Kill one player and you should lose passive mode for the rest of the s

[ash-274]

Misusing Passive Mode to get an "I shoot you and you can't shoot me back" advantage is certainly a d*ck move, but changing the way it works is probably not a great idea.

 

There was a time when Rhino tanks were the terror weapon of freeroam. The tanks were heavily armored, players under rank-42 had no real defense against them and even higher-ranks were having to pour a half-dozen rockets into it to make it smoke, and the way the insurance system worked meant that if your car was blown up (while you weren't even near the it or the tank, let alone attacking or fighting back) you paid the full insurance cost. This was also when a few jobs paid $12,500 and Survivals were $20k if you completed it and no other way to make decent cash.

Well, first the tank-griefers whined and made it so the PV-ownewrs paid the bills, then the players complained and after a back-and-forth no one pays the bill when a tank+PV=destroyed PV, but then tanks got the icon and the armor was nerfed to... well, Nerf™ foam. Now tanks are a joke since homing launchers and the Hydra and even the Savage can erase one fairly quickly.

 

So if enough players start complaining about PM-abuse and Rockstar decides to start tinkering with it, do you really think they will make it better or will it end up being worse, where those that weren't abusing it end up losing it just because a few a-holes abuse it?

[DominusTaranis]

Get rid of passive in public lobbies.You chose this, suffer it

Fix getting dropped into public if a heist/race/job fails WTF am I doing here? I came from an INV lobby

when you get online have it ask/warn which lobby you want. No crying, we warned you

Nah. A thousand times nah. Sometimes I wanna fight. If I'm alone, and 1v1ing a guy, and then all of his buddies roll up in vehicles, or a jet turns my direction, or a tank rolls around the corner....I'm not going to sit around and continue to engage against odds like that. You know damned well even if the tank isn't allied with the other foot soldier, that he's not going to help me kill it, not on purpose. 90% of the time, he'll snag a kill off me while focusing on the tank.

 

In this scenario, I'll readily admit I'd turn tail and run. Your suggestion essentially plants any solo player at a massive disadvantage. Why should I be forced to sit through clouds just to dodge a griefer/attack vehicle?

[Ryan1888]

 

Get rid of passive in public lobbies.You chose this, suffer it

Fix getting dropped into public if a heist/race/job fails WTF am I doing here? I came from an INV lobby

when you get online have it ask/warn which lobby you want. No crying, we warned you

Nah. A thousand times nah. Sometimes I wanna fight. If I'm alone, and 1v1ing a guy, and then all of his buddies roll up in vehicles, or a jet turns my direction, or a tank rolls around the corner....I'm not going to sit around and continue to engage against odds like that. You know damned well even if the tank isn't allied with the other foot soldier, that he's not going to help me kill it, not on purpose. 90% of the time, he'll snag a kill off me while focusing on the tank.

 

In this scenario, I'll readily admit I'd turn tail and run. Your suggestion essentially plants any solo player at a massive disadvantage. Why should I be forced to sit through clouds just to dodge a griefer/attack vehicle?

People are going to help their friend if they see someone killing them. If I'm getting ganged up on I'll try and fight back or I'll leave if it's too much. If someone is in a jet or tank then I'll try and rocket them out of it. If it takes a few deaths before I get him, so be it.

If someone really wanted to grief you, passive doesn't make a huge difference. They can easily stalk you and blow up your vehicles before you enter them and things like that.

[DominusTaranis]

 

 

Get rid of passive in public lobbies.You chose this, suffer it

Fix getting dropped into public if a heist/race/job fails WTF am I doing here? I came from an INV lobby

when you get online have it ask/warn which lobby you want. No crying, we warned you

Nah. A thousand times nah. Sometimes I wanna fight. If I'm alone, and 1v1ing a guy, and then all of his buddies roll up in vehicles, or a jet turns my direction, or a tank rolls around the corner....I'm not going to sit around and continue to engage against odds like that. You know damned well even if the tank isn't allied with the other foot soldier, that he's not going to help me kill it, not on purpose. 90% of the time, he'll snag a kill off me while focusing on the tank.

 

In this scenario, I'll readily admit I'd turn tail and run. Your suggestion essentially plants any solo player at a massive disadvantage. Why should I be forced to sit through clouds just to dodge a griefer/attack vehicle?

