Jump to content

Don't forget to Donate this month! If we reach of Donation goal of £200 the In-Game bonuses will be enabled :93_punch::96_ok_hand::91_thumbsup:


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

1 Follower

About Pungu

  • Rank

Player Info

  • In Game Name
  1. Player Report - Tim Turner - 01/15/18

    We've already provided video evidence that shows the police didn't get shot at by us and the police have failed to provide evidence proving that they did.
  2. Player Report - Tim Turner - 01/15/18

    I was the only other SMG member at the situation and as you can see I don't shoot and only try to escape from the situation. The other SMG member online can be seen at around 00:07 in Papa Smurfs video. His hexagon was very far away as you can see and so he was not involved.
  3. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    Apart from this- What about th shot you fired when you tabbed back in? Or the shots that I'm fairly sure you missed because you were tabbed out? We were in support because of a situation started from the killing of PapaSmurf, which shouldn't have happened
  4. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    I'm not replying to this thread until tomorrow.
  5. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    I don't think you've actually read my reply. It wasn't 30 seconds as I quit clearly outlined. If you disagree I'd like to know why. Right not you're just ignoring the main point I made towards the end with regards to time. Please do find the video of other people shooting. I'd love to see it. We wouldn't have been in support if you had not killed PapaSmurf in the first place
  6. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    The fact I spent this long writing this shows that I dont want to be banned and have the capability to defend myself. The fact that you point this out as a negative aspect shows how flawed your argument is. What's the point in rules if they can be changed at a moments notice? I may have rdm'd, it's not night and day. If I did rdm it was by a matter of 2 seconds. My point is that I shouldn't be banned because of that in the same way that Luker and Zyn should not be banned for their rule breaks. I did not abuse the fact that you were afk. Believe me, we would've robbed you if you weren't afk. Furthermore it is not our fault that you are afk. You should've hidden yourself
  7. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    If the CTSFO public handbook it incorrect then it shouldn't be a thing. We were told those are the rules. You can't complain at me for pointing out that you broke them if you didn't make me aware that they changed. I don't think you get my point about you metagaming. Why don't you read my whole reply before replying yourself. The point is that yes, it did not make a difference, and yes it was a minor rule break, but so was my 'rule break' (if it even is that). I'm using it as an example. I've already said that I'm not trying to call you out. In the same way I don't see why im being called out for this
  8. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    If it was not updated in the public handbook then the rule should not apply. This is a lack of communication from the police, how are we meant to know?
  9. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    Alright let me just clear up first and foremost that this should not be a report for SMG. This was me, if anyone is to get banned it is only me. All other gang members were dead and I was the only one partaking in combat. Now I move onto why I should not be banned. I'm going to start out by highlighting why this gunfight should not have happened in the first place with the first point being- CTSFO should not have been on patrol Quite simple really, the CTSFO Public Handbook states that: There must be at least 2 full patrols (3 people in each patrol) for a CTSFO patrol to take place Here I have a screenshot showing that this was not the case: https://gyazo.com/a22ec9a0eacf37d59f4153024f59288f Two patrols of two and one patrol of 4. The CTSFO handbook states that a full patrol is 3 people. Therefore there was only 1 full patrol and there was no justification for a CTSFO patrol to be online at the time. You may say that there were enough people online for there to be 2 full patrols, but there were not 2 full patrols. This is a violation of the handbook; it's black and white. Papa Smurf Tim Turner states that: " I initiate telling him if he drives off his tyres will be shot, he drives off and I open fire at the tyres. It kills him unfortunately.". He then claims that Papa Smurf did not value his life by driving off. This is ridiculous. If someone clearly threatens to shoot your tyres, then you should not fear for your life, only when someone starts shooting is when you should be fearful. Why would anyone initiate on tyres if it is exactly the same as just saying "If you drive off you will be shot"? What would Papa Smurf lose by attempting to drive off? His tyres have been threatened, he should not be killed if he tries to drive away. Why not attempt to escape? If his tyres get shot out then oh well, he has lost nothing. He took a risk and it didn't pay off, but he shouldn't have been killed. Without this 'RDM' this gunfight did not have to begin. Also, when CTSFO pulled up on Papa Smurf he was at the scene of an accidental VDM situation and when he passed CTSFO a note saying this, he was blatantly ignored and they then went onto start the gunfight. It would have been nice of them to understand this and just move on as Papa Smurf was simply waiting for the medics. I would now like to point out all the things that CTSFO has done wrong- Metagaming There is quite clear metagaming displayed in the video. As Zyn Smith dies at 00:05 you hear him say "To the North". He is dead now and should not be speaking. Now I am not unreasonable, I can understand someone saying a quick word as they die (most people do) but again at 00:21 you