PDA

View Full Version : LR Rule



Epic Bread Man
28 Jun 2009, 03:18pm
Well Earlier today I was playing on the PB Server and near the end of on round their was only a Terrorist and two Counter Terrorist's left alive, so as normal the Last remaining Terrosist is entitled a Last Request and this T wanted "Shot for Shot match" against one of the CT's, anyway...the Terrorist managed to win the s4s match fair and square, But then all of a sudden the last CT which was an admin killed the Terrorist without question or any hesitation.

At the Beginning of the next round I asked the Admin why he killed him and he replied to me "The T won s4s and obviously because he won by killing the CT, Therefore I can kill him for killing a CT.


I Would like to know weather this is allowed to be done or Not, Admins would be preferable to reply to this post so I may have a more accurate answer to this.

I belive that this is not correct, and the winning T should be able to face off against another CT until their all dead (If the T lasts that long)

Thanks,

- Bread

Crimson
28 Jun 2009, 03:29pm
Honestly, I think killing them is fine. Last Request isn't a rule on our server, and no T is "entitled" for last Request.


Edit, It's the same as the killing afk, it's up to the admin imo.

Mystique
28 Jun 2009, 03:33pm
It is not a rule on the server, but in this case i think it was pretty unfair. The T was giving a last request, which he won fair and square. But then being killed because he killed a CT by winning a game, is a pretty lame reason to kill someone...

Caution
28 Jun 2009, 03:33pm
I agree with you, Epic.

While a LR is by no means required on our servers, that CT took the S4S challenge anyway on his own free will, knowing there's a possibility he can die. If I had gotten killed like that, I would have asked whoever it was to knock it off.

Dracula
28 Jun 2009, 03:36pm
Well Earlier today I was playing on the PB Server and near the end of on round their was only a Terrorist and two Counter Terrorist's left alive, so as normal the Last remaining Terrosist is entitled a Last Request and this T wanted "Shot for Shot match" against one of the CT's, anyway...the Terrorist managed to win the s4s match fair and square, But then all of a sudden the last CT which was an admin killed the Terrorist without question or any hesitation.

At the Beginning of the next round I asked the Admin why he killed him and he replied to me "The T won s4s and obviously because he won by killing the CT, Therefore I can kill him for killing a CT.


I Would like to know weather this is allowed to be done or Not, Admins would be preferable to reply to this post so I may have a more accurate answer to this.

I belive that this is not correct, and the winning T should be able to face off against another CT until their all dead (If the T lasts that long)

Thanks,

- Bread

I find it pretty gay to get the kill that way but the way I think about it is we didnt even have to give you the last request. I have done it a few times [mainly to little kids, Harpreet, or Regs] but I much prefer to not give them 1 and just let them whine.

PingPong
28 Jun 2009, 03:53pm
Honestly, I think killing them is fine. Last Request isn't a rule on our server, and no T is "entitled" for last Request.


Edit, It's the same as the killing afk, it's up to the admin imo.

Sorry crimson but i disagree, since he was allowed a last request AND he won it lets him kill his opponent without death. Its was completley uncalled for that he was killed. If your given a lr you earn the right to live if you win in my opinion

MtrxMn
28 Jun 2009, 04:44pm
I find it pretty gay to get the kill that way but the way I think about it is we didnt even have to give you the last request. I have done it a few times [mainly to little kids, Harpreet, or Regs] but I much prefer to not give them 1 and just let them whine.

What's the point of just sitting around doing nothing for the last few minutes

Dracula
28 Jun 2009, 05:08pm
What's the point of just sitting around doing nothing for the last few minutes

Laughing at the people that whine.

Awacs
28 Jun 2009, 05:40pm
Its a LAST request....

Dante
28 Jun 2009, 05:45pm
This is the same as a Sanctioned knife fight in the middle of the round, when the T wins and a CT kills him for "rebelling" which is a freekill according to Suri. So, I would say that admin did wrong and freekilled, if the T went on trying to turn the gun on the CT and tried to kill him yes he would be rebelling but if not then no, he shouldn't have been killed and the Ct was a douche to freekill like that.

Crimson
28 Jun 2009, 06:58pm
This is the same as a Sanctioned knife fight in the middle of the round, when the T wins and a CT kills him for "rebelling" which is a freekill according to Suri. So, I would say that admin did wrong and freekilled, if the T went on trying to turn the gun on the CT and tried to kill him yes he would be rebelling but if not then no, he shouldn't have been killed and the Ct was a douche to freekill like that.


Suricruise doesn't even play Prison Break.


As stated by Awacs, it's a last Request.

Runski
28 Jun 2009, 07:17pm
Its a LAST request....

It's a LAST request cause there is only 1 T or CT left. At least through my experiences in PB servers, after you kill a CT in a LR, you should be able to LR another CT, sicne your the lastperson... There would be no point in a LR if you get killed immediatly after you accomplish something.

Caution
28 Jun 2009, 08:02pm
Unless the T knows prior that if he wins he will die (and still decides to continue on), it's a freekill in my book. Unless an AO or above tells me otherwise, I will treat it as any other free kill.

Dante
28 Jun 2009, 10:25pm
Suricruise doesn't even play Prison Break.


As stated by Awacs, it's a last Request.

It's still a freekill num nuts read it thro. If they kill someone after a LR is sanctioned tell an admin that you were freekilled or something and let them handle it.

Dracula
28 Jun 2009, 10:34pm
It's still a freekill num nuts read it thro. If they kill someone after a LR is sanctioned tell an admin that you were freekilled or something and let them handle it.

New rule on the server, admins cant punish if they didnt see it :]

Awacs
28 Jun 2009, 10:40pm
Again, whats the point of LAST request? To be the LAST one alive. It will be much less appealing to be a pussy and not rebel all round if you only get to do ONE thing. AKA LAST request.

trakaill
28 Jun 2009, 11:35pm
T might not be entitled to an LR but if a CT gives one he better fucking own up to it...
Who ever the admin that did this is...your a pussy
This is freekill and should not have gone down that way if a player had done that he would have got slayed...

