Zip ties / Handcuffs

[prospekt 8]

+1 to any RP feature.

[hazdude222 0]

You'd just disconnect wouldn't you?

[jason.jblackman@gmail.com 3]

You'd just disconnect wouldn't you?

Like people already disconnect in the middle of gunfights?

Any feature has the potential to be exploited, however, this feature can be useful to both 'parties', helping the prisoner with the ability to survive a gunfight, whilst the handcuffers are able to barter for the prisoner's life.

[_Profile_Shame 37]

i dont get why people disconnect in this game. youre going to die inevitably, there is no scoreboard.

love this idea.

[jason.jblackman@gmail.com 3]

i dont get why people disconnect in this game. youre going to die inevitably' date=' there is no scoreboard.

love this idea.

[/quote']

Chances of living after disconnecting are small anyway. Usually people will do so when hit, and upon reconnecting will either be shot or just bleed to death.

Glad you're on board with the idea :D

[prospekt 8]

Even if they disconnect, they would reconnect with handcuff, and no help to get rid of them :D

[jason.jblackman@gmail.com 3]

Even if they disconnect' date=' they would reconnect with handcuff, hand no help to get rid of them :D

[/quote']

Sounds harsh, but serves them right ;) Haha

[curiousepic 1]

Interesting idea. We need more non-lethal ways to interct with other players :)

[jason.jblackman@gmail.com 3]

Interesting idea. We need more non-lethal ways to interct with other players :)

Yeah, I just noticed a thread which suggested non-lethal weapons too, such as tazers and rubber bullets.

[JudgeX 1]

+1 to this.

If someone respawns or disconnects while cuffed, they die and you get their stuff if you haven't already taken it. I think this adds to the game and shouldn't be too hard to implement.

If implemented correctly, it also gives a way to incapacitate a player without killing... so, you sneak up on a guy who is near your position, cuff him, tell him to leave or ask if he wants to be cool with you... establish whether you trust him on his word or not, and release him... or take all of his ammo and let him loose and leave him a magazine somewhere to pick up later...

Lots of cool possibilities with this, and something very nice for the RPers, too. Bandits can take you and a friend hostage, release one of you, and send you off to find a certain item to trade for freedom.

Yeah, you can disconnect, or you can play along, either way, they get something out of it.

[Ungotter 2]

+1 to this.

If someone respawns or disconnects while cuffed' date=' they die and you get their stuff if you haven't already taken it. I think this adds to the game and shouldn't be too hard to implement......

[/quote']

So what happens in the unfortunate event my internet dies or I simply want to stop playing? I can't do that because some shmuck gets to run off with all my goodies; THAT PROBABLY WON'T FIT IN HIS DAMN BAG ANYWAY.

And yeah well if I got sent off by a bandit to find an item to trade; I'd find a gun and pop him square in the mouth. It's hard enough to team up with my bloody friends, nevermind getting trecked around by some high and mighty bandit.

Not sure how you trust anyone's word. If Stalin were here everyone would be in cuffs, that paranoid old goof.

"YOU COOL?"

"I COOL"

>Continues to handcuff

"YOU COOL?"

"I COOL"

>Removed handcuff.

Why on Earth would I ask someone if they were cool when I could just shoot them in my legs or sneak past them. As you said, your idea benefits the RP'ers and the people who cuff you. What about the people who came here to play a survival game and not 'A day in the life of a zombie apocalypse :3' for these people there isn't much alternative unless you want to create new servers for these RP elements. Yet that doesn't change the fact this ONLY benefits the RP'ers and the person with the handcuffs.

Not sure what i need handcuffs for; there's a gun at the back of his head if you're close enough to cuff him.

[jason.jblackman@gmail.com 3]

+1 to this.

If someone respawns or disconnects while cuffed' date=' they die and you get their stuff if you haven't already taken it. I think this adds to the game and shouldn't be too hard to implement.

If implemented correctly, it also gives a way to incapacitate a player without killing... so, you sneak up on a guy who is near your position, cuff him, tell him to leave or ask if he wants to be cool with you... establish whether you trust him on his word or not, and release him... or take all of his ammo and let him loose and leave him a magazine somewhere to pick up later...

Lots of cool possibilities with this, and something very nice for the RPers, too. Bandits can take you and a friend hostage, release one of you, and send you off to find a certain item to trade for freedom.

Yeah, you can disconnect, or you can play along, either way, they get something out of it.

