Denied Medic weapon rule change

This suggestion has been denied and will not receive development.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Oasis

Well-known Member
Sep 6, 2022
139
29
41
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Rule change: Medic classes aren’t allowed to use heavy weaponry (LMGs, Sniper Rifles, etc)

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
-Balance. Medics on surface with sniper rifles are overpowered because they can go around sniping people and getting a free hostage, 100% of the time. It’s low effort roleplay (not even rp tbh)
-Realism. Medics in real life (even combat medics) wouldn’t have LMGs and Anti-Material sniper rifles. Even currently, medics having rifles and ARs is a bit overkill.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
People who use these weapons on medic might be angry their only strategy is gone.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
It improves balance and realism on surface and in foundation.
 

"Aki"

Well-known Member
Jan 21, 2023
139
32
41
-Support


If this is for CI Medics, there is no point Normally every CI can use a sniper, and Combat Medics need a sniper lic so i don't get what's the point of this suggestion
 

Oasis

Well-known Member
Sep 6, 2022
139
29
41
-Support


If this is for CI Medics, there is no point Normally every CI can use a sniper, and Combat Medics need a sniper lic so i don't get what's the point of this suggestion
The point is that it upsets (mostly) surface balance. CI medics now can grab a SVD or AMR and come back everytime with a hostage. The point of the suggestion is to improve realism and balance. Even now, surface warfare is mostly sniping eachother. Punishing anyone CI is fighting against by also guaranteeing capture hurts it even more.
 

"Aki"

Well-known Member
Jan 21, 2023
139
32
41
The point is that it upsets (mostly) surface balance. CI medics now can grab a SVD or AMR and come back everytime with a hostage. The point of the suggestion is to improve realism and balance. Even now, surface warfare is mostly sniping eachother. Punishing anyone CI is fighting against by also guaranteeing capture hurts it even more.

I get your point but, we only have 2 marksmen and the times we ever get extra snipers its so rare, while Foundation has B1 and Nu7 Recon/Marksmen. There is no point to Limit CI From using the weapons they get.
 

Snow

Active member
Jan 31, 2023
108
22
21
-Realism. Medics in real life (even combat medics) wouldn’t have LMGs and Anti-Material sniper rifles. Even currently, medics having rifles and ARs is a bit overkill.
its scp foundation in this universe everything is possible
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darren

SamPaval

Active member
May 26, 2022
1,172
160
21
bro what? thats kinda fucked. Foundation CMs shouldnt be allowed heavy weapons tho.
Its really not?

What's the point in being combat when no combat is going on.

And this just sounds like a massive skill issue. At that point people we start asking to remove heavy weapons entirely
 

Michael Dzhetnikov

Civil Gamers Expert
Mar 22, 2022
618
64
91
Its really not?

What's the point in being combat when no combat is going on.

And this just sounds like a massive skill issue. At that point people we start asking to remove heavy weapons entirely
How is it a skill issue? you just mad because you cant use your m249. There is no point in having Nu-7 Medics when there are combat medics. There should be a change.
 

SamPaval

Active member
May 26, 2022
1,172
160
21
How is it a skill issue? you just mad because you cant use your m249. There is no point in having Nu-7 Medics when there are combat medics. There should be a change.
CM and Nu-7 medics are different mate.

CM can help us from time to time but they arent in are TS3 And have Different dutys in both servers.

CMs dont regularly go on surface to help us do missions

They only really help us in raids (defense and attack)
 

Change Z. "Somebody"

Head Moderator
Head Moderator
SCP-RP Staff
Jun 13, 2022
145
19
41
The point is that it upsets (mostly) surface balance. CI medics now can grab a SVD or AMR and come back everytime with a hostage. The point of the suggestion is to improve realism and balance. Even now, surface warfare is mostly sniping eachother. Punishing anyone CI is fighting against by also guaranteeing capture hurts it even more.
Foundation/Goc has 8 snipers CI has 2... It doesn't matter if you one shot the medic before it's an issue. They'll capture you wether or not your sniped -support
 

Darren

Well-known Member
Jul 14, 2022
1,277
188
41
-SUPPORT yea its failrp for a medic to use a LMG thats dumb same thing with juggs
 

Deleted member 4984

Guest
My opinion on these changed and all these new rule changes is that even if needed they fuck with the new players.

I completely agree with cloak in the sense that the server does not require a million rules and that they should be coded in ( restrictions ) or balanced something which SSL has the ability to do with VGuns. Even if there will be a rule for every possible unbalanced situation and possible exploit it's just going to fuck with new players. When was the last time you saw a online video game (outside of gmod) with rules where you could be banned for using a gun at a certain range or something similar because the devs are to lazy to patch/balance their own game.
 

Dinklesprinkle

Civil Gamers Expert
May 11, 2022
343
61
71
This is an IC issue you can approach the DoM over for example before i left the uk i determined people can use everything given they have a license bar heavy weapons regardless of license or not
 

Yeke

Community Supervisor
Community Sup.
Group Moderator
Mar 20, 2022
784
3
144
71
Suggestion Denied


Hi @Oasis ,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.

After discussion with the Superadmin team, we do not find this is needed for staff ruling of what medics can and cannot pickup, equipping of weapons would fall under an In-character ruling of Standard Operating Procedures set out by the faction / regiment and based on their licenses.

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as denied.​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.