| Elevated Gaming Network http://elevatedgaming.net/forums/ |
|
| No Metagming Rule http://elevatedgaming.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=29540 |
Page 1 of 5 |
| Author: | koolaid [ Sun Mar 11, 2018 8:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | No Metagming Rule |
I've been under the impression that CT's must play their role as CT/guard i.e. they do NOT know where the secrets in cells or in the walls go to until they follow through them, therefore, if a T uses a teleport, a CT can't run to their possible destinations to intercept since they aren't supposed to know where it goes. This has been enforced on razor with CT's running directly to garage after a T uses cell teleport, and going into armory after a T uses vending machine etc. I was just told by a Staff that this only covers CT's watching/blocking secrets, which has been established as a rule for a long time. If this is the case, the "no metagaming" rule doesn't actually introduce any new gameplay and should be removed as it causes confusion among admins. |
|
| Author: | Uchies [ Sun Mar 11, 2018 9:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
I'm making a mega-thread on this subject right now. |
|
| Author: | Uchies [ Sun Mar 11, 2018 9:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
The only people I've seen properly enforce this rule were those who were at the original admin meeting where the consensus of it's meaning was reached. That's why I'll have a thread posted, hopefully tonight, including all the bits and pieces that are important. |
|
| Author: | Yiggles Moto [ Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
No metagaming is a dumb rule that only aims to help rebellers. If you try to rebel and you get killed, that's a risk you took. People know where secrets are and go to, that just comes with experience. |
|
| Author: | Uchies [ Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
Yiggles Moto wrote: No metagaming is a dumb rule that only aims to help rebellers. If you try to rebel and you get killed, that's a risk you took. People know where secrets are and go to, that just comes with experience. The rule is obviously being misused and misinterpreted, and consequently, incorrectly prescribed. You can't use the no meta-gaming rule without the conjunction of every other rule. There are 2 main reasons we have this rule, and if you look at all the other rules, it's to prevent CT's from sweeping secrets at the beginning of the round without any knowledge that there could be a rebeller... and to prevent CT's from using the knowledge of a missing weapon as a cue of an active rebeller. |
|
| Author: | Cooper [ Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
In terms of actual roleplaying, the jist of metagaming would be along the lines of “Using information that your ‘character’ did not obtain itself but rather using external information received OOC (out of character)”. It’s like walking up to someone when roleplaying who you have never met in character and telling them their name or other information which you wouldn’t have received through roleplaying your character. In roleplay, metagaming is looked at as a form of cheating and “Fail RP”. In the meeting this was also compared to the “New Life Rule” in GMOD RP where you don’t remember information from your past life IC (in character). In this case meaning when you respawn you technically don’t remember where secrets are or where they lead (meaning even if you see someone running into a secret you wouldn’t technically be able to call them put without following them since your character wouldn’t have that information). Although this would make sense when using the actual meaning of metagaming, I have been told otherwise and it also seems even Staff+ aren’t at a clear consensus or on the same page how this rule is/should be interpreted. Personally I have two opinions on this rule: Either one, clarify this rule to be in line with the actual definition of metagaming or rename/reword it to be more accurate to what it actually means. What it is now is either a misnomer or a very watered down version of metagaming where it only applies to very specific and particular cases. How it is being said now isn’t really metagaming and isn’t very precise in its meaning. Or two, like Yiggles said just remove it because most people who have a problem with CTs “metagaming” are just salty about getting killed and having the risk of taking a secret not pay off in the end. I really don’t mind the rule but if it is in place then at least make it accurate. |
|
| Author: | Yiggles Moto [ Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
Uchies wrote: Yiggles Moto wrote: No metagaming is a dumb rule that only aims to help rebellers. If you try to rebel and you get killed, that's a risk you took. People know where secrets are and go to, that just comes with experience. The rule is obviously being misused and misinterpreted, and consequently, incorrectly prescribed. You can't use the no meta-gaming rule without the conjunction of every other rule. There are 2 main reasons we have this rule, and if you look at all the other rules, it's to prevent CT's from sweeping secrets at the beginning of the round without any knowledge that there could be a rebeller... and to prevent CT's from using the knowledge of a missing weapon as a cue of an active rebeller. Which is why it's a dumb rule to enforce it that way. I agree they shouldn't be sweeping for secrets unless prompted (seeing a T go there/a T is missing from the group). But to force CTs to ignore their experience of the game (x gun is missing/x vent is broken, they might be over here) is only aiding the people who are already risking to be killed. There's a difference between camping a secret waiting for a T to be there, and knowing a T is going to be there. What's the point in having experience in a game if you can't use it? |
