o.0 Those seem a little contradictory.
Again, a little contradictory (to me). You want a MOTD rule over a small issue? I thought you were for keeping the motd small and simple.
Please, read your earlier posts before replying.
But we're bitching Now! Fix it NOW! I won't bitch about not having them in two months, I promise! (as long as we aren't considering bringing them back)
My god, you want to change the rules of PB and you can't answer that question!?!?
(I'm not sure if your serious or not, but god help us if you are.)
Read my earlier post.
Yet you want to make an entire MOTD rule over it.
I'm telling you, they usually work it out. Show me otherwise (demoS) and I'll change my opinion. I never usually have that issue, and if it arises go with it and spam my orders out next round.
Why not just ask for a photo of his military ID? I know its kinda creepy, but I'd put the debate to rest if we could compare the picture to previous info he has posted.
I'm not attempting to troll. I'm simply trying to make everyone see that camping is camping.
Those that hate camping will call out camping even if done for a good reason. They don't like camping. Simple.
If I'm going to guard a room on the side of the map opposite of the Terrorists, I'm still guarding something. So, I'm camping. So, I am helping the team by securing that room on the off chance of a rebellion that gets to me.
Its hard as fuck to enforce, and open to so much interpretation it just gets fucking stupid. Get away from this slippery slope. I can almost guarantee admin and player complaints coming from camping and some admin's hate of camping should a rule be created.
Its allowed plain and simple. You got warning shots. You've got enough.
Under your logic, if I go camp the left side of pool the whole round, I'm camping and should be slayed for it. Even though there is a deagle, a secret vent, AND a teleporter in there on razor.
I'm camping the armory on freeday to protect the guns. Under your logic, slay.
I'm camping... to protect... Under your logic, slay.
Wrong.
Unless I missed something in this thread, you must warn for them if their holstered, so it means you can't AWP someone running around with a loaded m4 on their back.
Idiotic? Yes.
Does anyone care? No.
Agreed. No warning shots sound better. I'm still wondering why no higherup has stated a clear set of rules about this.
Oh, wait, Its PB. Let me get a quote on how the higherups feel on PB.
Don't expect clear rules on a "retarded" server. Especially if the higheups won't listen to counterarguments and petitions to remove warning shots.
Most higherups just don't care.
Edit: For on topic, I rarely give WS considering the lack of "guidelines" to them. When possible, sure. If you think in any way they could harm anyone, blast them.
Edit2: If anyone actually finds real higherup approved guidelines, post them please. I'm not going to go through 24 pages of the search results.
Make the game hard, thats the enjoyment of it. And the reason you "have" to go CT is the fact we don't want to mess with your stupidly pussified rules. Play the game hard with a challenge or get the fuck out. I enjoy getting my ass busted as T for 2-3 rounds before that oh so sweet kill. And if they want to camp, go right ahead, I like a challenge.
But meh, slaying for camping is now non-punishable so I guess we have a new non-written rule.
