Rule Suggestion Big Issue

[Houston Benton]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:

Add a rule that forbids CI players from hopping on SCP's during a raid.
Or CI Requesting for SCP's to hop on during a raid with the intent to breach.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:

This hasn't been suggested previously

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):

Less Long breaches that kill everything activity wise on the server
Less Coordinated-OP SCP's that ignore CI raiding parties

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:

None It forces CI to work with whatever SCP's that are onsite at that time rather than hopping on a combo-wombo of Type green's, astronaut, 079 that kill any semblance of roleplay

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:

Would make SCP breaches that occur not last that thing as it'll be random players.
​

 

[Jack Raider]

once again, its already against the rules, call a sit instead of complaining on forums.

It's literally a clip related to the suggestion, I don't get your anger about it lmao

 

[Tigole]

That makes zero sense, in that case CI could get onto foundation then flag on SCP

Was about to make this argument. Realistically anyone can be good at an SCP

 

[Starling6]

the mald is crazy from both sides

+ soup,

millions must nerf ci

 

["Comet"/Shoobinshurt]

It's literally a clip related to the suggestion, I don't get your anger about it lmao

There's no anger, I'm saying why are you guys complaining on the forums about something thats already against the rules.

 

["Comet"/Shoobinshurt]

Was about to make this argument. Realistically anyone can be good at an SCP

Even if this becomes a rule then people can just get on foundation and then get on the SCP, there's no point in the suggestion.

 

[Sule Goodman]

This is quite literally already a rule, its usually just hard to find evidence of

 

["Comet"/Shoobinshurt]

This is quite literally already a rule, its usually just hard to find evidence of

If you feel an SCP is teaming make a sit and ask staff to spectate, don't need evidence.

 

[Evil]

 

["Aki"]

I sent it as a perfect example of how SCP played by CI react to ongoing CI raid elsewhere + from what I see this is not a complaint section, so 'thing that was handled' doesn't mean anything - if someone is warned for ERP does that mean they didn't ERP in the past, because it was handled? Slightly illogical thinking!

I don't think the example is perfect thought. it's not like you guys lead 076-2 into 079 and he ignores all the CI. no ofc he will just go in and kill everyone and there are also a few times where the 076-2 just straight up ignores the foundation who is trying to lead him into 079.

Legit same thing can be said for foundation mains that go out of their way to target CI gang, The clip you sent is a 076-2 Which is yes, a CI player but also someone who didn't know they can break 008 doors.

 

["Businessman"]

All I am going to say is this - you can surely guess what faction 076 player is from - yes the SCP that murders everyone on his escape path - unless they're chaos insurgency (new SCP canon????)

Untitled - Clipped with Medal.tv

24 Views - Watch Untitled by Jacek Daniels and millions of other Garry's Mod videos on Medal. Tags: Garry's Mod

medal.tv

He was actively trying to avoid going into 008's airlock. If he only wanted to avoid CI why would he let go off A-1 too? I have never seen CI ally with a SCP but i did see foundation ally with an SCP many times under the name "passive breach"

 

[Jordie]

+Support I wanna see this show

nerf ci again please thanks. love roleplay

 

[casseno1]

once again, its already against the rules, call a sit instead of complaining on forums.

Crazy statement ngl

 

[Cloudblade]

+Support

 

[TheKupKake]

Add a rule that forbids CI players from hopping on SCP's during a raid.

You had my +Support from here lol.

But no this is a really big issues, Youd have CI dying at MG then flagging on to SCPs.
Its one thing if they were already on the SCP before going to the raid, but half the time its just:

>Dies in MG.
> Opens chat
[Comms] Xx_Random_CI_xX: Yo someone hop on SCP-076.
> Ignores CI/Streches the C1 for so long another one happens while the breach is ongoing

 

["Comet"/Shoobinshurt]

You had my +Support from here lol.

But no this is a really big issues, Youd have CI dying at MG then flagging on to SCPs.
Its one thing if they were already on the SCP before going to the raid, but half the time its just:

>Dies in MG.
> Opens chat
[Comms] Xx_Random_CI_xX: Yo someone hop on SCP-076.
> Ignores CI/Streches the C1 for so long another one happens while the breach is ongoing

That's not allowed already.... You are already required to ask in ooc dude. Also that example is mixing......

 

[TheKupKake]

That's not allowed already.... You are already required to ask in ooc dude. Also that example is mixing......

Yeah the comms thing is mixing, But it isnt against the rules (as far as im aware) for them to ask on Teamspeak.

Thats the issue Huston is talking about

But tbf the issue of CI flagging on to an SCP pre planed in a raid, is a massive issue

 

[Glovano]

+/- Support

Really don't know where this is going. A lot of Foundation players putting up + support because they can't deal with a lvl 200 CI player on a SCP job that can be easily dealt with strategy but coping as they usually would leave in this scenario, then we got CI player's that are just mass breaching and usually ruining all of the RP doing - supports as if they can't handle something like this (it is not detrimental just get a SCP main to get on). Instead of thinking of a better solution of fixing the auto breaches that causes all of this lets just point fingers at each other and argue like the uncivilised people we are and lose all of the common sense in this, at this point its not becoming an argument between what is fair or not but a fight in the community because they don't like one faction. Its just all toxic after all.

 

[Simon "Kitton" A.]

View attachment 22759

here comes the popcorn

this is fire so far

I wish i was active enough to see the issue myself

 

["Comet"/Shoobinshurt]

Yeah the comms thing is mixing, But it isnt against the rules (as far as im aware) for them to ask on Teamspeak.

Thats the issue Huston is talking about

But tbf the issue of CI flagging on to an SCP pre planed in a raid, is a massive issue

How is it different if a different play plays the SCP, this makes no sense...

 

[Welper]

I'd argue +support, but not necessarily because "grr I hate CI", but because it restricts the "breach" aspect of the server. New players would have to either be lucky enough to be on an SCP that CI want to breach, when they want to breach it, or wait in the autobreach queue. Perhaps fixes could be made so that when a CI calls "SCP X flag on", there's a reduced risk of metagame, such as making their name white like an RSD, maybe have CI do that call BEFORE they raid, or something of the sort. But I do think that it's better for everyone if it's not restricted to only people who are CI, who are on the job at the time. The only thing this would harm is the ability of CI to wreak havoc on site, whilest teaching the new player how the SCP works, so they know in future.