Bubblez Posted March 15, 2017 Content Count: 1057 Joined: 11/30/09 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2017 Exactly. I do see your opinion and do completely understand where you are coming from and you obviously do present a great counter argument. But again we are in 2017 and we are dealing with a majority of kids who do not see it the way we do. Most of them do not have even the courtesy to admit when they are rebelling and die and just complain because they didn't get warning shot. The way I see is that it worked for years without no problem and I don't think it would be problem if it was put back into place. Of course initially its going to be a shit show, but it will fix out quite fast. With your example of jumping out of the pool, yes obviously they need to jump out of water to get out so they shouldn't be given a warning shot for that. And with some of the Ct's not understanding that, they might decide to shoot them and should be punished. But this downside is a lot better overall compare to the other problems that occur when a shit load of warning shots are given to those terrorists jumping etc. These are just my two cents from what I see in game. Link to comment
Juice [TRADING] Posted March 15, 2017 Content Count: 24 Joined: 01/20/17 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2017 no jumping or standing should be automatic Link to comment
Cam Posted March 15, 2017 Content Count: 1193 Joined: 06/28/16 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2017 Could we make a poll on this? Link to comment
Luke Posted March 15, 2017 Content Count: 2230 Joined: 12/14/15 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2017 This really isn't an issue either way. There are technicalities to it that aren't really that important. 'Why should I have to say no jumping?' is just as easily countered by 'why do you need them not to jump?' or 'why can't I jump when I'm still crouching?'. If you do REALLY need them to not jump as you're checking weapons etc, then say no jumping. It's simple to follow and is the way the rules currently stand. Even if the rules do change - which isn't really that necessary or important on this matter either way as long as the rule itself is distinct - the other way would be just as easy to follow. 1 Link to comment
asdfg Posted March 15, 2017 Content Count: 1421 Joined: 12/22/15 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2017 (edited) Here's my opinion on this, it's mostly blends from Gokus and ExRevs posts. First of all there are 2 different orders that have to do with the crouching movement. We have "Crouch Walk" and "Crouch" For example, "Crouch to pool" or "Crouch Walk to pool" So, on the order "Crouch to pool" the order, no jumping would not be implied, because you can jump while crouched. On the order "Crouch Walk to pool", no jumping would be implied because if you jump, you are no longer walking, you are jumping. I think making the order "Crouch to pool" having jumping implied would create more problems than it would fix. For example, the regs would be all over the forums asking if this was implied or if that was implied. I think a better solution would be to leave this up to how the CT words his order. Edited March 15, 2017 by Nimmy Link to comment
Poobah Posted March 15, 2017 Content Count: 418 Joined: 01/15/17 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2017 As someone who has only played PB/JB a few times, I think I may have some slightly valuable input here. The way I see it, if you order T's to crouch walk to where ever, they should crouch walk to the destination. I think if they jump, they should be given a warning shot. Reason being, they were not told to jump. They were told to crouch walk. As for their counter-argument which will inevitably be "Well you didn't say I couldn't jump." I'd argue that they're not in charge, they don't get to make the orders. Yes, you can still remain crouched while jumping, but you weren't told to jump. To me, it makes sense to do only what you are told. If you are concerned as to whether or not you can do something you should ask instead of doing it first and likely creating problems. I can also see the argument that you just say "No jumping" but then what if someone decides they're gonna crouch walk backwards just because they can. Now you gotta say "No jumping and face forwards" (assuming that you find them facing backwards is a problem for what ever reason...) and it just goes on and on with all the different specifications that you'd have to state. That's why I feel that you should do as you are instructed to, no more, no less. Just my thoughts, let me know if you agree or if I'm missing something since I don't really play PB/JB often. Link to comment
All Ts Posted March 15, 2017 Content Count: 4441 Joined: 05/28/16 Status: Offline Share Posted March 15, 2017 The whole arguement about crouching & no jumping being implied is really petty. It's so petty that we literally couldn't know whether it would hurt or help more without implementing it. It literally feels like a fix that has nothing to do with quality of life and much more to do with people bitching. The simple fact is people are going to bitch no matter what, they will find a reason-any reason. Leave it the way it is and they'll constantly bitch that they didn't hear the order. Change it and people will post 25 threads a month and bitch at eachother on the server. Honestly makes very little difference. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Reply to Thread
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now