shrimp

I'm curious to know what parts of this might turn out to be confusing or difficult. The only difficult part lies on Garnet's end with the coding. Other than that, things like the faction-rules will be enforced only upon the faction and enforced by the faction leader with the help of staff. Other than that, it should be pretty straightforward. Mercenaries on the server might help, or they might not.

G4S would only be able to participate in war if hired, and the terms of their employment may range from simple scouting and recon to full armed conflict. G4S won't be able to capture points as that would likely be unnecessarily complicated to implement. As far as an independent claim goes, I assume you mean a base location, in which case I am looking for suggestions on.

The rank structure is based on a real thing, I swear it's like that for a reason.

So, this goes back to the competency of the leader. Establishing Passive RP is one of the main goals of this suggestion. If the people selected for G4S can't fulfill that, they shouldn't be there. Go ahead, my inbox is always open.

Subfactions would not have individual budgets. I think a proper way to do it would be to place control of the budget in the base factions (Army, 2GA.) from which allied subfactions could make requests to utilize the budget to employ G4S for various activities. G4S can charge whatever they want for services, and even more as the complexity or difficulty of a job increases. This would make a faction repeatedly hiring for things like entire fireteams very difficult, as it would rapidly exhaust their budget. This forces a realistic cooldown on each side. The equipment G4S would have access to on their end would be highly specialized to carry out certain tasks (Things like flashbangs, mines, precision rifles, etc) and these items would be single-life, and come at a hefty premium via the G4S budget. The directors of G4S would control the types of gear being issued, so that no unnecessary gear is being purchased and money is wasted. The quality of weaponry, as is standard for a high caliber PMC, will be top notch.

Let's hit each base. Money is added to the nation budgets after each war. The amount added is calculated by the amount of players on and a win or loss, losers earning slightly more. Nations can then use their budgets at any given time to employ G4S to do whatever they want.

No, not likely. For one, the values present in the budget will be on a much different scale than the money used in game. A player adding to the budget would hardly make a dent, nor would it even be possible. This is prevent the likelihood of staff being able to spawn money and influence the budgets.

So each country would have their own budget. The budget is an independent quantity that can be accessed by officers via a command that would open up a menu that displays the budget and subsequent options to utilize the budgets, ideally. Upon addition, each country would be granted an equal amount, and RU & US would constantly gain money to use with G4S after each war.

Nothing, actually. The only things you would have to consider differently as leaders is the budget and how you plan to use it, which requires you simply just meet with the other subfac leaders in your faction.

Like I said, whoever is chosen should be pretty intelligent and creative, as well as capable of RP. It's pretty simple criteria that can be somewhat hard to come across. As it stands, according to Phantom, those types of people on the server now are few and far between. That being said, I'm fairly confident that simply the prospect of this being added has already grabbed the attention of some older, much more experienced retired players.

