Gentleman's Agreements

**TheSkudDestroyer** · 10-08-2007, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSkudDestroyer

Gentleman's agreements are really hard for even some TG regs to follow politely. A prime example would be the 60 player street game we had on PW night last night. I simply typed in "Gentleman's agreement not to use AT rockets with so many players?" And alot said yes.

Then I see several TG regs using LATs, which while within the rules, I was hoping it wouldnt happen.

The worst is to see HAT in the hands of a regular on such a small cramped map. While you can use any AT against covered units, when a majority of players are trying to limit this behavior... for one regular to openly use it infront of everyone is a disappointment to me.

While this is very off topic, it just illustrates how players abuse these non-official rules and take advantage of those around them.

Maps like street NEED these unofficial Gentleman's agreements!

This is a post I made in the "Cheap or Tactical?" Thread. I believe there's a good discussion to be had on this topic..

Quote:

Originally Posted by wikipedia

A Gentleman's agreement is an informal agreement between two or more parties. It may be written or oral. The essence of a gentleman's agreement is that it relies upon the honor of the parties for its fulfillment, rather than being in any way enforceable.

I believe when a player on TG agrees to follow the Rules and SOP's of the Server that they also agree to the "TG-Way."

There are more than rules and regulations on gameplay on our PR server. There is proper etiquette that alot of us follow. For example...We don't talk alot of trash, or go out of our way to annoy the other team. We expect that if there is a squad specifically for armor, that they receive how ever much armor is allotted to them by the CO.

But what other "Gentleman's Agreements" do you guys think exist on the server? I have a lot, but I'd like to see what you guys have stocked up in you first.

**gijoe** · 10-08-2007, 03:49 PM

Im really glad that you brought this up because there has been a major decrease in the ammount of people following the gentlemens code. I think that this is an issue that needs to be enforced on the server, maybe no punishment but definitley enforce the following of the gentlemens code.

**thegreatnardini** · 10-08-2007, 04:14 PM

I posted this in the other thread, but I just spotted this one so here goes:

One of the biggest problems with these agreements is new people joining the server. Back in the day when we'd have to seed our bf servers and there would be only 4-10 people on for an entire map, most of the time we would opt for no vehicles or snipers, etc. When new people joined in, however, they didn't know about the agreement and hopped in a tank. The same applies with our PR server

There are some gentleman's agreements which I believe should be enforced. The biggest one I feel is vehicle squads. If you have a helo squad, have been sitting around for ten minutes and some douche bag takes your helo, he deserves to be kicked not only for being disrespectful, but also being detrimental to our team. He may even be a good pilot, but he's still causing our team to have one or two less players who are still sitting on the helipad instead of doing their jobs.

The same goes for tanks. If we are playing an armor heavy map like Kufrah and some guy decides to be Ahnuld and take off by himself in a tank he should be warned. If he persists, he should be kicked. People like this can cause the enemy armor squad to decimate entire rounds. The tanks should be worried about enemy tanks, not take out a wave of single-manned tanks at the beginning and proceed to wipe the enemy infantry off the map.

**Sabre_Tooth_Tigger** · 10-08-2007, 04:21 PM

War is chaos so I think special agreements especially on a public server is too tenuious or subtle to work.

Either its a rule or not and hopefully that rule is clear to all and easy to enforce.

Theres nothing to stop you acting like a gentleman of course even when its not agreed.

Like I wont do that 1st flag attack. I dont do the HAT from a heli attack. I dont attack UCB on a grey/before AAS. I may refuse to transport or help others in doing those things.
In a scrim I would follow orders but on a pub server I'd leave the squad.

