[Suggestion] No-Warning (32+) Rule Revision/Removal

Uchies · **Posted:** Fri Mar 30, 2018 2:41 pm

updated thread title to reflect better contextually

Cooper · **Posted:** Fri Mar 30, 2018 2:56 pm

Uchies wrote:

Cooper, i couldnt have said it better.. but im not talking about removing the warning rule, im talking anbout removing the “no warning for 32+” rule..

the warnings on the server set us apart from other jb servers, its why i joined (because of the good gameplay)

The focus of other people has clearly shifted to removing the warning rule as a whole, that’s why I was putting emphasis on that.

I did say my opinion on the 32 people thing in my post though, I think it does what its supposed to in terms of balance especially on “rebel maps”. The 32 person rule is merely a taste of what it would be like without the warning rule, it will get much worse if warnings are removed as a whole.

koolaid · **Posted:** Sun Apr 01, 2018 1:37 pm

Terminator wrote:

Uchies wrote:

Yeah, except that killing people for a minor mistake and not rebelling is not fun, in my eyes. It’s not very gameplay friendly, unless your idea of gameplay is murking everybody.

Again, I’m just voicing concerns brought to me by users on the server.

i mean what do u consider minor?
like a slight movement of the mouse when afk frozen? i see it as kinda being an asshole if u kill for that.
but if u say freeze on my spray when i spray it and they start folowing u, like u cant call that minor cuz ct got a risk of dying.

minor is opinionated and in my opinion "minor" mistakes shouldnt be killed anyway, warning or not.
accidents happen but if u go look around when afk frozen then u just didnt listen to orders and should die

viewtopic.php?f=152&t=29873

Hmmmm...

Terminator · **Posted:** Sun Apr 01, 2018 1:58 pm

koolaid wrote:

Terminator wrote:

Uchies wrote:

Yeah, except that killing people for a minor mistake and not rebelling is not fun, in my eyes. It’s not very gameplay friendly, unless your idea of gameplay is murking everybody.

Again, I’m just voicing concerns brought to me by users on the server.

i mean what do u consider minor?
like a slight movement of the mouse when afk frozen? i see it as kinda being an asshole if u kill for that.
but if u say freeze on my spray when i spray it and they start folowing u, like u cant call that minor cuz ct got a risk of dying.

minor is opinionated and in my opinion "minor" mistakes shouldnt be killed anyway, warning or not.
accidents happen but if u go look around when afk frozen then u just didnt listen to orders and should die

viewtopic.php?f=152&t=29873

Hmmmm...

wether we agree with it or not and if we like it or not warning rule is there and needs to be enforced.
simple as that, i did what i had to do.

Mr. Simplistic · **Posted:** Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:08 pm

Terminator wrote:

koolaid wrote:

Terminator wrote:

Uchies wrote:

Yeah, except that killing people for a minor mistake and not rebelling is not fun, in my eyes. It’s not very gameplay friendly, unless your idea of gameplay is murking everybody.

Again, I’m just voicing concerns brought to me by users on the server.

i mean what do u consider minor?
like a slight movement of the mouse when afk frozen? i see it as kinda being an asshole if u kill for that.
but if u say freeze on my spray when i spray it and they start folowing u, like u cant call that minor cuz ct got a risk of dying.

minor is opinionated and in my opinion "minor" mistakes shouldnt be killed anyway, warning or not.
accidents happen but if u go look around when afk frozen then u just didnt listen to orders and should die

viewtopic.php?f=152&t=29873

Hmmmm...

wether we agree with it or not and if we like it or not warning rule is there and needs to be enforced.
simple as that, i did what i had to do.

yea i agree with term, i was gonna ctban him if term did'it cuz rules are rules whether we like them or not and i reaalllyyy dont like the warning rule but think a "no wordplay" rule instead of a "no extreme wordplay rule would be way better.

but yea, since thats how the rules are now thats how we have to enforce em

Uchies · **Posted:** Sun Apr 01, 2018 3:36 pm

If the warning rule was removed altogether, I would probably stop playing CT (even though it would be a huge CT advantage)... because I could accept dying for a mistake that's my own, but wouldn't want to be complicit in extreme Nazi-playstyles that would manifest. If you don't like the warning rule, you should go check out one of the other jailbreak servers populated on CSS... If that style is so much better why join EgN?

