Shane wrote:

Haze wrote:

Shane wrote:

The lesser evil would be having a player-base that didn't have to resort to killing people as many times as possible without getting killed.

Also, I pointed out that it sorely changes things if Tyrael did not attack first, because that makes him a non-aggressive player. Mobs are clearly aggressive, and anyone that attacks first is clearly aggressive.

If Tyrael did attack first and Tiplet cured Tyrael, then yeah, it's aggression, and the ban should be lifted.

So technically since "self defense isn't an act of aggression", this opens up the possibilities of having the healer that was killed 3 times being unkillable, and able to attack the other team without repercussion. If I attack someone that has been killed 3 times (whether by accident or on purpose), they have free reign to attack me because it's self defense then.

I have no idea how you are stretching my words to state that. Usually I can bridge the gap to stupid responses, but this time I am at a loss.

You said defending yourself is not an act of aggression. This means if someone attacks a player that has been killed 3 times already, they can "defend" themselves all over the person until they kill the person or they are outran. I didn't know I had to spell out a simple concept like this, hope you understand now, if you don't.. tough luck.

_________________________________________

Just because shatter didn't get the kill shot, doesn't mean he wasn't aiding in the pks. So unbanning him simply for that reason would be stupid since he was involved in the issue in question and was aiding in the apparently relentless pking anyway.

Also not being a forumer isn't an excuse for not defending yourself. If they really wanted something done about it, they should make it a point to get on and say something about it as opposed to leaving it in the hands of another person.

_________________________________________

honestly what more can they do when i've already said everything that happened, the only thing they could possibly say is "po is right, that is what happened" if they want to defend themselves

_________________________________________

Spamkilling is more of a mapping flaw than anything.

There is only one place where you shouldn't be able to be repeatedly killed as you spawn and that would be Argo. As it is there is no real help for the weak or solo PC who wanders into Argo against a larger group or strong PC.

It's more of the system that needs to be updated because the cube and the number of deaths from the cube seem to not be a punishment for people who like to play as "outlaws".

I remember proposing how Argo could just use a few characters like silias who shoot arrows, but maybe different NPC's who would shoot magic or a superfast guard or something. It would only be for argo but it would help it so that it should be a "safer" place to stay and you wouldn't/shouldn't have to worry about criminal as much.

Also it might be a good idea to have outlaw timers for Argo stick longer.

Back on topic:

Tiplet and Tyrael, Shatter and Ace they are all known as PKers. Not necerraly spamkillers but they do try to do it as much as possible even on other characters. (Im not saying this about all of them but they know who they are).

I didn't see any evidence nor was I the one who banned them. I would just like to say that if you troll and such fine, but if you completely ruin the gameplay of others it won't be tolerated. I'll say this to Tiplet and Tyral as a warning because you both are known to grief weaker players too much.

_________________________________________

uh, so, what was the post saying jeebs? all i got out of the topic related part is you were gonna warn tiplet/tyr of spamkilling, which im sure both know of, however, i dont understand where this leads to the actually ban itself

_________________________________________

Haze wrote:

Shane wrote:

Haze wrote:

Shane wrote:

The lesser evil would be having a player-base that didn't have to resort to killing people as many times as possible without getting killed.

Also, I pointed out that it sorely changes things if Tyrael did not attack first, because that makes him a non-aggressive player. Mobs are clearly aggressive, and anyone that attacks first is clearly aggressive.

If Tyrael did attack first and Tiplet cured Tyrael, then yeah, it's aggression, and the ban should be lifted.

So technically since "self defense isn't an act of aggression", this opens up the possibilities of having the healer that was killed 3 times being unkillable, and able to attack the other team without repercussion. If I attack someone that has been killed 3 times (whether by accident or on purpose), they have free reign to attack me because it's self defense then.

I have no idea how you are stretching my words to state that. Usually I can bridge the gap to stupid responses, but this time I am at a loss.

You said defending yourself is not an act of aggression. This means if someone attacks a player that has been killed 3 times already, they can "defend" themselves all over the person until they kill the person or they are outran. I didn't know I had to spell out a simple concept like this, hope you understand now, if you don't.. tough luck.

Sup I stretch words to make my arguments sound smart.

I quote, which I brought up in like my first post, from the rules themselves:

However, killing a non-aggressive target (one who has not struck first)

Oh, oh hey, what's that special word at the end there? You know, that modifies the relative time of an occurrence? One who has not struck first? That special word means that if someone attacks them, then if they retaliate it is not counted as aggression. The fun part of the word also adds, by assumption of pure, clean, logical logic that just about anyone not stupid should be able to follow, that in the special instance that they do in fact strike first, the original label for their action is rang up as 'false'. This means, in layman's terms, someone that attacks first suddenly becomes aggressive.

Ho.

Ly.

****.

_________________________________________

Ok guys, since this is obviously an issue now, and will obviously continue to be so in the future, I think that when a ban is made, the admin that did the banning should make a report on the forums within 1-2 hours of the banning so that this kind of thing won't happen again. Not doing so could result in someone ramaining unfairly banned, or unfairly unbanned.
I think a report should include the reason for the ban, the rule it relates to, and if it applies to the situation, the story of what happened from the witness/victim. (also the length of the ban)

Right now what is happenning is Po and Ace are defending their side, but we haven't heard anything from the banner or the "witnesses" (Tyrael and Tiplet). This makes it hard to judge the situation fairly, and as I said may result in an unfair action or lack of action.