Maybe this thread is for stuff considered bad gameplay? For example I will use LAT & GL on any target and any distance & I would repeatedly throw grenades. I dont see those actions as overly easy or overpowered like HAT is.

m203/GL has been balanced now, it requires a pause before firing to be accurate. In game solutions are allways better then agreements, ideally

Rather then vehicle squads, maybe it could be restricted by kits. If there is only 1 aircraft then there is only 1 pilot kit. Same for crewman etc

**TheSkudDestroyer** · 10-08-2007, 05:37 PM

If they do that to kits, what would stop the same person that nardini listed from taking one and saying "well I have the kit!"?

**Sabre_Tooth_Tigger** · 10-08-2007, 06:44 PM

Your right he would be the pilot, end of argument? Its a bit like this now for APC and tanks away from base, no kit no play.

It might be best combined with stricter penalties for people who use assets badly.

Grtz on your badge btw

Blackie Lawless · 10-08-2007, 07:23 PM

I personally don't care for smacktard gameplay, it's childish and degrades the gameplay of others. I also don't care for players who are arguementative or resistant when confronted about their gameplay or attitudes. These things degrade the server environment, cause good players that frequent the server to leave, and are basically an attempt for everyone one on the server to conform to the way these retards want the game to be played.

The environment has become very lax lately concerning peoples language, taunts, teabagging, misuse of the rules, breaking of the rules, etc...

I think it's bad for the oriented individuals who have made PR popular, and have made TG a great place to play. Of course you are going to have hackers and the like visit the server and try to take advantage of the atmosphere for their own enjoyment. The solution is simple in my opinion, kick them, and if they continue, ban them, permanantly.
Who cares about the loss of a crappy player, but noone wants to lose a good player.

Even password night is getting out of control lately.

$0.02

TheSkilledOne · 10-09-2007, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger

Like I wont do that 1st flag attack. I dont do the HAT from a heli attack. I dont attack UCB on a grey/before AAS. I may refuse to transport or help others in doing those things.
In a scrim I would follow orders but on a pub server I'd leave the squad.

Maybe this thread is for stuff considered bad gameplay? For example I will use LAT & GL on any target and any distance & I would repeatedly throw grenades. I dont see those actions as overly easy or overpowered like HAT is.

Agree with you on this except I Frown upon using a LAT Vs 1 Lone gun man. and as always I will provide why I do not like this tactic. The LAT is Light Anti-Tank, now with the Anti-Tank comes a powerful hit with nice splash damage and decent accuracy, some one who knows the curve this LAT takes cause Abuse it to all get out. He has a weapon designed for 1 soldier, a Rifle, Unless that soldier is in a Hardend target the LAT shouldnt be used as it is too important and a waste. You do not see Modern armies running down the road launching rockets at One guy with a gun standing in the road. No you take your rifle and shoot him.(Pending he is a enemy combatant).

1. you only get 1 shot with the Anti-tank, Over kill for 1 guy Especially when in the open.
2. You have anti-Personnel Rifle, and your squadies should be watching your back
3. Only use I see for LAT vs Personnel is vs a Squad (3+) moving in a tight pack and can not grenade them and Vs a Hardened target (Specifically in a Bunker / Sandbags)

**Terminal Boy** · 10-09-2007, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSkilledOne

Agree with you on this except I Frown upon using a LAT Vs 1 Lone gun man. and as always I will provide why I do not like this tactic. The LAT is Light Anti-Tank, now with the Anti-Tank comes a powerful hit with nice splash damage and decent accuracy, some one who knows the curve this LAT takes cause Abuse it to all get out. He has a weapon designed for 1 soldier, a Rifle, Unless that soldier is in a Hardend target the LAT shouldnt be used as it is too important and a waste. You do not see Modern armies running down the road launching rockets at One guy with a gun standing in the road. No you take your rifle and shoot him.(Pending he is a enemy combatant).

1. you only get 1 shot with the Anti-tank, Over kill for 1 guy Especially when in the open.
2. You have anti-Personnel Rifle, and your squadies should be watching your back
3. Only use I see for LAT vs Personnel is vs a Squad (3+) moving in a tight pack and can not grenade them and Vs a Hardened target (Specifically in a Bunker / Sandbags)

A big +1 to that!

