.:`=-~rANdOm~`-=:. Game Servers
.:`=-~rANdOm~`-=:. Game Servers (Read Only) => Discussion => Topic started by: [TTPN] ShadowMoon on April 13, 2012, 02:47:51 AM
-
Ok, to get things straight, is prop killing/pushing AFKs to death bannable/kickable?
Apparently, a guy named tom de falco STEAM_0:1:48505020 , keep killing AFKs (including me), either through karmable or non-karmable way, while I was busying celebrating BD, warned him when I noticed, but he replied with the words "It's Allowed". So, I wish to know about this statement
By the way, happy Friday of 13th! :D
-
As far as I know it, Pre/Post Round allowed, During Round not allowed
-
As far as I know it, Pre/Post Round allowed, During Round not allowed
Other way around.
Pre round is not allowed, pushing afks (and only afks) is allowed.
-
I didn't think killing anyone by prop pushing was allowed in any circumstance.
-
I didn't think killing anyone by prop pushing was allowed in any circumstance.
Definitely agree with this.
-
It is, as usual, up to the person who is on duty at the time. I do not ban for killing afks, but I do yell harshly at people for doing it. I'd rather let them get moved to spectate, so they aren't afk again the next 10 rounds.
-
I just kick people who do nothing but AFK anyway.
-
pushing afks (and only afks) is allowed.
So you're saying pushing 5 afks to death is allowed?
-
So you're saying pushing 5 afks to death is allowed?
Why shouldn't it be?
They're either gonna get RDMed or moved to spectators. Don't see the problem in it.
-
Why shouldn't it be?
They're either gonna get RDMed or moved to spectators. Don't see the problem in it.
Or come back in the middle of the round.
-
Or come back in the middle of the round.
Youre saying kicking them is fine (It is...), but causing them to die when they would get killed quickly by a T (Or smart inno, in the case of the AFK being T) anyways is harsh?
-
Youre saying kicking them is fine (It is...), but causing them to die when they would get killed quickly by a T (Or smart inno, in the case of the AFK being T) anyways is harsh?
IMO, it's not harsh so much as it makes no fucking sense to begin with. If they're gonna get killed by a Tater - or RDM'd - why not let it happen instead of incurring the karma loss yourself?
IMO also: pre-round pushing should be allowed ONLY so long as it doesn't cause somebody to die right as the round starts - which happens A LOT in crummy cradle.
-
IMO, it's not harsh so much as it makes no fucking sense to begin with. If they're gonna get killed by a Tater - or RDM'd - why not let it happen instead of incurring the karma loss yourself?
IMO also: pre-round pushing should be allowed ONLY so long as it doesn't cause somebody to die right as the round starts - which happens A LOT in crummy cradle.
-snip-
I feel like I dropped my ass in the toilet.
-
Like cable said.. STOP BUMPING THREADS
Are you for real
-
Like cable said.. STOP BUMPING THREADS
maybe you should take your own advice
-
While we're on the subject of rules:
Seems like an issue is coming up - for some, myself included - regarding baiting. Had a few brief and semi-quasi heated arguments over whether or not certain things were baiting - primarily a non-Detective, non-Traitor destroying a health station without the Detective's go-ahead (while D(s) is/are alive, of course). Somebody does this, I kill them, they end up being Inno, I get pissed, they herp derp about it not being baiting, I resist the urge to punch out my computer monitor.
Apparently some people fucking believe it isn't baiting to do that. Really. >:(
-
http://forum.randomgs.com/index.php/topic,7835.0.html (http://forum.randomgs.com/index.php/topic,7835.0.html)
unkarmable prop killing, pre round killing, some asshole stading with a cup in a door and people can't pass it...
prop pushing just brings to much problems.
-
While we're on the subject of rules:
Seems like an issue is coming up - for some, myself included - regarding baiting. Had a few brief and semi-quasi heated arguments over whether or not certain things were baiting - primarily a non-Detective, non-Traitor destroying a health station without the Detective's go-ahead (while D(s) is/are alive, of course). Somebody does this, I kill them, they end up being Inno, I get pissed, they herp derp about it not being baiting, I resist the urge to punch out my computer monitor.
Apparently some people fucking believe it isn't baiting to do that. Really. >:(
It's just people being assholes. I honestly can't even care about that, if you're gullible enough to keep killing people for destroying the health station, then that's your problem. Don't mean to sound offensive about it, but that's how the game's played. Sure it's a total asshole move to do, but people are always going to do it. Unless karma loss is implemented to destroying a health station.
-
While we're on the subject of rules:
Seems like an issue is coming up - for some, myself included - regarding baiting. Had a few brief and semi-quasi heated arguments over whether or not certain things were baiting - primarily a non-Detective, non-Traitor destroying a health station without the Detective's go-ahead (while D(s) is/are alive, of course). Somebody does this, I kill them, they end up being Inno, I get pissed, they herp derp about it not being baiting, I resist the urge to punch out my computer monitor.
