Rejected General Rules

Hi. Ive got a ban on me, for a rule that has been removed, but is still enforced. Never knew it existed previous to the slay i got, although technically the report which lead to the slay should have been invalid as my t bud walked in front of me as i shot. Im talking about the Guass Rifle warning rule, which I honestly never knew existed. Plus i even checked the rules before leaving the server to see if it said that... My suggestion: Don't Remove Rules from the rules list if they are still in effect. Its confusing and honestly annoying.

 

Now to be fair, you were just going to be slain for the rule. You were banned for leaving with a slay on you.

 

Agreed, although the slay should've been invalid in the first place in my opinion. I'm willing to serve the ban out to its end, as i believe i was in the wrong.

 

As I pointed out in the similar thread, the gauss rifle is an explosive item, so it falls under the warning teammates rules:

WARNING TEAMMATES
1. Warning if you're about to use an item, usually explosive or traps, that may cause damage to them.

The rest of the rule is in the extended rules. I think it used to be more clear that it applied to the gauss rifle specifically, but the wording was shortened and broadened to make the rules less lengthy

 

Right, but it wouldn't have damaged them, as the area I was aiming had no t buddies near enough... They walked in front of me as i clicked, i had no way to know they would do that, and thus didn't warn. Also didnt know i had to warn as, again, the rule isn't there :/

 

if he ran in front of your shot it should be crossfire, I thought that you killed your T buddy with splash damage and tried to get out of it lol. I don't see a difference between what you did and someone running in front of a 1shot headshot weapon.

 

Thats what i thought, but i guess not as my appeal was denied. Doesnt matter much tho.

 

Really the only difference is that the guass is an explosives weapon and there is a rule that explicitly says you need to warn for explosive weapons.
It would kind of be the same as if you cooked a frag grenade intending to throw it at an inno but then your t buddy steps in front of you and you throw it at the back of his head.
You weren’t intending to kill your t buddy with it, but your actions still got them killed, and if you had warned it could have been prevented.
Same situation could be applied to all kinds of crossfire, I think the explosive weapons rule is just a technicality in your case.

 

So essentially, its up to the admin/mod who handles the report on whether its crossfire or not. In this situation, it could have been prevented had i warned, but then again, so could most instances of crossfire. Besides, grenades are a no-brainer and definitely dont compare to the gauss rifle and how it works.
Its almost an instant shot from you to your target, which then explodes upon impact. A frag requires a few seconds to cook before exploding, giving ample time to warn/run away before it explodes. The gauss does not. Because my T buddy in this situation would not have been harmed had they not run in front of me, shouldn't this technically count as crossfire? Wouldn't it count as crossfire had the same exact thing happened with a normal rifle? Or with a deagle? Its not like they died due to the explosive damage after it hit an innocent, they literally walked in front of me as I pressed my mouse button down. I think in this situation, it should be counted as crossfire. As with any other weapon, including harpoon, it wouldve been.
Please, clarify the rules a bit more so that when people actually read them, they don't get confused or mislead.
You may have removed it to slim the rules down, but 99% of people dont read the extended rules until some situation like this one happens. I myself have read them more times than i like to admit, mainly because of misunderstanding, or confusion.
If a rule isn't there, but is still enforced, thats essentially the same as saying, "Oh, Highwon said this is how it is now, but it hasnt been updated yet". Allowing admins to come up with rules and such on the spot. Would they do that tho? I dont think so.

 

We just need a bit more clarity, either update the rules regarding crossfire, or return the gauss rifle specification. Tbh i think both need to happen.

 

I would say that the Gauss Rifle is more akin to a sniper with an explosive after-effect than it is to a grenade. The grenade has a different unique animation for holding vs cooking, a grenade doesn't explode instantaneously, and a grenade is a physical object. The gauss rifle has the same animation as a normal sniper, the explosive shot is instantaneous, and there is no physical object. It's a railgun. The explosion wasn't even the problem in this instance.

Here's my question. Let's imagine the exact same situation but instead of the gauss rifle, he was using the barrel gun. Would he need to warn before he shot the barrel if he didn't see any traitors in the way at the time of the shot?

 

I think they'll say only if i shoot the explosive one :/

 

I want to point out that the reason explosive weapons or traps must have a warning for them over regular weapons or even some other items, like the barrel gun, is because of the AOE(area or effect). With regular weapons, you can predict right where your shot will cause damage, but with explosions there's an AOE that causes more of an expanded area of damage.

So, use a warning and all is fine. It's still in the rules.

 

Except ive never seen someone else warn for gauss rifle shots. :/

 

Just because it isn't very common doesn't mean it isn't in the rules. You can probably get away with not warning if you know your T buddies aren't in the area. Playing smart makes a warning unneeded, but you should warn anyways if you intend to use the gauss rifle as that will ensure you don't get in trouble for your T buddy accidentally stumbling into your shot. I will admit that a further debate could be had if your shot landed square on to the person as opposed to AOE damage, but this is something i'd need to consider further.

 

Well, Happy Holidays everyone!
Im fine with serving the ban, as it was rdm and leave. although i disagree with the fact that I was slain for my t bud not being in the area im aiming for, then walking in front of me as I shoot... Hell, even if i did warn, its likely they could have missed the warning, and blamed me. And if i had warned in VC, then with there being no way to verify it, and it being word v word, I most likely Would have been slain anyways. In this instance, or similar instances, it should be considered crossfire. I can say with 100% certainty that if i had been using a normal rifle, they would've been killed just the same, but id have gotten off without a slay, as per crossfire ruling.

 

you would not get slain in a word v word situation

Spoiler: scenario1

It seems that the staff think you are trying to describe a scenario like this
(randomly selected people of no significance)

Spoiler: scenario2

But from what you are saying it seems like this occured

 

That's almost exactly what happened.

 

We will be discussing what we believe should happen to the gauss rifle rule in a meeting today. Thank you for suggesting this, I will have a response later on!

 

Thank you! Sorry for taking up your time with this