To me, this is a serious matter because unlike the prevailing sentiment that we should keep dumbing down how common sense works so that you can only shoot at someone who is already killing you, I believe we should allow for intelligent players to play intelligently or they will stop playing altogether. I get it, dying sucks. It really does. But some of you need to get off the video games and do something else god damn. For TomCats case, he literally had everything he needed to make a justified kill using common sense. 1. Hit indicator - The hit indicator reveals which direction you are shot from. Given that he was shot from one direction and turned over to that direction where only one player stood (T DOORS WERE NOT OPEN), he was more than justified to shoot said player. But thats not it! 2. Impact sound - The scout specifically has a different sound for impact on the body, along with a different sound when fired. Knowing this, we can actually identify which gun we are shot by when it happens. This would help narrow down the weapon that said player was using. 3. Damage Taken - Each gun does a different amount of damage, and knowing which guns do what can help you narrow down the weapon used to shoot you. Seeing as TomCat was shot in the upper shoulder, it must have counted as a body shot which would do roughly one health states worth of damage - or 20 damage. 4. Positional Sound Awareness - Good players can locate who shot them based on sound alone, as each bullet distinctly makes sound that traces back to the source. If you were to play with good headphones, you could easily determine where you were shot from. All of these points combined should make apparent that TomCat was acting completely out of intelligence and had more than sufficient evidence to kill who shot him. That's not even to mention that there are bullet cases that drop from guns, PaleRider was the only one in the vicinity with a sniper, and that the traitor doors were not open. The kill was incredibly NORMAL, and most smart players wouldn't report for what was so obvious. I say we push for more intelligence on our server, and not cater to those who can't function or those who are acting out of spite.
Back before death scenes it wouldn't have resulted in a slay, but this isn't those days. As a traitor I've been killed plenty of times by people who I shot in the back and I don't report them cause, well I did it. Unless I really thought I hid around a corner before they turned around or a similarly sneaky play. As an inno, I find it so hard to identify who shot me on a map like Dolls, where everyone is super far, yet get killed for it all the time. I don't understand it but unless I felt like they couldn't see me when they turn around I accept it. I feel like this is more in the fault of the reporter than the staff member involved, though honestly I probably wouldn't have slain for it.
Man I remember the days before deathscenes, makes me realize how many damn years I've played this game
Oh nah, its not like we *couldnt* use DS, its just the fact that we didnt have it entirely. Like it was out there and ready to use, but it wasnt implemented on the servers. Just be happy you werent staffing modded on Dust 2 during that time. Jesus fuck it was so hard to get people slain for prop killing it was stupid.
To be completely honest, I'm still a bit peeved about this. Spiteful's comments make it look like he barely even reviewed the report. Honestly, though, it's just the rules are shit, and abused by shit people. My plan is to start recording myself shooting people in the back in this exact same situation, have them turn around and kill me every time, then report them and have them get slain. Sure, it's a jackass thing of me to do, but that's the point: The ruling is garbage and unfun, and any reasonable person would shoot me in that situation and would be 100% right for doing it. The only reason it's tolerable the way it is now is because most people have the decency and experience not to report for it. The way the rules are set up, you basically are never allowed to kill snipers, no matter what, unless you are perfectly aligning your view with theirs. And even then, I've been slain, because a half-centimeter movement of the barrel is the difference between several feet of space when you get far enough away.
As a mod I do not agree with some of these rules, honestly they're outdated. I saw these types of rules back in 2013, 2014. Times have changed, and it's not hard to read rules, and play the game. People who dont read the rules, or the extent of rules, learn the hard way, that's their choice. Honestly I'd like to see changes, but yano, gotta pest Highwon about it since he's the only person who has the say.
