[Ace1579]

Or like i said take the chance and shoot him but hey it is up too you and if you are wrong then RIP

So what your saying is its somehow diffirent if they are inno or traitor? If its a traitor lieing and you killed him for it its suddenly ok? Thats also saying doing something in ttt based off of a chance that it may be right is not slayable in itself. Its how the base rules are setup your breaking the game thinking this way!

If im a T or a inno and i just lied about someone shooting at me and someone decides to kill me i can't report them for killing me because i lied in the first place............which ALL GOES BACK TO THE POINT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE.............."It is YOUR CHOICE to kill someone in that situation if you are right and he just lied then good for you but if he was telling the truth and killed a man in self defense then you get slain.......And to avoid taking that risk you put a good old TTT friendly SUS on them and just kill them later.


At the end of the day if you do get reported Staff will be able to check the logs and make the final decision based on what happened

[boba]

@Ace1579 I still don't think that's right at all. You get DNA and you get slain for something you didn't witness?? We have always tell people to report the person who did the damages first. DNA should never be considered slayable offence unless the player was proven or if they were there when it happened. But either way, it's never the person who took DNA is the one at fault. They simply see a body that was called to and took DNA. Like you're really going to slay someone for doing their job? In any case, we always tell them to report the person who did harm instead of the person who attacked you based on DNA.

This is the same shit with koses. A koses B. So C kills B. They were all innocent. The one who gets slain is A. He called the kos and had the first call-out of RDM. Even if he didn't do the first damage but he was the one who did the actual mistake. C would be the detective person, it's not their fault for following what they have and heard.

[Stingray]

Or like i said take the chance and shoot him but hey it is up too you and if you are wrong then RIP

So what your saying is its somehow diffirent if they are inno or traitor? If its a traitor lieing and you killed him for it its suddenly ok? Thats also saying doing something in ttt based off of a chance that it may be right is not slayable in itself. Its how the base rules are setup your breaking the game thinking this way!

If im a T or a inno and i just lied about someone shooting at me and someone decides to kill me i can't report them for killing me because i lied in the first place............which ALL GOES BACK TO THE POINT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE.............."It is YOUR CHOICE to kill someone in that situation if you are right and he just lied then good for you but if he was telling the truth and killed a man in self defense then you get slain.......And to avoid taking that risk you put a good old TTT friendly SUS on them and just kill them later.


At the end of the day if you do get reported Staff will be able to check the logs and make the final decision based on what happened

So you just said if its a t its not rdm if its an inno its rdm. That is not the way the rules work on ttt it breaks the game. You do not take chances in ttt the rules are made so that if you are taking a chance your breaking a rule.

I believe I have thought of a fix for this problem
So like how tbaiting is kosable but not slayable, defending yourself is NOT slayable as the rule is intended BUT defending yourself still makes you kosable UNLESS if you are proven obviously. Then what will happen is as rule intends fault will lay on the one to start an rdm train to be slain. Killing innos is kosable as intended. This is the only way you can implement it without breaking the game. This is how most of our players interpret the rules anyways.
This CANNOT be up to staff discretion rules NEED to be solid!

Detective should never be slain for following dna off of an innocent, thats not the way ttt works.
If you are playing off of uncertainty and taking a chance if they are a traitor or not its rdm. You end up breaking a rule.

We also need to better enforce and clarify the rule about giving a chance to id. Our "good players" tend to kill someone right after they kill and dont give a traitor OR innocent the chance to id. All the time im killed while going to id a t body by "good players" their reaction is its a mistake BUT if im a traitor and they are inno they think the rules somehow change because the body was inno and simply state they killed blank was inno. Somehow they forget its an unid body and they killed all on chance and try to circumvent the rules... does that sound familiar ace?

[matt_st3 (Strongrule)]

...what??
I’ll respond in the morning but what??
There’s so many things wrong with that. Statements and assumptions both.
I’m not approving anything saying you can’t defend yourself unless you want to be kosd.

[Stingray]

...what??
I’ll respond in the morning but what??
There’s so many things wrong with that. Statements and assumptions both.
I’m not approving anything saying you can’t defend yourself unless you want to be kosd.

If you defend yourself and kill an inno how do you prove that it was in self defense? There needs to be a solid proof that they rdmed, the only proof is an inno dead. The person that rdmed you gets a slay, you shouldnt get slain for defending yourself AND thats after round which is the only way you can truly tell if someone rdmed (in the logs). Anyone and everyone if caught killing an inno as t says something along the lines of they were shooting at them. So we would be forced to believe them. Most of the players already play this way, when i kill an inno in plain sight i dont expect anyone to believe me. When the body is ided and inno i expect to be killed and in fact usually am before i can even say anything about it or even id because people run around and kill someone as soon as they see someone drop another player.
Do you not agree that if you are taking a gamble if someone is t or not its rdm plainly because everything that makes someone kosable is based on 100% certain proof? The base rules insure that to kill an inno as inno someone was breaking a rule

[lacer]

I believe I have thought of a fix for this problem
So like how tbaiting is kosable but not slayable, defending yourself is NOT slayable as the rule is intended BUT defending yourself still makes you kosable UNLESS if you are proven obviously. 

what the fuck did I just read

[The Dutch Problem]

How the fuck is that fair, jesus. I've successfully managed to defend myself from a man whom attacked me and thats grounds to kill me. Nice. And to what you said, note that if they DONT give you time to ID the corpse you have grounds to report them because if they dont know the fucks happening they cannot, CAN NOT, interveine in random gunfights unless KOS's are called. If staff doesnt slay for this, then thats just a fault in the training.

