Negotiation Rules

[Jack G]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Change negotiation rules to the 2nd week of the 3 attempted weeks rulings.
For those unaware, it was basically that players are in charge of negotiations with no suggested or minimum prices. This meant that negotiations actually become negotiations instead of just 'let me pull up the forums and see what the minimum price i can pay to have this hostage taken back is'. Goofy ah bull shit.

I would also like to recommend we implement 2x elements
Original offers for price can be increased after a failed hostage attempts. None of this 'grrr u insulted me, extra 10k' shit.
Offers and Negotiations must be realistic (to prevent 4x MRE offers).

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
No however this suggestion was BY FAR the most liked week rules that there was for the 3x weeks ran.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
People can have what they want implemented, right now it sounds like SL are basing the rule off of 15x messages in 1x channel that 90% of players didn't know about. Yes, it was in the announcements, however a lot of people openly discussed the weeks in Messhall with server leadership and therefore like myself, didn't see a reason to also put it in a channel.

Let's go over some of the Feedback that was given:
Parker: It's a bit sad that vehicles are never offered
Axel: 2nd week was horrible (speaking about how he had an offer for 9 MRE's for the GRM)
Parker: Can agree everyone just offered MRE's
Parker also was the one that offered MRE's as well as advocated for others to offer 9 mre's...
Parker: "Steven did the same" (offered mre's)
Jason M: 2nd week was good
Myself: Last weeks (2nd week) was rly good, just needs to add that negiotiations must be realistic to stop the whole 4MRE thing
Myself + Nirvan: "This is literally gonna be reject an offer ok, 10% more"
"There's going to be like 0 actual negotiations, all script work"

I want to know, what out of ALL of this feedback made you decide the decision that was made between all of SL. Because if I'm expected to write out multiple suggestions weekly, is it so hard for me to expect SL to actually use their eyes and spend 10 minutes looking for some feedback.

From the feedback above:
People don't like Minimums because it's script work and no negotiations.
People followed what SL did in offering MRE's and therefore, week 2 'seemed' back but the only negative was that people are acoustic and offered 9 mre's for a GRM
It's sad that Vehicles are never offered, which is true. If there's a suggested price that people can base a cash negotiation off, they will ALWAYS pick the cash. There CANT be any suggested or minimum prices, it just doesn't work. If you're wanting negotiations, let us.


Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
We actually listen to the community feedback and it ends up being horrible and so we... revert it to the original way it was? I guess?

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
It's what the players want, you'll see with the +supports and when I'm right I'll post a big fat walter white gif.

 

[Nirvan]

+support
If you're going to deny this suggestion might as well add an NPC that buys hostages for 110% of the suggested price since you guys want to basically kill all the negiotating rp that goes on!

 

[Rainbow Dash]

+support

 

[Kvalax]

+Support

I find it irritating that I always have to negotiate according to the 'book' and I am the person here who has negotiated most lately. We should negotiate, but additional rules would make it smoother.

- Realistic offers (prevent Parker from offering 1 MRE).

- High Command should always negotiate.
Suppose someone gets kidnapped from ISAF, ISAF should also take responsibility and negotiate for someone from his regiment

We don't see vehicles because the economy is simple and money is only used for knives and hostages. So if something had to be done about that, it would already solve a lot so the players can spend their money on something.

 

[Jorge]

+Support
Negotiations just don’t make sense at all you either accept an offer which is probably underpriced by hell or add 10% to it, denying this would just result in Parker lowballing every offer and calling 100 sits if you don’t accept

 

[HighWorks]

+ support
Considering I am SGRU and having to deal with negiotations all the time I think this is a good suggestion.
Although I believe there will never be the balance between giving vehicles and giving out cash. At some point SGRU will rob NATO so badly they will have to give out vehicles. Maybe a balance will be created by players and NHC / SSHC will value vehicles more then cash for negiotations.

 

[Jason M.]

+Support (hear me out tho)

`Jason M: 2nd week was good`
I did say this. this is true

I think overall, the idea of having no baseline for negotiations is good, however only for money. I enjoyed week 2, but I also enjoyed the heavier emphasis on vehicle trading throughout the test weeks.
I believe that what should be done is the following:

Players are permitted to negotiate for hostages at their own discretion using money, however hostage ranks (As previously used) mark a minimum vehicle that must be paid for the release of the hostage.

This would mean that in theory, if i kidnapped a LT, I could negotiate with NATO and ask for 70k, they would have to either negotiate with me and come to a conclusion with money, or counter my offer with a vehicle, like they could before
(The vehicles would still be a minimum amount, and could still be negotiated for).


Personally I'm still half awake writing this I cant tell if what I said made sense