It's that time again! Preface: Hey everyone, I'm shrimps. For those of you who are new or too old to remember me, I'm an old MRP player. I founded the modern RU and all that fun stuff. One thing I'm pretty well known for is suggestions, and that brings us here. Recently, a certain individual on the forums brought up the topic of roleplay in MRP and what can be done to improve it. If you'd like to read that post, you can find it here. One of the primary things I've sought to accomplish in this community during my time as a faction leader, staff, or otherwise was to improve the state of RP, and like I said on the aforementioned thread, it's very difficult to do in one swift movement. These things take time. In the interest of an attempt to gradually increase the tangible RP functionality of the server, I've come up with a brief but fairly groundbreaking course of action after discussing a bit with Garnet and resurrecting my creative abilities. I'll do my best to thoroughly explain the processes and their effects here. I would also like to ask that if you are going to provide a response to the suggestion or any specific part of it, please make sure you read said parts completely, thanks. Part I: The Overhaul As the title suggests, this is going to be a bit on the experimental side as far as any changes go. Take everything with a grain of salt. Frankly, I'm a bit out of the loop when it comes to the server, but I've got a pretty good idea of the current state from Garnet and others. That being said, the goal here is to insert a dynamic into the server to break up the monotony, as it a common complaint between wars and what not. Having the ability to spice things up and create a near infinite number of unique interactions between the various groups at play at any given time is the foundation of solid RP, even at the lowest level. This brings me to my next, and probably most controversial point. Group 4 Securicor, also known as G4S. The modern battlefield is plagued by indirect warfare, unmanned systems, and the chaotic element known as the Private Military Contractor. G4S happens to be the largest multinational security company to date, and is headquartered in London. G4S has deployed units for a variety of operations in a number of war zones since the early 2000's all for one reason, money. As far as the effects this would have on the server, how it would be structured, and any other essential information will be discussed further below. For now I'd just like to talk about the role a mercenary corporation would have on this specific server. For starters, G4S would operate independently of either faction, bearing no favor towards the United States or Russia. As a neutral group, G4S would be able to act in whatever way benefits them the most as a small unit of professional mercenaries. Actions available to G4S Mercenaries include assassination, theft, sabotage, private security, surveillance, reconnaissance, and paramilitary operations granted the client has a proper amount of coin to warrant such actions. Part II: The Economy In order to have a functional money based entity to work properly on the server, same major modifications are due to the economy. I personally think there are a number of ways to go about this and I'd like to hear what anyone else thinks, but the method I came up with is as follows. First, establish 'budgets' for the three major factions. This will be consistent values accessible by officers of the respective elements, likely to be done by creating a UI accessible by people on an officer job via a command. Hopefully not too code heavy, and integrated enough to make it fluid. Officers would be able to transfer money to G4S for various negotiated services. If possible, the budget of each faction would be synced up to the war timer. At the conclusion of each war, the US and RU budgets would be granted a sum of money dependent on the outcome of the war with the loser being granted marginally more. This value would scale to the amount of players on at the time of distribution to reduce the effect low-pop wars have on the overall budgets. This will allow the faction on a losing streak to use their surplus budget to enlist the services of G4S and gain in advantage in the next conflict or dish out some revenge to spice things up. This leads us to what use G4S has for the money in a server context. I think the most reasonable thing to do is create a vendor NPC for use by G4S members to acquire single life specialized equipment for operations. The more money G4S stockpiles and earns by carrying out operations successfully, the more effective they will be in future operations, and the more options they will have available. These items will come at a hefty price to balance out any chance at being used abundantly, forcing G4S to carefully plan out their operation logistics and financial state. This also opens up similar options for the two nations, as their budgets could potentially be used for alternative means. This would force each subfaction to interact with each other in order to properly distribute funds and add another element to the currently simple war scheme. I'd like to reiterate I'm very open to alternative ideas to this layout of financial logistics, so please, read over this and respond accordingly. Part III: The Structure G4S, as a neutral entity, needs its own base of operations in order to prepare for operations and meet with delegates from the warring nations to negotiate contracts. