Right now you're not allowed to kill a detective that tazes you once you get up because it's "not self-defense" Previous ruling was the following Detectives that shoot someone with the taser should be killed for it in self defense unless they provide am HP station for the damaged player. If a player is tazed, they should be able to kill a detective as soon as they are able. Make it that ruling again
isn't this how it was at one point last year when the taser was originally added? It's dumb. Don't randomly shoot with a taser, unless you planned to get killed sMH but; there should be a cap on it. Like you can't just 1 minute later kill the detective because he damaged you with it lmao
The current ruling is something I do disagree with in kind of a street justice sense. If a detective shot me I would defend myself, but if he shoots you with a tazer you cannot due to it no longer being considered self defense. In general I think this is a ruling which is confusing to new players and could lead to situations where a player is being hunted down by a detective with little opportunity of recourse if the detective becomes distracted. In general though, if you shoot a player with a taser, you should expect to be shot back at.
While I do think that considering the "only if they don't offer healing" point is an interesting one, it's really hard to get right. Detectives don't have an infinite supply of points or health stations, so they may not physically be able to offer you healing. So while it does sound neat in theory, it could be easily abused or worked around.
the healing part is just w/ mango was going with They shouldn't be damaging you in the first place, let alone not being able to compensate for that damage
ill go ahead and post the current logic for the ruling that we have at the moment to provide contrast and better discussion your argument is that you should be able to kill someone for tasing you because it puts you in danger; which it does. while you are tased in the rag-doll state, you are in danger of being stepped on which kills you. if you are not stepped on and survive getting up, you are not in danger of being stepped on and killed anymore. there is no in-between at the moment with the taser. its either you get tased, are rag-dolled for 8-10 seconds and get up only taking 10 damage, or you are tased and then stepped on which kills you. in the instance where you are stepped on and die, its RDM and there is no chance for retaliation; pretty simple. if you live, you only would have taken the initial 10 damage 10 seconds ago and you are not in danger of dying from the taser anymore. per the extended rules, you can only kill a detective in self defense. So, the idea behind the current taser ruling is that if you get up with no harm, you aren't in danger anymore, meaning it isn't self defense to kill the detective who tased you. to be honest im not set on either side of the way we treat being randomly tased by a detective
or we can change that all to simply "shoot someone with taser and you can get shot for damaging them, so just simply don't do it"
The first portion of the extended rules stating that any player causing damage to another player is grounds to be killed clearly contradicts the taser portion of the extended rules. The taser causes 10 damage so you can be killed for it. I honestly don't see the point in making this rule so complicated. I mean, just look- you typed out a big-ass paragraph just to explain ONE rule. On a side-note, I'd like to point out that the extended rules say that you can kill someone for shooting at you, regardless of their role, but then again states that you can only kill a detective in self-defense later in the rules. Not a huge deal, but I thought I'd point it out since I was already perusing the extended rules.
I don't think that self defense should be a reason to kill the detective just for the sake of killing, I believe your life should legitimately be in danger. From a gun that does no damage? Yeah, it puts you at a disadvantage, but only for a short bit of time. You would likely not be able to defend yourself anyways when you get back up if the detective plans to kill you. If he doesn't, then this would just give people a reason to murder the detective. I am not really in favor of this, but I can understand the argument and i'll keep my eye on this thread. EDIT: Apparently it does do damage. I had no idea. I literally never use the taser.
I agree with what @Pacifist said, also what if its crossfire etc, just because you got tazed doesn't mean hes trying to kill you, use other factors to judge that although i will correct pacifist on 1 part, Tazer does damage as with most stuff to prevent random use without consequence
I would rather have the tazer do no damage, it would be fun if the detective had the power to taze someone for absolutely no reason and they not be able to do anything about it, but it seems that people are very set(edit: maybe they aren't, tho) on the 10 damage being "an attempt to kill". Obviously it would still be rdm if the tazer got them killed (or if you walked on a tazed person to kill them? hm).
@Pacifist If I remember correctly, the taser DOES actually deal 10 damage. I agree with you somewhat- I personally would not kill for tasing, or crossfire damage, but it's more about being consistent with the rules. For as long as I have played on SGM, damaging someone is grounds to kill, no matter what and I think it should stay that way. You can never truly know the intentions of the person who shoots you. The same goes for taser crossfire. It's just that- crossfire.
it does do about 10-15 dmg, it makes no sense that detectives can free damage you in a game where your hp matters a shit ton lol. Either remove the dmg from the taser or make it so that you can kill detectives for ruining your hp
Who decides what's self-defense and what's not? I don't know if the detective tasing me is planning killing me once I un-ragdoll or not, especially since you are extremely vulnerable in ragdoll state. In this, and any, situation, self-defense should be considered killing another player after said player damages you in any way. I say, "any way" because just like crossfire or prop throwing, I cannot be sure if the player is attempting to kill me or not. I don't see the point in changing one rule to completely contradict our definition of RDM. We have rules in place to prevent excessive killing from damage or situations like this, i.e. toxic gameplay, and they should be handled when they arise.
Well, it used to be more defined, but basically self-defense is when the detective is actively trying to kill you. But since when you're tazed they can still kill you while you're a ragdoll, if they didn't try then they aren't still actively trying to kill you, same as if a detective shot you for 10 damage and ran away... it wouldn't be self-defense to follow them to try to kill them, you would just have to report them for rdm.
