enforced play 2 lose ruleset would mean that no one would win any conflict, because everyone is playing to lose
every fight would be a tie
the OTA would play 2 lose just as much as the citizen

remember that the term "play 2 lose" is solely a HL2RP thing, it is not used in any other avenue of roleplay that i have ever seen
no WoWRP'er ( @Erkor )
no DiscordRP'er
no D&D player, no Warhammer gamer, NO ONE uses the term Play 2 Lose except us

and its definition isn't even codified accurately
people confuse "play 2 lose" as playing your character accurately to their own strengths
that's not playing to lose, that's just roleplaying without being a cunt

 

[Mic15000]

You all aren’t ready for the DnD style rolling system talk

that sounds overcomplicated and annoying

rolls sidestep the problem and you are unable to claim someone is powergaming / cheating, as it's a clear role. Maybe just state the 'boundaries' of success. Eg, 0-10 critical failure, 90-100 major success

** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 9 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 1 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 4 out of 100.
** C79:75.QUICK-8 has rolled 0 out of 100.

Yeah, no thanks.
I would prefer to simply enforce a 'Play to Lose' rule, and the conditions surrounding whether you have a leverage or not outlined through a set of clauses. With the turn of action alternating between the players.


The etiquette and communication in S2RP scenarios most certainly needs to improve. The visibility in regards to who is doing what is also a pain in the ass.

 

[Laura]

You all aren’t ready for the DnD style rolling system talk

Ya'll aint READY for straight up character sheets

 

[constantdisplay]

I don't believe that is as effective as you would imagine it to be. One time Event Staff had explictly warned everyone that the upcoming combat was going to be S2RP and it still devolved to S2K within seconds of both groups meeting eachother. This was back on Metro when rebels were sabotaging the Combine infrastructure underneath the Bridge. This is not always the case, but it definitely happens without reprecautions.

if thats the situation im thinking of, the awful visibility and general confusion led to that
i think it would of helped regardless with the bridge situation considering mostly everyone was grouped together

 

[STUCK IN A CAKE]

I would love to make a character sheet for my hl2 character - but that's more for fun than trying to enforce it in game