I only open fire if I see no reason that someone would open fire on someone (Note this depends on if callouts are made, if they are I follow the initial callout if not I attack the attacker). But that is ONLY if I see the firefight start, if I dont I hang back untill I see a callout, a failiure to ID the body or that I'm being fired upon. If they give me a valid reason I sus them and I'll hunt them down in OT unless they get proven in the meantime or die.

If I nab DNA off a corpse and the killer is a man whom defended himself and has clearly stated it but i failed to read it, I EXPECT to be slain because if they stated it its no-longer their fault if they die. Its the fault of the man with the DNA scanner who fails to understand the self-defense rule and its impact to OT. This can be taken with a grain of salt in voice chat knowing mic spam exists but there is this beautifull thing called text chat, the thing that gives IRREFUTABLE proof that you called out that you defended yourself from X.

[Swartsy]

How the fuck is that fair, jesus. I've successfully managed to defend myself from a man whom attacked me and thats grounds to kill me. Nice. And to what you said, note that if they DONT give you time to ID the corpse you have grounds to report them because if they dont know the fucks happening they cannot, CAN NOT, interveine in random gunfights unless KOS's are called. If staff doesnt slay for this, then thats just a fault in the training.

I only open fire if I see no reason that someone would open fire on someone (Note this depends on if callouts are made, if they are I follow the initial callout if not I attack the attacker). But that is ONLY if I see the firefight start, if I dont I hang back untill I see a callout, a failiure to ID the body or that I'm being fired upon. If they give me a valid reason I sus them and I'll hunt them down in OT unless they get proven in the meantime or die.

If I nab DNA off a corpse and the killer is a man whom defended himself and has clearly stated it but i failed to read it, I EXPECT to be slain because if they stated it its no-longer their fault if they die. Its the fault of the man with the DNA scanner who fails to understand the self-defense rule and its impact to OT. This can be taken with a grain of salt in voice chat knowing mic spam exists but there is this beautifull thing called text chat, the thing that gives IRREFUTABLE proof that you called out that you defended yourself from X.

This is one of the reasons why I’m only using text chat ingame.

You are absolutely right. It isn’t fair.
The way you explain what you would do in this situation is exactly how it should be done.

However it’s not really something what a new player would know. Perhaps the rule(s) should be more explained and detailed regarding this matter.

[Stingray]

How the fuck is that fair, jesus. I've successfully managed to defend myself from a man whom attacked me and thats grounds to kill me. Nice. And to what you said, note that if they DONT give you time to ID the corpse you have grounds to report them because if they dont know the fucks happening they cannot, CAN NOT, interveine in random gunfights unless KOS's are called. If staff doesnt slay for this, then thats just a fault in the training.

I only open fire if I see no reason that someone would open fire on someone (Note this depends on if callouts are made, if they are I follow the initial callout if not I attack the attacker). But that is ONLY if I see the firefight start, if I dont I hang back untill I see a callout, a failiure to ID the body or that I'm being fired upon. If they give me a valid reason I sus them and I'll hunt them down in OT unless they get proven in the meantime or die.

If I nab DNA off a corpse and the killer is a man whom defended himself and has clearly stated it but i failed to read it, I EXPECT to be slain because if they stated it its no-longer their fault if they die. Its the fault of the man with the DNA scanner who fails to understand the self-defense rule and its impact to OT. This can be taken with a grain of salt in voice chat knowing mic spam exists but there is this beautifull thing called text chat, the thing that gives IRREFUTABLE proof that you called out that you defended yourself from X.

Its not fair but really you shouldnt be getting rdmed to begin with. I agree with the second paragraph whole heartedly. As for the third your saying someones individual personal word is proof. We dont take someones word as proof anywhere else unless its detective or provens word. Is this much different than calling a kos on someone for shooting at you and being kosed for kosing an inno? Everyone knows kosing an inno is automatic kos on you and prey on it because an inno could and should be shooting the person for an actual reason to begin with. In the end as long as everyone is playing by the rules with 100% certainty the only people shooting innos should be ts

[The Dutch Problem]

Killing an innocent is not a reason to KOS. Killing an innocent for NO REASON is a reason to KOS. I didnt think thats THAT difficult to conceive? Genuinly whats so bloody difficult about that.

Not to mention only thing I see from you is you walking in on a gunfight, with a man that says he was attacked BY the innocent dead guy. You SUSPECT he's lying and kill him. Most important word: SUSPECT. You're killing him out of suspicion, wich as we all know, is RDM. Not. That. Fucking. Difficult.