Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Remus

Hostage situations in events

Recommended Posts

This is a suggestion for some rules pertaining to events, specifically when a hostage situation occurs.

When a person is taken hostage, assumedly a high ranking officer, the priority should be to save the life of the officer, that's why there are negotiations.

But whenever there is a hostage situation, the end result is a firefight between the hostage-takers and the troopers with the hostages being swiftly executed and being revived after.

so I believe there should be a rule about not reviving a dead hostage. The ability to just revive them removes some of the importance of negotiation.

If the hostage dies. the troopers fail, no reviving them and celebrating a job well done. 

This is a lot better RP wise and is more realistic.

 as a Navy officer, I am a common hostage, it's annoying and frustrating when you know the negotiations will never last and you'll just be revived so it doesn't matter anyway. 

I hope this will be taken into consideration and would like to hear what you guys think of this

 

Navy Lieutenant Commander, Mandor Teth 

Edited by Remus
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 

The way current hostage situations are handled kind of breaks the immersion of the RP. Everybody just turns to shooting as soon as one round of negotiations fail or something along those lines. I'd love to see some more RICH RP from the troopers in these kinds of situations.

Edited by Brass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This rule would make more sense if personnel with any significant importance were captured.

Too many times has a Janitor, Workman or simply low-ranking person been captured and, to be honest, there is no incentive to negotiate for their life. I have recently ordered troopers to cease attempting to negotiate because the SOLE hostage was a Workman, like who actually cares?

I think Event characters should also be briefed on what boundaries and expectations there are regarding ransoms and taking over hostages. I'm sick and tired of capturers demanding "ONE BILLION CREDITS OR WE BLOW UP THE SHIP" like what is the actual, realistic end goal for the capturer if they act like this? Let's get some more concrete, realistic requests such as "GIVE US ACCESS TO THE ISB DATABASE OR WE KILL ALL ISB OURSELVES" and if negotiations go through, they are actually given datapads which we can attempt to steal back or, wait for it, they actually get away with.

Another pet peeve of mine is that if negotiations actually do succeed and the capturers do have the ability to leave the ship with their reward, the ship they leave on always blows up in the end and everyone knows it. How about the Imperials actually fail once for a while? How about Event characters who put effort and realism into their roleplay actually get rewarded for it by winning the event for the enemy? That would definitely spice things up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-1

A lot of the time the person captured is someone who’s not worth trying to rescue a lot of the time, very rarely is a MJR General or a Admiral taken hostage, what’s the point of trying to negotiate for someone who can easily be replaced in RP? Also I don’t believe that every time it ends in a firefight, many times I’ve seen the bad guys get away with their hostage.

Chef does have a point however when he brings up that we almost always get the bad guy in the end, with the ship they’re given exploding or some shit.

14 minutes ago, Brass said:

+1 

The way current hostage situations are handled kind of breaks the emersion of the RP. Everybody just turns to shooting as soon as one round of negotiations fail or something along those lines. I'd love to see some more RICH RP from the troopers in these kinds of situations.

1. There are a lot of troopers who try to RP in these situations, I suggest you try listening, viewing and looking at the comms when these situations happen.

2. Majority of the time, it’s the event characters that end up starting the shooting when the troopers are trying to RP.

3. What else can happen after the failure of the negotiations? Do we ask them nicely in RP to get off the ship? Like that’s going to happen, the enemy is going to resort to shooting people every time because that’s the only option they have if they’ve kidnaped a guy who can be easily replaced in RP, or they can give up which rarely happens.

 

Ultimately I think the choice should always be up to the event master as to what happens with the event. Would it be nice if there was veriation in hostage situations? Sure. Would it be nice if the bad guys didn’t get blown up in the end or didn’t get shot up for a change? Yeah, but the formula works. And in the cases that the formula isn’t followed, I’m not a fan of putting useless rules into what can be done for events.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stevo. said:

2. Majority of the time, it’s the event characters that end up starting the shooting when the troopers are trying to RP.

 

I am not here to state a +1 or a -1 but instead, put my input in -

Assuming this was about the latest event when I left the group of troopers at the bridge entry after a private was denied to speak to the ISB Agent who was conducting the Negotiation. In my eyes I was going to go walk slowly towards the Mandalorians whilst be unarmed to have the ISB Agent follow me back to the main attack force to talk about new tactics (Which normally works in every event as it extends the time of the event as well as expand options for both sides being the Empire or the enemies.) Instead when I approached the group I could not hear anything whilst literally, all Mandalorians were either talking (roleplaying) or screaming for no reason which lead me not to be able to listen to an event character being played by Kolto who was just simply telling me to move away.
The plan we were deciding on before I approached the Mandalorians was to swarm them after the killed the  ISB Agent as we all knew it would happen but instead I was killed first igniting the rest of the troopers to begin their own strong, strategic push to eliminate all of the event characters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being someone who has run hostage events in the past, the issue is not fully on the event characters. Time are time after time we have sith just walk up to us and get in our face. There is nothing we can do, because shooting at them gets us all killed, and leaving them there just ruins the situation entirely. I've had an entire regiment in cuffs locked up in a room, only for Vader to just walk in and sit there staring at us.