can hear him say "To the North, over by the houses". This is clear information over 15 seconds after he is dead. This isn't the odd word as you die, this is blatant metagaming. Luker returning to gunfight Luker clearly returns to the gunfight after losing connection. At the beginning of Tim Turners video you can see his hex in Agios PD as he is preparing to join the gunfight. I can upload a video of him connecting roughly 30 seconds before I start shooting. This means that he connected and joined in a gunfight that was already active. I understand he lost connection but I see no rule stating that if someone loses connection they are exempt from other rules. The fact he spawned back at Agios PD allowed him to gain an unfair advantage during the gunfight as instead of having to react to the situation at hand he can sit in PD and plan out what he is going to do without any risk of being shot. This is combat spawning. I think he should have stayed in the PD. My point with pointing out these casual rule breaks is not to try and get anyone banned or to make anyone look bad, but instead to highlight that everyone does this every once in a while and that if people really want to nitpick every single thing someone has done wrong, they can (as i have demonstrated above), but is there really any need? Now some flaws in what Tim has said in the report- "Made me drop my MXSW" First of all, I see no reason why this shouldn't have happened. I was already banned from the TS server and was not aware you were still in support. Either way you should have logged off or hidden in a building. We saw someone with a gun we wanted, we got it. Furthermore saying we made him drop his MXSW is just not true as can be seen from this video: https://plays.tv/video/5a57b25b4a406c5a2b/yes-we-definitely-forced-you-to-drop-the-gun?from=user Nothing much else to say, we pointed out he had a nice gun and immediately he dropped it and somehow he twists this to make us look bad? "My question is, the police use OAB, we don't warning shot anymore." Well it's not a question but I see what you're trying to say. If this is so then why at 04:27 did you take warning shots at a helicopter that was hovering above you? Isn't the fancy OAB system meant to do that? You've contradicted yourself. Also you took warning shots with your silencer on which meant they are technically not warning shots. Okay, now why I shouldn't be banned- "3 minutes 30 seconds" At 00:15 in the video Tim Turner runs along the road and zooms in on some bushes. Little did he know I was behind those bushes healing myself and saw a him flash past in the distance over the bushes. I have no recording of this but I promise you I am not lying, and either way there is no proof that I did not see him. Innocent until proven guilty. https://gyazo.com/a90d18295c4e3167d4b26e7397d19ee8 So assuming I last saw Tim at 00:15 (give or take 2 seconds) and the second lot of shooting breaks out at 03:32 it was 3 minutes and 7 seconds since the initiation started. This is taken down even further when you take into account that (on my video) I have eyes on police at 00:31 and then start shooting at 00:35. (And yes I have a video of this part and not the earlier part becaise https://gyazo.com/686f29216b995f89602134ef065614ab https://gyazo.com/20857bf40b53a2a21aa76660c1c04594 4 seconds difference. This brings the total time down to 3 minutes and 3 seconds. Taking into account that there is not exact timestamp of when I saw Tim near the beginning (And in fact in hindsight it is likely that it was after what I already stated due to the fact he was cleary running when I saw him and in the video he is not running when I took the screenshot, but starts running afterwards) this means that it is up in the air whether or not I was over the limit for initiation. Given that this is so unclear, would it really be fair to ban me? Even if I was say, 3 seconds over the limit, I see no reason why it is ban-worthy. Surely I cannot be expected to have a timer ready for whenever I see police? Even then how would I prove it? How would it be accurate? There would be a delay between me shooting and pressing the timer. All these factors come together to mean that there is no realistic way for me to know if 3 minutes exactly has passed, and what difference does it make? If I had shot 3 seconds earlier nothing would have changed. All this is is an attempt to ban someone for shooting 3 seconds too late. This is more of a game of chance than an intentional rule break. Besides, you're really telling me that CTSFO were not out to kill in the final moments? Look at then run around crouched with their guns up. You're telling me that if they saw me first they wouldn't have shot? That's ridiculous. I think that to issue a ban for this would be somewhat unfair. Even if this is a rule break it is barely one and it overall made no difference to the outcome of the gunfight and that's the point. If I had sat there, clearly over the time limit in order to gain a clear advantage then I would understand, but come on guys, what would have been different if I had shot 3 seconds earlier? If you still believe this was a clear rule break then I urge you to look at the examples of CTSFO breaking/bending the rules. It happens, I see no need for bans. If Zyn were banned for his 'metagaming' I think that would be unfair. If Luker were banned for his 'combat spawning' I think that would be unfair. These are examples of barely breaking the rules, as is me maybe shooting after initiation. There is no need for any punishment, we learn from it and move on. As for my toxic attitude in teamspeak I apologise, as you can understand I was frustrated as I don't think the gunfight should have started but I shouldn't have been disrespectful. I hope you can agree that me that a ban should not be issued here.
  10. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    We are preparing a group response to this later this evening
  11. Player Report - [SMG] Gang - 01/11/18