Fast Bullet
29 Jun 2009, 12:47am
Its a LAST request....

This Is what i said.i did not state because he killed a ct.I said because its a LAST REQUEST and after he gets his last request you can kill him.

P.S. If the admin your referreing is me ofc.

Edit. Last request means your last request be4 you die,it does not mean 1 more if you win.

Epic Bread Man
29 Jun 2009, 01:45am
Dude I didnt do this to try get you in any kind of trouble Fast Bullet, Hence i said "An Admin" all i wanted to know was weather this was correct and made this post for opinions of others beause I have never seen this been done before.

Fast Bullet
29 Jun 2009, 02:13am
Dude I didnt do this to try get you in any kind of trouble Fast Bullet, Hence i said "An Admin" all i wanted to know was weather this was correct and made this post for opinions of others beause I have never seen this been done before.

LOL. Don't get me wrong,I'm not mad At you XD .Its just that ppl don't know the meaning of the word LAST .And that makes me sad .

tank40175
29 Jun 2009, 02:56am
Suricruise doesn't even play Prison Break.


As stated by Awacs, it's a last Request.

Not much, but well within Suri's right to make the call, last I checked.

Metal
29 Jun 2009, 06:58am
Its a LAST request....

When you make a LR * Last request is a way to end the round*
make sure you say S4s until i die.

Crimson
29 Jun 2009, 09:42am
Not much, but well within Suri's right to make the call, last I checked.

Hate to break it to you, but Suricruise doesn't have the rights to make the call on rules anymore, This rule should be up the current AO.

As stated by Fast bullet, It's a frigging last request! You don't kill the Counter-Terrorist, and request another one.

It like the last meal, you can't just request more, after eating it, just doesn't work like that.

Dante
29 Jun 2009, 10:16am
Hate to break it to you, but Suricruise doesn't have the rights to make the call on rules anymore, This rule should be up the current AO.

As stated by Fast bullet, It's a frigging last request! You don't kill the Counter-Terrorist, and request another one.

It like the last meal, you can't just request more, after eating it, just doesn't work like that.

Well then that's the same to you Obez.

Epic Bread Man
29 Jun 2009, 10:34am
Oh Dear, lets get back to the subject at hand please?

trakaill
29 Jun 2009, 12:12pm
This Is what i said.i did not state because he killed a ct.I said because its a LAST REQUEST and after he gets his last request you can kill him.

P.S. If the admin your referreing is me ofc.

Edit. Last request means your last request be4 you die,it does not mean 1 more if you win.

first your wrong..second your a pussyx2!
....thanks for the infraction :D

Fast Bullet
29 Jun 2009, 12:14pm
first your wrong..second your a pussy!

Im right!

Mystique
29 Jun 2009, 12:33pm
Stop freakin flaming each other, it was just a question!

FightingRooster
29 Jun 2009, 01:51pm
I'd call it as a freekill. From all the PB I've played, if a T kills a CT in an LR, he gets another go with another CT.

trakaill
29 Jun 2009, 03:06pm
I'd call it as a freekill. From all the PB I've played, if a T kills a CT in an LR, he gets another go with another CT.

^ for once he spoke the truth....its been like that since pb existed...but hey cant do anything against e-wusses...

Fast Bullet
29 Jun 2009, 04:21pm
As stated by Fast bullet, It's a frigging last request! You don't kill the Counter-Terrorist, and request another one.

It like the last meal, you can't just request more, after eating it, just doesn't work like that.

QFT!

trakaill
29 Jun 2009, 08:09pm
I'd call it as a freekill. From all the PB I've played, if a T kills a CT in an LR, he gets another go with another CT.


It's a LAST request cause there is only 1 T or CT left. At least through my experiences in PB servers, after you kill a CT in a LR, you should be able to LR another CT, sicne your the lastperson... There would be no point in a LR if you get killed immediatly after you accomplish something.


Unless the T knows prior that if he wins he will die (and still decides to continue on), it's a freekill in my book. Unless an AO or above tells me otherwise, I will treat it as any other free kill.

here is the QFT...noob...

*Queen VenomousFate*
29 Jun 2009, 08:13pm
Hell i'm busting out the big red text again. Since a last request is not in the rules, I DO NOT CARE what happens when one is given or not given. For all I care a CT could grant a LR to a T and then just mow that T down with a shotgun as soon as the T tries to attack him. And a T could grant a last request to a CT and then all the T's could just simply gang up on the CT. Since it is not in the rules, the only rules that must be followed when giving a LR are those rules in the MOTD.

IF IT IS NOT IN THE "MESSAGE OF THE DAY" IT IS NOT A RULE!!!

*Queen VenomousFate*
29 Jun 2009, 08:23pm
Unless the T knows prior that if he wins he will die (and still decides to continue on), it's a freekill in my book. Unless an AO or above tells me otherwise, I will treat it as any other free kill.

AS SOON AS THAT T SO MUCH AS TOUCHES A CT, IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL TO MOW DOWN THAT T REGARDLESS OF WHAT RULES SOMEONE MADE UP FOR LAST REQUEST.

I DON"T CARE IF YOU SIGN A LEGAL CONTRACT ESTABLISHING THE RULES FOR A LAST REQUEST, ALL I CARE IS THAT THE RULES IN THE MOTD ARE FOLLOWED.

Here is an example.
Terrorist = "Hey can me and this CT knife fight if in the end the other CTs promise not to kill me?"

Counter-Terrorists = "Yea sure man, you can knife fight him we wont kill you if you win"

Terrorist = Ok Cool!

(The Terrorist then proceeds to knife the CT once and immediently after all the other CTs mow him down with a hail of gunfire)

Dead Terrorist = "Hey, AO can you please ban those guys! They broke the rules! They promised they wouldn't freekill me, and that was a freekill!"

