Rule change required?

LeadMagnet · 09-17-2009, 02:25 AM

Tonight there was a lot of grief while playing Al Basrah. As we were sitting in a Scimtar engaging hostiles entering the 2 story building with a known cache someone decided to pull the jack-in-box routine from the mosque with an rpg. After a near miss I returned fire killing him. This rule makes absolutely zero sense. Current ROE states that a TIC may return fire in self defense (section 3 E subsection 1). Furthermore, recent changes to the ROE state that troops must withdraw from contact if action endangers non-combatants. Therefore if you want to go 100% realistic then all troops/assets must withdraw from any and all TIC's if there is a collaborator present.

Wouldn't it be easier to just make it "no firing into or out of mosque"?

bjoffe · 09-17-2009, 02:42 AM

Why, the mosque is a great place to engage from.
I more or less assume he was on top of the wall? The rule's intention as i see it is to avoid spawnrape. No-one spawns up there, anymore.

sirsolo · 09-17-2009, 02:43 AM

Im with the whole anti-spawnrape thing. Unless you then continued to spray into the mosque... no violation. The Jack-in-the-box is what set me off in this scenario.

Drew · 09-17-2009, 11:30 AM

I was in that round, I was getting told that the scimi would every now and then fire into the mosque, but a saw was spawn raping for a little while

if they have taken the time to get up onto the wall, they should be allowed to be shot.

Oh and were you in the scimi that got bayoneted? Because I did that, it was a devilish plan that failed, I placed a mine behind you, but it didn't go off when i made you reverse over it lol

LeadMagnet · 09-17-2009, 11:45 AM

Hehe, yeah that was us. All the sudden my driver says "There's a guy on the roof with a mine!". Good thing for us there's an activation delay otherwise you had us. All we did was kill the guy(s) with the rpg and suppress another shooting at infantry moving in on the cache (fired at the wall underneath him).

**snooggums** · 09-17-2009, 12:18 PM

With the number of caches that spawn within a reasonable distance of the mosque I would like the rule to be changed to no shooting in or out also.

KevlarBR · 09-17-2009, 01:42 PM

If the 2 story building was OUTSIDE the mosque, fire at will bro. If they are shooting from the inside... Well, you have the vehicle, you have the scope, you have the zoom, you have the Heat rounds... And Insurgents get nothing, just a clumsy RPG and a set of rocks.

I was playing at that time and it was completely unecessary people complaining over and over again from the same stuff. Poor thing, RPG was harassing you??? Move your god damn vehicle to a better position, use the zoom and do your job.

And, well, if PR was 100% real, jack-in-the-box wouldn't even be possible. So let's not start with this whole "this is not real!" conversation cuz it won't lead anywhere. Everyone knows and everyone likes that PR seeks reality in an arcade enviroment. Otherwise we'd be all be playing ArmA.

No changes needed to the rules, either deal with it or go find another server to play. I'm pretty sure most others aren't as sensible in this matter as TG is. And that's why I am, and I believe you are too, playing on this server my friend, and not any other.

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 09-17-2009, 02:39 PM

Look, a couple of things:

1) Let's stop telling people that if they don't like it to go somewhere else. That isn't what we're about at all, and you need to consider the source of the question first and the validity of the question next before you go rushing off to judgment.

2) The rules are pretty clear - no firing into the mosque. However, it sure seems to me as though the RPG wasn't in the mosque. It seems as though he was pretty comfortably out of the mosque in order to be able to fire onto the scimitar as he was. The rule is to prevent the BluFor from parking their armor, jeeps, and scoped weapons in a position to just rake in the kills on spawning insurgents. The benefits of this is quite obvious, as the intel points just some cascading in. The situation from last night does not meet the criteria of this rule.

There were arguments, again, that "this is war so everything goes". Well, quite frankly, that isn't true. It isn't war. It is a video game and there are quite distinct differences between the two that I really shouldn't have to explain to anyone. Our rules are our best attempt to provide a fair and level playing field for all players to enjoy their time on our server and to have a competitive match that does not provide an un-necessary advantage to one group over another. Therefore, the rule about camping the mosque is in place. True, it does not mirror real-life ROE as they currently exist, but it doesn't have to as the BluFor on these maps have incredible advantages over the OpFor as it already is. With that said, we've made rule changes in the past to adjust to the different and changing dynamics of Project Reality and we will continue to do so when and where it makes sense.

The big question I have from the round last night is this: Why was there a warrior parked inside the mosque at the end of the round? If I've ever seen a clear-cut case of baserape, this would be it. I'll be watching the BR file today when I get time to see exactly what happened there.

Celestial1 · 09-17-2009, 03:48 PM

I believe the biggest issue is not a rule change but rather rule clarification in regards to insurgent bases.

We all know that no conventional army can attack a base if it is not captureable, and this applies to the Mosque as well. However, it has been kind of blurry in regards to insurgents shooting out.