    I am a bit busy tonight but will write a response to this as soon as I can
  12. Time Submitted: 04:49:28 PM | 01/06/18 Submitted By: Pungu (2001) In-Game Name: [SMG] nootnoot8 Steam / Player ID: 76561198035188000 Date of Event: 01/06/18 Link to evidence (player report or video): https://youtu.be/4-yMKUoCWEU Details of Event: Ran up a tower, went to close the hatch and just flew out. Idek Compensation Amount: Wetsuit-3000 Carrier Rig Heavy- 100000 Kitbag-3500 Type 115-225000 RCO-10000 Bipod-15000 25 mags- 27500 TOTAL=384000 Confirmation of legitimacy: Yes I understand and agree.
  13. Seismic | s | Recruitment | Closed

    Name: nootnoot8 Age: 16 Hours: 1759 Steam ID: 76561198035188000 (pls whitelist this time) Why you want to Seismic: Have seen very good roleplay from you guys and would like to roleplay with you guys because I love roleplay What can you bring to Seismic: Lots and lots of roleplay aswell as good roleplay skills and roleplay becuase I love roleplaying RP Skills 1-10: 10 Combat Skills 1-10: 0.5
  14. Hmm

    Well I guess I'm gone BYE
  15. So I have a few things to say- Right now on the server there seems to be a great imbalance in the way rebels actions are viewed by the staff team compared to how the polices actions are viewed. I'm not trying to say that we rebels are perfect but I think it's a fair point to make that right now the whole situation is somewhat bias towards the police. Me writing this was all triggered by a situation which I will briefly outline below: We were driving along the main road in a Quilin and drove past a police sports hatchback that was in Agois and (rightly so) it turned around and started following us with its sirens on. We asked our helicopter pilot to land up the road so we could be set up and show dominance. We pulled up near the HM and hopped out in order to talk to them with our guns down. They proceeded to drive off and do a 180 and as can be seen in the video they kept backing up and down when we tried to speak to them before speeding off as soon as backup arrived and pulling up on our Quilin in order to talk to us. The talking can be seen in the video and after that we drove off to our gangbase with the police in hot pursuit. When we arrived at the gang base I had a conversation with the police which was not recorded. After this fairly long conversation the police left after we threatened them. The final part to this story is me driving along the road and getting spiked and tazed about 10-15 minutes later. I record in 1 minute segments and so the video is chopped slightly and there are some details missing but I think it outlines the situation well: Now I will move on to the points I wish to make: One of the main issues I see here is that everything we do is seen as baiting. I think it needs to be understood that rebels break laws and the thought of the police questioning us if we are in possession of illegal guns or driving illegal vehicles should not matter to us; we are rebels. Right now if we simply drive a Quilin along the main road we are called out for baiting and I fail to see how this should be the case. We are driving from point A to B and we want to use a vehicle that we see as superior to civilian vehicles and because we are rebels we are justified in doing so. I think the fact we were not baiting is backed up by the fact that we actively tried to escape the police as can be seen clearly in the video and our intention was not to start a gunfight which in the end was caused by the police. I would like to say that no complaints about baiting were received by the police from this situation in particular, but when roleplaying with the police (especially at the gangbase which unfortunately I do not have a video of) they seemed annoyed at me outside of roleplay and I felt that they were implying that we were baiting. We can compare this behaviour to how the police acted in the video above. Look at the way, when I approached them, they backed away and as soon as I ran back they zoomed forward again in order to bait me back until their backup can arrive. I feel as that if we were caught doing this all hell would be let loose. This driving backwards and forwards seems like typical baiting behaviour to me and it was intentionally done to avoid roleplaying with me so they could wait until they have the upper hand in the form of backup. This clearly shows that from the beginning the cops had the intention to 'win'. This is something that is constantly brought up when cops claim that rebels should not be afraid to lose their gear (in the form of being arrested) if it results in good roleplay and to me it seems like in this situation the police are avoiding roleplay in order to 'win' by arresting us. I would like to say that I disagree with the idea that trying to 'win' is a bad thing but the whole point of this is to say that if we rebels did this is would be viewed as unacceptable while the police do it and they get away with it perfectly fine. My next point is how in the video you can see that when talking to them initially one of them starts to try and sneak behind us. I have no problem with this on its own since it is (quite fairly) trying to get the upper hand should things go sour but my problem is that because of this aggressive behaviour we decided to leave. The way in which the police acted after this annoys me (E.G blocking our car with their bodies to stop us). My biggest problem is that when we reached the gang base