|
| Author: | Uchies [ Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
Yiggles Moto wrote: Uchies wrote: Yiggles Moto wrote: No metagaming is a dumb rule that only aims to help rebellers. If you try to rebel and you get killed, that's a risk you took. People know where secrets are and go to, that just comes with experience. The rule is obviously being misused and misinterpreted, and consequently, incorrectly prescribed. You can't use the no meta-gaming rule without the conjunction of every other rule. There are 2 main reasons we have this rule, and if you look at all the other rules, it's to prevent CT's from sweeping secrets at the beginning of the round without any knowledge that there could be a rebeller... and to prevent CT's from using the knowledge of a missing weapon as a cue of an active rebeller. Which is why it's a dumb rule to enforce it that way. I agree they shouldn't be sweeping for secrets unless prompted (seeing a T go there/a T is missing from the group). But to force CTs to ignore their experience of the game (x gun is missing/x vent is broken, they might be over here) is only aiding the people who are already risking to be killed. There's a difference between camping a secret waiting for a T to be there, and knowing a T is going to be there. What's the point in having experience in a game if you can't use it? Well, there's a glitch on the server where a weapon may spawn invisible. The only way you can tell if it's there or not is by picking it up. For instance, the sidearm in garage regularly spawns invisible. Not fair to use that to sweep awp window. |
|
| Author: | Yiggles Moto [ Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
Uchies wrote: Yiggles Moto wrote: Uchies wrote: Yiggles Moto wrote: No metagaming is a dumb rule that only aims to help rebellers. If you try to rebel and you get killed, that's a risk you took. People know where secrets are and go to, that just comes with experience. The rule is obviously being misused and misinterpreted, and consequently, incorrectly prescribed. You can't use the no meta-gaming rule without the conjunction of every other rule. There are 2 main reasons we have this rule, and if you look at all the other rules, it's to prevent CT's from sweeping secrets at the beginning of the round without any knowledge that there could be a rebeller... and to prevent CT's from using the knowledge of a missing weapon as a cue of an active rebeller. Which is why it's a dumb rule to enforce it that way. I agree they shouldn't be sweeping for secrets unless prompted (seeing a T go there/a T is missing from the group). But to force CTs to ignore their experience of the game (x gun is missing/x vent is broken, they might be over here) is only aiding the people who are already risking to be killed. There's a difference between camping a secret waiting for a T to be there, and knowing a T is going to be there. What's the point in having experience in a game if you can't use it? Well, there's a glitch on the server where a weapon may spawn invisible. The only way you can tell if it's there or not is by picking it up. For instance, the sidearm in garage regularly spawns invisible. Not fair to use that to sweep awp window. Well CTs arent allowed to pick up guns from where they spawn, so they aren't allowed to determine if the gun is there or not (besides the visuals). That's a server/map problem, not a people problem. Gun missing + T missing? Totally reasonable to check spots where evidence points to. |
|
| Author: | Needy [ Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No Metagming Rule |
koolaid wrote: ...if a T uses a teleport, a CT can't run to their possible destinations to intercept since they aren't supposed to know where it goes. I know this is definitely stretching the metagaming aspect but as far as I'm aware, if a CT sees / hears a T possibly in vent or like said, use teleporter (vending machine to kitchen), then once they've gotten that information that a prisoner is missing, they're to search for the rebelling T, one of which could lead them into kitchen "coincidentally" you could say. "I didn't know they'd be in there, I was simply searching for the rebeller". Whatever, smart ass rule, you could say, but it's just about unrealistic not to anticipate that a CT will go to where the secret is leads (i.e if they know) to find the rebeller, they aren't just going to play dumb. Wasn't at the meeting when this was discussed but should be clarified more (in the rule itself) or even rewritten as we aren't an RP server after all. Yiggles Moto wrote: If you try to rebel and you get killed, that's a risk you took. People know where secrets are and go to, that just comes with experience.
|
|
| Page 1 of 5 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|