Dirtboy

The admin team revised the PR rules and came up with revamped set that should pertain to all things PR. If you haven't noticed the new sticky, here is the
LINK.

If you have any questions, please pm one of our super sexy admins.

Dirt

__________________
|TG-6th| Dirtboy
Need an Admin? | Want to help TG? | The 6th Devil's Brigade

oldirti

yah...got it

__________________

[TF21]Wolfe

Is HAT/TOW sniping allowed now?

It may be worth clarifying that in the rules to avoid disagreements, arguments, and unnecessary reporting of rules violations both in-game and on the forums. Other than that, it looks like everything is basically the same except the restriction on the HAT snipe.

Dirtboy

Wolfe,

It still goes under Rule #1. Striving for realism. How is shooting a H-AT at infantry instead of armor helping the team out? I am not saying that you do it, I am pointing out that it is not realistic to shoot at infantry. We came to the conclusion that it is difficult to enforce such said rule, but think that it ween itself out. Personally, I would rather be shot by H-AT as infantry then having a APC roll up and smoke the H-AT guy.

__________________
|TG-6th| Dirtboy
Need an Admin? | Want to help TG? | The 6th Devil's Brigade

[TF21]Wolfe

Shifting the HAT snipe rule from "NO HAT SNIPING, EVER" to "only when it's realistic" will be even harder to enforce than before. Arguments will break out as to "how realistic" it was to use the HAT in the manner it was, with the dead person always arguing it wasn't realisitc, while the HAT person always arguing it was.

Personally, it doesn't matter to me whether HAT sniping is allowed or not, but the rule governing it should be absolutely clear and leave no room for debate for the sake of the players and the sanity of the admins. Simply put, gray area rules like this make baby jesus cry.

In the meantime, I have been discussing the HAT with the devs and requested that the blast radius be reduced to an area similar to that of a tank's AT round; doing massive damage to armor but minimal damage to infantry. This change would be done for the sake of both gameplay and realism, since the HAT is designed to be a puncture weapon, not an area of effect.

Halcyon

I have a question on the uncap base rules, specifically about the opposition shooting into/out of the uncap..

How far away from the uncap can someone get until they're deemed "fair game?"

__________________
[TF21] Halcyon

gijoe

This is great, the only rule i was waiting on was the asset one

__________________

[TF21]Wolfe

I think that depends on the map; some uncap bases are within a stone's throw of the first flag. It's a gray area too, but might be one of those "if it feels like basecamping, than it probably is". As of late, I say far away from the enemy main to avoid any such dispute.

d1sp0sabl3H3r0

The HAt/LAT rule is simple - there isn't one. Strive for realism, but if you want to use your HAT on that one guy sprinting across the field, then go for it. Just don't expect a lot of happy teammates when the enemy armor tears them apart because you're out of ammo on your HAT and you've got those two kills.

__________________
|TG-X|d1sp0sabl3

kilroy0097

Anyone who can't read between the lines in the new rules is either choosing to be ignorant or is purposely feigning ignorance. The majority of players we complain about don't even read the rules so it won't matter how it's reworded. They didn't read it then and they won't read it now. We the regular players still have to attempt to enforce order by continuing to report players who blatantly disregard the spirit of the rules. Anyone that complains that they need exact wording in the rules before they will actively follow them is a rules lawyer and is certainly not following the spirit of the rules. Report them as you would report any other smurf pubber child.

__________________

thegreatnardini

Excellent post Kilroy. Basically the rules revolve around realism, which is what PR is all about. If you are doing something that, while not specifically against the rules, is bending the aspects of realism to get cheap kills we will have a problem.

As far as the UCB distance rule, we aren't going to go over every map and measure out a set distance for you to steer clear of. Basically if you think you're too close you probably are, and there's no reason to be close to a UCB in most cases.

__________________

lTG-6thl TheGreatNardini

Ghost Dog

Bring it on Spec Ops .

I 'm guessing we will see a lot more H-AT sniping now, but at least we should see a lot less discussion around it right?

__________________

d1sp0sabl3H3r0

We want you to strive for realism. If someone lets loose with a HAT on infantry, so be it. We're fairly confident that it will catch up to the player shooting the HAT (TOW, LAT, blah blah blah) eventually, probably sooner rather than later, and there is really no need for the admins to get involved. Is it against the rules? No. Should you do it? From a realism perspective, probably not. You will probably end up needing those AT rounds against real targets and wish you had them back.

__________________
|TG-X|d1sp0sabl3

Corporal_Cody

The only times I feel H-AT sniping is "appropriate" is when destroying a bunker, or when engaging a clump of infantry inside of a bunker or "static" bunker. I feel this way, because realisticly, there have been times when soldiers have cleared out such things via H-AT weapons. Of course, based on how the game is played, I could be wrong about my opinion.

snooggums

One request: The maps that don't have a main base named as such are hard to determine sometimes. Does anyone have a list of the current maps with the names of the mains that aren't named main?

And hurray for the no gunfire in mains until the flag is in play! Spec Ops should be silent!

__________________