Project Reality Forums

Ok last night on Al Basrah I was killed around 20 times as a civi. In 0.6 the British would be down to almost no tickets. I say for every civi killed the British lose 10 tickets, 10 intel points, and cant get kits for 5 minutes.(Kit is for person who killed civi) Now the British cant just kill and not get a real punishment for the civis death.

They should lose 1 ticket really, make it 10 and games will be over in 15 minutes.
The person, who killed the civilian should still have the 10 minute kit ban.

The British should definitely lose more intel points for killing civilians, since one civi death can easily be evened out by killing a couple of Insurgents and loss of intel when killing civilians is none, really

Yes to every punishment. Nothing to the health, but any direct punishment would be great.

I feel civilians to be totaly pointless atm, they get killed like everyone else and noone cares.

Something does need to be done.
I was playing as a civie last night as well....people just play with disregard to checked fire now. As a mod priding itself on reality...this element of "trigger control" needs to be brought back.

Right now its, "Oh well.....I shot a civilian."

It needs to be....."Ah [email protected] shot a civilian!"

losing 1 ticket for every civilian killed sounds reasonable, anyways hope they come up with something to stop people from carelessly killing civis

Can it be possible to code total loss of ammo as a punishment? That would be a very immediate incentive to stop doing the wrong thing, especially for armour to watch their heavier cal fire or risk the wrath of ... dun-dun-dun ... the UN!

If an Insurgent blows up an ammo cache, it displays a message to everyone in the server "n00bkid has been shot as a traitor"
Maybe if a Brit kills a civilian, it should say "Tr1gg3rHappy murdered a civilian" or something

I'm thinking when you shoot a civi you would get a blur affect for like 30 secs or so. My angle would be the psychological affects from killing an innocent bystander. I know I'd lose my will to keep fighting, whence the blur or maybe you can't fire weapons and move at half speed.

snotmaster0 wrote:I'm thinking when you shoot a civi you would get a blur affect for like 30 secs or so. My angle would be the psychological affects from killing an innocent bystander. I know I'd lose my will to keep fighting, whence the blur or maybe you can't fire weapons and move at half speed.

I'm really against these kinds of instant, CS esque TK punishes.

The idea of a kit ban is really good though. Like ytou've been demoted or something =)

Shooting civilians in 0.6 increased insurgent tickets and that was the best way to prevent British from shooting them. Now that insurgents already have a huge amount of tickets, this aspect has disappeared. What can we do?

*trying to sum up all ideas:*

Increase player penalty

How?
- more respawn time : that's already done, and IMO increasing that time will not change a lot of things, except that less players will be on the battlefield.

- no more requested kits for a certain time : done too.

- Physical punishment ? As someone said, IRL soldiers are not killed by their teammates for having killed a civilian. Punishment only occurs once back to the base.

- Other direct punishment? Still don't think it's a good idea, as said above. Moreover, sometimes civilian has to be killed (when giving your position, for example), to protect yourselves and your mates. So instant-punish would not be a nice congratulation...

- New idea : when killing a civilian, the British player is spotted on the map ? This could be explained by the "revolt" caused by the killing.



Increase team penalty

From far, that seems to be the best way. Indeed, if they're annoying the team, civilian-killers will be immediately corrected by their mates / SL / commanders... How to do?

- Ticket loss. As long as insurgent will have huge amount of tickets, the only thing we can do is downing British tickets.

- Increase loss of intelligence points. Since intel can be regain, this solution isn't too hard for British team and still may be efficient. Therefore, they're one problem here : as far as i know, players don't see intel points, and so the British team isn't aware of that one of her soldiers has killed a civilian...

- ?

... And i don't see any other solution ...

However, another aspect of the problem isn’t studied enough. Most of the time, if civilian are killed, it's because they behaved as real insurgent.
Killing a civilian isn't allowed, but killing one throwing you rocks while his friends are firing AK-47 behind would be more tolerated, i think. To resolve the problem, civilians should behave as civilian, and not as moving targets whose only desire is to be shot.


Civilian to behave as civilians.

What does the civilian do, IRL ? He doesn't wear weapons. He doesn't engage British (he's not insurgent!). When British army is coming, he may stay at home... How to reproduce that in PR ?

- "he doesn't wear weapons" : now, I don't think rocks remains a good idea. During a "battle", a civilian throwing a rock should be considered as hostile and maybe shot. Give the civilians ... Well... nothing … only their hands as a 'weapon'. And as a placeholder, they may only keep their wrench.

- I don't know if they’re a way to link current weapon and death penalties... But if it is possible, civilian that would actually use their rocks (or binoc', if considered as an hostile action) should be allowed to be shot, as if they were real insurgents.

- "he doesn't engage british". That means the real civilian will not be found following insurgents. Currently, you gain more points when close to your squad, so player distance to others may be used. Try not to give penalties when killing a civilian close to enemy insurgents (which are not civilians of course). This will lead to civilian don't moving with insurgents, which is a far more realistic behavior, but it may also bring another problem i will explain later.

- "he may stay at home". That is partially brought by previous suggestion, as civilian may be found alone. We can't force them to hide the whole round, no one would play it; and civilian role in RP is to help his team, without British knowing it. But at least we should find a way to keep them in the city... I don't have many ideas now, but maybe something related to score: give them points as long as they stay alive ?

- Of course, civilian should also fear death, at least as much as soldiers. Why giving them a 10 second respawn time? If a civilian is shot, i will benefit to the Insurgents as a faction, but clearly not to himself. So bring back normal respawn time for them, and count their death in the stats, even if there is no ticket loss (don't know how it is in 0.7, but they were not counted in 0.6). Civilian must try to stay alive !