[/quote']

Yeah, completely. You could also send out prisoners as zombie bait to empty towns, the possibilities are pretty much endless.

---

So what happens in the unfortunate event my internet dies or I simply want to stop playing? I can't do that because some shmuck gets to run off with all my goodies; THAT PROBABLY WON'T FIT IN HIS DAMN BAG ANYWAY.

And yeah well if I got sent off by a bandit to find an item to trade; I'd find a gun and pop him square in the mouth. It's hard enough to team up with my bloody friends, nevermind getting trecked around by some high and mighty bandit.

Not sure how you trust anyone's word. If Stalin were here everyone would be in cuffs, that paranoid old goof.

"YOU COOL?"

"I COOL"

>Continues to handcuff

"YOU COOL?"

"I COOL"

>Removed handcuff.

Why on Earth would I ask someone if they were cool when I could just shoot them in my legs or sneak past them. As you said, your idea benefits the RP'ers and the people who cuff you. What about the people who came here to play a survival game and not 'A day in the life of a zombie apocalypse :3' for these people there isn't much alternative unless you want to create new servers for these RP elements. Yet that doesn't change the fact this ONLY benefits the RP'ers and the person with the handcuffs.

Not sure what i need handcuffs for; there's a gun at the back of his head if you're close enough to cuff him.

Why are people still not getting this?

Handcuffing would be an ALTERNATIVE to killing people when they're incapacitated. Neither parties have to participate.

[fosty99 160]

Oh no, I've been handcuffed.

*disconnect*

*join another server*

*get on teamspeak*

"Hey guys join [insert server name here] and go to [insert location here] and uncuff me.

It's a good idea but I think there will be a lot of people who would be able to abuse their way out.

[jason.jblackman@gmail.com 3]

People can abuse their way out of dying, that doesn't mean we should disable dying.

[swiftmike 0]

I feel like if this was implemented in a game, although a good concept, it sort of encourages alt f4 play, where if you get incapcitated and shot right after and killed, you will have no time to react and abort where as if you are being handcuffed and as the animation comes up it will give the player time to quit.

I think if they fix the alt f4 problem all together and have the body still interactable even though he isnt in game, this could work. But he would have to stay handcuffed when he logs back in for this to be viable, and the question with that is how does one get his handcuffs off? If it is linked to 1 player who has the keys and plans on never removing them, how does he get them off?

If there was a general way to break them off this could work amazingly. Put a stationary interactive thing (like the hatchet stuck in a tree stump) that are in most towns and players have to get to one in order to get the cuffs off. This would force the player to run around with their hands cuffed, i.e. them not being able to fight back against the zombies.

Of course this would snowball into something greater where bandits who live to troll/grief other players, who generally kill on sight regardless, will now be handcuffing everybody instead of killing them so they have to find something to get them off. And at that point, when your loot is all gone and you have no way to shoot your weapon, people will just restart anew character.

It definitely COULD work but doesn't seem like the easiest thing to balance out.

[Sgt.Spam 42]

OP: You forgot ball gags.

[jason.jblackman@gmail.com 3]

I feel like if this was implemented in a game' date=' although a good concept, it sort of encourages alt f4 play, where if you get incapcitated and shot right after and killed, you will have no time to react and abort where as if you are being handcuffed and as the animation comes up it will give the player time to quit.

I think if they fix the alt f4 problem all together and have the body still interactable even though he isnt in game, this could work. But he would have to stay handcuffed when he logs back in for this to be viable, and the question with that is how does one get his handcuffs off? If it is linked to 1 player who has the keys and plans on never removing them, how does he get them off?

If there was a general way to break them off this could work amazingly. Put a stationary interactive thing (like the hatchet stuck in a tree stump) that are in most towns and players have to get to one in order to get the cuffs off. This would force the player to run around with their hands cuffed, i.e. them not being able to fight back against the zombies.

Of course this would snowball into something greater where bandits who live to troll/grief other players, who generally kill on sight regardless, will now be handcuffing everybody instead of killing them so they have to find something to get them off. And at that point, when your loot is all gone and you have no way to shoot your weapon, people will just restart anew character.

It definitely COULD work but doesn't seem like the easiest thing to balance out.

[/quote']

I said in the OP something that would counteract people being stuck in cuffs forever - that being that if the prisoner moves far away enough from the handcuffer, then the cuffs would break.

