Jail Break Rule Discussion/Suggestions/Comments

[Maxwelldon]

alright, but then just put it in the rules so they won't cry about it.

Clarification of clarification, for clarification of clarification on clarification of clarification on PB rules ~ lol

 

Also can we can clear up on the case of crossfire, example, when a T Is using his teammate as a shield against his will or not making it hard for the ct to take out the person who is actively rebelling without killing the bystander. Is crossfire a offense and slayable? Or is it based off the scenario and the current active admin's judgement.

By what I play on the PB on T side, I always jump out of the way if there is going to be crossfire and have allowed other T's to do it too. Who sane "person (RP'er)" would let themselves be shot in the process? I would say "use common sense" but this is probably too much asked these days since everything has to be told with very prescribed detail on what you can do, and can't do.

Of course still avoiding to shoot the "innocent" specimens in our beloved Prison while playing CT. Why are they in the Prison in the first place then? To be a meat wall? Isn't it their choice also to decide if they Want to be shot while covering an armed prison mate? Again, in this situation I would say "use common sense" but still, it seems to be too much to be asked of some people on PB.

[Lupin]

Also can we can clear up on the case of crossfire, example, when a T Is using his teammate as a shield against his will or not making it hard for the ct to take out the person who is actively rebelling without killing the bystander. Is crossfire a offense and slayable? Or is it based off the scenario and the current active admin's judgement.

 

Crossfire depends on how severe the crossfire was. If the CT manages to kill like 3 or 4 innocent people while in the middle of killing the rebeller. He should be slayed. But if it's only like 1 maybe 2? it should be ignored.

 

If a T is using his/her allies as a meat shield, the CT should try their best to avoid shooting the innocents.

[Goku]

I'd say crossfire is admin's discretion on if they should be slayed or not. As @Lupin said, if they mow down 4 people while trying to kill one person I'll slay them. To me, genuine crossfire is when the CT is trying to shoot a T and a stray bullet hits or kills an innocent T. But if the CT just unloads an entire clip and kills half the Ts that's not crossfire imo.

 

Again, it's mostly admin discretion.

[Nuclear Onion]

I'd say crossfire is admin's discretion on if they should be slayed or not. As @Lupin said, if they mow down 4 people while trying to kill one person I'll slay them. To me, genuine crossfire is when the CT is trying to shoot a T and a stray bullet hits or kills an innocent T. But if the CT just unloads an entire clip and kills half the Ts that's not crossfire imo.

 

Again, it's mostly admin discretion.

 

Crossfire depends on how severe the crossfire was. If the CT manages to kill like 3 or 4 innocent people while in the middle of killing the rebeller. He should be slayed. But if it's only like 1 maybe 2? it should be ignored.

 

If a T is using his/her allies as a meat shield, the CT should try their best to avoid shooting the innocents.

 

Clarification of clarification, for clarification of clarification on clarification of clarification on PB rules ~ lol

 

 

By what I play on the PB on T side, I always jump out of the way if there is going to be crossfire and have allowed other T's to do it too. Who sane "person (RP'er)" would let themselves be shot in the process? I would say "use common sense" but this is probably too much asked these days since everything has to be told with very prescribed detail on what you can do, and can't do.

Of course still avoiding to shoot the "innocent" specimens in our beloved Prison while playing CT. Why are they in the Prison in the first place then? To be a meat wall? Isn't it their choice also to decide if they Want to be shot while covering an armed prison mate? Again, in this situation I would say "use common sense" but still, it seems to be too much to be asked of some people on PB.

 

All right, all about common sense, like the majority of JB rules. Thanks for answering for me

[Maxwelldon]

All right, all about common sense, like the majority of JB rules. Thanks for answering for me

Any time man, haha [emoji1]

[Goku]

All right, all about common sense, like the majority of JB rules. Thanks for answering for me

 

While we're at it, can we finally discuss and change this:

 

So are we gonna discuss changing the baiting rule or what? Or is it currently being discussed in a higher up section?

 

Seems that the majority (90+%) of the server, as well as the majority of admins prefer and believe the way BoM described baiting, is what the rule should be/is.

 

Last I checked it was defined simply as "when a CT walks into a T who is already actively knifing".

 

For clarification, this is the way BoM described it:

 

That is wrong, so let me explain:

 

Baiting is basically doing something that a CT would never do if they're actually trying to stay alive, therefore being A. Stupid or B. Intentionally taunting (AKA BAITING) the Ts.