Ao (Me) = "No, I will not ban them, I do not care what rules you MADE UP for this Last Request thing, I ONLY care about the rules in the MOTD, and the rules state that a CT may kill a T if that T attacks a CT, and you attacked a CT, so they had every right to mow you down even though they said they would let you live if you win."

Dracula
29 Jun 2009, 08:32pm
Thank you good sir, hopefully people will read larger reder text.

Fast Bullet
30 Jun 2009, 02:30am
Ty VenomousFate !

Epic Bread Man
30 Jun 2009, 02:33am
Finnaly a Staight answer! thanks you VF!

Mammal
30 Jun 2009, 09:26am
^ for once he spoke the truth....its been like that since pb existed...but hey cant do anything against e-wusses...

Where you around when PB started? (Serious question)
We only had ba_jail_messiah and LR hadnt even been thought of yet, it was fun then with the servers full 24/7 just all messing around together :)

MtrxMn
30 Jun 2009, 01:34pm
This is gonna make a lot of rounds drag on though because people are gonna be afraid to lr

PingPong
30 Jun 2009, 01:41pm
I'd call it as a freekill. From all the PB I've played, if a T kills a CT in an LR, he gets another go with another CT.

Agreed

skitzophranic
30 Jun 2009, 01:49pm
also agree'd

vvvvv

Caution
30 Jun 2009, 09:14pm
Ao (Me) = "No, I will not ban them, I do not care what rules you MADE UP for this Last Request thing, I ONLY care about the rules in the MOTD, and the rules state that a CT may kill a T if that T attacks a CT, and you attacked a CT, so they had every right to mow you down even though they said they would let you live if you win."[/COLOR][/SIZE]

Then the same must be said about a T not choosing to have a LR period. If he can get killed for it, then he should not be able to get killed for not doing it.

Bad Dog
30 Jun 2009, 10:32pm
Its a LAST request....

'Nuff said.

MtrxMn
1 Jul 2009, 08:46am
Then the same must be said about a T not choosing to have a LR period. If he can get killed for it, then he should not be able to get killed for not doing it.

Yeah, i've seen multiple times where a t says he doesnt want to do a last request and he was killed then.

*Queen VenomousFate*
1 Jul 2009, 03:26pm
Then the same must be said about a T not choosing to have a LR period. If he can get killed for it, then he should not be able to get killed for not doing it.

There is a limit with the last T. The point of the jailbreak server is for the Ts to attempt to break out, not to be little girls and just obey everything the guard says.

There comes a time after a minute when if the T has not yet made a move, you can say something like "Hey T, can you please try and do something since you are holding up the game? If not I am gonna kill you" If an admin is present they will inform you when it is ok to kill the last T due to time wasting. If not, just wait AT LEAST a minute, and give the T ample warning that if he doesnt do something he will be killed to move the game along.

Dante
1 Jul 2009, 05:45pm
But that is kinda bs, he will be killed either way because the CT will sit far enough back that he can kill right off the bat, complete bullshit.

Dracula
1 Jul 2009, 05:49pm
But that is kinda bs, he will be killed either way because the CT will sit far enough back that he can kill right off the bat, complete bullshit.

/cry

MtrxMn
1 Jul 2009, 08:00pm
/cry

why don't you ever play as t?

Caution
1 Jul 2009, 08:41pm
why don't you ever play as t?

LOL

Awacs
1 Jul 2009, 08:53pm
why don't you ever play as t?

Much as I hate to admit it but... Valid point.

*Queen VenomousFate*
1 Jul 2009, 11:00pm
But that is kinda bs, he will be killed either way because the CT will sit far enough back that he can kill right off the bat, complete bullshit.

I believe this page may answer all of your questions about how to avoid the CT that is sitting across the map waiting to shoot you when you do something wrong.

Walls, the marvelous invention that prevents anyone else from seeing what you are doing when you are behind said wall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall)

trakaill
1 Jul 2009, 11:44pm
There is a limit with the last T. The point of the jailbreak server is for the Ts to attempt to break out, not to be little girls and just obey everything the guard says.

There comes a time after a minute when if the T has not yet made a move, you can say something like "Hey T, can you please try and do something since you are holding up the game? If not I am gonna kill you" If an admin is present they will inform you when it is ok to kill the last T due to time wasting. If not, just wait AT LEAST a minute, and give the T ample warning that if he doesnt do something he will be killed to move the game along.

SO YOU TYPE BIG RED LETTERS TO STATE YOUR POINT ON "ITS NOT IN THE MOTD" WELL THE MOTD ALSO STATES THAT YOU CAN ONLY KILL A T IF HE IS ESCAPING OR TRYING TO KILL SOMEONE SO DONT BE SURPRISED IF THEY CAMP THE LAST 3 MINUTES, IF YOU KILL THEM ITS FREE KILL PERIOD..AND IM FOLLOWING YOUR TREND HERE....WE ALSO PLAY THIS GAME WITH COMMON SENSE AND IF SOMEONE IS GIVEN AN LR THE CT SHOULD OWN UP TO IT

*Queen VenomousFate*
2 Jul 2009, 12:36am
SO YOU TYPE BIG RED LETTERS TO STATE YOUR POINT ON "ITS NOT IN THE MOTD" WELL THE MOTD ALSO STATES THAT YOU CAN ONLY KILL A T IF HE IS ESCAPING OR TRYING TO KILL SOMEONE SO DONT BE SURPRISED IF THEY CAMP THE LAST 3 MINUTES, IF YOU KILL THEM ITS FREE KILL PERIOD..AND IM FOLLOWING YOUR TREND HERE....WE ALSO PLAY THIS GAME WITH COMMON SENSE AND IF SOMEONE IS GIVEN AN LR THE CT SHOULD OWN UP TO IT

- CT's are not allowed to kill prisoners unless they are not complying with the rules given.

