Re: It’s time to start enforcing the rules on TG tagged players.

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 05-28-2009, 01:22 PM

Not to bust your balls, but you missed the part where we elected not to put the rule in because it was already implied in rule #1, and also because it isn't a black and white rule to enforce, as evidenced by the examples of both Bullseye and myself.

**Alpha_s9** · 05-28-2009, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by d1sp0sabl3H3r0

Not to bust your balls, but you missed the part where we elected not to put the rule in because it was already implied in rule #1, and also because it isn't a black and white rule to enforce, as evidenced by the examples of both Bullseye and myself.

Is that posted later in that thread? If so... can we remove the thread to avoid confusion? I was under the impression that it was a rule because of that post, and I don't always take the time to read all the replies complaining/commenting about rule changes.

I guess in the future I'll just stick to what is in the "official" rules list and ignore any rules posted outside of that list, even if it's by the admins.

*Edit*

Looks like you already took care of it... Thanks!

*Edit numba 2*

Actually it just had an updated post so it was showing as unread.

**fullkontact** · 05-28-2009, 02:22 PM

Look, people. I don't want to get Bullseye banned, that's the last thing I want. I don't want anybody banned.

All I was trying to do was to highlight to potential areas where TG is lacking in ediquette and following rules. Nothing more, I was not trying to name or shame I did not want a flame war like this, I was meerly bringing it to the attention of others with real examples from ingame whereby there has been a slip or mistake made.

**Alpha_s9** · 05-28-2009, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by fullkontact

Look, people. I don't want to get Bullseye banned, that's the last thing I want. I don't want anybody banned.

All I was trying to do was to highlight to potential areas where TG is lacking in ediquette and following rules. Nothing more, I was not trying to name or shame I did not want a flame war like this, I was meerly bringing it to the attention of others with real examples from ingame whereby there has been a slip or mistake made.

I see... so now that alpha has posted it's officially a flame war!

:P

**Fighter** · 05-28-2009, 06:10 PM

Let me clarify my comment.

My comment was made on the assumption that the member in question had taken the thing out just to rack up kills. Assuming is never the answer I suppose. Now that Bullseye has explained he was helping the team, I will go back on what I said. I wasn't attempting to start a flame war.(comment removed)

**orpal** · 05-28-2009, 06:13 PM

Man, if PR was a simulation of real life combat then you would be right about being unrealistic pushing tank with apc, but did Bullseye go there to get kills and for his personal pleasure ?? No, he did it so OTHER teammates could play normally, he fixed their mistakes.

Now you want to stick him for that, or even point out that as a mistake, than my friend you have to clear some things out. Now if you ask me he should get a ribbon for that instead a thread that drags his name down. But since there's nothing up to me, all I can do is stand for him, which I am 100 %.

I am aware that rules apply for everyone, but seriously there are many other guys on the server that play by the rules and are MUCH less effective as Bulls is. Think about it.
And the fact that he personally took time to help me with my SM, only proves he's a real teamplayer.
Without him I wouldn't be in an IHS nor would I be a SM.

That's just my opinion since Bulls took it pretty seriously.

**snooggums** · 05-28-2009, 06:35 PM

Bullseye started a pm exchange with me and I have edited my previous comment to highlight what I really had the issue with. No I don't think he should be banned if the one-manning rule is still in shades of gray, although I still disagree with his actions and he should not have responded by telling the person to 'shut up'. I also find anyone stating that one incident deserves a permaban to have unrealistic expectations of players.

I would like to discuss the two examples of one manning an APC and I will explain why I think it breaks the rule that vehicles should be used in a realistic manner. I also want to note that just because something helps your team does not make it right, nor should it make something an exception to the rules. I also focus so much on the rules because they are what allow us to play with the same standards for everyone, and without them games are not fun because there are always exploits.

For the tank rescue example: Sure it sucks getting a tank stuck in a ditch. So does flipping a comm truck, flipping a chopper and many other things that happen. It doesn't matter that it is worth 10 tickets or how long it takes to respawn, losing an item happens. An APC would not realistically be able to pull a tank from a ditch and that would fall under using the game engine exploits (but is to fix the game engine limitation of getting a tank stuck in a ditch). A
one man APC unsticking a tank is both exploiting the engine and using the APC unrealistically.