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar enough with the current iteration of the map Garnet prepared to suggest a viable option, and I'm open to suggestions. If added, the base for the current map will likely be temporary, and the addition of one to a future iteration of the map will be factored in and it will improve from there. The criteria for a temporary base are simply a small building or compound to house a meeting room and an NPC vendor. Beyond housing needs, the chain of command for G4S from top to bottom will be as follows: Officers: Operations Director [ODR] -Faction Leader that oversees day to day operations, appoints squad leaders during mobilization, and manages the budget. Assistant Director [ADR] -Second only to the Director, fulfills all duties of the Director in the event of his/her absence. Chairmen [BDR] -Enforce the protocols established by the Directors, oversee the negotiations of contracts and interactions with foreign parties. Commander [CDR] -Oversee the training and deployment of units, coordinate field operations as the operations commander. Enlisted: Captain [CPT] -Act as operations leader in the field, report to the Commander for promotions and demotions, training, and other comments. Lieutenants [LDR] -Manage lower enlisted outside of operations and assist in training efforts. Sergeants [SGR] -Upper level foot soldiers, eligible for team leader assignments. Corporals [CPR] -Next in line for team leader assignment, mid level foot soldier. Privates [PVR] -Low level foot soldier, learning the ropes. Distribution of operation equipment will be determined by rank. Higher level soldiers will be granted access to better equipment than base soldiers in operations on a basis of experience. Regarding the classes themselves, I will make no recommendation on playermodels, however I will recommend a 4 class system that pertains to the ranking structure, allowing for further specialization within the faction itself by way of the gear vendor. Class Recommendations: For the standard secondary, I went with the currently unused SR-1M. It's a reliable shooter with a large magazine size and does very well in the covert environment, fun to RP with in my experience. For standard primaries issued to each class, the notion behind each choice is being a all-around useful, compact firearm that can be a tool in nearly any operation alongside specialized gear. The selections are as follows: G4S : Director Primary: FN P90 (khr_p90) Secondary: SR-1M (khr_sr1m) Additional Gear: weapon_crowbar G4S : Commander Primary: FN P90 (khr_p90) Secondary: SR-1M (khr_sr1m) Additional Gear: cw_flash_grenade, cw_smoke_grenade G4S : Operative Primary: FN P90 (khr_p90) Secondary: SR-1M (khr_sr1m) Additional Gear: cw_smoke_grenade G4S : Mercenary Primary: FN P90 (khr_p90) Secondary: SR-1M (khr_sr1m) Any additional gear on the classes themselves is there for the sake of convenience due to how often added gear might be in use. The crowbar is for RP purposes, I swear. This setup allows for all classes to share a common load out and express uniformity in RP situations, which I can fully get behind. Classes are set up to compliment the rank structure. Lower enlisted will have mercenary, higher enlisted will have operative. Commander and Chairmen will have Commander, and the Directors will have director. I really don't know where to start with playermodels. I'll take suggestions on it for sure, but the easy way out is always CS professional models. Part IV: Roleplay Integration The main purpose of this suggestion is to take a step towards roleplay. The members of G4S will be heavily bound by roleplay rules, specifically things like being limited to In-Character, or IC interactions only in game. For example, while in game, members of G4S will not be able to use terms like 'RDM' or things that would not exist in real life inside IC forms of communication, like local voice and comms. G4S members have to maintain character at all times, regardless of how other players act around them. This will set the tone for the baseline level of RP required to interact with G4S, and will usually be limited to the officers of the warring factions. The theory behind this is that, officers will be required to act in character in order to make dealings with G4S, thus developing their sense of character. These interactions will also expose any accompanying enlisted to the standard IC interaction and further develop the tone at a slow and steady rate. Over time, this will gradually expose the server to a new baseline for roleplay, and open a variety of doors in terms of roleplay options. The management-appointed leader of G4S would be encouraged to incorporate further dynamic roleplay elements of both passive and active RP into the faction over time to expose the server to a broader and more refined level of roleplay and realism, likely improving the general atmosphere of the server. In the field, G4S members will be expected to maintain their level of roleplay as they would off the job, providing a fluid and functional experience to both the participants and the victims. The three faction system worked quite well in the past according to Garnet, but as stated by him, one of the three never failed to eventually die out. At the time, all three factions were warring factions and operated at an equal level. This provided an element of unpredictability to the nature of conflict, but was a struggle to maintain. In this format, a neutral group would be cultivated and maintained by management itself, ensuring that all the set precedents for RP, numbers, and structure are being met to their fullest, as well as not being a large enough group to take away from the bulk of the population on the warring sides. Part V: Administrative Incorporation The functionality of G4S relies heavily on rules. Rules that bind the members of G4S to roleplay regulations, as well as rules that layout a foundation for the activities G4S may partake in as far as things they can be contracted for, and for their pricing. The latter half of the rules pertaining to operations will have to be strict enough to avoid Officers on either side requesting ridiculous things, but lenient enough to allow for creativity and unique interactions. I will not lay out exactly what I would want the rules to be in this case because I feel that is better left to staff with a better knowledge of the server as is, but I will say this; consider the effect it has on the limitations of roleplay. As far as appointing people to lead and run this faction, I will not make any case to suggest someone, however I would advise you choose someone with an able understanding of at least medium-level RP, and a decent comprehension of the creative process, on top of being capable of the regular duties of faction leaders. If requested, I can provide recommendations, but I will leave it to staff unless asked. That being said, I myself am making no bid to participate in this faction in any way. I have nothing to gain from this, and would merely like to see a level of RP be formally introduced to the server and executed properly. If you have any questions, don't be afraid to ask, because I probably forgot something. Thanks, shrimps.