What you claim is the rule, is an overly narrow definition of the actual rule as stated above. Once a CT has told the T in chat/mic that "If you do not try to do something to escape in the near future I am going to kill you" the CT has in fact, placed a new, and reasonable rule in place. This rule is no different then when a CT says "Move to this spot or die". The CT has put into place a new rule, which, if not followed will result in death. So long as a warning such as this is given, I see no problem with that CT killing that T after a reasonable length of time has passed.

As for the LR, I would hope that a CT would own up to it, but ultimatly, as stated in the rules, he cannot be punished for violating a LR. End of Story.

Huwajux
2 Jul 2009, 05:05am
But that is kinda bs, he will be killed either way because the CT will sit far enough back that he can kill right off the bat, complete bullshit.
Then it is the terrorist's fault for not rebelling with everyone else, and this is 99% of the time down to the terrorist wanting a last request.

why don't you ever play as t?
+rep

trakaill
2 Jul 2009, 05:11pm
- CT's are not allowed to kill prisoners unless they are not complying with the rules given.

"If you do not try to do something to escape in the near future I am going to kill you" the CT has in fact, placed a new, and reasonable rule in place.

This is not a reasonable rule! you cant force a T to rebel that is just dumb, I was has been like this and never will..your a nice guy and but this whole argument on your part doesnt make any sense at all!!!! You need to stay the fuck off the Pb servers if your going to admin that way This is the reason these servers have come to what they are, people like you that dont know the rules come in and make up shit like the CTs can force the T to rebel or they get killed...You can go back to the admin complaint and find issue where an admin shot/slayed executed the last T and got in trouble for it

! Bottom line is your completely wrong and either you go by the rules like a dumb fuck or play with common sense!

Dracula
2 Jul 2009, 05:21pm
This is not a reasonable rule! you cant force a T to rebel that is just dumb, I was has been like this and never will..your a nice guy and but this whole argument on your part doesnt make any sense at all!!!! You need to stay the fuck off the Pb servers if your going to admin that way This is the reason these servers have come to what they are, people like you that dont know the rules come in and make up shit like the CTs can force the T to rebel or they get killed...You can go back to the admin complaint and find issue where an admin shot/slayed executed the last T and got in trouble for it

! Bottom line is your completely wrong and either you go by the rules like a dumb fuck or play with common sense!

No you need to shut the fuck up and stay out of PB.

Caution
2 Jul 2009, 06:26pm
"If you do not try to do something to escape in the near future I am going to kill you"

How is that ANY different from saying "stay underwater, and if you come up, you die" ? The CT is going to be watching you closely, so obviously you're going to not be able to do something to try and escape.

Sorry, but that is flat out, grade A retarded. If I see a player doing that, I will punish for it. Record a demo and report me, but I'm not following some assinine rule that makes 0 sense and just gets put into effect all of a sudden.

*Queen VenomousFate*
2 Jul 2009, 06:51pm
How is that ANY different from saying "stay underwater, and if you come up, you die" ? The CT is going to be watching you closely, so obviously you're going to not be able to do something to try and escape.

Sorry, but that is flat out, grade A retarded. If I see a player doing that, I will punish for it. Record a demo and report me, but I'm not following some assinine rule that makes 0 sense and just gets put into effect all of a sudden.

You guys misunderstand me. I am simply saying this for THE LAST T ALIVE. This would never apply in any other circumstance. When a T refuses to play the game as intended and is simply not doing anything for the last 3 minutes, he is disrespecting every other player on the server. He is holding up 19 other people from being able to rejoin the game. I believe that this disrespect is enough reason for a CT to ask the T to please do something, otherwise he will kill him just to move the game along.

This is one of the rare instances when I will go away from a strict interpretation of the rules. If a player is holding up so many other players by not playing the game, it is the unwritten rule that you give that player an ultimatum to do something, or else you take action to move the game into the next round.

Admins do this all the time when they ask a player to get killed so we can start a new round.

I only support making rules for things that are absolute, for example there is no middle ground on racism, either you are being racist or not. That is why I would not support making a rule that allows killing of the last T to move the game along, because I feel that it would be wildly abused since the rule would be so broad. Therefore, I leave it up to the players of our servers and our admins to be respectful of other players right to play the game, and to sacrafice themselves or die in order to move the game along.

Even my iron clad set of rules has its minor exceptions and this is one of them, there comes a point when the desire of 19 dead Ts to play the game, overrules the right of a single T to live, especially since that T will still be alive next round. As long as this is done with respect, and reasonable amounts of time are given, as well as requests to die to move the game along, I do not see a major problem with it.

*Queen VenomousFate*
2 Jul 2009, 06:53pm
This is not a reasonable rule! you cant force a T to rebel that is just dumb, I was has been like this and never will..your a nice guy and but this whole argument on your part doesnt make any sense at all!!!! You need to stay the fuck off the Pb servers if your going to admin that way This is the reason these servers have come to what they are, people like you that dont know the rules come in and make up shit like the CTs can force the T to rebel or they get killed...You can go back to the admin complaint and find issue where an admin shot/slayed executed the last T and got in trouble for it

! Bottom line is your completely wrong and either you go by the rules like a dumb fuck or play with common sense!

I have not made up a single rule. I have used the rules we have in place to make an interpretation of what to do in a situation that pits the ironclad rules, vs the rights of 19 dead Ts to play. In a situation like this it is only logical to have the rules meet the will of the players half way.

*Queen VenomousFate*
2 Jul 2009, 06:54pm
No you need to shut the fuck up and stay out of PB.

Thank you for your support Dracula, but this is not necessary.

Please do not turn this into a flame war guys, I have been respectful to all of you, so please be respectful in your responses.

*Queen VenomousFate*
2 Jul 2009, 07:02pm
Sorry, but that is flat out, grade A retarded. If I see a player doing that, I will punish for it. Record a demo and report me, but I'm not following some assinine rule that makes 0 sense and just gets put into effect all of a sudden.

