Poll

Should we shoot our clan members/ "friends"  on opposing team?

Yes. I would like to see this as a new server rule.
36 (48%)
No. I don't like this.
39 (52%)

Total Members Voted: 74

Author Topic: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]  (Read 19523 times)

Offline YoMama

  • VIP
  • Hero Member
  • **
  • Posts: 638
  • Rank: Hoodsta
  • Score: 24630
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #30 on: December 15, 2017, 02:47:09 am »
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 :)
And here we find the problem. People who don't shoot each other when they should don't care about fairness, they just care about themselves.

There's a major difference between your examples and enforcing the rule against helping the opposite team. DB, chainsaws (to an extent) and Rustlers are all things that everyone can use, regardless of their social status in the server. They're all something that is understandable and fair in that I can be a good DBer, have DBing shit added, but people can use that against me as well.

In contrast, you have to be part of a special group which has conspired together to make an alliance. You can't magically conjure up an alliance with the opposite team and use it against someone else. Someone without an alliance can't kill you while your friends watch and do nothing, but you can do that to them, if their teammates are also your friends. You also have to have knowledge of the alliances to even know how to avoid the shit that gets pulled. I had no idea IDF and GgT had a non-aggression agreement until I got killed by a GgT cop without an IDF terrorist teammate doing anything to stop it. I had to ask if they were "allied", and unsurprisingly they were. Explain to me how this could possibly be fair, or reasonable? The only thing you can say is that I could make my own clan, but that isn't solving the problem, is it? It's just pushing the bullshit to people who have even less power to retaliate.

While you're at it, someone explain to me how this will "destroy the server and/or the gamemode". I'd love to know. Would something as simple as just having "allied" players on the same side really ruin anything? Again, elaborate.

Difficulty of enforcement is not an excuse (if there is even that much difficulty), and just the fact that people are resorting to that argument should tell you something. Just because there are "gray areas" doesn't mean that the black-and-white shouldn't be addressed.

The "it's been this way for X years" argument is absurd. I guess what I should take from this is that clans have been breaking the rules for X years, and that long-established clans don't really deserve my respect because they've built their reputations on this shit?

You can claim again that I'm taking things too seriously and overcomplicating the issue, but I see walls of unsupported bullshit spouting from the pro-alliance side, none of which addresses what should be the core issue: is this behavior fair?
« Last Edit: December 15, 2017, 02:48:58 am by YoMama »

Offline Judah

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 74
  • Rank: Vic
  • Score: 124
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #31 on: December 15, 2017, 03:07:59 am »
Here's another example where I and another player were killed by someone alllied to the president while my team did nothing - https://youtu.be/Acn2r-pHFBM

You can avoid shooting a player, run away from an attack on your teammates but if you do nothing while your teammates are getting shot at and then continue to stand next to the attacker without counterattacking then you are clearly allied to someone who is working against your team.

It's not about avoiding. It's about shooting someone who is a threat to your team either because they plan to or already have killed your teammates in your immediate vicinity.


M a k a v e l i .

  • Guest
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #32 on: December 15, 2017, 09:18:42 am »

Offline IDAN

  • VIP
  • Sr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 323
  • Rank: Unknown
  • Score: Unknown
  • PPLV <3

Offline Saurabh

  • VIP
  • Hero Member
  • **
  • Posts: 526
  • Rank: Unknown
  • Score: Unknown
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #34 on: December 15, 2017, 02:20:39 pm »
@yomama

I thought i made the actual point of my post clear. But i guess you didn't get it...here repeating this:

"
Not saying that it should not be enforced because it is hard, but saying that a players habitual of avoiding another player will keep doing so and the fair gameplay for all would still not be achieved."
"So i still think that such "change" can not be brought in by enforcement of a rule but only if the players are willing to play that way themselves."