[ivan2294 0]

This seems like a really epic idea, I would totally be okay with being handcuffed as long as I got to live. And since I'm a naturally nice guy, if I handcuffed someone else, I would not take ALL their stuff.

However, I still see some problems with this. While your idea of an area of effect is good, how about there's also a time-limit? So if someone Alt-F4s they still have to wait like 3-10 minutes or so until they can "break" the handcuffs. And the timer would only go down if they were outside of the prisoner radius.

So that way when a "guard" releases the player, they would have 3-10 minutes to get away. Some guards would definitely be generous enough to let them keep a weapon, and this way they can't be shot in the back.

OR

Maybe you can put blindfolds. Not sure how that would work though.

[Lady Kyrah 1109]

EDITED OP' date=' IN ORDER TO GIVE MORE PRECISE DETAILS [/b']

I think that Handcuffs or some other equivalent should be implanted in to the game, such as zip ties, for basically the following reasons. They're pretty much the same as what I said in the previous OP, but I want to clean it up a bit.

How would the Handcuffs be used?

Handcuffs could use one slot in the utility slots of the inventory (where the compass, map etc goes). Once a player is incapacitated, and cannot move, the player with the handcuffs should see the option 'Handcuff player' in the scroll menu, similar to how they would currently see 'Give morphine'. The handcuffs wouldn't heal the player, it would have to be up to the handcuffer to do that.

The handcuffed player then would not be able to access their weapons, or possibly their backpack, and would instead rely on the guards to feed them etc. To stick with realism, the handcuffed player should run slower than normal, however, they could sprint and risk falling over (similar to how blood loss causes a player to fall over - thanks for the idea _Profile_Shame)

Why would you handcuff? Why not just kill?

At the time of writing, the only actions that tend to be performed on an incapacitated enemy player are either killing them, or letting them bleed out. Handcuffs would give an opportunity for other players to allow the incapacitated enemy to live, whilst being able to do numerous things with a prisoner, such as:

- Holding them hostage. Players could offer to give the prisoner back to the enemy group in return for a ceasefire, loot, or possibly one of their own players back.

- Getting information. Players would be able to offer the prisoner their life in return for information, such as locations of enemies or loot.

- Stealing. Rather than killing for loot, as is usually done, the player could instead just handcuff the prisoner and take the loot from his backpack. This allows the enemy to keep his life and location, which he otherwise would not have.

How would the prisoner escape?

A feature could be implemented where if the prisoner is out of range of the handcuffer, the handcuffs break and the prisoner is set free. This allows the prisoner to escape, whilst encouraging the handcuffer to stay with the prisoner, and not just go round handcuffing other people. This can link back to the possibility of falling over when sprinting with handcuffs mechanism, as it allows the prisoner to risk being killed in order to sprint away and break the cuffs.

What stops the player just respawning or disconnecting?

Absolutely nothing, just as there is nothing to stop a player respawning or disconnecting in the middle of a gunfight. However, players may not choose to respawn, as by doing so they would lose their loot and location in the world. Handcuffing offers an alternative to outright killing a player.

Hope you like the improved OP, and tell me what you think.

You haven't played on kuroscript:experiment have you?

Sounds like what this gmod gamemode had, i like those stuffs, but it's very delicate to balance.

I think the handcuffs should remain on as long as another player is nearby (any player, to reduce a sense of "ownerhsip"), we can assume the guardians do what they have to to keep their prisoner.

Another player can obviously free the prisoner at any moment.

If no other players are nearby, the prisoner can then access an action that let him free himself in a few second (or imediately, why not)

For those who don't see why using a prisoner.

IT'S A MOBILE BACKPACK.

Only loophole i see is the prisoner logging off.

[ivan2294 0]

EDITED OP' date=' IN ORDER TO GIVE MORE PRECISE DETAILS [/b']

I think that Handcuffs or some other equivalent should be implanted in to the game, such as zip ties, for basically the following reasons. They're pretty much the same as what I said in the previous OP, but I want to clean it up a bit.

How would the Handcuffs be used?

Handcuffs could use one slot in the utility slots of the inventory (where the compass, map etc goes). Once a player is incapacitated, and cannot move, the player with the handcuffs should see the option 'Handcuff player' in the scroll menu, similar to how they would currently see 'Give morphine'. The handcuffs wouldn't heal the player, it would have to be up to the handcuffer to do that.

