Rule Suggestion Prevent CI from Flagging to D-Class during D-Block Raids

Rule suggestions will be reviewed by Superadmins, this may take longer than standard content suggestions.
Jack Edwards (Spoon)

Jack Edwards (Spoon)

Civil Gamers Expert
One Year Club Two Year Club Advent 2024 Conversation Starter
Jun 2, 2024
265
58
111
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Prevents players actively playing CI from flagging onto D-Class during a CI raid targeting D-Block either as a primary or secondary objective.
Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Not that I am aware of.
Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
Prevents CI from flagging on D-Class during D-Block raids to effectively get a second or even third life during a raid.
Makes it less of a pain in the ass for GSD and Foundation to combat D-Block raids.
Less codes for Foundation.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
D-Block raids are slightly less effective.
CI get less combat.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
CI being able to immediately flag to D-Class after dying in a D-Block raid or otherwise just using D-Class as additional lives to continue helping their friends raid Foundation should honestly already be a rule. Picture this, CI raids D-Block, they bring a bunch of pistols but also have some energy weapons. A few of the raiding CI die getting to D-Block. Instead of waiting for the raid to end or doing something else, they immediately flag to D-Class and rush to showers. Their CI friends then give them energy weapons to help them, effectively acting as another life during the raid. This is an issue on both sides with CI intentionally flagging to D-Class to prolong raids and riots, which negatively impacts Foundation in an unfair way.
And to all -supports, please explain why this is a bad suggestion.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Headbutt
Upvote -15 Downvote
I can tell it's a well intended suggestion, but I agree it's generally already not allowed based on the rules and there would be no way to realistically enforce this unless the staff were plentiful, mindful, and had a vendetta.


I don't personally find it an issue, because even though that last D block raid on US was lame, it wasn't because of CI flagging to d class. We need to remember that CI even at their worst, still makes the game exciting for us, they fuel the burner for all the MTF players to do something, and even GSD and D class.

The only way I can see this realistically being enforced, is CI leadership holding the same rules they do when they're defending a raid, if you die wait X amount of time before leaving bunks, they can do that before flagging onto d class for example, but that takes integrity, sportsmanship, and overall isn't really required and again, no way to track it.

Personally, I only ever find CI annoying when they sit in a corner and pixel peak with energy weapons that 1 shot you, and the only thing holding my complaints back, is knowing how much we outnumber them and how valuable each CI life is compared to the endless stream of foundation they have to carve through.
 
-/+ Neutral.
I feel like it would already fall under failrp/metagaming to do so already IF done in a way like
"Oh I just died as CI in the bathroom, Let me hop on scout, Sprint up to them and get them to drop me a gun so I can continue the fight"
I do see why it could be infuriating to deal with in general, But enforcing this would be hard.
 
vvvvvv4203 said:
-/+ Neutral.
I feel like it would already fall under failrp/metagaming to do so already IF done in a way like
"Oh I just died as CI in the bathroom, Let me hop on scout, Sprint up to them and get them to drop me a gun so I can continue the fight"
I do see why it could be infuriating to deal with in general, But enforcing this would be hard.
Click to expand...
that’s not what this suggestion would be changing. It would make it entirely not allowed for ci or get on d class. For instance if ci says d class flag on, no ci could flag on even with character separations. He justifies this however with things that are against rules and doesn’t have anything to do with suggestion. It doesn’t make sense.
 
Advil Smith said:
that’s not what this suggestion would be changing. It would make it entirely not allowed for ci or get on d class. For instance if ci says d class flag on, no ci could flag on even with character separations. He justifies this however with things that are against rules and doesn’t have anything to do with suggestion. It doesn’t make sense.
Click to expand...
Just make it so CI players aren't allowed to play on the server
 
+support, noticing that all the negatives seem to bring up how E-11 are able to flag on during a breach. how about you make a cooldown for both? I think if your planning on raiding D-Block and your CI then you should plan ahead and play as a D Class and wait, not just flag on once they make it. Similar to SCP breaches. Make the Players play the job before the actual "fun" starts, then it adds overall to every side. Makes everything less metagamed.
 
-Support. Simply impossible to enforce, as well as circumstantial evidence of flagging on D-Class during a riot then being accused of job abuse. as well as not allowing anyone on the server to play a certain class for a certain amount of time.
 
Jack Edwards (Spoon) said:
Making a generalized response here
To CI, please stop just calling this a "Cope Suggestion", not every suggestion aimed at restricting CI is a cope suggestion. I ultimately won't be offended if this is denied


I've been playing on UK GSD a bit too and it's been happening there a lot lately, which is part of the inspiration behind this suggestion

I can make suggestions regarding the server and I did not I claim this is job abuse


I would say depends, my example would be if a player has both Nu-7 and E-11. They are fighting CI during a raid but once the raid reaches HCZ they immediately flag E-11 so they are able to better combat the raid. That would be unfair and I would be with you there. If it's someone switching roles purely to make it easier for them to combat a scenario or groups then yes, but I also agree similar to my suggestion it would be hard to differentiate between flagging for the sake of preventing/combating a scenario or flagging because they want to play that role.

Aye in a sense, like I said and I agree with the point this would be hard to enforce, individuals flagging to the role purely for ease of preventing/combating scenarios is unfair as instead of playing the role for fun or RP, switching the role to prevent something negative to their faction or other character from happening.

And in general I would like to remind people this is just my opinion. I am obviously biased as everyone is so it's not the end of the world if this gets denied. I just wanted to make it as I felt it was unfair, but that's ultimately staff's choice. It's just a game at the end of the day :]
Click to expand...
ive played dclass for a couple days just to see how hard it is to escape and its immposible to escape bassicly without ci because you always have 2 gsd sat in towers and the second you get a card your most likely gonna get rdmed by a gsd so ci are the only chance you have of getting out when ci flag on dclass your able to escape because you have people that are actualy good at pvp instead of the random dclass that dont listen or know how to actualy group up
 
Last edited:
Ace'honoured' said:
ive played dclass for a couple days just to see how hard it is to escape and its immposible to escape bassicly without ci because you always have 2 gsd sat in towers and the second you get a card your most likely gonna get rdmed by a gsd so ci are the only chance you have of getting out
Click to expand...
Good. That's what makes sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skittles
'Remembrance' said:
+support
all the ci mains are saying -support because it affects them.
Click to expand...
Dumbest reply OAT.

This is like saying groups of people can’t protest legislation that affects them negatively.

“Hey dude this bill only affects this group of people and that group of people are against it but because they’re the ones being affected they don’t get an opinion.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Advil Smith
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back