I am confused by this reasoning for slays, as a t would know if someone was an innocent committing a t act, but an innocent would not. I don't understand why in this sense that this terrorist that witnessed another terrorist (inno or t) commit a t act is not GBA after the body was identified. As there was no telling that they were a traitor or innocent when they committed the t act. This happened yesterday, and this morning. (est) Just wondering if this is a newer rule or something? I believe I've done this many times, but got no slays.
The rules of GBA have not changed. However there seems to have been a minor misinterpretion of how the GBA rule works within the staff team. This have been corrected. The act of GBA, is witnessing a player commit a Traitorous act, and not doing anything to kill or KoS the player, the reasons why roles arent specified into this rule, is due to how it works in the heat of the moment. Players rarely will have time to ID bodies right after a gunfight, without a new one starting. In the given scenario, you killed a player for being GBA to an inno that comitted a T act, after the given fact, that you identified the body and confirmed they were Innocent. + Additionally the player you killed for GBA, was also victim to the T act - Since the Creeper head was thrown at them. To best answer your Question, its best to explain this with 2 scenarios: Scenario 1: The one you explained - You witnessed a player toss around a creeperhead and another player witnessed this too. You kill the one who did it confirmed their body to be inno then killed the other guy who witnessed it for GBA. - Valid case of GBA, not RDM The issue with that strategy however is, that killing someone for being GBA to a known innocent, can in some cases be considered Toxic Gameplay. In this specific scenario it wouldnt be Toxic. But if its a repetitive thing for you to do, or if the scenario calls for it, then a Toxic gameplay warning will likely head your way. Scenario 2: The one you explained + the Additional information - This is how the scenario actually went down: You witnessed player A throw the creeper-head at player B. Player B didnt respond by killing player A for it, however you did. You then proceeded to kill player B for not acting on a T act, that they were the victim of. Since you cant be GBA if you are the victim of the T-act, this case would be RDM. Hope this solves your Question and Concern.
Please expand on the toxic gameplay as I believe in most situation that is unfair to use against players It shouldn't be about if the person committing the T act is a T or not solely as a traitor I'm more than happy to ignore innos killing each other over T acts, why would I act I'm a T let them kill each other an inno should of acted on the T act, finding out it was an inno who did the T act doesn't change the fact they ignored the T act.
To start off, I corrected some wording in the earlier response, Many cases has been swapped out with some cases, as GBA is case by case scenarios, and therfor more difficult to give an over all response to on whats Toxic and what isnt. The GBA rule does not specify roles, at the point where a player is GBA they can be killed for witnessing a Traitorous act especially because you witnessing the GBA is unaware of the given roles of people. But if you witness the GBA, kill the player committing the T act and find out they were innocent, then whats the point of acting on the GBA? Guilty By associating with an Innocent. Doesnt really sound right. A traitorous act is considered an active threat, if that threat turns out to be innocent, then that nearby threat is already neutralized. I get where you are coming from, with ignoring innos commit a T act. Some people do it, some people dont, and takes a free kill instead claiming that guy comitted a T-act etc. If a given scenario was something alike. Inno shoots Inno while in the middle of a group of people, noone acts on the T-act you could technically kill every single one of them for GBA. While not knowing yet if the guy that shot you was traitor or not. But if you took a moment to ID the body and find them to be innocent, then would you still think its smart to kill the others for GBA, when you are now aware that it wasnt even a Traitor that shot you. That is my take on GBA itself. But to give you a concrete answer on when its Toxic and when it isnt, I will be honest and say its too difficult to create parameters for such a rule, due to every GBA scenario's abillity to be unique. Like we all know that its Toxic to kill people for GBA on a Traitorous act that you were behind, or which you started, by shooting or t-baiting someone else into shooting you, and then kill a bystander because they didnt act on either person's side.