I have not put into place a new rule. I have stated what I believe should be the case. As of now any player who kills the last T can still be banned.

PLEASE NOTE... THIS ENTIRE SECTION OF THE FORUM IS DEVOTED TO THE DISCUSSION OF THE RULES, NOTHING POSTED IN HERE IS AN ACTUAL RULE UNTIL IT IS APPROVED BY A BD AND APPEARS IN THE MOTD!

Essentially unless I say "The rule is that" or "There is no rule for" do not take what I say here as a rule.

Everything I have said is my opinion. Nothing in here, that has been discussed constitutes an actual rule.

My Post about what to do if a T is not trying to escape was a discussion about the rules. No rule is an actual rule until it is in the MOTD/!Rules.

I appologize to those who thought I had just made up a rule on the spot, because I havent, I dont do that, I was simply stating my beliefs about what should happen.

I appologize for making my first post about the last T being able to be killed after a certain time sound like I was stating a fact. I did not intend it to be as such and it is 100% my fault for my failure to use the correct qualifiers when I wrote that post. Please forgive me, since I so often have to tell a player what is and what isnt a rule (As noted by my large red text), I get used to stating things in absolutes. I did not intend the post about the Last T being killed to be thought of as me stating a rule

So basically I will stick to being a dumbfuck and following the rules exactly as written :)

Note: My very first post in this thread was me stating a fact. As noted by the fact that I clealy stated that according to out MOTD, it is not a rule. Everything beyond that is my opinion.

Spliff
2 Jul 2009, 07:14pm
I believe there should be an LR rule, if there is truly a last terrorist and several CT's then you can do LR, but if there is only 1 CT after a s4s or something then the T should get a LR.

*Queen VenomousFate*
2 Jul 2009, 07:18pm
I believe there should be an LR rule, if there is truly a last terrorist and several CT's then you can do LR, but if there is only 1 CT after a s4s or something then the T should get a LR.

Hehe, a chance to use the correct qualifiers.

The current rule for this as stated in our MOTD is that LR do not have to be given. This was decided upon at a community gathering.

If you wish to ask for a rule to make LR mandatory, please make a new post, so that your idea isnt lost in the sea of my posts :)

Dante
2 Jul 2009, 08:39pm
Ok, from what i've gotten from this is that killing T...blah blah blah, ok Well, One of the objectives for the T's are to rebel, and Ct's to keep order, i don't see how a T that is following orders, and doing nothing but obeying should be told to rebel or be killed, it's as what the others said as asinine, If a Terrorist wants to obey the rules and try to rebel well that's their problem but if a T doesn't want to rebel because the slightest touch will instantly get him killed i see nothing wrong with that.

The game is to have fun, try to rebel, but you Do Not have to rebel, because not everyone will, sometimes i like sitting back and relaxing while i watch others die from rebelling. It's just wrong on a few levels I think.

Caution
2 Jul 2009, 09:06pm
I have not put into place a new rule. I have stated what I believe should be the case. As of now any player who kills the last T can still be banned.

PLEASE NOTE... THIS ENTIRE SECTION OF THE FORUM IS DEVOTED TO THE DISCUSSION OF THE RULES, NOTHING POSTED IN HERE IS AN ACTUAL RULE UNTIL IT IS APPROVED BY A BD AND APPEARS IN THE MOTD!

Essentially unless I say "The rule is that" or "There is no rule for" do not take what I say here as a rule.

Everything I have said is my opinion. Nothing in here, that has been discussed constitutes an actual rule.

My Post about what to do if a T is not trying to escape was a discussion about the rules. No rule is an actual rule until it is in the MOTD/!Rules.

I appologize to those who thought I had just made up a rule on the spot, because I havent, I dont do that, I was simply stating my beliefs about what should happen.

I appologize for making my first post about the last T being able to be killed after a certain time sound like I was stating a fact. I did not intend it to be as such and it is 100% my fault for my failure to use the correct qualifiers when I wrote that post. Please forgive me, since I so often have to tell a player what is and what isnt a rule (As noted by my large red text), I get used to stating things in absolutes. I did not intend the post about the Last T being killed to be thought of as me stating a rule

So basically I will stick to being a dumbfuck and following the rules exactly as written :)

Note: My very first post in this thread was me stating a fact. As noted by the fact that I clealy stated that according to out MOTD, it is not a rule. Everything beyond that is my opinion.


Then I apologize for misunderstanding you and for coming off a bit like an ass :P.

*Queen VenomousFate*
2 Jul 2009, 09:45pm
Then I apologize for misunderstanding you and for coming off a bit like an ass :P.

Do not worry, you did not misunderstand me. The way it was written was so that the way you understood it was the way it sounded. That was not my intent however, and therefore I appologize.

trakaill
3 Jul 2009, 01:56am
No you need to shut the fuck up and stay out of PB.

can we ban this fucker....everyone knows he is a dick and everyone but the trolls think he is a dickhead..he is the same nut sack as speed and should really be given the same treatment.

Fast Bullet
3 Jul 2009, 02:09am
Back to the topic. After the T finishes with his LR ,you can kill him. That was the question, he got his answer so we can lock this thread .

Caution
3 Jul 2009, 02:31am
Back to the topic. After the T finishes with his LR ,you can kill him. That was the question, he got his answer so we can lock this thread .

No. There was no answer, just a discussion.

Fast Bullet
3 Jul 2009, 05:51am
No. There was no answer, just a discussion.



Ao (Me) = "No, I will not ban them, I do not care what rules you MADE UP for this Last Request thing, I ONLY care about the rules in the MOTD, and the rules state that a CT may kill a T if that T attacks a CT, and you attacked a CT, so they had every right to mow you down even though they said they would let you live if you win."

There

Dante
3 Jul 2009, 06:34am
But Fastbullet, It is not an OFFICIAL RULE there for you can't yet.