Uchies · **Posted:** Sun Apr 01, 2018 3:49 pm

Also, no one has even given me a half-ass "redeemable quality" other than "round progression" that removing the warning rule has... If your so passionate about it, express yourself? If you need to bump that K:D up a lil' bit, you can let me know. xd

Young Lean · **Posted:** Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:25 pm

Uchies wrote:

Also, no one has even given me a half-ass "redeemable quality" other than "round progression" that removing the warning rule has... If your so passionate about it, express yourself? If you need to bump that K:D up a lil' bit, you can let me know. xd

Removing the warning rule would discourage T's from rebelling, as it doesn't give them a rule to play around while trying to be sneaky.
Less rebelling T's gives more wiggle room for CT's to do fun shit, and it creates a more enjoyable environment for everyone.
Implementing rules to force people to be nice tends to create more issues in the long run.
In my opinion it is the administrators jobs to make sure nobody is going too hard as a CT, they control the flow of the whole dynamic.
As much as people want to see JB operate like a well oiled machine, it requires constant attention to keep a trouble free environment, and you have to be passionate about maintaining that balance to perform to the best of your abilities.
I believe this is why they limited it to sub 32 players aswell, their self sustaining rules work much better in smaller controlled environments, but you cant replace a real person monitoring interactions.
Attempting to do so will only limit players and continue to diminish the gameplay experience.

That's just my opinion though, I'm open to any criticism towards it.

Terminator · **Posted:** Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:36 pm

Young Lean wrote:

Uchies wrote:

Also, no one has even given me a half-ass "redeemable quality" other than "round progression" that removing the warning rule has... If your so passionate about it, express yourself? If you need to bump that K:D up a lil' bit, you can let me know. xd

Removing the warning rule would discourage T's from rebelling, as it doesn't give them a rule to play around while trying to be sneaky.
Less rebelling T's gives more wiggle room for CT's to do fun shit, and it creates a more enjoyable environment for everyone.
Implementing rules to force people to be nice tends to create more issues in the long run.
In my opinion it is the administrators jobs to make sure nobody is going too hard as a CT, they control the flow of the whole dynamic.
As much as people want to see JB operate like a well oiled machine, it requires constant attention to keep a trouble free environment, and you have to be passionate about maintaining that balance to perform to the best of your abilities.
I believe this is why they limited it to sub 32 players aswell, their self sustaining rules work much better in smaller controlled environments, but you cant replace a real person monitoring interactions.
Attempting to do so will only limit players and continue to diminish the gameplay experience.

That's just my opinion though, I'm open to any criticism towards it.

i believe it works both ways...

because if the warning rule is not there, ct's r free to kill u for a small detail. in wich i rather rebel and try to kill them then to follow orders for 3 min and then die because i didnt go to a spray i didn't see for a sec.

other way around could also be possible: T's that dont rebel since they scared they get insta killed and stuff.....
but i still think that the warning rule counts for a sort of balance between the ct's and there killing hunger

unless the T's mass run away but in that case i've seen ct's still handle it correctly and kill the guys that run to rebel

Young Lean · **Posted:** Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:48 pm

Terminator wrote:

Young Lean wrote:

Uchies wrote:

Also, no one has even given me a half-ass "redeemable quality" other than "round progression" that removing the warning rule has... If your so passionate about it, express yourself? If you need to bump that K:D up a lil' bit, you can let me know. xd

Removing the warning rule would discourage T's from rebelling, as it doesn't give them a rule to play around while trying to be sneaky.
Less rebelling T's gives more wiggle room for CT's to do fun shit, and it creates a more enjoyable environment for everyone.
Implementing rules to force people to be nice tends to create more issues in the long run.
In my opinion it is the administrators jobs to make sure nobody is going too hard as a CT, they control the flow of the whole dynamic.
As much as people want to see JB operate like a well oiled machine, it requires constant attention to keep a trouble free environment, and you have to be passionate about maintaining that balance to perform to the best of your abilities.
I believe this is why they limited it to sub 32 players aswell, their self sustaining rules work much better in smaller controlled environments, but you cant replace a real person monitoring interactions.
Attempting to do so will only limit players and continue to diminish the gameplay experience.

That's just my opinion though, I'm open to any criticism towards it.

i believe it works both ways...

because if the warning rule is not there, ct's r free to kill u for a small detail. in wich i rather rebel and try to kill them then to follow orders for 3 min and then die because i didnt go to a spray i didn't see for a sec.

other way around could also be possible: T's that dont rebel since they scared they get insta killed and stuff.....
but i still think that the warning rule counts for a sort of balance between the ct's and there killing hunger

unless the T's mass run away but in that case i've seen ct's still handle it correctly and kill the guys that run to rebel

Yeah there is definitely some merit to the rule, I'm just presenting another viewpoint on it. I think on maps like razor, warnings can be a real pain in the ass, but on maps where you cant easily rebel they're nice to have. Also without the rule, admins can tell CT's not to be as strict, but with the rule, admins cant really tell CT's to be more strict.

Register

Login

[Suggestion] No-Warning (32+) Rule Revision/Removal

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Who is online