People are going to help their friend if they see someone killing them. If I'm getting ganged up on I'll try and fight back or I'll leave if it's too much. If someone is in a jet or tank then I'll try and rocket them out of it. If it takes a few deaths before I get him, so be it.

If someone really wanted to grief you, passive doesn't make a huge difference. They can easily stalk you and blow up your vehicles before you enter them and things like that.

Passive still gives me a better chance at getting away from unfavorable situations. And good luck blowing up my Insurgent or Shafter before I get in it.

 

I get that a lot of people hate it. But it's very useful. Not only that, but rolling around in public sessions gives me an immediate pool of 20 some odd players to invite to a mission or job. And I don't wanna just sit in my apartment. Nabbing passive and cruising the lobby for a bit is a great way to chill and get into the GTA groove before jumping into the grind.

 

Plus, do you have any idea how entertaining it is to just follow someone in passive?

[Semaj 2JZ♢]

Nah. It's a perfect implementation for those who are non-aggressive. No reason a kill should hurt that ability either. I think it's funny that people will take advantage of it for their own benefit like they do. Also, how much it seems to piss people off. Learn and get better instead of bitching and trying to get things changed to please your whiney ass.

[Ryan1888]

Nah. It's a perfect implementation for those who are non-aggressive. No reason a kill should hurt that ability either. I think it's funny that people will take advantage of it for their own benefit like they do. Also, how much it seems to piss people off. Learn and get better instead of bitching and trying to get things changed to please your whiney ass.

or the ones abusing it could "learn and get better" and stop abusing the system. Why should I have to chase a jet griefer around the map and destroy their jets/tanks when they spawn to prevent them from using them to go back to griefing. If they do that, why should they just be able to cop-out like that? why should I have to watch my back when a passive stalker follows me and waits for me to drop my guard so that they can kill me?

 

 

 

Get rid of passive in public lobbies.You chose this, suffer it

Fix getting dropped into public if a heist/race/job fails WTF am I doing here? I came from an INV lobby

when you get online have it ask/warn which lobby you want. No crying, we warned you

Nah. A thousand times nah. Sometimes I wanna fight. If I'm alone, and 1v1ing a guy, and then all of his buddies roll up in vehicles, or a jet turns my direction, or a tank rolls around the corner....I'm not going to sit around and continue to engage against odds like that. You know damned well even if the tank isn't allied with the other foot soldier, that he's not going to help me kill it, not on purpose. 90% of the time, he'll snag a kill off me while focusing on the tank.

In this scenario, I'll readily admit I'd turn tail and run. Your suggestion essentially plants any solo player at a massive disadvantage. Why should I be forced to sit through clouds just to dodge a griefer/attack vehicle?

People are going to help their friend if they see someone killing them. If I'm getting ganged up on I'll try and fight back or I'll leave if it's too much. If someone is in a jet or tank then I'll try and rocket them out of it. If it takes a few deaths before I get him, so be it.

If someone really wanted to grief you, passive doesn't make a huge difference. They can easily stalk you and blow up your vehicles before you enter them and things like that.

Passive still gives me a better chance at getting away from unfavorable situations. And good luck blowing up my Insurgent or Shafter before I get in it.

I get that a lot of people hate it. But it's very useful. Not only that, but rolling around in public sessions gives me an immediate pool of 20 some odd players to invite to a mission or job. And I don't wanna just sit in my apartment. Nabbing passive and cruising the lobby for a bit is a great way to chill and get into the GTA groove before jumping into the grind.

Plus, do you have any idea how entertaining it is to just follow someone in passive?

I just think it's wrong that a player can grief all they like but when the tables are turned, they can just cop out and go passive. It is practically cheating on my opinion.

[elfoam]

This is silly op. If you dont want to be killed by a jet or insurgent go passive yourself. GTA isnt a combat simulator. Save the guns for missions.

[Ryan1888]

This is silly op. If you dont want to be killed by a jet or insurgent go passive yourself. GTA isnt a combat simulator. Save the guns for missions.

I don't have an issue with people killing me. I don't like people who are happy to stay out of passive and try to kill you when they have the advantage but when you have a good chance of them, they can just go passive. Going passive myself is just letting people like that win.

[DominusTaranis]

 

This is silly op. If you dont want to be killed by a jet or insurgent go passive yourself. GTA isnt a combat simulator. Save the guns for missions.