Runski
3 Jul 2009, 06:53am
All im saying is, why even give a T a last request when there is no hope in winning when your gonna be killed right after, you have better luck winning, spinning around in a corner counting your ABC's (yes I said COUNTING your ABC's) But in a LR there is no reason to give a T a last request, if there are two or more CT's still alive, cause the T will be killed. How are the Terrorists suppose to win in a LR, unless it's against only 1 CT...

Dante
3 Jul 2009, 07:41am
Exactly my point.

Fast Bullet
3 Jul 2009, 08:56am
All im saying is, why even give a T a last request when there is no hope in winning when your gonna be killed right after, you have better luck winning, spinning around in a corner counting your ABC's (yes I said COUNTING your ABC's) But in a LR there is no reason to give a T a last request, if there are two or more CT's still alive, cause the T will be killed. How are the Terrorists suppose to win in a LR, unless it's against only 1 CT...

A LR is when there's 1 T left he can have a death game(LR) ,so that ppl don't w8 3 more min for the round to end.
You cant expect that the last T is gonna kill all 9 of the CT's.The LR is not intended for that,its intended to end the round.If the T's don't rebel its there problem.The LR is not a second chance to kill all the CT's.

And the current rule states "CT may kill a T if that T attacks a CT"

So after the LR lets say S4S ,if the T wins the other Ct may kill him,because that rule stats so.End of story!

As long as there is no new rule added to the MOTD, i will allow any CT to kill the T after the LR.

And PPL FFS ITS A LAST RUQUEST!!!

Scree :O
3 Jul 2009, 09:04am
A LR is when there's 1 T left he can have a death game(LR) ,so that ppl don't w8 3 more min for the round to end.
You cant expect that the last T is gonna kill all 9 of the CT's.The LR is not intended for that,its intended to end the round.If the T's don't rebel its there problem.The LR is not a second chance to kill all the CT's.

And the current rule states "CT may kill a T if that T attacks a CT"

So after the LR lets say S4S ,if the T wins the other Ct may kill him,because that rule stats so.End of story!

As long as there is no new rule added to the MOTD, i will allow any CT to kill the T after the LR.

And PPL FFS ITS A LAST RUQUEST!!!

QFT :D


Seriously, it comes to the T's agreement with the CT. The rules say if a T harms a CT, he can be killed.

I'm afraid there will be two groups of admins, one group condoning such actions and others not. The BD should decide on the matter, and soon.

Caution
3 Jul 2009, 10:01am
There


PLEASE NOTE... THIS ENTIRE SECTION OF THE FORUM IS DEVOTED TO THE DISCUSSION OF THE RULES, NOTHING POSTED IN HERE IS AN ACTUAL RULE UNTIL IT IS APPROVED BY A BD AND APPEARS IN THE MOTD!

There.

Like I said before, record a demo and report me.

Dante
3 Jul 2009, 10:34am
Suri himself said, that, if both agree to it then it should not be rebelling.

Fast Bullet
3 Jul 2009, 11:45am
There.

Like I said before, record a demo and report me.

"CT may kill a T if that T attacks a CT"

That rule IS ALREADY IN THE MOTD!

Huwajux
3 Jul 2009, 11:49am
Suri himself said, that, if both agree to it then it should not be rebelling.
It's already been said that Suri has no say in the matter, despite how valued his opinion may be to some.

trakaill
3 Jul 2009, 01:57pm
It's already been said that Suri has no say in the matter, despite how valued his opinion may be to some.

this is beside the point!
Fast bullet ...dont you realize the stupidity of what your are saying...this completely defeats the purpose of an LR and you are just encouraging players to stay in a corner and do nothing till the end of a round. If you challenge someone and win the challenge, logic, common sense, and a few other things that people see would want to take that challenge to the next opponent..
If that doesnt suit you, either refuse the LR or go hide someplace till its over then have a real fight then.
If you wait and kill the T right away you just come across as a pussy and dont be surprised if people call you so...

Fast Bullet
3 Jul 2009, 03:15pm
this is beside the point!
Fast bullet ...dont you realize the stupidity of what your are saying...this completely defeats the purpose of an LR and you are just encouraging players to stay in a corner and do nothing till the end of a round. If you challenge someone and win the challenge, logic, common sense, and a few other things that people see would want to take that challenge to the next opponent..
If that doesnt suit you, either refuse the LR or go hide someplace till its over then have a real fight then.
If you wait and kill the T right away you just come across as a pussy and dont be surprised if people call you so...

I said that after the LR is finished ,the ct can kill the t.So it doesn't completely defeat the purpose of LR.CUZ LR IS A FUCKING LAST REQUEST .After you get it you don't get one more,its over.THE END!

Edited:Until there is no new rule added ,i will follow the current MOTD and kill the T after the LR ,if he attacked or killed a CT.

MtrxMn
3 Jul 2009, 04:11pm
I said that after the LR is finished ,the ct can kill the t.So it doesn't completely defeat the purpose of LR.CUZ LR IS A FUCKING LAST REQUEST .After you get it you don't get one more,its over.THE END!

Edited:Until there is no new rule added ,i will follow the current MOTD and kill the T after the LR ,if he attacked or killed a CT.

what if they're lr is to do whatever challenge against the whole team?

Caution
3 Jul 2009, 05:03pm
I said that after the LR is finished ,the ct can kill the t.So it doesn't completely defeat the purpose of LR.CUZ LR IS A FUCKING LAST REQUEST .After you get it you don't get one more,its over.THE END!

Edited:Until there is no new rule added ,i will follow the current MOTD and kill the T after the LR ,if he attacked or killed a CT.

And I will still punish for it :)

Fast Bullet
3 Jul 2009, 05:09pm
what if they're lr is to do whatever challenge against the whole team?

Well if all of the CT's accept,why not.As long as all the CT that will participate agree to the LR.And if he wins lets say a knife fight with 8 of the Ct's ,the 9Th ct can kill him.Lets say he refused the knife fight when the T asked.

