Change dumb RDM rule

Ah, well the reasoning still stands. It's not a guarantee that you'll actually get the last inno. So, it's lucky that you didn't just RDM your tbuddy.

 

What if we start considering the warning you get when a T buddy buys a Jihad when there is only 1 inno alive as the warning that you're going to jihad the last inno alive?
And that we consider it RDM when someone bought the Jihad before there was only 1 inno left and didn't warn the other Traitors.

I think it will be a good compromise to what OP is suggesting.

 

Wouldn't it be just better to leave things as they already are?
I mean players should train themselves to always warn first before doing an action that could damage other players.
Why make an exception to further complicate things?

-Edit
I did not read the posts made above beavis-fu's before I posted my input.
My comment is only for @beavis-fu 's post.

 

To the people saying "what if they miss?" uuh.. then he will get slain since he took the round of his tbuddy without warning. You don't slay people because they had the potential to take someones round away. That would be like slaying someone for t-baiting cause they "could have killed them". Doesn't make sense. Punishments should only be served if the victim lost any time ingame. We don't slay people for false kosing until someone takes damage from it. Since they won the round, jihader shouldn't be slain. If he missed, jihader would be slain. Pretty simple, right? If you false kos and cause a death, someone will be slain, but if you false kos and nothing comes of it, nobody is slain. This should be treated the same.

edit; damn i havent seen the community so divided about something before lol, usually it's pretty one sided but this one seems to be pretty controversial

 

Well, you don't have to 'train yourself to warn first' before arming a C4 or putting down a death station. The automatic warning system is considered sufficient for these items, then why not for a Jihad when everyone knows you're going to use it for the last inno alive.

 

By training one's self, I meant that all players, including those that are new to our servers should be at least familiar with the aspect of sending a warning before utilizing an action that could potentially hurt other players in the process. Not just any warning but one sent from them. Either from a keybind or mic.

 

It's not that I totally disagree with what you're saying, but I personally think that when you get a message that one of your T-buddy's bought a Jihad and there is only 1 'target' left, you should automatically assume that he is going for that 'target' and you shouldn't be near it.

And besides one's self should also be trained in paying attention to the chat and the state of the round (how many players are still alive etc. etc.) and know how to put 1 and 1 together (in this case: a T-buddy buying a Jihad, and only 1 'target' left)

 

Take this scenario in mind: Traitor #1 is going towards the room that the last Innocent is hiding in. Traitor #2 buys Jihad whilst in a T room and walks out of the T room door and immediately jihads whilst Traitor#1's radar is on a cooldown (i.e. not knowing his teammate last position. and has less than 1.5s to react or hide behind a solid object to avoid getting blown up by Traitor#2. Is it rdm or not? It's rdm. Despite the fact that he was warned of it.
For the sake of this scenario lets put this into innocent motel. Where the last Innocent is hiding in the bathroom with the T room in it. T#2 walks out of the T room to jihad, whilst T#1 enters the bedroom and opens the door to the bathroom with all of this unfolding. Or the tester area in bowling map.

 

Well a second warning wouldn't have helped, it's not like Traitor #1 would know the location of the Traitor #2 if he warns right before Jihading.

It now says in the rules that it is considered RDM when you do not properly warn people before jihading, that part we get. But we are not here to discuss what the rules say about this, we are here to discuss whether we should change the rules or not, and I am proposing to make it obsolete to 'extra' warn people when there is only 1 inno alive.

See the first part of this message.

 

Edit#1 : Idk what happened to the quote positions, I'm not experienced with this type of response.

 

Not really a good summary..

You kill a T-buddy with a Jihad alongside the last innocent, what's the problem? Traitorous are still victorious.

You kill a Traitor for T-acts and another traitor without much reason. The round ends and innocents are victorious. Sure the round instantly ends which is nice and all, but if the innocent hadn't RDMed the traitor, there can be a chance of traitors being victorious.

 

Honestly in my opinion It shouldn't be an "if it happened" scenario but more of "did it happen "scenario Because what i would see is that RDM is the possibility of changing an event that shouldn't of occurred for example when I shoot someone at the begging of the round without killing them but lower there health this impales there survival when a T comes around or ruins the fun of the round. But in this scenario there was no round or fight that would have changed from the death since the round ended but if the rounded did not end from the Jhad then this would be RDM. I believe it all depends on rather the rounded ended or didn't not if it didn't end

 

So if I kill all of my T buddies at the beginning of the round and still win, I can't be Mass RDM banned?
Nice

 

I don't know why this is a suggestion just bind a warning to a key and press it when you need to. It's actually not that hard. This is just an excuse to be lazy

 

The difference between T baiting/calling a false KOS that nobody follows, and comparing it to a Jihad that kills a T buddy is that one kills and damages the player before the round is technically over, and the other two don't

See:

They do though. Maybe not so much the active round, but postround. Plus they get less points if they die during the round. Not that it matters much, but it's an unnecessary thing if you just press a warning bind

 

It would be only when you win the round with the same play. (Cant tell if you are being serious)

Postround argument still no makes no sense. Your current argument sounds like, if I gun down last innocent and as soon as postround starts I gun down my T buddy, I should be considered to get punished since I ruined his postround which would be dumb. Them getting/not getting to play post round makes absolutely no difference and no RDM rules should apply because of something in post round.

Its also an excuse for people who are about to get slain when they forget to use binding and are about to get slain for something that changed absolutely nothing important. (No, them losing like 5 points is not important.)

 

You are still being killed without reason and with no warning during the round, therefore it is RDM. In fact, it's the definition of RDM.
People keep bringing up that in order for it to be RDM, it has to be taking away from the experience of the game. However, this is absolutely not the case, and is something that was entirely made up to strengthen their argument

Taken from the Extended Rules

Don't like that? Too bad, use your binds

 

I don't see the point in calling it RDM when the round has been won.

If a traitor doesn't warn and uses a jihad:

If the round ends with the jihad winning the round, no slays.
If the round ends with the jihad not winning the round, it's rdm based on the number of t buddies hit.

Seems to be a tad uncompromising if we punish someone that won the round for his team anyway. You can't ruin a player's round if the round has ended.

I see the "don't be lazy" argument, but seriously, the rules are for the player's safety and enjoyment, not for seeing through every detail and going the extra mile to punish a player.

+1

 

How about we make it discretionary, like goomba stomping? Since it is technically RDM, though some may not mind it

I feel like this is the best compromise