New Deathgame Rule??

[Raventi]

I think that it should be implied that if a T wants to play a deathgame, they can't go back from the designated area and if they do then they're dead because it is a deathgame after all. They knew what they were getting into and should follow through with it. If the T didn't hear that it was a deathgame....well then too bad your fault increase the volume you bum.

[Neptune]

You can order that once you go to the deathgame you can't go back, but if someone didn't hear it was a deathgame and just thought it was a normal order than that's not allowed, aka they can go back.

[nick]

I think that it should be implied that if a T wants to play a deathgame, they can't go back from the designated area and if they do then they're dead because it is a deathgame after all. They knew what they were getting into and should follow through with it. If the T didn't hear that it was a deathgame....well then too bad your fault increase the volume you bum.

 

CTs are the ones who say whether they can go back or not, if they don't say it then that's their choice to be lenient to the terorrists. It shouldn't be a rule because it's just an order CTs give, nothing like "If you have a primary, instant KOS".

[Toyz]

I think that it should be implied that if a T wants to play a deathgame, they can't go back from the designated area and if they do then they're dead because it is a deathgame after all. They knew what they were getting into and should follow through with it. If the T didn't hear that it was a deathgame....well then too bad your fault increase the volume you bum.

 

man, just tell them not to go back. I love my vanilla PB >=(

[Goku]

man, just tell them not to go back...

 

 

I'd like to take this moment to point out that it should be slayable if a CT DOES NOT state that you can't go back, then kills a T going back and saying "No going back".

 

So many times it will go like this:

 

CT: Line up on the line if you want to play a death game

 

T's line up

 

One T decides to go back

 

CT kills T

 

CT: No going back.

 

I understand if it is stated before hand "no going back" but I don't think the CT should be able to kill the T and THEN say no going back. Should at least warning shot the T and if he still tries to go back THEN kill him.

[Toyz]

I'd like to take this moment to point out that it should be slayable if a CT DOES NOT state that you can't go back, then kills a T going back and saying "No going back".

 

So many times it will go like this:

 

CT: Line up on the line if you want to play a death game

 

T's line up

 

One T decides to go back

 

CT kills T

 

CT: No going back.

 

I understand if it is stated before hand "no going back" but I don't think the CT should be able to kill the T and THEN say no going back. Should at least warning shot the T and if he still tries to go back THEN kill him.

Yea i agree, that is slayable.

[BoM]

I think that it should be implied that if a T wants to play a deathgame, they can't go back from the designated area and if they do then they're dead because it is a deathgame after all. They knew what they were getting into and should follow through with it. If the T didn't hear that it was a deathgame....well then too bad your fault increase the volume you bum.

 

Its always been implied, simply because it is an order that was given. While yes the deathgame is optional, the location and movements are orders, and should be treated just as normal orders. The only difference is that its a deathgame taking place along with the orders.

 

You can order that once you go to the deathgame you can't go back, but if someone didn't hear it was a deathgame and just thought it was a normal order than that's not allowed, aka they can go back.

 

This is the only time I'd be okay with this, and warning shots should still be given at least, but technically its the CTs choice still. If an order is given and someone didn't hear it, then dies AFTER WARNING SHOTS AND REPEATED ORDERS then its treated just as if it was a normal situation without a deathgame involved.. If someone is just mowing down people running back, then its slayable. Terrorists should also say something before they just run back, instead of making up their own rules.

 

CTs are the ones who say whether they can go back or not' date=' if they don't say it then that's their choice to be lenient to the terorrists. It shouldn't be a rule because it's just an order CTs give, nothing like "If you have a primary, instant KOS".[/quote']

 

^This, essentially CTs choice, T's should clean their ears out

 

I'd like to take this moment to point out that it should be slayable if a CT DOES NOT state that you can't go back, then kills a T going back and saying "No going back".

 

So many times it will go like this:

 

CT: Line up on the line if you want to play a death game

 

T's line up

 

One T decides to go back

 

CT kills T

 

CT: No going back.

 

I understand if it is stated before hand "no going back" but I don't think the CT should be able to kill the T and THEN say no going back. Should at least warning shot the T and if he still tries to go back THEN kill him.

 

CTs don't have to state it, it should be treated as a normal order, i.e. still use warning shots and repeat order if prompted. Its a courtesy for the CTs to actual say "No going back", but I agree warning shots are still required.

 

All in all this comes down to the much bigger issue at hand in PB.

1. People.....making....up....THEIR OWN FUCKING RULES

2. Lack of communication/both CTs and Ts doing things without communicating.

 

Doing either of these will ensue chaos as well as create odd rule conflicts like this. A lot of PB comes down to communication, and without it shit like this will keep happening, if not get worse. People are just playing PB as a do what you want and only half play the gamemode, not to mention actually following the rules. The reason CSS PB had implied rules, is because the regs of PB communicated, they developed courtesies like this one to make the game more enjoyable and understandable for everybody.

 

There is a level of rule discussion and clear cut clarification that can take place, however at some point it will come down to the regs who frequent PB. There will always things that can be done, but don't have to be done.