Jump to content

Comms Rules Clarification


Nerpington

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Name: 41stGC ARC SFC Nerp/Lord Nerp The Honored

Suggestion: Add a rule to either make all comms secure or all comms open

Implementation: People on the server do different things either *SC* for secure comms and *OC* for open comms/comms channel. I recommend a rule that all comms are secure unless stated that they are open or secure to a specific person. EX. *OC* (open) and *SC to NAME* (secure to someone). If a clone uses comms only those in the Republic faction can see that message. What I mostly want is a rule that states something regarding to this.

Lore: N/A

Edited by Nerpington
Posted

The rule is that comms are considered secure at all times unless either there is an indication that it's open comms or someone has hacked them. Advert is always considered open comms. This is stated in the server rules doc.

Posted (edited)

That rule kinda exists my guy. 

If you see an event job say something in [Secure Comms] (-SC-*SC*, etc) and act upon that, you can be punished

  • Respawn -> Kick/Arrest -> Ban.

Literally ripped from the updated rules.

But I also see what you mean, personnally i feel there is a lot of confusion with the Secure comms rules and i was going to make a post myself talking about it.

So, by the definition of this rule (shown above) anyone who doesn't put *SC* / [Secure comms] or any other variant is essentially speaking openly. I.e. people can see it, so people can act upon it. For example, If a CIS general puts in Comms with NO *SC* That he is attacking Alpha outpost or downloading data. Then clones can act upon that statement Right? Or would i have to "hack" into their communication systems/devices to see what their saying? But If I was to suddenly hack into there comms wouldn't that be seen as metagaming? Because i've saw something that peaks my interest / or affects the Republic negatively and then all of a sudden I decide to hack their comms out of the blue? 

*EDIT*

I understand this rule talks about event Jobs, But then what about Sith etc. Because every now and again they do switch between normal comms and then having *SC* in it. (As does everyone tbh)

Also I feel that if  this SC rule is for Event Jobs then it also applies to clones and SIth a like. If SC is in there comms than you can't act upon it. But people say all comms are secure so whats the point of having this rule for Event Jobs then if "all comms are secure"? A really confusing situation. 

Can someone clarify this in the comments. As this really effects everyone. 

Thanks.

Edited by Anders0n
Posted
13 minutes ago, Anders0n said:

*

I understand this rule talks about event Jobs, But then what about Sith etc. Because every now and again they do switch between normal comms and then having *SC* in it. (As does everyone tbh)

Also I feel that if  this SC rule is for Event Jobs then it also applies to clones and SIth a like. If SC is in there comms than you can't act upon it. But people say all comms are secure so whats the point of having this rule for Event Jobs then if "all comms are secure"? A really confusing situation. 

Can someone clarify this in the comments. As this really effects everyone. 

Thanks.

It applies to Event jobs because of the discrepancies that have been occuring. When an event job would comms something in people would respond saying oh it's open comms or whatever. 

However, it does apply to EVERYBODY. Comms are considered secure unless hacked or otherwise mentioned. Essentially, putting SC in the message basically tells the defects "hey, this is secure don't react to it". At least that's my take on it. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Blueberry Juice said:

It applies to Event jobs because of the discrepancies that have been occuring. When an event job would comms something in people would respond saying oh it's open comms or whatever. 

However, it does apply to EVERYBODY. Comms are considered secure unless hacked or otherwise mentioned. Essentially, putting SC in the message basically tells the defects "hey, this is secure don't react to it". At least that's my take on it. 

Okay, now thats clarified. Why does this rule exsist if "all comms are secure". Just implement  a rule that says All comms are secure unless *OC / [open comms] or any other variant is put in the comms sentence. And if any defect acts upon it then beaned them. 

 

Posted

Its a rule that all comma are secure and you technically don't have to add *SC* in front. People just do that to stop meta gaming and if they don't people might think it's open comms because no one reads the rules

Posted
10 hours ago, Peaceshield said:

Its a rule that all comma are secure and you technically don't have to add *SC* in front. People just do that to stop meta gaming and if they don't people might think it's open comms because no one reads the rules

He said it perfectly, its already a rule, just no one follows it and this is the best way to stop meta gaming.

DENIED

//Locked

//Moved to Server Suggestions - Denied

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...