Hostage with gun to head

[Johnny Knuckles]

I think this would add a new way for people to use hostages would be cool to see it added if it can

https://forum.fivem.net/t/release-take-hostage/840235

[Xiriss]

I love the idea behind this 

+1 

[luna]

this looks cool

[Kota]

This needs to be added. I can see it being used in many situations. 

However doing this should auto count as a crime to keep it even keel so people arn't abusing it. 

[Charles Hill]

I could see this providing some extremely new and refreshing RP to the robbery scenarios on both sides of the law. Providing now PD has to find a way to negotiate the hostage away from the criminal. But also provides an interesting and new way to escape from the robbery!

[Merr Khan]

Sure, as long as police get sniper teams to counter it.

[UnknownRNGS]

7 minutes ago, Merr Khan said:

Sure, as long as police get sniper teams to counter it.

I want both of these really badly now

[Porkinator]

Mechanic's like this provide a fantastic level of immersion and depth to RP. I'm all for it, having it setup that their hands need to be up first of all, mainly to stop people just running up and "insta" grabbing each other. I don't think sniper teams are really required, a simple scope on an assault rifle for example, surely that would suffice.

[Gasman]

8 hours ago, Jordan.S said:

I don't think sniper teams are really required, a simple scope on an assault rifle for example, surely that would suffice.

This is why police should have an intermediate junior rank before becoming training-level. At the very least, a certification tree like spike stripes.

[Matthew King]

+1 Loved the idea! 

[Dashfere]

+1, looks really good, would love to see this implemented!

[Kevin Ross]

I think we'd need a way for cop's to first deal with a situation like this before implementation, Otherwise +1

[UnknownRNGS]

11 hours ago, BertJohn said:

I think we'd need a way for cop's to first deal with a situation like this before implementation, Otherwise +1

I think the sniper teams mentioned above would be perfect for a situation like this. Almost all 24/7 locations are around highground so i doubt it would be that hard to implement 

[Kota]

On 10/24/2019 at 10:41 PM, BertJohn said:

I think we'd need a way for cop's to first deal with a situation like this before implementation, Otherwise +1

It's called RP and negotiation rather than just tazing and shooting. 

2.0 people shouldn't be shitlords about how and why they take people hostage. There should be a reason behind it that the PD can then RP and figure out. Not just doing it because. 

Also against giving PD a scope to take out someone holding someone hostage, To me it's pretty win heavy in favor of cops if they have to have a long rifle with a scope as the hard counter to this situation. I will tell you exactly how that ends up with the meta of officers these days. It will be 3 mins of trying to negotiate then shooting the suspect... What roleplay value is that? 

Want a counter for it PD then just use Roleplay and hostage negotiation tactics rather than using a OP gun. 

Edited October 29, 2019 by Kota Taylor

[vDrop]

80% of the community has a must win mentality, even a good portion that "rep" role play over gun play whine when there roleplay wasn't accepted or automatically accepted because there "role play" was superior to the others. 

Hostage grab is good until the first time someone holding a civ hostage gets shot in the head, and then whines no value of life, Even though they were just shot in the head, they are speaking casually as if they were never shot. 

Will 2.0 change that? Maybe. We'll see. But the grains of salt needs to go before anything will ever work. 

[Serena]

Not sure why a sniper would automatically be needed - hostages are already a thing. The animation looks cool until the actual execution part...

However, I don't see a way this could be put in unless there were some limitations first. For starters, a timer of how long this animation lasts before you have to re-initiate it. OR: A cooldown timer, cannot be spammed. Different from other animations, maybe only usable while in a store you can rob mechanic-wise. OR: An F1/F2 accept/denial where player consents so people at Elgin mechanic can't spam it on randoms.

Don't know which way to go about it, but tbh this is a lot of work surrounding 1 animation. It's a bit of a deterrent.

Edited October 30, 2019 by Serena

[Caralanco]

On 10/30/2019 at 2:48 PM, Serena said:

Not sure why a sniper would automatically be needed - hostages are already a thing. The animation looks cool until the actual execution part...

However, I don't see a way this could be put in unless there were some limitations first. For starters, a timer of how long this animation lasts before you have to re-initiate it. OR: A cooldown timer, cannot be spammed. Different from other animations, maybe only usable while in a store you can rob mechanic-wise. OR: An F1/F2 accept/denial where player consents so people at Elgin mechanic can't spam it on randoms.

Don't know which way to go about it, but tbh this is a lot of work surrounding 1 animation. It's a bit of a deterrent.

No need to add so many restrictions, wait for 2.0
Hands up 's enough

Edited November 1, 2019 by Oscar Wilde

[Kota]

3 hours ago, Serena said:

An F1/F2 accept/denial where player consents so people at Elgin mechanic can't spam it on randoms.

Personally this is what I was thinking would be a good option. 

[vDrop]

I don't think there should be a consent system tbh. Its intended as a hostage situation. If we are thinking for 2.0, there shouldn't be an issue with consent or abuse. If the mechanic is abused then those role players shouldn't be allowed to continue to be apart of the community, as the intended feature is simply intended to expand role play opportunities as well as provide a better immersion. 