Nah I mean like, when it wasn't around at all. I think deathscenes were first introduced in late '14? Fun times
It really does seem like the rules in place favor those reporting out of spite than those who have been wronged. It should be easy to identify that someone was rdmed, but in regards to this new case, we have someone who was angry they were killed and reported the person that killed them (knowing fully well that they had just shot the person) and because of small technicalities that are completely arbitrary to anyone with a brain, the reported person is slain. That should not be the case. This person was right in all of their deductions and the traitor was killed due to their own poor play, but because the rules do not allow you to use your brain, he is punished by a spiteful reporter. That is incredibly unjustifiable. On another note, cases like these are why I play on the server less and less. Because I have played a lot I know how traitors act and behave and I very quickly deduce who is who. Unfortunately, I can’t act on this knowledge because using your brain is against the rules and if I do I am slain. So either I act on what I know and get slain, or I dick around and not try. Considering how many veterans on the server I see doing the latter, I assume that this is actually a fairly large issue: The rules and server caters toward new and unintelligent players instead of the consistent playerbase.
What you're advocating for is basically to allow people to kill for suspicion. As it is, you need to be able to 100% prove that someone committed a T act before you can kill them. Allowing kills on sus would be a terrible idea imo, no matter what the limitations were. A lot of the more veteran toxic players would find ways to abuse the fuck out of it, and kill people with immunity. Our current system isn't perfect, sure, but I think it's still a hell of a lot better than dealing with suspicion kills. Also, in regards to the original point: I was talking to an admin about the report earlier, and they mentioned the possibility of someone opening the T door, waiting a second, and then shooting Tomcat and then backing in, which would allow the T door time to close before Tom looked over. So even if you disagree with my reasoning for the slay, which I know Tom still does (and I understand why, I really do), this second explanation is entirely plausible, and would definitely place them within the area that the hitmarker could have come from. Unlikely, but it could have happened. Now, imagine for a second this IS what happened. Tom then kills the guy, who turns out to just be a random innocent with no idea what happened or why he was killed. If we allowed kills on suspicion, then in this situation, Tom would not be slain, and the inno would feel extremely cheated. Take it a step farther, and Tom maybe could have seen the person go through the T door, but as they're already gone, could just claim he didn't see the T, and kill said inno out of spite, knowing he wouldn't be slain for it (Not saying Tom would do this, just an example) Frankly, no matter how we did things, people will ALWAYS find ways to abuse them. No system is perfect, but I think our current system works well, and we have protocols in place to try and reduce the loopholing as best we can.
I am not saying kills on suspicion should be allowed, I'm saying that the "100% certainty" clause needs to be reconsidered. Common sense and 100% certainty rulings can not exist together. Either you allow common deduction and common sense, or you don't. If TomCat had killed an unsuspecting inno, he would be punished for rdm, no matter if it was a kill on sus, so that point is invalid. The hit indicator would not have come from the exact same angle, and saying "the area that the hitmarker could have come from" is ignoring the fact that the hit indicator DIDN'T COME FROM THAT ANGLE. Well if he was shot from the left instead of the right the hit marker indicator could have come from the left! Its completely disingenuous. The angles are completely different, getting shot from 90 degrees East is different from 75 degrees North East. You want absolute 100% certainty? Then you have to make sure that you are being 100% accurate when considering scenarios. It's only fair. Even if the margin of error is less than 5 degrees. Or you could just not care about accuracy and fairness and claim that he needs 100% certainty to make the kill, in which case just remove the Common Sense ruling from the rules because its completely fucking pointless.