Whenever insurgents shooting out were engaged, there were times when the rule was 'no firing into mosque whatsoever' and times when firing back in defense was alright. Since it's not clear enough in the rules, it seems to vary at times, between both players and admins.

The Warrior inside the mosque was one of the APC squads in the round, and they held fire while they did this; they were not at fault in the actual baseraping either, from what I can remember from the round, as they were often with me and my squad, transporting us around, and we generally were on the Southern side of the city, so I knew where they were for 90% of the round.

The scimi/other vehicles that were North of the city are those to be looked at, as they were the sole reason for the 'baserape' cries, whether they be valid or not is beyond me, as I did not witness it.

Delta*RandyShugart* · 09-17-2009, 03:56 PM

Towards the end of the round I was the RPG user who got up onto the ledge of the mosque (I was not on the wall, but the ledge connected to it, just in case anyone confuses the ledge for the wall itself) and initially fired at an apc or scimitar (can't quite remember which one it was) which had stopped and was in the open completely. I was killed by APC or scimitar fire and a few other times after I was gunned down by AR, Rifle and IFV or Scimitar fire.

Lead, my suggestion is that at any time when you are on the server and you have a question in regards to TG's ROE ask in global for an admin to clarify, or within mumble or TS. There have been times myself when I have asked for a quick clarification just to make sure that what I am about to do isn't against the rules which are stated.

The rules regarding main bases/UCB are as follows:

Insurgents can attack enemy main at any time using whatever tactics they want as this is a real-life tactic. Remaining rules do not apply to insurgents only.
BluFor forces may not fire into a mosque area with a permanent spawn point, ever. Camping outside a mosque spawn point for the purpose of racking up easy kills is also prohibited.
Rule added 11-23-2008.

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 09-17-2009, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celestial1

The Warrior inside the mosque was one of the APC squads in the round, and they held fire while they did this; they were not at fault in the actual baseraping either,

This is entirely wrong. They did not belong there, and as far as I'm concerned there is only 1 reason to go in there in the first place, and it wasn't to hand out candy to little insurgents to win hearts and minds.

Part of the problem, and I'm not picking on you directly for this Celestial, is that players rationalize their actions and think that just because they don't shoot while they're in the enemy main that it's ok to be there. It simply isn't. It is just asking for problems to do something like this and people should know better. Dismissing the actions just because they didn't fire just shows lack of respect for the rules and the server, because it reeks of someone saying that the rules apply to everyone else but themselves. It doesn't work that way. This type of attitude causes all kinds of problems on the server and lowers our standards here.

**snooggums** · 09-17-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

Towards the end of the round I was the RPG user who got up onto the ledge of the mosque (I was not on the wall, but the ledge behind it, just in case anyone confuses the ledge for the wall itself) and initially fired at an apc or scimitar (can't quite remember which one it was) which had stopped and was in the open completely.

So the ledge isn't part of the wall? Are you implying that if you were standing on the higher non-ledge portion of the wall it would be different?

This is like the sniper climbing on top of the mosque itself to shoot out. Per the Insurgent specific rules it is against the rules to shoot the sniper (he is clearly inside the mosque area and not on an external wall), but I've seen admins comment that someone returning fire would not be punished if the insurgent sniper shot from there 'long enough'. I think LeadMagnet is really looking for clarification: are we treating the mosque like a main base and therefore able to return fire or are players shooting out of the mosque completely off limits to BluFor? If completely off limits, shouldn't the insurgents be restricted on shooting out since caches spawn awfully close to mosques?

Delta*RandyShugart* · 09-17-2009, 05:03 PM

No it is part of the wall, I edited the part of my post which you quoted. If my original description was more confusing , my apologies.

The Mosque on Al Basrah, just like on Karbala and Ramiel is a no fire zone for Coalition Forces, as it is stated in the Rules, it is considered a central spawn point.

BigGaayAl · 09-17-2009, 05:16 PM

I played in the round, and since the UK was playing the round very slow and keeping all the armor at long distance all round, it came across as quite lame to even get into the situation that sparked the discussions. There were plenty of places to fight without getting into the grey area that the scimi got in.

That cache was also not there at all. It was across the street from the mosque over a 100m form said building. Now the marker may have been there, but I believe we all now that is not necessarily where the cache is.

I reminds me of people that used to walk around near the enemy ucb, waiting till someone started shooting at them so they could shoot back.

Drew · 09-17-2009, 09:02 PM

So for the clarification of the rules

Mosques aren't like UCB's, where you can shoot aggressors shooting at you from inside

And the rule actually is: Good guys can't shoot in, bad guys can shoot out.
(if that is correct, maybe the rules should be changed or the wall be considered outside the mosque because to get onto the wall, you have to leave the mosque unless you have a rope)

I know the good guys always have the armor advantage, but what if an infantry squad walks past the northern entrance (as I have done many times) to get from the east side to the island and someone starts shooting them from just inside the gateway, surely that type of action is exploiting the rules?