Denied Revert the rule change 2.06

This suggestion has been denied and will not receive development.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Aleem Abdul

Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
MilitaryRP Staff
May 16, 2023
112
4
21
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Reverting the rule change 2.06 allowing the opposition team to shoot people on points they do not own.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
No

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
This is a terrible change as it allows for the opposition team to 1, be allowed to roam around on points they do now own when they are not warned off with the team who owns the point unable to do anything if they are in groups of 4 or more

And 2, it allows for the opposition team to kill everyone on a point they were warned off leading to literal deathmatches on points during the entirety of pre-war which is not fun for the team who owns the point as more often than not their fob camped or just stopped from accessing the point they own.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
I cant think of any, there was no reason for this to be changed and all this leads to at the moment is the team with more players to overrun points in pre-war leaving the team who owns the point with the options of either not warning them off and having to deal with the awful combat that happens at the start of war when people shoot seconds before war starts leading to ROE sits and just general extremely unfun combat , or they warn them off the point and the point becomes a TDM site as the team who owns the point cannot shoot people off of the point who may be looking into it however the opposition team who does not own the point is able to kill the team who owns the point just because they are on their own territory.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
This is an extremely poorly thought out rule, the combat is terrible as it restricts the team who owns the point to not being able to go on their own territory in pre-war as if they warn off the other team, the opposition can simply sit a few meters off the territory and kill anyone who is on the point while the owners of the territory are powerless until the opposition fire the first bullet in which more often than not it is to late and they are already dead. I cant see why this was implemented as it is a terribly poor thought out rule and leads to extremely awkward situations whereas the old system was much easier to play under and was simply, if the opposition steps on the point after the 10 second cooldown is over, they are KOS while on that point.
 
Upvote 1
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.

PianoDog

Well-known Member
Aug 13, 2022
27
5
41
20
+Support
Almost all of us agree that its fun to kill in pre-war on a point you don't own, but not when its our point.
 

parker

Well-known Member
Sep 24, 2022
78
13
41
Neutral, i think there should be a change, but not a removal maybe something like if both teams are on the point and they get warned only people who see the "name" of the point should be able to shoot i think tbf
 

MAXTAWAN

Active member
Jun 4, 2022
196
37
21
+Support
Yo, my friend! I gotta give props to Aleem, his suggestion is on another level of brilliance! It's like a burst of pure genius that deserves all the recognition. Seriously, it should be accepted without a doubt. And let's not forget, Aleem's got that handsome charm that adds an extra touch of awesomeness to his brilliance. It's like the perfect combo, brains, and looks! Can't argue with that, right? ??
 

MLGMagicHoodini

Active member
Aug 23, 2023
186
15
21
Portugal
www.youtube.com
-support
It's not a new rule, nor changed, the last change was a "Rule Clarification" not a rule to my understanding, also I don't find it fair, a enemy can call KOS, and the enemy just needs stands there, like a NPC, and waiting to be shot, to fight back? Once a warning to get off is given, the attacking forces, should be allowed to KOS on point, of the Defending Team
 

Jason M.

Civil Gamers Expert
Jul 10, 2021
373
71
71
-Support
It's a rule clarification. No rule was ever changed.

It's specifically made for clarification that if you are called 'KOS if ___' it is classed as a threat which, is painfully obvious, though had to be clarified for.. Some reason.

If this rule clarification was to be reverted and the rule changed to the opposite, that would mean I could technically go up to you gun pointed and say 'if you dont follow me you are going to die' and that is NO LONGER a threat.
See how that doesn't work?
 

Aleem Abdul

Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
MilitaryRP Staff
May 16, 2023
112
4
21
-Support
It's a rule clarification. No rule was ever changed.

It's specifically made for clarification that if you are called 'KOS if ___' it is classed as a threat which, is painfully obvious, though had to be clarified for.. Some reason.

If this rule clarification was to be reverted and the rule changed to the opposite, that would mean I could technically go up to you gun pointed and say 'if you dont follow me you are going to die' and that is NO LONGER a threat.
See how that doesn't work?
It does not mean that it just keeps enemies of ur point in pre-war idk where you got the idea that a threat is no longer a threat, its a rule clarification that isnt thought out and is abused every single war.
 

ZLT49A

Civil Gamers Expert
Sep 26, 2021
228
46
71
+ Support

Yeah I hate this rule, I don't know why it was implemented as there had been zero issues in the 3 years prior to it being added.
 

Dr Drew

Senior Administrator
Senior Administrator
MilitaryRP Staff
Content Team
Group Moderator
Jan 29, 2022
196
34
91
Suggestion Denied


Hi @Aleem Abdul ,
Your suggestion has been denied.
This is not a rule its a staff ruling as the ROE has always said you can kill anyone who makes a threat on personnel on your team, structures etc. Easy way not to die is don't openly threaten someone. For example you could say "NATO get off point a in 10 secs." in comparison to "NATO get off a point in 10s or KOS"
Thank you for taking the time to make a suggestion​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.