Snipers. They are, under the rules, just about untouchable. Especially if they take a position within a window or frame where you physically cannot look over their shoulder. Because there are very few locations where you can line up the path of the bullet perfectly with a person if they are at enough range, you will not be able to get a full view of both the sniper and the target perfectly, just about ever. In situation 1, you witness the bullet's trajectory and witness someone getting their head knocked off. Within 1 second, you trace the bullet back to someone standing in a window holding a rifle. If we go off 100% certainty, you are not allowed to kill this person because the 'real' sniper could have backed out of the window, and someone else jumped into the window, in a perfectly coordinated but coincidental move. If we go by the rules, you should be slain 100% of the time for killing the sniper in this situation. That is bullshit. In situation 2, you witness the sniper firing their weapon, see the bullet's trajectory. Within 1 second, you trace the bullet back to an Unid'd body with their head blasted off, maybe even still falling. If we go off 100% certainty, what could have happened is they shot just a few feet away from the body, or even shot the body, and a completely unrelated bullet was responsible for the death. Doesn't matter if every time they fire, a new body is made- It could all possibly be coincidence, and because it's impossible for you to get a full picture view from your position without likely dying yourself, you should be slain 100% o the time for killing the sniper in this situation. That is bullshit. In situation 3, you are standing right beside the sniper. Or even on top of them. You have nearly a perfect view of their barrel and line of sight. Just below you, is a crowd of people. You watch them fire, and you watch the bullet pass near the crowd. Now, from your perspective, you could draw a circle smaller than a penny, and the bullet and each of those people would all be inside. However, the bullet traveled and struck the far wall! Or a roof! Obviously they weren't shooting at the crowd. You will get slain, and that is bullshit. And then let's take something like propkilling. It's kinda really fucking obvious when someone is preparing to propkill you, especially when every corpse in the area that you've checked has been propkilled and no Ts have been id'd. Propkilling is almost always lethal unless the killer botches it, and a good killer rarely botches it. TTT is supposed to be a game about logic and reasoning, figuring out the best method to kill people and the best method to identify the killer. But SGM actively discourages any of that for the most lethal weapons we have in the game. Your only way to counter a sniper is to outsmart them, but you're not allowed to be smart. It just isn't fun to have a game where your options are to die, or kill someone and hope they aren't such a dick that they'll report you for it. And then for the being shot from behind thing? The T-room isn't actually relevant to teh overall issue, cuz 90% of the time it's not going to be a factor. We used to have a ruling, and technically still do I think just because the rules haven't actually changed, where a player could stand behind you with a shotgun, so close it's clipping through you, and shoot you. And if you turned around and shot them it would be RDM if there was ANY open path around you, because of the same possibility in situation 1 or some other bullshit. The only people that win with such a standard of 'No kills on suspicion' are toxic assholes. It doesn't make for a fun game. It barely makes for a game at all. It takes all the intelligence (if you can call anyone in Gmod intelligent) out of TTT and boils it down to 'Oh, my name is red. I can shoot people freely now.' 'Oh, I a bullet came close to me. I can shoot that person shooting me now' 'Oh, that guy shot someone. I don't know anything about the context of the situation, but who gives a fuck- I can shoot someone now." Do you want to know why everyone is so fucking toxic all the time in SGM? It's because we love the game, we love the atmosphere, but you've made it so goddamn boring that we have to make our own fun. The reason our extended rules are a goddamn book is that we have to plug every little gap that people find to squeeze out even a modicum of entertainment that ISN'T the same monotonous shit match after match. Absolutely nobody benefits from the 100% certainty rule. It's a relic, and the only people who even follow it anymore for reports are straight-up assholes. I'd like anyone to name a case where they reported someone over a technicality and weren't a complete for doing it. Fuck, I was a dick when I did it against people back when forgiveness wasn't a thing and all damage had to be reported and punished. It worked when SGM prided itself in upholding the strictest standard of the rules, but we don't do that anymore. @Lordyhgm @Jabba the Slut, what do you two think? I've been meaning to make the suggestion about the sniper issue for awhile now, but a discussion thread prob works better.
Lmao this is what I get when I just type shit between rounds. A wall bigger than even I want to re-read.
The most intelligent players are the ones that know when they can kill for 100% common sense and when to leave it as High Sus. The only point that left the kill in the above case as a non common sense kill is the first one due to the T-room and how it could be used to avoid getting caught. Else if its a closed off area with nowhere to hide, its often ruled as common sense if you get shot from behind and only 1 player is there and able to have done it Sounds and indicators can be just as innacurate as they can be accurate o.o
They're actually pretty darn accurate. I've been doing some testing, and if you account for the fact that it indicates off the turn of your back, it'll precisely reflect the shooting angle of any single shot. As for audio, it's entirely dependant on your setup, the big exception being if it's close to you or if the map distorts audio. As for the ruling, I really do think I turned around fast enough to have seen the T-room door open, but the point of contention between me and both Degolfer and Spiteful was everything else they claimed I was wrong for.
