01-12-2018, 01:27 PM
I will agree that sometimes the rules do take the fun out of the game, specifically test or KOS and such. I've said it before, but there's nothing worse than waiting a few rounds to become a traitor, possibly even needing that traitor round to be Top Player for that map, and having it ruined by a detective that happened to spawn near you and guess lucky.
As for the given scenario, I personally think the rules are fine with that situation. If A shoots B, and C walks in, sees B's body on the ground, C has no right to shoot, and that's how it should stay. If A has the fire discipline to not shoot at C, and is even somewhat damaged, they are at a disadvantage. Once people start to surround, if the detective decides to KOS him, then that's their choice, but innocents should keep their safety on.
Think about it. You're A. You're a traitor and you shoot B. B fights back and damages you down to 25 health, but you kill him. C walks in and you say he shot first. C doesn't believe you. How would you feel if C kills you without knowing if you actually shot first? What if B actually did shoot first and was innocent? If there are no restrictions on these rules, you will be killed for killing an innocent. Nobody saw the guy RDM you so they will kill you. It gives the RDMers more reign over the game.
Just want you guys to think about these real quick, see if you can find ways to bend the rules around them so they work better. Still, I am not for a change in the rules regarding this situation.
As for the given scenario, I personally think the rules are fine with that situation. If A shoots B, and C walks in, sees B's body on the ground, C has no right to shoot, and that's how it should stay. If A has the fire discipline to not shoot at C, and is even somewhat damaged, they are at a disadvantage. Once people start to surround, if the detective decides to KOS him, then that's their choice, but innocents should keep their safety on.
Think about it. You're A. You're a traitor and you shoot B. B fights back and damages you down to 25 health, but you kill him. C walks in and you say he shot first. C doesn't believe you. How would you feel if C kills you without knowing if you actually shot first? What if B actually did shoot first and was innocent? If there are no restrictions on these rules, you will be killed for killing an innocent. Nobody saw the guy RDM you so they will kill you. It gives the RDMers more reign over the game.
Just want you guys to think about these real quick, see if you can find ways to bend the rules around them so they work better. Still, I am not for a change in the rules regarding this situation.