It also doesn't help that most people don't care if they die, people don't treat death as they should in RP. Most just walk straight up to the event characters and look them in the eye. Which of course results in that trooper being killed, which starts the firefight that achieves nothing. This server does not abide by FearRP, and that is the whole problem. Sith need to understand that they completely ruin the point of a hostage situation if they just go in and block the exit entirely.

Event characters usually do well in their attempts to actually control a hostage situation, but they just get trumped on by sith and troopers who don't care about death.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Keta said:

Fear rp is not a rule, but it should be.

I agree with everything that has been said so far but I just wanted to give my feedback on what Keta has said here in particular as this has been a hot topic for weeks. I personally think that FearRP is a good thing for roleplay, but it is VERY circumstantial. An good example of this would be if a single Storm Trooper was being surrounded by three Imperial Commandos, they should probably fear for their life as they are severely out-armoured and out-gunned whereas if those roles were swapped when a single Imperial Commando was being surrounded by three Storm Troopers, they would not necessarily fear for their life as they would be more evenly classed against them with  his stronger armour and more powerful blaster. As I said before, it would be a great thing to add but in my opinion there are too many loopholes and each and every individual FearRP situation is different which would make moderating them very difficult.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, I would like to agree with everyone that has given their input so far, particularly @Stevo. and @SCHEFF. The current demands that event characters come up with are far too high class in general, let alone relative to the profile of the person/people they have taken hostage. We aren't going to start handing out billions in credits for the safe return of someone that can be easily replaced, and the same can be said if they took Thrawn or Tarkin. The Grand Admiral and Grand Moff would much rather be executed than to have the Empire literally crippled financially (keep in mind, we are talking BILLIONS here).

The example that Chef gave of:

19 hours ago, SCHEFF said:

"GIVE US ACCESS TO THE ISB DATABASE OR WE KILL ALL ISB OURSELVES" and if negotiations go through, they are actually given datapads which we can attempt to steal back or, wait for it, they actually get away with.

Would be excellent to see more of. But again, it has to be relative to the person/people they have taken hostage. Some holes for this example would be:

  • If anyone below Clearance 4 was captured, it would not be reasonable to hand over any data.
  • If any Inferno Squad or Death Troopers would probably not warrant giving ISB data, perhaps maybe just credits or safe passage off the ship for that one.
  • Any external personnel to ISB have been captured, obviously excluding people like Tarkin.

 

In regards to @pinejack and @Keta's mention of FearRP, it is of course true that FearRP is not an enforced rule on the server, but it would be much greater RP if people actually considered it. There have been many times, particularly on Naboo, where I have been walking, guarded by roughly 5 Death Troopers, and have just been gunned down by random civilians without any RP prior at all. If for example I am walking on my own and am suddenly surrounded by 3 civilians with guns, there is no way of getting out of that situation without help, but if I have Death Troopers with me, a non-military individual or group would at least think twice about engaging.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no penalties for dying other than losing 1k XP if you suicide. There needs to be an incentive for people not to throw their lives away before any FearRP rules can even be implemented.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers on the replies. Good to get feedback.

I can see your points and you're right. 

let me clarify though. I'm unsure if the post explained it well, I don't want more negotiations, if they're below a certain rank, you're right, we shouldn't care. 

But that leads into my point, we don't care. If they make a decision that the hostages lives don't matter as much as killing the hostiles, that's cool, it's what you'd expect. 

But when you make that decision, you're saying that they're lives no longer mean anything and you're willing to sacrifice them and don't care if they die. Thus reviving them makes no sense.

If you make a decision to sacrifce their lives, that's the decision you should be stuck with. Suddenly turning around and reviving them ruins the effect that their lives were sacrificed.  

I hope I don't sound too obnoxious. 

Edited by Remus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Remus said:

But that leads into my point, we don't care. If they make a decision that the hostages lives don't matter as much as killing the hostiles, that's cool, it's what you'd expect. 

But when you make that decision, you're saying that they're lives no longer mean anything and you're willing to sacrifice them and don't care if they die. Thus reviving them makes no sense.

If you make a decision to sacrifce their lives, that's the decision you should be stuck with. Suddenly turning around and reviving them ruins the effect that their lives were sacrificed.  

Just curious, are you implying these individuals should receive a permanent death as they have been sacrificed by their fellow troopers?

Edited by SCHEFF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can say running events where i take the co of Navy as a hostage or Mandor as he is a fairly high rank it has always ended in a firefight and with what @Stevo. said there are  no admiral to take hostage and all IHC staff are either with all of the troopers what is next to impossible to caputre or afk and we just don't take afk players to be hostages but it would be a good idea implementing some sort of consequence if thats Demotions or extra training to keep players in check but I wanna see how this goes and what comes out of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×