 

This can include:

-Standing on a Ts head

-Putting your back to a group of Ts(EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT KNIFING)

-Running through a condensed group of Ts, i.e. there is no possible way you would make it through there without getting knifed.

-sitting in a doorway near Ts (like in the kitchen doorway in razor), without a purpose

-The obvious running into a T while you're knifing.

 

As I've said on handling rules like this in the past, it comes down to admin discretion and includes a lot of gray area. There are cases where the CT might just be stupid, and not realize they're about to die with what they're doing. There are also cases where you know this person plays CT a lot and well, and then is suddenly walking back first into a group of Ts in lets say isolation. If the situation that the CT is putting themselves in makes no logical sense, and is clearly just to taunt the terrorists, then you are baiting them. It really is in the definition of the word, but apparently that has been forgotten over time. Now a CT doing this once, should not warrant a reaction from admins, but someone who is frequently taunting CTs should be punished accordingly.

 

If you guys disagree with this, I'd like to hear why to be honest. Blatantly taunting the terrorists is pretty rude and doesn't really lead to your objective. The main objective of the CTs is not to kill everyone, because you win at the end of the round as long as you're alive. The goal is to keep order and stay alive, which is the complete opposite of what your'e doing if you're wasting your time baiting.

 

 

 

Not only is that a far better rule, but it is what everyone playing already thinks it is.

 

 

 

Had another incident last night where half the damn server was in love with the word baiting but the current definition is not what they were trying to say it is.

[Nuclear Onion]

While we're at it, can we finally discuss and change this:

 

 

 

 

 

Had another incident last night where half the damn server was in love with the word baiting but the current definition is not what they were trying to say it is.

 

http://www.steam-gamers.net/forum/showthread.php?t=62297&p=751976

 

Now tell them to stop being shitters who take advantage of the their lack of common sense. (!rules will get changed, don't you worry :v)

[Nuclear Onion]

Also the list of !rules that I promised but forgot to put my end of the bargain on.

 

"Do CT's have to have microphones?"

"While it is encouraged for CT's to have microphones, it is not mandatory."

"Wardens"

"Wardens do not exist on this server."

"Freedays"

"Ct's are NEVER required to give freedays, and if one is given it can be revoked at any time."

"Do cells have to stay open?"

"No. The CT's can open and close the cells as they wish."

"Using the infirmary as a T"

"As a T, it is a privilege to use the infirmary, not a right."

"Breaking out of your cell"

"If you manage to break out of your cell through use of a vent, teleporter, secret button, etc, you are instantly killable."

"T's talking over CT's"

"If a T is making it hard to understand a CT's orders, they can be ordered to be quiet. This does not mean CT's can make T's be quiet the entire round."

"Is no detours / no delays automatically implied?"

"Yes."

"Zombie free days"

"CT's can participate if they wish, however remember that a CT can kill you for knifing him if he does not wish to participate."

"Wardays"

"CT's are not allowed to order T's to have a warday."

"Death games"

"CT's cannot order T's to play death games unless the T's willingly want to participate."

"Ratio Freedays"

"No matter how bad the ratio is, there is no such things as them, and it is not obligatory."

"Cell doors and no orders"

"If cell doors open and orders haven't been given, it is not automatically a freeday, CT's can still order you around."

"Baiting"

"Baiting is doing something that a CT would never do if they're actually trying to stay alive, therefore being either intentionally taunting or being stupid."

"Baiting AGAIN"

"Another form of baiting is when a CT runs into a T knife."

"Last Requests"

"They are not mandatory for a CT to give them or a T to do them, and if a T wishes to continue, the CTs can deny the request to continue and kill them."

 

are my color selections terrible or what

[Lupin]

Please make a rule that bans people for asking for a freeday nextround as an LR. It's getting out of control with all LRs being "freeday next round" and them adding twists to it like no restrictions, you can't revoke it and what not. It's dumb as fuck

[Goku]

you can't revoke it and what not. It's dumb as fuck

 

Did you not read the discussions above? You can revoke any order at any time and CTs don't have to honor the next day freeday. Like I always say, pick a better LR.

 

And I don't think we should make that a rule. This isn't North Korea, we don't need guidelines and rules dictating exactly what has to happen. In a way, the less rules the better.