the officers again seemed annoyed (out of roleplay) that I had cut off the roleplay situation and the reason I did is because of the way the police were trying to gain the upper hand, making me think that an initiation was coming, therefore I left. This leaves us rebels seeing no way out of a situation. Stay there and we potentially lose our gear in a gunfight OR we get blamed for starting a gunfight and if we leave the situation we are blamed for cutting of the roleplay. What options do you leave us? Now, onto the later video. As you can see in the clip beginning 1:42 I have been spiked by the police near Agios after they have left the situation at the gang base. I would like to highlight that it had been around 10 minutes since the situation for us it seemed that it was over. When I was spiked immediately I was bombarded with voices and what with the pouring rain and hunters running around I could not hear a thing. I would like to point out that my intention when I raised my gun was to put my hands on my head but I see how I should have holstered it straight away and I have no problem with being tazed. However, I think that if we (Nexus) had spiked cops and started running around yelling "HANDS UP HANDS UP" we would have been called to TS immediately afterwards for poor initiation or even have a policeman who was involved in the situation spawn as an admin and tell us off, which happened about half an hour prior. What happened was that one of our men was being chased in a stolen police car and he pulled over in order to talk to the police. Me and another gang member had set up to cover the situation if it went bad. (EXACTLY what the police were doing in the later situation). When the police hopped out one of them spawned as an admin and began telling us off for setting up in the bushes and 'cop baiting'. Keeping in mind this is before any sort of aggressiveness from either side I see this is unacceptable. For all the admin knew a quality roleplay situation could have sprouted from that pull over, so what if it resulted in a gunfight if there was roleplay before? Is that not the whole point? Why put a stop to something before it even begins? Anyway, back to the video at hand. These police shouted "HANDS UP HANDS UP" without any prior roleplay (apart from the situation 10 mins earlier which again, I saw as complete and no longer relevant) and again, I think that if we had done this we would be viewed in the wrong. I am not saying that doing a quick snatch and grab is wrong and I disagree that every robbery/arrest should have a huge narrative building up to it but if that is what is expected from rebels, why do the police get away with it? After I had been restrained and put in the car the police refused to talk to me despite me attempting to prompt conversation. I understand that you were ready preparing for my gang members to arrive but not a word was said to me apart from "HANDS UP" right at the beginning. I find this completely unacceptable especially considering there were higher ranks present. There was no attempt to talk to me or to negotiate with me and I think it is quite clear what the polices intention was here: Straight after I had been detained (without a word) they set up more spikes in anticipation of my gang members arriving and if the police claim that they expected to be able to take the whole of Nexus without a gunfight then they are lying. I was essentially used as a hostage to bait my gang members into a gunfight under the polices terms. If we had started a gunfight at the gang base we would have been called out for baiting or looking for gunfights, because the police would have lost, because we had the upper hand at our gang base. Now the police had the upper hand I see no attempt to roleplay and I see no complaints from them when a gunfight goes their way. Perhaps I could have been driven away and used to negotiate. Perhaps me in exchange for some illegal rifles, or vehicles. Now I know that Nexus is unlikely to accept those terms but the point is that you are meant to try. If we took a hostage to our gang base in order to bait police to us and when they arrived shot him in order to start a gunfight, with no negotiations, the staff team would be up in arms. This is essentially what has happened here. I have been taken with poor roleplay and used to bait my gang members into a gunfight and since they are the police this is seen as acceptable even though it is basically the same to events which have had us warned in the past. A couple of closing words: I do not wish to get anyone in trouble for this and this is not a PCC or a report. I am merely trying to highlight to the police and the staff that maybe the system is not as fair as it can be. I don't believe this is down to the rules but I think it is down to how people view the rules as being somewhat different per faction, which I don't think should be the case. Also I realise that this is going to be a heated topic but please keep it civil in the comments. If any Nexus members wish to provide further evidence or have any more points to make then please let me know and so I can add it or make a new post to avoid clogging up the comments with lots of different people. Finally I know that this post will be seen as controversial and if the staff team have any problems with it then I apologise but I feel that this needs to be said. Thanks

Important Information

By using the PhoenixRP website, you agree to our Terms of Use