I'm going back on the problem i spotted before. Civilian alone will be an easy target for British. Of course, that will make them hide, which is a good thing, but i don't think in reality British soldiers are running after each civilian they encounter to arrest him. That's another issue we have now: even if they don't shoot at civilian, British try to arrest them all... and that isn't a very realistic attitude. It's high time to get rid of this, but it's also a very difficult problem as we are talking about people in opposite teams that would not fight each others.


To not consider every civilian as an enemy...

To me, this is the key to obtain a realistic civilian behavior and relation with British forces. One of the solution would be to include civilian into British team so that a random civilian may be in Insurgent or British team, making the whole civilian people as a third team, what's we are looking for.

I refer you to that post that explain it precisely: click here.


To sum up :
- Civilian should not handle weapons and stay away from insurgents.
- English should not attempt to arrest every civilian they see.

The problem is that civis act as bullet-shields and cannon fodder, not that the Brits are too trigger happy.

You stand two feet away from a guy with an RPG and spot for him, I'm gonna blow you both away. You don't have to be holding a gun to be the enemy.

Holy **** that's quite a post....

I disagree with your premise that the civilians are not insurgents. The civilians are insurgents operating in support of their neighbors, just acting innocent, and not giving the brits a real reason to kill them. Civis with rocks is a riot, and soldiers who shoot rioters are generally disciplined. It's not good form.

but killing one throwing you rocks while his friends are firing AK-47 behind would be more tolerated, i think.

I disagree with this entirely. One of the greatest challenges facing troops fighting an insurgency is the fact that soldiers hide within the populace in public, and "civilians" are often used to mask the movements of fighters, or to hide in and as cover.

Someone suggested giving both sides civis, and then removing name tags from them, so it would be hard to tell which civi is on which side. I think that is a great idea. It would give everyone incentive to check fire, and add realism.

BloodBane611 wrote:I disagree with this entirely. One of the greatest challenges facing troops fighting an insurgency is the fact that soldiers hide within the populace in public, and "civilians" are often used to mask the movements of fighters, or to hide in and as cover.

Yes they do hide in the population, but what does this have to do with civilians being used as cover for the insurgents? If they are standing in the way of a direct threat, they represent a hostile intent.

Here's a couple of quotes from Kenwayy about killing a civilian standing infront of insurgents in a firefight:

WNxKenwayy wrote:Ideally yes. You get a PID (Positive IDentification) on your target before pulling the trigger.

In real life, that isn't always possible. Al Basrah represents a more initial wave/fallujah retake than a normal patrolling unit encounter. In that situation the rules of engagement change because of the increased danger. The golden rule is 'hostile threat, hostile intent'. If you believe there is a hostile threat or hostile intent, you paste them. Example would be a group of civilians protecting a gunman/RPGer. The civilian doesn't represent a hostile threat, but they sure as shit represent hostile intent. They could be forced to be human shields, which sucks, but that's war and you can be damn sure the other soldier will protect himself and his brothers first. Any soldier that wouldn't sure as shit shouldn't be there.

WNxKenwayy wrote:How many civilians die has no bearing on whether you see disiplinary action or not, its all based on the circumstance. If 3 civvies are standing in front of a guy launching an RPG at us we will kill them and face nothing more than a lot of paperwork and an inquiry. If you are on a checkpoint and follow the EOF and some car doesn't stop and you light them up killing a family inside you aren't throw straight in jail.

BloodBane611 wrote:I disagree with your premise that the civilians are not insurgents. The civilians are insurgents operating in support of their neighbors, just acting innocent, and not giving the brits a real reason to kill them. Civis with rocks is a riot, and soldiers who shoot rioters are generally disciplined. It's not good form.

One or few civilians throwing rocks are riot, i agree. And so i acknowledge i was wrong with my suggestion "he doesn't wear weapons".

But civilians throwing rocks when the squad is under fire from insurgents with RPG and AK are no more riots, they're declared insurgents. They're not only hostiles, they're enemies.

I believe that IRL, a squad taking fire, and giving fire back, will consider someone throwing rocks as a potential threat. For now he has rock, but he may pick a weapon and shoot, no?

So we really shouldn't give penalties when killing a civilian close to enemy insurgents.

That would force civilians to be hidden a few more, and as you said, "not to be giving British a real reason to kill them".

I think BloodBane agrees with your point of view, he just has a somewhat incomplete thought posted.

Personally, I'm all for Brit civis, and all civis lose name tags (although I'd have to think about keeping them on the map--if it's even possible to remove them).

If its possible I'd like to see the true civilian made a randomly spawning object much like the weapons Cache, but with a respawn if killed. Have them wander about carrying shovels(farmers, clearing for rubble), ammo/medic bags(medicine they're taking home to there sick mum)or wrenches, and set a trigger on them that they go prone for 30 seconds if they are shot at or there's someone really close to make them look more like players rather than scenery. Killing one of these civilians gives you the ticket loss, kit block etc.

The player "civilian" should be given a shovel or wrench that acts as a knife their rocks and a real ammo/medic bag so they look like the NPC civis to give a bit of confusion (or even to hide in plain sight by acting like the NPCs as well) but they'll still be able to take direct action against the conventional force if the dung heap hits the windmill.

Given, you're not gonna be screwed by your own chain of command for knocking off civis (most of the time). But you can bet that public opinion, both back home and in your AO, will suffer, and so will you. Now, I personally don't give a **** about the implementation of the punish system, but I think it represents the reasonable repercussions of soldiers actions.

i think the real reason behin death of civies is because everyone looks a lot alike. especially from a distance. i think the original civie skins (well, maybe less ridiculous) should be put back in.