Awacs Posted December 21, 2009 Content Count: 589 Joined: 03/14/09 Status: Offline Share Posted December 21, 2009 yepp. that's why we should keep it But we're bitching Now! Fix it NOW! I won't bitch about not having them in two months, I promise! (as long as we aren't considering bringing them back) Quote Link to comment
Metal Posted December 21, 2009 Content Count: 11723 Joined: 09/17/08 Status: Offline Share Posted December 21, 2009 I'm a admin, i know the rules. A CT doesn't have to give a T a lr. And for the overrule thing, it is a issue, but it doesn't happen all the time. But when it does, things get out of hand. Example: Someone telling T's to go heal, yet one CT tells them if you come in you die. If the CT gave that order to not come into medic, the other CT can not overrule him, but that isn't in MOTD. just saying Quote Link to comment
Awacs Posted December 21, 2009 Content Count: 589 Joined: 03/14/09 Status: Offline Share Posted December 21, 2009 I'm a admin, i know the rules. A CT doesn't have to give a T a lr. UM. Last T should always be offered a LR o.0 Those seem a little contradictory. And for the overrule thing, it is a issue, but it doesn't happen all the time. But when it does, things get out of hand. And i wont bother getting a demo, its a small issue and yes most of the time it works out. Again, a little contradictory (to me). You want a MOTD rule over a small issue? I thought you were for keeping the motd small and simple. Please, read your earlier posts before replying. Quote Link to comment
darth jacen Posted December 21, 2009 Content Count: 881 Joined: 08/10/08 Status: Offline Share Posted December 21, 2009 *COUGH* i didnt put in a request to have a meeting to discuss EVERY RULE in PB... and it WASNT shot down cause ppl didnt wanna hear... glad someone even if it is crimson wants to do it Quote Link to comment
Metal Posted December 21, 2009 Content Count: 11723 Joined: 09/17/08 Status: Offline Share Posted December 21, 2009 the overruled thing shouldn't be in motd, but we need a borderline for this Quote Link to comment
Karnivor Posted December 22, 2009 Content Count: 701 Joined: 04/18/09 Status: Offline Share Posted December 22, 2009 Ok, this thread is seriously getting out of hand.... As for warning shots, it is just a back and forth topic, you may have the people who support getting rid of them on here right now, but if they were removed, then those who just spent the time getting them required will descend in force and the whole cycle would start again. Really, warning shots arent to bad. Of course, what merits a warning shot, and what merits a kill are diffrent... Uncroutching for a second then re-croutching is something you warning shot for. Uncroutching and running somewhere, you get killed. Minor delaying on way to objective - warning shot Running full speed somwhere other than where you are supposed to go - kill idk, I guess that everyone feels one extreme or the other. Whoever gets killed feels it was BS that they got killed and not just shot in the foot. Whoever shoots them in the foot only to see them tele into armory is pissed that they now have to fight someone who is armed. TL;DR Warning Shots are needed, but they need to be somewhat regulated, and used as one see's fit. Quote Link to comment
Bad Dog Posted December 22, 2009 Content Count: 3380 Joined: 02/07/09 Status: Offline Share Posted December 22, 2009 Ok, this thread is seriously getting out of hand.... As for warning shots, it is just a back and forth topic, you may have the people who support getting rid of them on here right now, but if they were removed, then those who just spent the time getting them required will descend in force and the whole cycle would start again. Really, warning shots arent to bad. Of course, what merits a warning shot, and what merits a kill are diffrent... Uncroutching for a second then re-croutching is something you warning shot for. Uncroutching and running somewhere, you get killed. Minor delaying on way to objective - warning shot Running full speed somwhere other than where you are supposed to go - kill idk, I guess that everyone feels one extreme or the other. Whoever gets killed feels it was BS that they got killed and not just shot in the foot. Whoever shoots them in the foot only to see them tele into armory is pissed that they now have to fight someone who is armed. TL;DR Warning Shots are needed, but they need to be somewhat regulated, and used as one see's fit. Basically your saying people need to use common sense. Have you ever seen the players on our PB server? They are missing that gene. Quote Link to comment
Karnivor Posted December 22, 2009 Content Count: 701 Joined: 04/18/09 Status: Offline Share Posted December 22, 2009 Basically your saying people need to use common sense. Have you ever seen the players on our PB server? They are missing that gene. heh I know. still a valid point, even if an impossible point >.> Quote Link to comment
Breblo Posted December 22, 2009 Content Count: 20 Joined: 10/31/09 Status: Offline Share Posted December 22, 2009 This thread is getting off topic. We are trying to come to a verdict about the warning shot rule. Please if anything it needs to be reworded Quote Link to comment
trakaill Posted December 22, 2009 Content Count: 3736 Joined: 11/30/07 Status: Offline Share Posted December 22, 2009 This thread is getting off topic. We are trying to come to a verdict about the warning shot rule. Please if anything it needs to be reworded No it doesnt...its actually quite simple...if a T does something stupid you dont like and you want them to be doing something else give em a warning shot..if they are trying to kill you (or a teammate) shoot them in the head..I dont see how much fucking clearer than that it can get...and if you cant tell the difference between these too do something else than wasting time on a computer.. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Reply to Thread