If we want to make an exception for APCs because they are commonly transports it would be super easy to add that clarification to the rules list since in the 'New rule' thread there was no exception for APC and the two manning rule was as you noted part of the using vehicles realistically rule. Exception wording example: "Due to the new versions of PR placing an emphasis on APC transport the normally enforced rule regarding realistically manning vehicles (including a gunner for APCs) is not applicable if the APC is being used to transport other troops." Currently a new member reading the rules would not infer that it is ok to one man an APC for vehicle rescue or transport.

In the second example the APC was one manned to ferry troops. If there were 5 squads needing transport indicates that there were plenty of people on the server for a gunner in the APC. It isn't too much to ask for an APC to have a two man crew if they are the only transport vehicle on a full server until this is clarified.

I know there is a lot of focus on this but there are no exceptions for intentional teamkilling/wounding or for one man locked squads so really the gray area rules will be the ones we discuss.

**ForGlory&Pain** · 05-28-2009, 06:49 PM

the game engine and models make things get stuck in places that they should simply not get stuck. Since we dont have tow hooks on our tanks I dont think its bad to use an apc as a way of fixing a mapping oversight.

In some regards we have to suspend disbelief to get a result. We shouldnt lose the forest for the trees here.

Delta*RandyShugart* · 05-28-2009, 07:18 PM

I think what we have learned from the APC/Tank towing episode is that, if you have that kind of idea:
Get a gunner just in case you run into enemy contact

Alert your teammates of your plans, if there is no CO in charge, both in team chat (you might have to do this more than once) and on voip/ts.

Also if someone wants to use the APC and are in close proximity to you, you can set up a meeting point, or if you are at the main base and so are they, then it can be discussed.

That way if a question arises a SL can quickly say "Oh he's using it to try and get something "unstuck", I would also even if its quickly getting on TS alerting an admin so if someone say's "who's one manning an apc near a tank" or something like that it can be resolved before the yelling starts.

**McGann** · 05-28-2009, 08:38 PM

PR players are like soldiers. They are not happy unless they are complaining. Admins are like the "officers". If they give into their complaining two things happen.

1. They will not be happy cause they have nothing to complain about.
2. They will never get anything done cause they are trying to "make them happy".

So I say keep complaining it lets me know your happy.

IMHO

**caffeine** · 05-28-2009, 08:45 PM

oh. suh. nap.

**Wookie** · 05-28-2009, 10:12 PM

Isn't it nice to see these things hashed out in the forums and not in game......

**Die Nacht** · 05-28-2009, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by snooggums

Although I understand the change to having a warn/kick/ban system for ‘pub’ players or regulars that don’t wear the tags, we need to return to the days of skipping the kick step for TG tagged players that break the basic rules. Players that put on the tags are supposed to be examples to outside players and should wear it with respect and pride, not just because they think it’s cool. I can think of 5 tagged players right now that should be banned for being horrid examples of game play and I have yet to see one receive more than a kick when I have reported them. Most recent example:

TKing teammates because they wanted the map to end because they didn’t think 16 people was enough to have a good game on Asad Khal, then openly admitting to doing so. When reported they were warned, but in my opinion they should have been banned because TG members should follow basic rules.

I’m not saying TG members should be banned for accidental TKs or breaking the ‘strive for realism’ interpretive rule since that one is a bit subjective. I’m saying players that TK intentionally for any reason (rule 2), players that switch for assets then act like they own them when there is no commander (rule 9), who repeatedly explain the rules incorrectly for their benefit (all rules), don’t follow squad leader/commander orders (rule 11) and who commit suicide tactics while not insurgent (rule 4) should get at least a month temp ban as the first step of punishment. I don’t even care if they are warned in game then have it looked into later, if found to be breaking the rules they deserve a ban.

We have a large influx of new players for various reasons, we need to make sure that the TG tagged people are good examples so that the new people can learn the correct way to play.

Word...

Can't believe TG people do this.

**gijoe** · 05-28-2009, 11:22 PM

What if its not just the players? If Mr. Dispo you say "TG-tagged members ARE punished - severely - if they're caught breaking rules." What kind of punishment are we talking about for anyone above that? Say an admin breaks a rule? What kind of punishment should be given? Same as say a regular joe schmoe or a more severe one?

**d1sp0sabl3H3r0** · 05-29-2009, 12:27 AM

Well, since I flagrantly broke the one-manning rule, and since, by gosh everything is so perfectly black and white in this fantasy world some of you live in, I will ban myself for the period of 1 week, starting right now.

See you guys in a week.

Thread Tools

Display