Rules given before lr changed

[duffy]

I believe that the rule that states, "rules of an lr has to be given before the lr" should be changed to rules can be given after OR before the lr (however the player decides to do it). Every player on the server interprets the rule as you have to give the rules after the lr. Even myself as a CT I allow people to give rules after because most CT's (including myself here) give a 15 second time interval to send the lr and which most people take around ~10 seconds to even send out the lr and they don't give rules because they only have now 5 seconds to give the lr and will end up being shot by a CT if they doesn't send the lr.

 

I think the rule should be changed because 95% of the community plays by the changed rule, and this only causes confusion because then if a CT "cheats" the lr, the CT can just state that you didn't technically give the rules before the lr. It causes a lot of unnecessary arguing and time wasted a I think the community would be better off changing the rule.

[Infinityward]

I agree with drippy, Ive seen a t give gun toss rules, which are kinda lengthy just to have the ct deny the lr, they then have to give it again to a different ct and in some cases be denied again. In my opinion this just adds unnecessary time to the round.

[Trazz]

Wouldn’t mind seeing this happen in JB. As @drippy said majority of the CTs don’t mind players stating their rules after LR unless it’s some real tryhards towards it. Another way for this if wished to keep the rules where the T must state the rules prior to the start of the LR is to have them choose the CT first rather than which LR to do because once you get the CTs attention with the LR notification and they accept its too late to state or for them to register. If they are asked before the T selects which one to do then that could be reasonable and if the CTs don’t agree to the rules they can just cheat/abort the LR.

[urpalerp]

I honestly agree with what Drip’s suggesting. (Going to tag @fantastic @Military_king @Manny @eXtr3m3 for their input.) But to add on, when time for lr comes around, many cts are normally screaming into their mic to lr, so when a t says his/her rules and sends the lr, the ct does not hear the rules, which leads to them cheating the lr. I personally feel that having it where rules have to be given before lr leads to a lot of unneeded confusion. Giving rules after might make it a bit simpler and cleaner.

[Lokibelowkey]

This rule makes the rules of an lr clear and concise before an lr starts and has the ct accept the rules by accepting the lr. Changing the rule could have intentioned issue unless fully thought out and even so gives an unfair advantage to the t. One issue that arises is that a t can give a rule half way into an lr to shift it into their favor. Another problem is that most cts that accept an lr like shot for shot or no scope battle will not be looking at chat for rules rather be worried about not dying and killing their opponent. I feel that most cts wouldn't know what the rules of the lr are especially ones that are fast pace and requires your full attention in order not to lose. Also a ct could just kill the t before he has given rules, like in shot for shot if the ct has the first shot and the t is typing his rule the ct could just kill him. The only way I could see this rule being implemented is if someone changes the plugin to add a 10-15 second interval before an lr starts to give rules that way a ct accepts and then they have to give rules. But even if you add precautions like these the fact is that they t could give a rule like ct doesn't move it doesn't prevent from skewed rules. The current system prevents from the ct accepting an lr and being forced on rules they dont want if it gives the t an unfair advantage or if it will unintentionally delay the round example. The ct and t have to be across the map for shot for shot. Cts accepting rules after an lr has been accepted should be left to option rather than forcing as most players would have the courtesy of letting the t give rules. The current rule system is in place for a reason and in my opinion give the reasons and examples above shouldn't be changed.

[Tweedledee]

While we’re at it, why don’t we make LR’s fair too? I’ve seen and experienced way too many LR’s (gun toss in particular) that force the CT to jump from the highest distance on the map and die so that the T wins the LR without having to try to win it themselves. Forgive me if it’s been talked about before, but can we add a rule that states that T’s cannot give rules for LR that leads to the suicide of the CT?

[duffy]

going to bump this thread to see where the JB team stands on this.

 

As time goes on, this still is a problem and it still causes unneeded arguing and ends up with toxicity because CTs will "cheat" their lr but it's not technically cheating because the rules were given after the lr. I see a lot of people that play on JB and admins in favor of some sort of change to this rule. Either change the rule or make it more clear somehow and get the message across to the JB members.

[TheZZL]

Thank's for the bump, I can't believe I only just saw this post until now.

 

While we’re at it, why don’t we make LR’s fair too? I’ve seen and experienced way too many LR’s (gun toss in particular) that force the CT to jump from the highest distance on the map and die so that the T wins the LR without having to try to win it themselves. Forgive me if it’s been talked about before, but can we add a rule that states that T’s cannot give rules for LR that leads to the suicide of the CT?

 

I don't see too large of a problem with this as it doesn't happen too often. T's can do lots of things during an LR to favor things in their way, and still be able to Lr again after they win. Getting back to the OP, I completely agree with @drippy and the only concern is more time being wasted, but the T's just need to get that in order for themselves.

[GG EZ]

I would say yes this is a problem when it comes to LRs. But it’s just gonna open up a new can of worms if they add a rule where the T can give LR rules after Lr is accepted cause your gonna have to specify when you can’t make a new rule. For example 6 shots into the shot for shot LR the T says that he wants a new rule that you can only move left and right but the CT didn’t want to play shot for shot only moving left and right only, the CT wanted to play regular shot for shot and now he can’t cancel the LR since he already accepted it.

 

I would say leave it how it is and have the CT determine wether or not they want to follow the rules that were told after he accepted the LR

 

Also I agree with @Tweedledee in that we should focus on a more general set of rules for each LR rather then making it to where the T decides everything that happens in the LR which could potentially sway the way of how LRs go substantially to T side

[fantastic]

going to bump this thread to see where the JB team stands on this.

 

As time goes on, this still is a problem and it still causes unneeded arguing and ends up with toxicity because CTs will "cheat" their lr but it's not technically cheating because the rules were given after the lr. I see a lot of people that play on JB and admins in favor of some sort of change to this rule. Either change the rule or make it more clear somehow and get the message across to the JB members.

 

Thank you for the bump; I'm at work so I briefly skimmed over the thread but I'll add this to the JB plate of things to discuss. Sit tight .

 

EDIT: Moving this to rule discussion so this doesn't get lost.