Even carg got it, why is it taking you so long? xD

Offline YoMama

  • VIP
  • Hero Member
  • **
  • Posts: 638
  • Rank: Hoodsta
  • Score: 24630
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #35 on: December 15, 2017, 10:42:27 pm »
@yomama

I thought i made the actual point of my post clear. But i guess you didn't get it...here repeating this:

"
Not saying that it should not be enforced because it is hard, but saying that a players habitual of avoiding another player will keep doing so and the fair gameplay for all would still not be achieved."
"So i still think that such "change" can not be brought in by enforcement of a rule but only if the players are willing to play that way themselves."

Even carg got it, why is it taking you so long? xD
Because it still isn't a reason to not enforce the rule. I certainly understand what you're trying to say. However, there are plenty of rules that not everyone follows, because they aren't willing to. That's the reason why certain people are selected to enforce them. You can't deny that clans officially changing their policies is an easy step. If players aren't willing to play by rules they already knew existed, then they should be punished.

Another thing: this isn't "habitual". Lots of people shoot at each other, then stop once they see the nicks or skins of their friends. It's a conscious choice, just like it's a conscious choice for me to shoot anyone. You've made it clear that people playing as security are able to make the fair choice and follow their duty, and that you believe they should do so. It's not like you're suddenly unable to shoot someone once you're a cop after you were shooting your friends as a security.

Since you apparently enjoy talking down to people: it's really simple. If something is unfair, then it shouldn't be allowed. We have many rules and systems in place that show that this is a commonly-held belief. Basically all of those rules are enforced and people make efforts to follow them in the interest of fairness, except the "don't help your opponents" rule. I have argued, multiple times, that this is unfair. Last I checked, nobody's made any real attempt to prove otherwise. The "actual point of [your] post" doesn't address my argument. While it's great that you can make a "point", how about, instead of attempting to make me look stupid by acting like I can't comprehend your irrelevant and inaccurate "point" that players are apparently incapable of shooting their friends like they do players who pose no threat to them, you tell me why this is fair. Prove me wrong, instead of throwing bullshit in an orthogonal direction and expecting me to address it. xD

Offline Rev

  • VIP
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
  • Rank: Unknown
  • Score: Unknown
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #36 on: December 15, 2017, 11:05:23 pm »
Sorry, guys, but this is just ridiculous. For what my little brain can grasp of this topic, it was supposed to be a simple "Yes/No" to avoid what the other topic has become, but somehow this is turning out to be an unnecessary continuation.

Offline Carg

  • VIP
  • Hero Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1506
  • Rank: Homeboy
  • Score: 17525
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #37 on: December 15, 2017, 11:59:36 pm »
Even carg got it, why is it taking you so long? xD
No I did not :O Is it something about Solod abusing dizzy? I don't understand. Please write 2 topics full of essays and keep telling yourself that things will change :P

Offline Crash

  • VIP
  • Hero Member
  • **
  • Posts: 998
  • Rank: Playa Partner
  • Score: 10053
  • aka Kobe
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #38 on: December 16, 2017, 12:32:48 am »
Only 57 members voted till now. Where's more? :x

Offline Saurabh

  • VIP
  • Hero Member
  • **
  • Posts: 526
  • Rank: Unknown
  • Score: Unknown
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #39 on: December 16, 2017, 05:20:47 am »
Even carg got it, why is it taking you so long? xD
No I did not :O Is it something about Solod abusing dizzy? I don't understand. Please write 2 topics full of essays and keep telling yourself that things will change :P
No more essays lol
Quoting you carg:
Quote
True, sometimes some players(even admins) might force you to stop shooting another player from any clan or even clanless, but that's not because of the clan, it's more like the player that has to change.

Quote
This looks more like a moral problem and it should be fixed with words betwen the clan leaders/members, not with rules. Having a clan and making your own rules is probably the only democratic thing left in PTP.

10/10 carg

@yomama, i never said that peace contracts are fair for the game. I said it is enjoyable for players that do it.

Offline Drama

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
  • Rank: Unknown
  • Score: Unknown
  • I'm off
Re: Should we or shouldn't we? [poll]
« Reply #40 on: December 28, 2017, 02:29:10 pm »
Add it..