I don't have an issue with people killing me. I don't like people who are happy to stay out of passive and try to kill you when they have the advantage but when you have a good chance of them, they can just go passive. Going passive myself is just letting people like that win.I'm on mobile, so won't bother editing, but those last 6 words.

 

That right there is, in my opinion, what's wrong with online gaming. Too many competitive people. It's a game, just let it go. I'm not a griefer, and I get frustrated too. But you gotta learn to just drop it. Spending too much time worrying about other people is bad for your health. Besides, getting all up in a tizzy about it is what the trolls want.

[elfoam]

 

This is silly op. If you dont want to be killed by a jet or insurgent go passive yourself. GTA isnt a combat simulator. Save the guns for missions.

I don't have an issue with people killing me. I don't like people who are happy to stay out of passive and try to kill you when they have the advantage but when you have a good chance of them, they can just go passive. Going passive myself is just letting people like that win.

 

I mean GTA isnt competitive,if you want competition put 10,000 hours into training and make the national table tennis team. GTA is for relaxing.

[Non Funkable Token]

So if someone defends themselves from a griefer/troll, then decides to go into passive to avoid further combat, that is considered abuse?

 

Going passive and moving on is not abuse. Going passive and turning it off soon after to get a cheap kill is abuse, yes, even if the victim is a proved griefer.

 

I don't get why a guy who wants to avoid further combat has to bother about longer cooldowns when turning off passive. He's supposed to be avoiding action, right?

Edited May 4, 2016 by Perez84

[Ker Juice]

Passive mode either needs to be disabled when in an armored vehicle or aircraft and increase the time limit for every time you use it. That'll solve passive abusing or part of it.

It's absolutely upsurd how the colito carbon helicopters which have NO weapons, disable passive- yet jets and insurgents with turret still have the option. Rockstar logic.

[Ryan1888]

 

 

This is silly op. If you dont want to be killed by a jet or insurgent go passive yourself. GTA isnt a combat simulator. Save the guns for missions.

I don't have an issue with people killing me. I don't like people who are happy to stay out of passive and try to kill you when they have the advantage but when you have a good chance of them, they can just go passive. Going passive myself is just letting people like that win.

I'm on mobile, so won't bother editing, but those last 6 words.

 

That right there is, in my opinion, what's wrong with online gaming. Too many competitive people. It's a game, just let it go. I'm not a griefer, and I get frustrated too. But you gotta learn to just drop it. Spending too much time worrying about other people is bad for your health. Besides, getting all up in a tizzy about it is what the trolls want.

It'a not winning or losing as such. I mean that the griefers who abuse it get what they want either way. If they keep running to their jet/tank or stalking you and waiting to kill you, they still ruin the other player's enjoyment by either killing them and jumping into passive or making them go passive themselves to avoid passive stalkers killing them off guard. Passive mode is an extremely effective way to grief if a player abuses it and the current system allows them to do it. Edited May 4, 2016 by Ryangil23

[.Vooodu.]

 

Passive mode either needs to be disabled when in an armored vehicle or aircraft and increase the time limit for every time you use it. That'll solve passive abusing or part of it.

It's absolutely upsurd how the colito carbon helicopters which have NO weapons, disable passive- yet jets and insurgents with turret still have the option. Rockstar logic.

 

 

 

Its not just that passive does not work in the colito carbon. Hell.. you can't even turn passive on after you step out of the chopper. You need to walk about 10 feet away from the chopper before you can even use passive.

 

R* logic at its finest..lol

[GKPunk]

Vehicles like the SuperVoito Carbon, Swift Deluxe which are unarmed vehicles have passive mode disabled and the Hydra doesn't, I don't understand how that works. They should disable Passive Mode in fighter Jets/Attack Helos and make it available on those helicopter I mentioned at the beginning.

[EDSTEROK]

I could not disagree more. That's a massive punishment for every single player that has never used passive mode in the manner you describe. I understand you getting pissy about people doing that, but the proposed change is massively unfair. I really like the idea that's been bounced around by other members before now, where you can only turn passive mode on and off in properties. Sure, a jet griefer could jump out of their damaged jet and parachute to their nearest property in order to go passive before anyone "got their own back", but they wouldn't then be able to come out of passive once they got back in another jet.