Fuck it. Coming soon.

I don't remember doing either of these. An important part of making a suggestion is being able to accurately interpret feedback and responses.

One more thing because this bugs me every time I see it. It's a pretty common trope in gMod to say your RP server is semi-serious on server listings, whatever, it's inconsequential, but don't ever use that as a means to justify a suggestion. Low, Med, and High RP are completely different things, and try to understand what each one actually means when you try to discuss roleplay.

Just gonna break down your argument into bite sized chunks real quick and state some key concepts to functional and fluid roleplay. The reason there has been a general downscale of virtually all the server content is to help the server fulfill it's purpose more efficiently. It's not a roleplay server, therefore it doesn't need several Gbs of roleplay assets. Whether or not you have vehicles spawned and in use on the server, just having the vehicle base loaded can do some significant damage. Even though you stated that you're not trying to pursue anything based on feelings of 'nostalgia', I still think all your reasoning is geared toward the server as you remember it from way back when, and that's okay, it happens a lot. Nobody likes change, the playerbase gets recycled and the server today becomes the server of yesterday. Frankly, the server today would fucking implode if it had all the features it did 2 years ago.

Ethan's was loosely based on my ISI model, but done very poorly to a near slave-driver extent. Would not recommend using his or mine as a foundation for anything current. The best thing you'll probably be able to utilize today would be the Volkov model, but that would require nuking Vega. So this is right, and also horribly wrong. As someone who has fought for stronger roleplay elements for probably the better half of two years, I only got as far as RP operations and character backgrounds on one half of the server (e.g Volkov era, right after RU was re-implemented). It's often brought up by an odd handful of community members that 'the people want roleplay', but the fact of the matter is, it's just not true. The GG mold is and always has been a extremely low intensity roleplay environment heavily focused around combat and the structure therein, or, as I've always said, CS:GO death-match with extra steps. Low-RP is the niche GG occupies and thrives on. The main thing you lose with incorporating a vehicle base is tickrate, which basically translates to server performance, especially in combat. It was a pretty cancer discussion regarding the removal of vehicles back when it happened for what I think was the last time, but it was a pretty necessary forced change in order to; 1) Slow down the pace of combat. 2) Make combat itself less bullshit by improving hitreg. 3) Allow the server to perform a little better while the phase of new maps was beginning. This is right on the money, take notes kids. Alright, one last point of old man knowledge. Events are rough, and carry their own fair share of risk. It's really easy to look at the state of the server, pop on the forums, and say 'do events plz', but you miss out on a lot of important things about the subject itself. As somebody who was at one point a gamemaster (I think the first GM for this community) I can tell you right now, people can get really critical when an event isn't run to perfection, and running events is hard. It takes a lot of creativity, coordination, and patience while trying to lead people in the right direction. Events done poorly aren't fun and leave a bad taste in the mouths of everyone participating. Good events absolutely tear up the staff's stamina, which usually leads to a lot of good staff retiring and burning out very quickly.

Don't even get me started. It's been tried, and each time it's been tried, it's been proven that it just doesn't work. Changing the mindset of an entire established community overnight is virtually impossible. Frankly, consistently integrating roleplay elements is a lot more difficult and nuanced than adding a couple events. You might need a really, really comprehensive plan to do so and even then, you still need support from a vast majority of the population.

never opened gmod faster in my life. the boys are buzzin'

Could you provide the name? Just out of curiosity. Beyond that, here are my two issues. First of all, after reading through this app a little bit, I've encountered quite a lot of grammatical issues. If you truly value the position as much as your friends claim you do, please put the effort into the app. Secondly, it occurred to me earlier that the faint memories I have of you include undesirable things such as driving vehicles through RU base, micspamming, and other unpleasant activities. For everyone else, as a word of advice; when you have someone you share ties to attempting to make a point or apply for something, don't back them up. It's typically a given that you support them, and actively filling a thread with what is effectively biased support is kind of a red flag to people who would look for certain discrepancies as can be seen above. -1

moments old baltic tomfoolery y'all remember afg? post afg revival target practice (everyone hated this) volkov era, the first vegaman and the last attempt at swagrp bonus meme

awesome