[Tex Galante]

11 hours ago, vDrop said:

I don't think there should be a consent system tbh. Its intended as a hostage situation. If we are thinking for 2.0, there shouldn't be an issue with consent or abuse. If the mechanic is abused then those role players shouldn't be allowed to continue to be apart of the community, as the intended feature is simply intended to expand role play opportunities as well as provide a better immersion. 

I agree with this. Whats the point of adding it when you have to consent? 

"You are about to be taken hostage: F1 to accept, F2 to decline"

Suddenly when the cops see someone become a hostage, they become an accessory to that crime and so on. 

18 hours ago, Serena said:

maybe only usable while in a store you can rob mechanic-wise.

I feel this is too limiting for the scenarios imaginable. What if I kidnap a rival gang member and I want them to see I have him? What if I rob a bank? Currently we have no mechanics in place for banks but the scenarios can be played out. 

I think the hostage could have a way of fighting back and the one taking the hostage could possibly have potential cues they will have to pay attention to. Kind of using the weed system:

1. Hostage taker would have cues to pay attention to after a few seconds to maintain control of the hostage.

2. Hostage would get similar cues after a few more seconds after. 

3. If the hostage taker continues to maintain control, the hostage cannot break out.

4. Should the hostage pass X amount of skill checks or the taker fails X amount, the hostage will be able to free themselves. 

Obviously we don't want people holding hostages for too long of a time but we also don't want the hostage being able to free themselves within moments of being taken because that defeats the purpose. This system would need testing to find the perfect balance but I think this would be a good solution. 

[Kota]

Personally, I think it should have zero restrictions even the ability to shoot the person... Why cuz 2.0 is hyped up to be the second coming of roleplay with less restrictions... I am sick of pretending to have ahold of someone during RP scenes this actually allows you to mechanically grab and escort people to where you want in a hostile way. And be able to actually have a hostage rather than pretending to have a hostage. 

Fact is judging on the response above from staff that it has to be managed or restricted in some way just proves to me that 2.0 is still gonna be more of the same mentality wise from staff just with a locked door on the server.  That being said if you are gonna force a restriction I would prefer the f1 f2 menu as it's the least intrusive imo. 

If you're gonna whitelist the community then turn around and not trust your whitelisted members what are you all even doing bothering with the whitelist to begin with. 
 

Edited October 31, 2019 by Kota Taylor

[Matthew King]

The main dilemma of this is we don’t know what 2.0 is going to be like. Yes, it’s whitelisted so you’d expect that the people who are whitelisted understands and acknowledges the rules. But, that doesn’t mean that trolls or asshats wouldn’t come and be disruptive. Anybody can put one hour of their time into an application to get whitelisted. However, we are used to our community since we all know each other and the staffs are making sure that whitelisted members take these things serious. I agree with Kota, whitelisting should symbolize trust and acknowledgement to the rules and must be picked carefully, so you’d expect that the staffs would trust the whitelisted community more. In this case, I would suggest to give less restrictions but more attention to what’s happening. 

[Kevin Ross]

5 hours ago, Kota Taylor said:

If you're gonna whitelist the community then turn around and not trust your whitelisted members what are you all even doing bothering with the whitelist to begin with. 

Even in whitelisted cities people still abuse there trust. Whitelist is not a shield, Its a door. It can only let in what you let in, If what you let in isn't what you expect, Well there already in the door.

[speed]

5 hours ago, Kota Taylor said:

Fact is judging on the response above from staff that it has to be managed or restricted in some way just proves to me that 2.0 is still gonna be more of the same mentality wise from staff just with a locked door on the server.  That being said if you are gonna force a restriction I would prefer the f1 f2 menu as it's the least intrusive imo. 

If you're gonna whitelist the community then turn around and not trust your whitelisted members what are you all even doing bothering with the whitelist to begin with. 

You're criticizing the staff team for being worried about potential abuse, while in the same thread, people are suggesting sniper rifles as a counter to the mechanic? 2.0 is a process, not a simple on/off switch like you seem to be expecting. Yes, it is our responsibility to develop the server and the community in a way that promotes the RP we expect to see in 2.0, but development means nothing if the mindset of the community is not in line with the mechanics we're providing. In time, more things will become possible, but don't expect perfection on day one.

Yes, we're removing many restrictions in 2.0, and will remove more as the community gets settled. But we're not going to blindly add mechanics to the server without considering the potentials for abuse, even in a whitelisted community, especially at the onset. Further, the concerns and general thoughts of a single staff member don't mean that's exactly how the mechanic would be implemented, if it were. Serpico and I frequently discuss our concerns about suggestions, and then find a way to implement in a way that aligns with our goals, even if it varies significantly from the original suggestion. So for you to use a single staff member's non-official comment on a single suggestion as "proof" that 2.0 is going to be "more of the same", perhaps it's not for you at all. Your negativity isn't needed here.

For everyone else, feel free to keep the suggestions coming. I do like this idea, but I also want to see how you guys think such scenarios would play out in the server.

[Kota]

10 minutes ago, speed said:

So for you to use a single staff member's non-official comment on a single suggestion as "proof" that 2.0 is going to be "more of the same", perhaps it's not for you at all. Your negativity isn't needed here.

So I am not allowed to speak my mind in a public forum about my personal opinions and concerns on subjects because they might be deemed negative? I mean isn't that the point of a public forum to voice concerns and opinions? 

You should know me better than that speed. I have since day one of joining this community been very vocal about stuff. That will never change.