I think there should be a divide between actual accidental crossfire and a complete disregard of the person in front of you. Example: Person A and B are traitors. Person C is innocent. B is casually walking behind C and has no idea that A is behind him. A opens fire on C, hits B and C, and C turns around and in the ensuing gunfight both B and C are killed. In this situation I think A should be slain, since he completely disregarded B's presence in front of him. I guess what I'm trying to say is that you shouldn't be allowed to shoot through people to get to the person you're trying to hit, when you're obviously capable of just waiting a few seconds.
I actually agree with you that deliberate disregard for others shouldn't be allowed. The issue is that it's impossible to prove what is disregard for others and what is accidental. What system do you propose to differentiate between disregard and generic old crossfire? I've had some stupid situations where my traitor buddies have died or I have died because of various factors that looked kinda deliberate, but have been total accidents. I'd be glad to hear whatever solution you might have for this issue that won't result in unfair slays being placed on people for accidental crossfire.
It doesn't necessarily have to be on purpose. Like accidental RDM it can just be accidental. Well if there is a very high chance that you're gonna hit someone you're not supposed to hit. you're acutely aware that the chance is very high, you still do it and you hit that person, then you should be slain. I think my example illustrates this very well, a lot of incidents of crossfire happen when the shooter has already begun shooting and due to the movement the bullets cross paths with an unfortunate someone. I think for sure that when the first few 'crossfire' shots hit the wrong person the shooter should be slain, since he had the gun aimed at the wrong target to begin with, yet didn't do anything to prevent the bullets hitting that person until it was too late.
I personally don’t think that’s fair or addresses the main issue in that you have no control over how your teammates move or act. Changing this rule to be this open ended creates a loophole where players could rather easily get other players slain if they wanted just by moving into their shot paths. It wouldn’t be easy to punish these trolls either as we would have to prove intent. Are we supposed to be calculating chances of who or what the shots will be hitting now? I don’t see how it’s possible. Sometimes you don’t even know that there’s a t buddy there. I agree there are some more blatant situations than others, but those situations usually tend to get players punished for toxicity if they are literally shooting through other players to get to someone else. This combined with lag, slow players, bad aim, and simple bad luck all force me to give this suggestion a -1. I personally don’t want to be slain because I can’t know what my teammate is thinking or how he will react when both of us are converging in on a lone innocent in a hallway. If he moves in front all of a sudden and my first shots hit him I’d be pretty salty about getting my next round after that lost, probably much more salty than I would have been about simply dying to crossfire in the first place. I understand the intention and the direction you’re going here, but I don’t think it’s the right answer to making some crossfire kills more fair.
I stand in the middle on this one, reason being, I have staffed during an incident on this one and I see where SGM comes from and I see where the majority come from. Here's my story, and to be honest I am upset over the situation. So on innocent motel, the T room near the elevator and the kitchen. One was in the room, lets call him A. T buddy in the doorway in front of an Innocent, that T we will call B and the inno C. Player A shoots kills B, leaves C alive doesn't even wound him, not much anyway. Leave C alive. Player B claimed RDM, Player A claimed crossfire. I asked other staff of this and was told it sounds like classic case of toxic gameplay and crossfire, no right to slay the individual for they didn't commit RDM. In my head it still bugs me tbh, but I also understand rules are there for a reason. If ever there was a way to prove a player was completely innocent of the situation or was just being toxic, I'd love to support this more than ever. But as of right now, I'm neutral on the fact for the rules are rules. I could only see right now, the amount of people that have committed an honest mistake in crossfire getting slain over assumptions. That's where I agree with Graze on this matter.
As much as I want to say that this is something that probably would come up enough to be an issue, it probably isn't. I see plenty of people doing toxic things like trying to get hit on purpose and such (which makes the current rule good). But I have yet to see someone actually killing their T-Buddies on purpose and pulling this card. Now, I haven't been on SGM for long, but I have staffed for a long time on other servers. Most of the servers I staffed on had a similar rule, and it really never was an issue. My suggestion if you see someone doing it is to record them and report it on the forums. If you catch them doing it multiple times you should be able to at least make them have to answer for it. But again, this to me seems like a last resort kind of thing. Try to believe that people are not going out of their way to be toxic like that unless they are known for doing so. I personally shoot and kill T-Buddies sometimes in the heat of a fight without meaning to do so. I would never try to do it on purpose because I know T-Buddies are what is going to help me win the round and RDMing them is just bad.
I feel if they shot the other player first before shooting the first and did not attempted not to shot team mates unless it completely out of their control like if their buddy rand in front of them as they where taking a shot or they are shooting something other then a player and a player walk behind that breakable object
