Change Rule 19

It very well may not have been clear to the majority of players; that does not mean a majority of players supported implementing the current rule (or are you trying to tell me you got everyone onto forums to give their opinion, as if that's ever happened?). Why not take some polls? Do you not want to hear what people want?

Disagree.

--- Double Post Merged, Sep 16, 2018, Original Post Date: Sep 16, 2018 ---

Okay, this is what I'm talking about: under the current rule, if you actually managed to kill the last T before he typed !lr that would be a free-kill. That shouldn't be seen as a freekill.

 

this is not what im saying, im just asking wich is the right thing to do cause almost 70% of players work by the last part you said (1 T is in red, 20 is in blue, red wins, kill all blue apart from the last lucky 1)
in many roulette games once there are 2 left even if one of them should die all cts start screaming on mic don't kill him he have LR according to Rule 19
like wtf everyone is using his own rule ?
this is why im asking for a finale clearance that everyone should follow, cause clearly everyone has his own Rule 19

 

Yeah, it’s inconvenient and annoying, though. What do you mean you can’t go back? If you implement a rule and you get backlash, that’s when you know the rule needs rethinking.

I don’t know why you’re so insistent and obsessive over exactly 2 Ts being left alive anyway. It’s completely arbitrary in the first place.

 

Actually there’s a lot of backlash. Just by playing on the server you can tell that.

 

I

I think we touched on this in the other thread, but this is breaking the rule as it's written. Once you have 2 Ts alive, one in red and one in the "die" room blue, the T in blue is safeguarded by the rule regardless of how you look at it. You can't kill him unless he rebels after reaching LR.

From my perspective I'm guessing that the rule was made to make wardens play smarter in this situation, so like JayJay says, you make sure there's at least two in each colour/room. Actually, the rule enforces wardens to do this, unless you want to change how it's written, but I don't think it was made to allow what you're talking about?

--- Double Post Merged, Sep 17, 2018, Original Post Date: Sep 17, 2018 ---

I think we want to avoid this.

 

To be honest you all sound so mad about this rule and how it works, yet I don’t see any reports about it, ima continue playing the way I do and have done for years.

It’s not about safe guarding etc it’s to make CTs actually look for people hiding/rebelling before getting to the lr stage , or to give the last 2 alive from climb or something their lr.

If I said you got 10 seconds to pass this part of death run and you don’t, ima still wipe out everyone who didn’t even if it was all of them.

 

That's true, nonetheless my opinion is that it is.

I don't think that's an accurate picture of what's happening. As I said before, when this gets brought up on the server virtually everyone (Ts and CTs alike) is on my side of the fence (and I don't mean that in a rude way, it's the honest truth). I play this game for fun, not for kills.

I disagree. It's more than fair, i.e. gives an unfair advantage/benefit, for the T who has hidden/afk, and is unfair to the rest of the Ts on the server. And they (the Ts who are dead/weren't hiding) are usually very vocal about how unfair it is when these situations occur. As I said, plenty of backlash on a regular basis.

I think just removing it would do the job. (Maybe it's nice to have a rule mentioning LR, but I don't think it needs to be explained; it's pretty obvious how it works to anyone who watches a round.)

Yes, it is breaking the rule as it's written, and that's why I think it needs to be rewritten. There is no logical reason to keep the blue T alive. He failed the game like everyone else. That's why the rule is flawed.

Indeed it forces wardens to command differently, but I would argue against the idea that it makes them command "smarter", and I definitely don't think the different commands make the rounds more fun.

Another point I'd like to make is that, for example if a T gets lucky in the blue/red game above and should have been killed but makes it to LR because he was one of the last two alive, he can still win and keep LRing theoretically until all CTs are dead, if he just keeps typing !lr fast enough that none of the CTs can kill him in between. So my suggestion doesn't actually prevent the lucky T from getting LR and winning the round, if he's also skilled enough.

 

if you think im against the Rule guess what: No im not against it
till now i didn't face any problems with this rule:
as a Warden when there are few Ts i count them and if there is any rebel he will die before doing the next game
and as a T i used this rule to hide in cells/escape and then doing LR and rebelling.
the only reason to hate this rule is that you don't know how to use it.

 

Apologies to bring up an old thread... I've only just started playing again and this rule is bugging me a little; it hinders the choice of games that a ct can play. For example, the ct needs to get rid of 2 T's for Lr and the only game he can really play to do this is by First/Last reaction otherwise he risks killing more than he is allowed to kill.. This making round endings repetitive and boring IMO. However, the camping and such doesnt bother me too much!

I know this splits the community but would a whole vote be allowed to just see where everyone lies and see what the day to day players base actually favours...

 

Okay I’m in a bit of a dilemma here...I did a 2vs1 football where the t that won was by himself...I killed the other 2ts as they were the losers. However, people said I freekilled because rule 19 states I should only kill one....I feel like people are using rule 19 to open doors to advantages which shouldn’t be there in the first place..I didn’t slay because I saw how unfair it would have been if I didn’t kill both in which I stood my ground and would do it again in order to bring fairness..in my head I can understand where rule 19 would bring fairness to rebellers but I feel this rule needs to be clarified further for many as people haven’t seemed to grasp the approach of it...

However, if I was wrong to kill both I want to bring a perfect example such as volleyball where if I did a 2vs1 there, the 2ts who would have lost are guaranteed death so both share the same principle in the manner of death

 

It's not that complicated .In case of 2v1 games .You could give LR to the winner T and either let him choose LR partner ,or do a game between the 2 losers (like last reaction etc ).The volleyball in maps like carceris kills the loser team instantly ,then as a warden you shouldn't choose this game for 3 players in first place.

 

Okay so the 2ts get a chance to stay alive whereas if the 2ts win the football game the other t who is by himself is automatically killed...do you understand where I’m coming from now ?

 

Basically I’m saying is if I did a 2vs1 football...the stakes are unfair because apparently if the t by himself wins then the other 2 ts get a second chance of getting lr whereas if the t by himself loses he is automatically killed....

What I did was 2vs1 football and I said losers will die...I killed the 2ts who lost and let the one who won by himself live....then people shouted rule 19 freekill and that I must slay but I really don’t see how it’s fair


The t by himself is already at an unfair Disadvantage considering he’s alone...

 

Alright fair point