 

Your suggestion, IMO, is MUCH worst. Someone can be minding their own business looking for something to do then starts to get griefed by someone or some group and they have to run home to go passive? Or spawns in a pub lobby (even if coming from a closed one) after doing a mission, race, heist or simply failing to join one and starts to get killed. Now their only choice if they don't wish to partake in a street DM is to get back to their apt. to go passive. Now THAT is an unfair punishment which in fact rewards griefers. The opposite of what going passive is meant to do.

[rlk232]

So here's an example of fair use that someone would call "abuse". I see a level 350 continually abusing low levels, like really low levels, below 25, exclusively for a while, and he keeps committing suicide. I get my tank, go off the radar and kill his ass, then go passive. Those idiots will ALWAYS spam rage-mail, but it's really a quick taste of their own medicine.

 

Another case is I'll be hunting a guy down with a gun, he'll go OTR just to get in his whatever the hell excessive vehicle, then I'll get my tank/hydra and kill him once or twice. Then, I go passive because I don't want it to continue forever, sorry, I want to like, upgrade a car for something and not fight out Hydra vs Hydra for 6 hours, dillhole.

 

So, in summary, passive mode is always used to an extent, the only abuse is if people do it non-stop, toggling in and out, in between killing you, just like the morons who abuse suicide. It really doesn't need to be limited because if you see someone's doing it, you should know after the first time and if they really are abusing it, go passive yourself, or leave. Oh no, someone got a free kill off me, it's the end of the f***ing world. Boo frickity hoo, suck it up, buttercup.

Edited May 4, 2016 by rlk232

[Goten21]

 

So when I defend myself against a bitch trying to steal the hobo money I earned from a quick job, I shouldn't be able to go into passive mode for the rest of the session? Nty pls.

[Furry_Monkey]

 

I could not disagree more. That's a massive punishment for every single player that has never used passive mode in the manner you describe. I understand you getting pissy about people doing that, but the proposed change is massively unfair. I really like the idea that's been bounced around by other members before now, where you can only turn passive mode on and off in properties. Sure, a jet griefer could jump out of their damaged jet and parachute to their nearest property in order to go passive before anyone "got their own back", but they wouldn't then be able to come out of passive once they got back in another jet.

 

Your suggestion, IMO, is MUCH worst. Someone can be minding their own business looking for something to do then starts to get griefed by someone or some group and they have to run home to go passive? Or spawns in a pub lobby (even if coming from a closed one) after doing a mission, race, heist or simply failing to join one and starts to get killed. Now their only choice if they don't wish to partake in a street DM is to get back to their apt. to go passive. Now THAT is an unfair punishment which in fact rewards griefers. The opposite of what going passive is meant to do.

 

 

You disagree then. Okay.

 

Come up with an idea that can't be criticised and.... actually you can't. There will always be a set of circumstances that make something unfair.

 

Also, that wasn't my idea and I clearly stated that

[joel15cat]

I said once, but can you imagine The Division with passive mode? Ridiculous, right? I think the same in GTA.

[Semaj 2JZ♢]

 

I could not disagree more. That's a massive punishment for every single player that has never used passive mode in the manner you describe. I understand you getting pissy about people doing that, but the proposed change is massively unfair. I really like the idea that's been bounced around by other members before now, where you can only turn passive mode on and off in properties. Sure, a jet griefer could jump out of their damaged jet and parachute to their nearest property in order to go passive before anyone "got their own back", but they wouldn't then be able to come out of passive once they got back in another jet.

Your suggestion, IMO, is MUCH worst. Someone can be minding their own business looking for something to do then starts to get griefed by someone or some group and they have to run home to go passive? Or spawns in a pub lobby (even if coming from a closed one) after doing a mission, race, heist or simply failing to join one and starts to get killed. Now their only choice if they don't wish to partake in a street DM is to get back to their apt. to go passive. Now THAT is an unfair punishment which in fact rewards griefers. The opposite of what going passive is meant to do.

If someone is just "minding their own business looking for something to do", they can do that in other places where other players can't attack. You have no right to dictate what goes on in a public lobby. Also, if someone is "accidentally" dropped into a public from a private, they only need to press "start", select find new lobby, and they are transported right back to their private sesh. No need for movement or confrontation. Your excuses are of the fabragé variety; Easily broken.