The handcuffed player then would not be able to access their weapons, or possibly their backpack, and would instead rely on the guards to feed them etc. To stick with realism, the handcuffed player should run slower than normal, however, they could sprint and risk falling over (similar to how blood loss causes a player to fall over - thanks for the idea _Profile_Shame)

Why would you handcuff? Why not just kill?

At the time of writing, the only actions that tend to be performed on an incapacitated enemy player are either killing them, or letting them bleed out. Handcuffs would give an opportunity for other players to allow the incapacitated enemy to live, whilst being able to do numerous things with a prisoner, such as:

- Holding them hostage. Players could offer to give the prisoner back to the enemy group in return for a ceasefire, loot, or possibly one of their own players back.

- Getting information. Players would be able to offer the prisoner their life in return for information, such as locations of enemies or loot.

- Stealing. Rather than killing for loot, as is usually done, the player could instead just handcuff the prisoner and take the loot from his backpack. This allows the enemy to keep his life and location, which he otherwise would not have.

How would the prisoner escape?

A feature could be implemented where if the prisoner is out of range of the handcuffer, the handcuffs break and the prisoner is set free. This allows the prisoner to escape, whilst encouraging the handcuffer to stay with the prisoner, and not just go round handcuffing other people. This can link back to the possibility of falling over when sprinting with handcuffs mechanism, as it allows the prisoner to risk being killed in order to sprint away and break the cuffs.

What stops the player just respawning or disconnecting?

Absolutely nothing, just as there is nothing to stop a player respawning or disconnecting in the middle of a gunfight. However, players may not choose to respawn, as by doing so they would lose their loot and location in the world. Handcuffing offers an alternative to outright killing a player.

Hope you like the improved OP, and tell me what you think.

You haven't played on kuroscript:experiment have you?

Sounds like what this gmod gamemode had, i like those stuffs, but it's very delicate to balance.

I think the handcuffs should remain on as long as another player is nearby (any player, to reduce a sense of "ownerhsip"), we can assume the guardians do what they have to to keep their prisoner.

Another player can obviously free the prisoner at any moment.

If no other players are nearby, the prisoner can then access an action that let him free himself in a few second (or imediately, why not)

For those who don't see why using a prisoner.

IT'S A MOBILE BACKPACK.

Only loophole i see is the prisoner logging off.

Honestly the only reason I'd ever handcuff someone is because I don't like killing others. I wanna give them a chance, but if I have to shoot I will.

[ytman18@gmail.com 9]

PR:ArmA II had this feature a while back and it was completely broken. You couldn't get out and it was effectively used as the ultimate humiliation to a captured foe.

With the wonders of telepathic VoIP I'd never keep a prisoner with me. I'd rather leave him there and throw a smoke grenade at him :D

[pynion 0]

IMO maybe two versions, real handcuffs that cannot be broken unless you have help, like a blood transfusion. And the plastic zip tie ones, which can be broken on your own with time, 15-30ish seconds, and you make pain sounds when you try to escape.

[mike10019314@yahoo.ca 3]

yeh a zip tie can cut you up a bit if you force it,

[general_elmo@yahoo.com 1]

-1

very sadistic RP idea imho

If it were me being handcuffed i wouldnt really care.. you have all my loot so im prity muc dead already. Even if i manage to escape (which seems like way too much hassle) i got nothing to kill Zeds with if i aggro one.

I would just respawn or logout. Keeping my 'stats' isnt that important to be honest but keeping that AK-74 kobra is very important. No kobra, no m1911.. i might aswell just restart :)

[jason.jblackman@gmail.com 3]

You haven't played on kuroscript:experiment have you?

Sounds like what this gmod gamemode had, i like those stuffs, but it's very delicate to balance.

I think the handcuffs should remain on as long as another player is nearby (any player, to reduce a sense of "ownerhsip"), we can assume the guardians do what they have to to keep their prisoner.

Another player can obviously free the prisoner at any moment.

If no other players are nearby, the prisoner can then access an action that let him free himself in a few second (or imediately, why not)

For those who don't see why using a prisoner.

IT'S A MOBILE BACKPACK.

Only loophole i see is the prisoner logging off.

Yeah, the idea of not having player-specific 'ownership' sounds better actually, and is probably easier to implement.

Also, to the people saying "I would just kill myself" or something along those lines, you're forgetting that this is an OPTIONAL ALTERNATIVE to you being killed in the first place. Neither party has to participate in this, it is just nicer than being killed and can offer a more fun game experience than 'kill on sight'.