Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]

[Spectre]

In football there's the coach and the president of the club. If cops and terros had leaders who could kick useless members out of the team it wouldn't be necessary. But as those figures don't exist, rules, enforced by the staff, have to take over their job

Yes, and let's just completely suck all the fluidity and freedom of choice out of everything, because SAMP servers are just that important I think we're eventually going to end up with these rules approved:

What's next? Making a rule that whoever is Terrorist must attack the President at all costs? That Civilians should publicly declare in the chat that they will attack everyone before they do it? That all Cops and SWAT should stay near President as well, because that's how he would be protected in real life?

[YoMama]

Yes, and let's just completely suck all the fluidity and freedom of choice out of everything, because SAMP servers are just that important I think we're eventually going to end up with these rules approved:

You guys keep using the "it's just a game" and "it doesn't matter" excuses while claiming that enforcing the rules would ruin everything for clans. I guess that excuse only goes one way, as in the way you want it to go?

Doesn't being unable to shoot your clanmates do more to suck the fluidity and freedom of choice out of the game?

[Spectre]

You guys keep using the "it's just a game" and "it doesn't matter" excuses while claiming that enforcing the rules would ruin everything for clans. I guess that excuse only goes one way, as in the way you want it to go?

And you guys keep coming up with really unnecessary suggestions that restrict clans and force them to change their policies. Like I said to you in that other topic, you of all players, who have been playing on PTP since like the beginning, should know that this kind of thing has existed in the past and nobody was bitching about it. And the server always had constant influx of new players who stayed and became regulars despite all the flaws and inconveniences. I could also argue that you pushing for your suggestion is really pointing the server in the way which you and few others consider to be a good course.

Doesn't being unable to shoot your clanmates do more to suck the fluidity and freedom of choice out of the game?

Nope? Because I want to be able to make a decision on my own who I'll shoot and who I won't. Simple as that.

[Miau]

Spectre, by the way, I was wondering. Can you name any other team sport, videogame, whatever... where it's perfectly legit to choose between allying rival (rival by definition, like cops and terros or Barcelona and Real Madrid! ) teams or not?
If there are some examples, maybe you're right and this is perfectly normal choice you're claiming. If there aren't any... maybe you should start wondering if there's something wrong here that needs to change.

[YoMama]

I could also argue that you pushing for your suggestion is really pointing the server in the way which you and few others consider to be a good course.

How? Because it makes things fair?

[Spectre]

How? Because it makes things fair?

Oh, you're long way away from making this server 'fair', if that's what you're aiming for.

Spectre, by the way, I was wondering. Can you name any other team sport, videogame, whatever... where it's perfectly legit to choose between allying rival (rival by definition, like cops and terros or Barcelona and Real Madrid! ) teams or not?
If there are some examples, maybe you're right and this is perfectly normal choice you're claiming. If there aren't any... maybe you should start wondering if there's something wrong here that needs to change.

What I love is how you completely glossed over my concern about possible future suggestions by either you, YoMama, or someone third, that would make this server one of the strictest on SAMP. I'm telling you now, those are coming eventually
And no, I will not indulge in expanding this discussion with you anymore, or YoMama, simply because I'm weary of it (although I know the "you lack arguments, we won, woooo!" is coming ). You take all of this way too seriously, as you've proven so many times in the past. Things have been like this on this server for many years and no one was as horny as you are to change things because everyone was too busy playing the game. And the server survived since 2006, that's 11 frickin' years. Really makes you wonder, doesn't it?

You've got your poll, you'll know the results in short time, I'm done with replying to this topic. If countless other replies have not made you think about what you're suggesting, I doubt any more of mine will do it. Shouldn't have replied this much in the first place, but eh, at least I tried.

[pRiMoZ]

Spectre, by the way, I was wondering. Can you name any other team sport, videogame, whatever... where it's perfectly legit to choose between allying rival (rival by definition, like cops and terros or Barcelona and Real Madrid! ) teams or not?
If there are some examples, maybe you're right and this is perfectly normal choice you're claiming. If there aren't any... maybe you should start wondering if there's something wrong here that needs to change.

Minecraft!

[Saurabh]

No need for FIFA or UEFA. If a player constantly stands and watches when the rival scores, I think he wouldn't last very long in the team x)

Hm, but I think there is need for FIFA and UEFA, since you want this here to be a rule In this case, they are "admins" of football, amirite?

In football there's the coach and the president of the club. If cops and terros had leaders who could kick useless members out of the team it wouldn't be necessary. But as those figures don't exist, rules, enforced by the staff, have to take over their job

Winning as a team in a competitive match would get them money and their "enjoyment". So standing idle in a football game would not make any sense.

A corrupt cop in real life ,  who refused to shoot his terrorist friend will also get fired.  BUT samp is a game that we don't get paid for and players want to relax and enjoy playing it, if they find it better to fight a selected regulars and avoid fights with others, they can and they will do it. They SHOULDN'T do it, but they can and they will do it. If you could pay a player to compensate for the "fun" element  he will lose, he might play the way you want him to play.

Everyone is selfish when it comes to having their "fun". Good db players will ask to enable db and the ones who hate chainsaws might suggest to remove them. Great pilots might even suggest extra rustlers at civ spawns for them and that too will be affecting the gameplay of others but hey! Who cares? Selfish

[M a k a v e l i .]

FIFA, I remember what that is

[Saurabh]

FIFA, I remember what that is

Wtf. Did that really happen lol. Corrupt people everywhere!

[Storm]

You know shit's got serious when a game is compared to real life

[Miau]

You know shit's got serious when a game is compared to real life

Sports are games too. So I guess you meant: You know shit's got serious when a game is compared to other games.

[Saurabh]

You know shit's got serious when a game is compared to real life

Sports are games too. So I guess you meant: You know shit's got serious when a game is compared to other games.

When a game is compared to sports*

Samp is just a game, it's not even an e-sport thing. If it were counter strike , then i might have agreed that playing to win is more important that having "fun".

[IDAN]

11-12 years ago We have too clans and all those years I don't see any problem.

Who are you guys that tell me on who to shot?

Only Secs need to shoot anyone. and must kill them because if the wont shoot terrors its will destroy the game mode.

[Madman]

No i dont like this shit