**Ghost Dog** · 10-09-2007, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger

... especially on a public server is too tenuious or subtle to work.

Either its a rule or not and hopefully that rule is clear to all and easy to enforce.

That is indeed the biggest problem. As long as it 's not a rule, most people won't care and those who do, will only get frustrated. I myself play in the lines of the agreements, but as long as TG remains a public server, I do not see pubbies do this.

As mentioned in the other thread, I would like to see an agreement disallowing forward attacks. The maps weren't designed for them and they tend to make gameplay very poor.

**Terminal Boy** · 10-09-2007, 08:31 AM

Make it a rule and show a warning in the server loading screen.

People who don't like the rule have two choices:-

1. Accept it and play on.

2. Ignore it and get banned.

It might be because I'm an old fart, but I can usually obey rules and can take it on the chin when I'm punished for breaking one.

westyfield · 10-09-2007, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackie Lawless

concerning peoples language, taunts, teabagging, misuse of the rules, breaking of the rules, etc...

We are still talking about PR, right?

Also, what street map is it that Skud mentioned in the first post? Is that the one with the crashed Blackhawk, or a new one?

**gijoe** · 10-09-2007, 05:25 PM

I think that teabagging is kind of a disrespect thing and some thing to be concerned about but kind of not. Lets say that if two people were having a friendly competition, then maybe, teabagging after you kill the other person may be OK. but if you dont know the person and you are in a frustrated mood, then it wouldnt be ok to teabag the person because they might take it offensive or a hostile act toward them.

**StevieRay** · 10-09-2007, 05:47 PM

I love that we are discussing teabagging...sorry, I am laughing too much...no disrespect, it is funny.

**Sabre_Tooth_Tigger** · 10-09-2007, 06:44 PM

Street map is 16p infantary map, no larger size exists afaik. No crashed bh that I saw. Its part of the 0.6 build

10-08-2007, 03:49 PM	#2 (permalink)
gijoe Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 1,302	Re: Gentleman's Agreements Im really glad that you brought this up because there has been a major decrease in the ammount of people following the gentlemens code. I think that this is an issue that needs to be enforced on the server, maybe no punishment but definitley enforce the following of the gentlemens code. __________________

10-08-2007, 04:14 PM	#3 (permalink)
thegreatnardini Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Philleh Posts: 1,541	Re: Gentleman's Agreements I posted this in the other thread, but I just spotted this one so here goes: One of the biggest problems with these agreements is new people joining the server. Back in the day when we'd have to seed our bf servers and there would be only 4-10 people on for an entire map, most of the time we would opt for no vehicles or snipers, etc. When new people joined in, however, they didn't know about the agreement and hopped in a tank. The same applies with our PR server There are some gentleman's agreements which I believe should be enforced. The biggest one I feel is vehicle squads. If you have a helo squad, have been sitting around for ten minutes and some douche bag takes your helo, he deserves to be kicked not only for being disrespectful, but also being detrimental to our team. He may even be a good pilot, but he's still causing our team to have one or two less players who are still sitting on the helipad instead of doing their jobs. The same goes for tanks. If we are playing an armor heavy map like Kufrah and some guy decides to be Ahnuld and take off by himself in a tank he should be warned. If he persists, he should be kicked. People like this can cause the enemy armor squad to decimate entire rounds. The tanks should be worried about enemy tanks, not take out a wave of single-manned tanks at the beginning and proceed to wipe the enemy infantry off the map. __________________ lTG-6thl TheGreatNardini Happy Easter \| Battlefield 2 SOP's \| Kicked? Banned? Click here!!! \| Need an admin? PM me \| XFire

