Okay, so after reading and listening to some of the comments / concerns (and playing in the server), here's some possible suggestions and feedback from me. Please note these are suggestions in a discussion and are not, at this point, an actual implemented rule change:
For starters, T's delaying rounds was a huge concern in PB. Forced LR's is a great rule change, in my opinion, and cuts down on this quite a bit. I don't plan on touching that at all.
Moving onto death games - one problem seems to be the repetitive use of FRLR and Simon Says. When Goku initially installed this rule, one of the primary reasons for allowing forced death games was mentioned as being able to use more functions of the map that were not being used previously - ie the huge amount of deathgames that are located in some maps. As it stands, it's increasingly apparent that this isn't really happening, and that it's always FRLR / Simon Says. One possible workaround for this would be to do as suggested, and only allow map-made deathgames - period. In the instance that T's agree to FRLR or any other CT created death game, then cool, but it shall not be forced.
Issuing limited numbers of death games per round based upon the map would be extremely confusing and hard for people to learn and understand. However, allowing one forced death games per round would alleviate the issues arising from the possibility of a CT sending all the T's to a roulette pit and keep spinning the ball until they are all dead.
After doing a bit of thinking on this whole topic, my thought process is, in summary:
Forced death games have the advantage of thinning the T's numbers a bit, and in that way can work in favor of keeping the round times down.
Forced death games such as FRLR & Simon Says can be played repetitively until all T's are dead (as long as they mix it up slightly so it's not, in a literal sense, every single round. While this isn't technically a 'CT decided death', anyone can kill off all the T's in one sweep if they just keep playing. As it stands, we don't have rules that say "During Simon Says, you have to do it this way" or "The last T is automatically the winner and cannot be forced to keep playing. Even though this should be common sense, the reason why this is a big deal is because of this scenario: Random SA joins PB. CT does the aforementioned and makes T's play Simon Says until they are all dead. Admin slays said CT. CT files an admin complaint because he broke no actual rule. Admin is now facing possible punishment for enforcing something that isn't a rule. While this is just one example and I am not saying an admin would or would not receive punishment, I think it's shitty of me as a leader in general to put you guys in a scenario where you're even being discussed for a punishment. You can let your imagination run rampant with possible scenarios of where this could work out poorly for all parties involved.
Having clear, defined rules is great, but you have to weigh the output of how many stipulations you are requiring for a certain rule to be in effect. If, in the event, we have to add 10 stipulations to forced death games for them to be kosher with all parties involved, is it really worth putting up pages and pages of stipulations for ONE rule for players and admins to read so everyone is on the same page?
So, if we were to keep death games, these would be my suggested changes...these are completely subject to change if someone can point out reasonable flaws, it just doesn't work, or if better ideas get tossed out. These are not the specific way I would word them in a 'Rule Guide', it's moreso just getting ideas out there. I'm open to suggestions and criticism:
No time limit or T limit required for when a CT can force a map made death game.
CT's can only FORCE one death game per round. This mean one round of whatever one death game the CT's choose that is map made.
Reword the 'special orders' rule so that CT's may give T's who live after a death game a freeday, IF they wish to. This builds incentive for T's to possibly want to participate in any future death games CT's may want to initiate after their one forced death game has been used. All normal free days rules apply, so they can be revoked at any time, etc. (This one I'm not too strongly about. I'd be willing to test it, but I'm not super confident that it would work - but I definitely think it's a possibility. Wording would probably need a little tweaking.)
Forced LR's can still be initiated once the requirement is reached, even if CT's have forced a death game. This is a complete separate entity.
Any deathgame deemed as broken, bugged, or does not give a possible chance of survival, will not be allowed to be forced. These will be a specific case-by-case basis and I would be the sole person rendering a decision on that. It will not be left up to SA discretion as there are too many of you and that will get confusing real quick. The only one I can even think of off the top of my head is breakfloor on the Spy map, which does not usually (if ever) allow T's to live.
I'll be on TS / steam all day if you guys want to shoot me a message or talk to me about suggestions. I plan on doing a meeting on Friday, more than likely. Stand by for official day / time.
Promotions