Fast Bullet
3 Jul 2009, 05:13pm
And I will still punish for it :)

Quoted from haggard in the admin section from the post Everything Admins need to know:
You cannot punish other admins for any reason, contact the President, Vice President, Board of Directors or any of the Administrative Officers to mediate. They will take action if needed.

Any one that slays me for killing the T after the LR will get an admin complain for sure,because i did nothing wrong by the current rules stated in the MOTD and the fact that the admin who slayed me was breaking the rules!

Caution
3 Jul 2009, 05:23pm
Quoted from haggard in the admin section from the post Everything Admins need to know:
You cannot punish other admins for any reason, contact the President, Vice President, Board of Directors or any of the Administrative Officers to mediate. They will take action if needed.

Any one that slays me for killing the T after the LR will get an admin complain for sure,because i did nothing wrong by the current rules stated in the MOTD and the fact that the admin who slayed me was breaking the rules!

I'm well aware of that, smart one. I never once said I would punish another admin for it, but I WILL punish players for it.

Dracula
3 Jul 2009, 05:28pm
I'm well aware of that, smart one. I never once said I would punish another admin for it, but I WILL punish players for it.

Then you will have admin complaints.

Caution
3 Jul 2009, 05:34pm
Then you will have admin complaints.

I'll manage.

Nighthawk
3 Jul 2009, 06:00pm
There was a guy earlier who perma banned someone for killing a guy for having a gun as his lr which was s4s. I think he deserved it but this contradicts it.

Caution
3 Jul 2009, 06:46pm
There was a guy earlier who perma banned someone for killing a guy for having a gun as his lr which was s4s. I think he deserved it but this contradicts it.

Ok that's a little extreme. At the very most I would ban for 5 minutes, and even then it would have to be because it was continuous.

*Queen VenomousFate*
3 Jul 2009, 06:53pm
Suri himself said, that, if both agree to it then it should not be rebelling.

Suri is no longer an upper level staff member here.

Also note... he used the qualifier "should" meaning that it is his opinion and in no way reflects the rules.

*Queen VenomousFate*
3 Jul 2009, 06:55pm
And I will still punish for it :)

No you will not.

*Queen VenomousFate*
3 Jul 2009, 06:56pm
I'm well aware of that, smart one. I never once said I would punish another admin for it, but I WILL punish players for it.

Once again, you will not.

Please just follow the rules as they are written. Mowing down the last T does make you an asshole, but here at SteamGamers, we dont ban people for being assholes, we ban them when they break the rules.

Please do not become one of the asshole players we wish we could ban, just follow the rules we set for admins and you will be fine.

*Queen VenomousFate*
3 Jul 2009, 06:56pm
There was a guy earlier who perma banned someone for killing a guy for having a gun as his lr which was s4s. I think he deserved it but this contradicts it.

Please tell me as much info about this ban as you can.

QUAD POST FTW!

Dracula
3 Jul 2009, 07:55pm
c-c-c-c-combo breaker!

Caution
3 Jul 2009, 08:32pm
Record a demo and report me. I am NOT going to allow a CT that is FULLY aware that it is a fair LR to just mow down the last T. Grade A bullshit.

Venomous, you aren't even the AO of PB and you're going to come in, not even discuss a rule with other players, but simply say what is and what isn't. Hey, did you know that until recently, team killing was not in the PB motd, and it's not in the other motds. So from what you have been saying in all your arguments, we can't punish for it?

Like I've said before, report me and give me three strikes. I have NO problem following a rule (no matter how much I may disagree with it) that has actually been discussed.

Caution
3 Jul 2009, 08:40pm
And another thing, not killing afks until the end of the round was never in the motd until somebody FINALLY added !rules in. But Spiked himself has said that it is upon the discretion of the admin on at the time to take action or not to. That was never in the motd, but an admin could still punish for it if he saw fit.

Please stop with the "It's not in the motd, don't punish for it" approach. There are several scenarios where we justfully (spellcheck?) ban people for breaking rules that aren't specified in the motd (can name them if needed).

This is starting to get pointless though. It's not so much of a discussion, but more of an undiscussed 'non rule'. I've said all I needed to and I sense this turning into either a flame war or pointless bickering. Make an admin complaint on me and give me all three strikes, but I'm not following something that has been said out of nowhere, and it's especially annoying as someone who plays PB constantly. Once again, no disrespect to you Venomous, but I'm not following that until an actual discussion has been brought up.

Sorry for the double post.

Runski
3 Jul 2009, 09:28pm
How is this a rule discussion if we keep getting referred back to the ole "If it's in te MOTD or !rules it's okay" This part of the forums is pointless if we cant discuss without having someone come in here and say "It's in the MOTD it's fine" or "It's not in the MOTD, dont do it." Im done in this thread.

MtrxMn
3 Jul 2009, 09:33pm
No you will not.

OWNED

Ulrich
3 Jul 2009, 10:59pm
I do this all the time and I counter with the statement,

"He asked for shot for shot; He didn't ask to live if he won, and he did kill someone."

Fast Bullet
4 Jul 2009, 04:47am
I do this all the time and I counter with the statement,

"He asked for shot for shot; He didn't ask to live if he won, and he did kill someone."