10-08-2007, 04:21 PM	#4 (permalink)
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: eurasia Posts: 2,319	Re: Gentleman's Agreements War is chaos so I think special agreements especially on a public server is too tenuious or subtle to work. Either its a rule or not and hopefully that rule is clear to all and easy to enforce. Theres nothing to stop you acting like a gentleman of course even when its not agreed. Like I wont do that 1st flag attack. I dont do the HAT from a heli attack. I dont attack UCB on a grey/before AAS. I may refuse to transport or help others in doing those things. In a scrim I would follow orders but on a pub server I'd leave the squad. Maybe this thread is for stuff considered bad gameplay? For example I will use LAT & GL on any target and any distance & I would repeatedly throw grenades. I dont see those actions as overly easy or overpowered like HAT is. m203/GL has been balanced now, it requires a pause before firing to be accurate. In game solutions are allways better then agreements, ideally Rather then vehicle squads, maybe it could be restricted by kits. If there is only 1 aircraft then there is only 1 pilot kit. Same for crewman etc __________________ *WWII German infantry weapons in detail*

10-08-2007, 05:37 PM	#5 (permalink)
TheSkudDestroyer Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: NY Posts: 2,974	Re: Gentleman's Agreements If they do that to kits, what would stop the same person that nardini listed from taking one and saying "well I have the kit!"? __________________ \|TG-6th\|Skud, NA Deputy Lead Tester To Hell and Back: The untold story of having your Dick Blonov ?uestlove just murdered me \| I love TG - You do too!

10-08-2007, 06:44 PM	#6 (permalink)
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: eurasia Posts: 2,319	Re: Gentleman's Agreements Your right he would be the pilot, end of argument? Its a bit like this now for APC and tanks away from base, no kit no play. It might be best combined with stricter penalties for people who use assets badly. Grtz on your badge btw __________________ *WWII German infantry weapons in detail*

10-08-2007, 07:23 PM	#7 (permalink)
Blackie Lawless Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 18	Re: Gentleman's Agreements I personally don't care for smacktard gameplay, it's childish and degrades the gameplay of others. I also don't care for players who are arguementative or resistant when confronted about their gameplay or attitudes. These things degrade the server environment, cause good players that frequent the server to leave, and are basically an attempt for everyone one on the server to conform to the way these retards want the game to be played. The environment has become very lax lately concerning peoples language, taunts, teabagging, misuse of the rules, breaking of the rules, etc... I think it's bad for the oriented individuals who have made PR popular, and have made TG a great place to play. Of course you are going to have hackers and the like visit the server and try to take advantage of the atmosphere for their own enjoyment. The solution is simple in my opinion, kick them, and if they continue, ban them, permanantly. Who cares about the loss of a crappy player, but noone wants to lose a good player. Even password night is getting out of control lately. $0.02

10-09-2007, 08:31 AM	#11 (permalink)
Terminal Boy Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: London, England Posts: 283	Re: Gentleman's Agreements Make it a rule and show a warning in the server loading screen. People who don't like the rule have two choices:- 1. Accept it and play on. 2. Ignore it and get banned. It might be because I'm an old fart, but I can usually obey rules and can take it on the chin when I'm punished for breaking one.

10-09-2007, 05:25 PM	#13 (permalink)
gijoe Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 1,302	Re: Gentleman's Agreements I think that teabagging is kind of a disrespect thing and some thing to be concerned about but kind of not. Lets say that if two people were having a friendly competition, then maybe, teabagging after you kill the other person may be OK. but if you dont know the person and you are in a frustrated mood, then it wouldnt be ok to teabag the person because they might take it offensive or a hostile act toward them. __________________

10-09-2007, 05:47 PM	#14 (permalink)
StevieRay Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: CT, USA Posts: 391	Re: Gentleman's Agreements I love that we are discussing teabagging...sorry, I am laughing too much...no disrespect, it is funny. __________________

10-09-2007, 06:44 PM	#15 (permalink)
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: eurasia Posts: 2,319	Re: Gentleman's Agreements Street map is 16p infantary map, no larger size exists afaik. No crashed bh that I saw. Its part of the 0.6 build __________________ *WWII German infantry weapons in detail*

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links