Apparently some people fucking believe it isn't baiting to do that. Really. >:(
most of times (when i used to play TTT) i used to heal with the hp station and then destroy it if i allredy had fighthed with a traitor in that round
-
f you're gullible enough to keep killing people for destroying the health station, then that's your problem.
... so, it's my fault because I kill somebody for doing something a T would do, when he is neither D, nor authorized by a D to do it, nor proven [and/or authorized on top of that]? If I read that correcrtly, nice logic there. ::)
-
... so, it's my fault because I kill somebody for doing something a T would do, when he is neither D, nor authorized by a D to do it, nor proven [and/or authorized on top of that]? If I read that correcrtly, nice logic there. ::)
it isn't like you would get punished for doing so...
I mean, some maps got amazing spots for camping, just stand in there and when someone aims at you it means that he got a radar wich equals a traitor wich means KOS...
I know that method could end up killing an innocent in a stupid way, but still I do it knowing the risks.
-
Can we just leave it at, "Up to the admin/vip present at the time"?
-
Can we just leave it at, "Up to the admin/vip present at the time"?
Hm....
Nope.
-
Hm....
Nope.
Then I'm afraid you will never be satisfied. That is how things work here.
-
Not much a VIP can do anyways.
"You rdm detectibe?!?! 10min ban!"
"You knived T buddy! Bad boy! 10min ban!"
and so it goes.
-
Can we just leave it at, "Up to the admin/vip present at the time"?
This is what I keep telling people when they go "BUT THIS ADMIN SAID ____"
I think it'd be a horrible idea to set up a baseline for what admins can ban for and how long, mainly due to how each specific situation is different, and SHOULD be left up to the admins judgement.
-
don't unkarmable prop kill, don't pre round kill someone.
i find those 2 unfair, after that for me it is ok.
-
don't unkarmable prop kill, don't pre round kill someone.
i find those 2 unfair, after that for me it is ok.
You see guys, some maps like crummy cradle, when there are more than 2 AFKs..
Tom / anybody who trying to prop kill them, AFKs will somehow stack/goomba each other, damaging their karma during the procedure.
So, in retrospection, i still disagree with prop killing AFKs.
-
I think it'd be a horrible idea to set up a baseline for what admins can ban for and how long, mainly due to how each specific situation is different, and SHOULD be left up to the admins judgement.
yeah I agree with this because most of the time admins/vips do make the right decision
-
yeah I agree with this because most of the time admins/vips do make the right decision
Yeah "most of the time". But still.. Not all decision are right..
-
Yeah "most of the time". But still.. Not all decision are right..
Well yes, when it all comes down to it we're all human, however VIPs and Admins are trusted to make the right decision a large majority of the time. Otherwise they wouldn't be in that position in the first place.
-
UPDATED: Is Glitching in cs_assault bannable?
-
UPDATED: Is Glitching in cs_assault bannable?
Glitching is not allowed in any map.
-
UPDATED: Is Glitching in cs_assault bannable?
Varies from admin to admin.
My personal opinion is it's fine if they stay visible.
If they run behind the no-draw'd wall, I just slay them next round.
-
UPDATED: Is Glitching in cs_assault bannable?
As long as they stay in sight of people and don't go behind walls where no one can see them, no.
-
As long as they stay in sight of people and don't go behind walls where no one can see them, no.
Why did you say that 2 times.
-
Why did you say that 2 times.
My sides.
-
Why did you say that 2 times.
my sides
-
What the fuck.
-
What the fuck.
LOL
-
the real snivy is the one with the eggs.
the other snivy... i don't remember right now but yeah admins be trolling.
-
I fucking lol'd again. BUT CHANGE YOUR FUCKING SHIT BACK
Any ways... no exploits are officially bannable really, so long as the players has no actual advantage. So the exploits on assault are fine as long as they stay visible, BUT, if an admin asks you not to exploit at all, then don't. A lot of the time people don't listen and too many people go and exploit and don't stay visible and it can be hard to keep track of who's doing what... so if the admin says it's fine, then great, just stay visible. If the admin says it's not fine, then don't do it at all, for the time being. When there aren't any admins on I wouldn't care if you did exploit so long as you stay visible.
-
I fucking lol'd again. BUT CHANGE YOUR FUCKING SHIT BACK
Any ways... no exploits are officially bannable really, so long as the players has no actual advantage. So the exploits on assault are fine as long as they stay visible, BUT, if an admin asks you not to exploit at all, then don't. A lot of the time people don't listen and too many people go and exploit and don't stay visible and it can be hard to keep track of who's doing what... so if the admin says it's fine, then great, just stay visible. If the admin says it's not fine, then don't do it at all, for the time being. When there aren't any admins on I wouldn't care if you did exploit so long as you stay visible.
Currently, I still have some demo and Steam IDs waiting to be banned.
As long as they stay in sight of people and don't go behind walls where no one can see them, no.
Yet, all the demos I currently have are those who hide behind the walls, either as D/T/I.
-
which part of 'we can't do shit because sourcebans isn't up' didn't you understand ._.
-
which part of 'we can't do shit because sourcebans isn't up' didn't you understand ._.
I understand. I just need triple confirm about glitching..