[ash-274]

 

 

I could not disagree more. That's a massive punishment for every single player that has never used passive mode in the manner you describe. I understand you getting pissy about people doing that, but the proposed change is massively unfair. I really like the idea that's been bounced around by other members before now, where you can only turn passive mode on and off in properties. Sure, a jet griefer could jump out of their damaged jet and parachute to their nearest property in order to go passive before anyone "got their own back", but they wouldn't then be able to come out of passive once they got back in another jet.

Your suggestion, IMO, is MUCH worst. Someone can be minding their own business looking for something to do then starts to get griefed by someone or some group and they have to run home to go passive? Or spawns in a pub lobby (even if coming from a closed one) after doing a mission, race, heist or simply failing to join one and starts to get killed. Now their only choice if they don't wish to partake in a street DM is to get back to their apt. to go passive. Now THAT is an unfair punishment which in fact rewards griefers. The opposite of what going passive is meant to do.

If someone is just "minding their own business looking for something to do", they can do that in other places where other players can't attack. You have no right to dictate what goes on in a public lobby. Also, if someone is "accidentally" dropped into a public from a private, they only need to press "start", select find new lobby, and they are transported right back to their private sesh. No need for movement or confrontation. Your excuses are of the fabragé variety; Easily broken.

If being able to defend myself from NPCs requires me to run to an owned property first to drop Passive, then the whole system would need to be junked.

[MatthewH]

I said once, but can you imagine The Division with passive mode? Ridiculous, right? I think the same in GTA.

How is a shooting game comparable to GTA? You play shooting games to kill people because it's pretty much the sole point of the game. GTA is a sandbox where you can do pretty much anything you want. If I want to go cruising in one of my cars why should, I have to deal with some random idiot who suddenly decides to shoot at me for no valid reason?

Edited May 4, 2016 by MatthewH

[rlk232]

Good point above, but it also shows why we need solely friendly lobbies.

[Furry_Monkey]

Good point above, but it also shows why we need solely friendly lobbies.

 

That splits up friends and crews who don't want to always do the same thing as each other all the time. That's been my objection to friendly and non-friendly sessions all along. While I can see the appeal, the negative can't be ignored.

[BlackHeartedGovernor]

Quite simply just have friendly and non friendly lobbies.

 

I can't see how the player base would be split up if I'm honest, you would end up with less people in a session but I'd rather be in a session with 5 decent people rather than 15 assholes who just abuse Passive.

 

The game shouldn't have a cop-out like passive anyway. Passive players just clog up space, that space could be used for someone who will actually use the weapons that Rockstar gave them.

 

At the end of the day, I doubt anyone gives a crap about what your character looks like or the vehicle you are driving, so what is the point of playing the game just to drive about? IMO do something or just leave.

 

I'm more happy to have 10 jet griefers than 20 people just driving around doing nothing.

 

Least the jet griefers are making the session exciting. The game wasn't intended for people to just drive around, 80% of the modes have competitive elements, most involve killing another player or even have the option. Rockstar doesn't give you all this stuff at your disposal for you not to use it.

[BlackHeartedGovernor]

 

Good point above, but it also shows why we need solely friendly lobbies.

That splits up friends and crews who don't want to always do the same thing as each other all the time. That's been my objection to friendly and non-friendly sessions all along. While I can see the appeal, the negative can't be ignored.

Not really a negative, why join a crew if you don't have the same interests? That is somewhat like someone like me joining a racing crew who aren't PVP type players and then me complaining? If they aren't all doing the same thing then what is the point of being in a crew if you aren't playing with them? Better off finding a crew which has a similar way of playing.

[STEEZYR]

Your suggestion is dumb and passive mode isn't changing, get over it.

[BlackHeartedGovernor]

Your suggestion is dumb and passive mode isn't changing, get over it.

No one said it was changing? Some were merely suggesting ways to improve it. As we all know how bad it is at the moment. If I really wanted it changed I would contact Rockstar. Someone passive stalks me I usually just leave, some were stating that having to do that should be needless. If you aren't going to properly contribute then I really hope you don't reply any further.

[YaDoesntHaveToCallMeRay]

 

This is why I think that once you come out of passive and kill one person, you should be forced to stay out of passive for the rest of the time you are in the session.

Just plain dumb! That could punish a player that comes out of passive and someone attacks him and wins the battle.