QFT

I am not saying kill him the second he attacks the ct in s4s,that would destroy the purpose of LR.I am saying after the LR is over that you can kill him if the CT died or get attacked in any way, because it says so in the current MOTD that you can kill a T that attacked a CT.Until a new rule is added that specifies that you cant kill a t after the LR,you can kill him if he attacked a ct in any way

Huwajux
4 Jul 2009, 05:02am
With a little team morale, look at what the terrorists can accomplish. We won 37 rounds whilst the Cts only won once, that's what happens when you have a bunch of terrorists who aren't afraid to sacrifice in the zerg rush against the Cts. Not really making a point, just thought it was cool to see what can be done if we didn't have any LR whores.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d71/Huwajux/ba_jail_electric_large_spfix0005.jpg

Dracula
4 Jul 2009, 09:31am
With a little team morale, look at what the terrorists can accomplish. We won 37 rounds whilst the Cts only won once, that's what happens when you have a bunch of terrorists who aren't afraid to sacrifice in the zerg rush against the Cts. Not really making a point, just thought it was cool to see what can be done if we didn't have any LR whores.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d71/Huwajux/ba_jail_electric_large_spfix0005.jpg

Ill come in and camp see how many you win :]

Huwajux
4 Jul 2009, 12:03pm
Ill come in and camp see how many you win :]
It's no use! That's what the Cts tried to do most of the time and we just rushed the vents and the first cell, not caring whether we died or not. I guess the zerg rush technique really does work. :laugh:

Awacs
4 Jul 2009, 12:33pm
It's no use! That's what the Cts tried to do most of the time and we just rushed the vents and the first cell, not caring whether we died or not. I guess the zerg rush technique really does work. :laugh:

My point in the no-camping rule is proved.

Also, LR is Last request. Its as simple as that.



Now onto the next part.

Lets start debating this ONE point at a time.

Points:
1. Giving an LR period (Mostly resolved by the rules)
2. What happens if the terrorist refuses an LR with 2-3 minutes remaining
3. Killing in the middle of a sanctioned LR
4. Killing AFTER an LR and the multiple LRs problem

Its a lot easier to build rules in my opinion if every part of the issue I can see is addressed in order.



Now, My views on the points.
1. As stated in the rules, Up to the CT team. Also up to the terrorist, as it could most likely get him killed

2. I'm iffy if he should live or die.

3. I'm against this. Its a sanctioned LR (Which isn't in the rules), even though the rules currently state after an attack you can kill the T.

4. I think an LR should be a LAST request. It will increase the rebelling and cut down on time used if you know you only get one game.




(If this has already been addressed, I thought it would be a little easier if it was in an orderly form.)

*Queen VenomousFate*
4 Jul 2009, 02:52pm
How is this a rule discussion if we keep getting referred back to the ole "If it's in te MOTD or !rules it's okay" This part of the forums is pointless if we cant discuss without having someone come in here and say "It's in the MOTD it's fine" or "It's not in the MOTD, dont do it." Im done in this thread.

The purpose of this thread was not to propose a new rule or talk about a rule that already existed. The original purpose of this was to ask a question about a rule. That is why I said it was not a rule and used the MOTD as my explanation.

If someone makes a new thread and wants to discuss a rule they want to see put in place or removed, that is different because they are not questioning whether a rule exists, but they want to see discussion about a rule they want or dont want to see.

I only step in to tell people what the rule is when they ask a question as to what the rule is. It is then my job to clarify to rules, not to discuss them, but to clarify the rules.

If you want to discuss make a post that says "Add a rule that makes it illegal to kill a T if they win a LR" or something like that.

*Queen VenomousFate*
4 Jul 2009, 02:54pm
And another thing, not killing afks until the end of the round was never in the motd until somebody FINALLY added !rules in. But Spiked himself has said that it is upon the discretion of the admin on at the time to take action or not to. That was never in the motd, but an admin could still punish for it if he saw fit.

Please stop with the "It's not in the motd, don't punish for it" approach. There are several scenarios where we justfully (spellcheck?) ban people for breaking rules that aren't specified in the motd (can name them if needed).

This is starting to get pointless though. It's not so much of a discussion, but more of an undiscussed 'non rule'. I've said all I needed to and I sense this turning into either a flame war or pointless bickering. Make an admin complaint on me and give me all three strikes, but I'm not following something that has been said out of nowhere, and it's especially annoying as someone who plays PB constantly. Once again, no disrespect to you Venomous, but I'm not following that until an actual discussion has been brought up.

Sorry for the double post.

I am not going to argue with you about any failures that our MOTD has had in the past. If you want to discuss those make a new thread. This thread is about LRs and as far as this thread is concerned that is all I care about.

*Queen VenomousFate*
4 Jul 2009, 03:00pm
Record a demo and report me. I am NOT going to allow a CT that is FULLY aware that it is a fair LR to just mow down the last T. Grade A bullshit.

Venomous, you aren't even the AO of PB and you're going to come in, not even discuss a rule with other players, but simply say what is and what isn't. Hey, did you know that until recently, team killing was not in the PB motd, and it's not in the other motds. So from what you have been saying in all your arguments, we can't punish for it?

Like I've said before, report me and give me three strikes. I have NO problem following a rule (no matter how much I may disagree with it) that has actually been discussed.

First of all, we no longer have AOs assigned to different servers. Every AO is now in charge of every server (Although since I am a senior tenured AO I still demand that I stay in charge of Zomvie Escape :).

Like I said in my last post, if you want to DISCUSS a rule, make a thread about DISCUSSING a rule. The purpose of this thread was to ASK A QUESTION about a rule. And therefore in my AO capacity I looked at our MOTD and made a descision about whether or not this is against the rules.

IF you want to DISCUSS what happens after a LR, then you are free to make a thread in which you request a DISCUSSION. But if anyone comes into this area and posts a QUESTION about a rule I am going to tell them what the rule is and not back down.

I would be happy to discuss with you what should happen after a LR, and maybe we can work on a rule that satisfies both of us. This thead however, asked what the rule is RIGHT NOW, and I told them what the rule is. If you wish to discuss this rule then please bring it up in another thread and after a thorough discussion we can give it to a BD to decide the rules.

I know it may seem nitpicky, but if a player comes to this area looking for clarification of a rule, and they see a thread that asks the same question that they need answered, I want them to be able to look at that thread and know that as of now, these are the rules.

*Queen VenomousFate*
4 Jul 2009, 03:10pm
I even made a Thread so that we can DISCUSS our current rules :)

I am closing this thread to force the disccusion to move to the new thread. Please continue our discussion over there. :)

http://www.steamgamers.com/forum/showthread.php?p=233339#post233339