Lsrcr Forum

Karu_Tepes wrote:

Aleksa wrote:

I'd rather suggest removal of sawnoff and a taze weapon for LEOs using silencer weapon. Well that will make an interesting story.

-1

Just make the sawnoff a VIP packet/VIP club weapon, and remove taze and shocking. problem fixed.

Restricting a certain weapon, especially 1 as OP as the Sawnoff, to a VIP packet will make the server VERY pay2win.
Sawnoffs should've been removed 2 years ago when the server went from Cops and Robbery to TDM 'cophunting' being mainstream.
Yes, 'cophunting' is fun and all but it's literal TDM with ZERO Cops and Robbery type gameplay, just because it's labelled cops vs crims doesn't mean it's not DM/

Allow sawnoff for armies only, restrict cops from killing crimes in certain area such as in the surroundings of lspd and allow shooting at places like lsa riot zone where cophunters camp at the roofs and shoot

Robin wrote:

Karu_Tepes wrote:

Aleksa wrote:

I'd rather suggest removal of sawnoff and a taze weapon for LEOs using silencer weapon. Well that will make an interesting story.

-1

Just make the sawnoff a VIP packet/VIP club weapon, and remove taze and shocking. problem fixed.

Restricting a certain weapon, especially 1 as OP as the Sawnoff, to a VIP packet will make the server VERY pay2win.
Sawnoffs should've been removed 2 years ago when the server went from Cops and Robbery to TDM 'cophunting' being mainstream.
Yes, 'cophunting' is fun and all but it's literal TDM with ZERO Cops and Robbery type gameplay, just because it's labelled cops vs crims doesn't mean it's not DM/

Hmm, perhaps just army (who already have OP weapons) and Pagati (because of the Lupara tradition)?

Karu_Tepes wrote:

Robin wrote:

Karu_Tepes wrote:

Just make the sawnoff a VIP packet/VIP club weapon, and remove taze and shocking. problem fixed.

Restricting a certain weapon, especially 1 as OP as the Sawnoff, to a VIP packet will make the server VERY pay2win.
Sawnoffs should've been removed 2 years ago when the server went from Cops and Robbery to TDM 'cophunting' being mainstream.
Yes, 'cophunting' is fun and all but it's literal TDM with ZERO Cops and Robbery type gameplay, just because it's labelled cops vs crims doesn't mean it's not DM/

Hmm, perhaps just army (who already have OP weapons) and Pagati (because of the Lupara tradition)?

All of Army's high-powered weapons are heavily restricted through rules, the sawnoffs should be heavily restricted as well to accommodate 1 single entity being able to access a weapon that can outmatch any other gun on foot.

Robin wrote:

Karu_Tepes wrote:

Robin wrote:

Restricting a certain weapon, especially 1 as OP as the Sawnoff, to a VIP packet will make the server VERY pay2win.
Sawnoffs should've been removed 2 years ago when the server went from Cops and Robbery to TDM 'cophunting' being mainstream.
Yes, 'cophunting' is fun and all but it's literal TDM with ZERO Cops and Robbery type gameplay, just because it's labelled cops vs crims doesn't mean it's not DM/

Hmm, perhaps just army (who already have OP weapons) and Pagati (because of the Lupara tradition)?

All of Army's high-powered weapons are heavily restricted through rules, the sawnoffs should be heavily restricted as well to accommodate 1 single entity being able to access a weapon that can outmatch any other gun on foot.

Maybe army can only use sawnoffs on red wanteds or most wanted, and pagati can only use sawn offs on hits and for roleplay? I say hits because it's the tradition to send a message by unloading both barrels into a target.

Removing/restricting a whole weapon (sawnoff) doesn't sound like a good idea. If you really want to do something, then restrict 2shot and allow people to use sawnoff with 4shot only. If remove 2shot or restrict sawnoff, majority of the playerbase will be disappointed and maybe even stop playing LSRCR, it doesn't matter if it's considered RP or not, it has become a part of lsrcr over these years, and I don't think doing any of these is a good idea.

BeaTen. wrote:

Removing/restricting a whole weapon (sawnoff) doesn't sound like a good idea. If you really want to do something, then restrict 2shot and allow people to use sawnoff with 4shot only. If remove 2shot or restrict sawnoff, majority of the playerbase will be disappointed and maybe even stop playing LSRCR, it doesn't matter if it's considered RP or not, it has become a part of lsrcr over these years, and I don't think doing any of these is a good idea.

Yeah but we can't code that. We would have to make a rule, and unlike you, I don't have the time to record every tiny rulebreak and report it without being staff. You'd end up having to ban 90% of the damn users before they could leave.

BeaTen. wrote:

Removing/restricting a whole weapon (sawnoff) doesn't sound like a good idea. If you really want to do something, then restrict 2shot and allow people to use sawnoff with 4shot only. If remove 2shot or restrict sawnoff, majority of the playerbase will be disappointed and maybe even stop playing LSRCR, it doesn't matter if it's considered RP or not, it has become a part of lsrcr over these years, and I don't think doing any of these is a good idea.

Imo it should be more focussed on going against TDM in a balanced way, rather than promoting roleplay.
RP, as much as I like it, has been dead within Lsrcr for a good few years with less than 5% of the playerbase even being remotely interested in it.

Karu_Tepes wrote:

BeaTen. wrote:

Removing/restricting a whole weapon (sawnoff) doesn't sound like a good idea. If you really want to do something, then restrict 2shot and allow people to use sawnoff with 4shot only. If remove 2shot or restrict sawnoff, majority of the playerbase will be disappointed and maybe even stop playing LSRCR, it doesn't matter if it's considered RP or not, it has become a part of lsrcr over these years, and I don't think doing any of these is a good idea.

Yeah but we can't code that. We would have to make a rule, and unlike you, I don't have the time to record every tiny rulebreak and report it without being staff. You'd end up having to ban 90% of the damn users before they could leave.

Whether you have the time or not doesn't matter, you can't remove a weapon like sawnoff and make it available only for pagati and army. Rules are there for a reason, you can't just say that remove all the rules because you don't have the time to report rulebreaks... I know many players will break the 2shot rule if it gets implemented, but it really is the best course of action. Removing sawnoff will not be easy because every player relies on sawnoff, making it available only for pg/army will cause an immense imbalance between the different classes. You can host a poll on whether people want sawnoff to be removed, I am pretty sure that majority will vote against it.

BeaTen. wrote:

Karu_Tepes wrote:

BeaTen. wrote:

Removing/restricting a whole weapon (sawnoff) doesn't sound like a good idea. If you really want to do something, then restrict 2shot and allow people to use sawnoff with 4shot only. If remove 2shot or restrict sawnoff, majority of the playerbase will be disappointed and maybe even stop playing LSRCR, it doesn't matter if it's considered RP or not, it has become a part of lsrcr over these years, and I don't think doing any of these is a good idea.

Yeah but we can't code that. We would have to make a rule, and unlike you, I don't have the time to record every tiny rulebreak and report it without being staff. You'd end up having to ban 90% of the damn users before they could leave.

Whether you have the time or not doesn't matter, you can't remove a weapon like sawnoff and make it available only for pagati and army. Rules are there for a reason, you can't just say that remove all the rules because you don't have the time to report rulebreaks... I know many players will break the 2shot rule if it gets implemented, but it really is the best course of action. Removing sawnoff will not be easy because every player relies on sawnoff, making it available only for pg/army will cause an immense imbalance between the different classes. You can host a poll on whether people want sawnoff to be removed, I am pretty sure that majority will vote against it.

And those same kids will vote against removing cop hunting, but you suggested it.