_________________________________________

Yeah, i'm just sad to see the game come to this.

_________________________________________

See the game come to what?

_________________________________________

reply to Magnus Gallant:

See the game come to me. ;)

_________________________________________

This whole situation.

_________________________________________

Its the same situation, just a different day, its been this way for like 3 years now, so I don't really see it as something new, so it shouldn't be much of a surprise to you either.

_________________________________________

Uhm yeah when I started I'm pretty sure i was killed more then four times in argo not being hostile. So it has changed since I started.

_________________________________________

Shane wrote:

Haze wrote:

Shane wrote:

Haze wrote:

Shane wrote:

The lesser evil would be having a player-base that didn't have to resort to killing people as many times as possible without getting killed.

Also, I pointed out that it sorely changes things if Tyrael did not attack first, because that makes him a non-aggressive player. Mobs are clearly aggressive, and anyone that attacks first is clearly aggressive.

If Tyrael did attack first and Tiplet cured Tyrael, then yeah, it's aggression, and the ban should be lifted.

So technically since "self defense isn't an act of aggression", this opens up the possibilities of having the healer that was killed 3 times being unkillable, and able to attack the other team without repercussion. If I attack someone that has been killed 3 times (whether by accident or on purpose), they have free reign to attack me because it's self defense then.

I have no idea how you are stretching my words to state that. Usually I can bridge the gap to stupid responses, but this time I am at a loss.

You said defending yourself is not an act of aggression. This means if someone attacks a player that has been killed 3 times already, they can "defend" themselves all over the person until they kill the person or they are outran. I didn't know I had to spell out a simple concept like this, hope you understand now, if you don't.. tough luck.

Sup I stretch words to make my arguments sound smart.

I quote, which I brought up in like my first post, from the rules themselves:

However, killing a non-aggressive target (one who has not struck first)

Oh, oh hey, what's that special word at the end there? You know, that modifies the relative time of an occurrence? One who has not struck first? That special word means that if someone attacks them, then if they retaliate it is not counted as aggression. The fun part of the word also adds, by assumption of pure, clean, logical logic that just about anyone not stupid should be able to follow, that in the special instance that they do in fact strike first, the original label for their action is rang up as 'false'. This means, in layman's terms, someone that attacks first suddenly becomes aggressive.

Ho.

Ly.

****.

Okay, I'm going to try again since your caveman-like intelligence can't comprehend that I'm not trying to bend what YOU are saying, but rather question the rule itself.

Player A kills Player B 3 times. Player A then attacks Player B a 4th time, whether by accident or on purpose. Player B then can retaliate, without repercussion, because it is then self defense and is not considered aggression towards Player A. Thus creates a problem in that this person can use the "self defense" card and not be attacked back. I have tried explaining this multiple times and you cannot grasp it so hopefully this time it is laid out and simple for you.

_________________________________________

This is what happened I went to argo to repair and sell some **** and ace and shatter ganked me. I did not attack them they attacked me.

i respawned and they ran through town and killed me again, tippy got on to come pray for me and they killed him, he respawned and they killed him again, he then went over to pray for me and ace and shatter killed him again. after that i respawned and they started attacking him again he cured me to help me because they were killing both of us.

they then killed him again for the fourth kill and tried to argue "well he cured you and thats a hostile action" even when they were the ones killing me.at time did tippy attack them nor did I.

it was blatant spam killing end of story. if they have SS's to prove otherwise or any evidence let them show it now.

_________________________________________

Uhh bull**** tyrael I didn't hit him after his 3rd death until after he cured you buddy. Also i'm sorry i can't get ss's because I dc every 5 mins which half of ffo will testify to. Also didn't expect you to cry your way into getting me banned again i thought you were a man. Guess not. I also like how you just have "they then killed him a fourth time" lacking all details. Not to mention the fact that you came out of argo the second time looking for a fight basically, we didn't run through town to kill you. The only time that happened was Tiplet's second death. Most people know my word is more credible than yours.

_________________________________________

reply to Pkftw:

you cannot even defend your claims allyou do is insult people ace seriously that shows you dont care about being unbanned seriously.

and rad what i said "tippy got on to come pray for me and they killed him, he respawned and they killed him again, he then went over to pray for me and ace and shatter killed him again. after that i respawned and they started attacking me again he cured me to help me because they were killing both of us.

they then killed him again for the fourth kill and tried to argue "well he cured you and thats a hostile action" even when they were the ones killing me.at time did tippy attack them nor did I. "

let me post AGAIN for you

"they started attacking me again he cured me to help me because they were killing both of us.

they then killed him again for the fourth kill and tried to argue "well he cured you and thats a hostile action" "

you just agreed with me he curedme then you killd him the 4th time.

_________________________________________

Let me post again, I didn't attack him until after he cured you therefor i wasn't killing both of you until he stepped in. I mean i'm sure i could stand here and make stuff up too and probably get unbanned but i'm atleast being legit about this. I just like how you turn into a whiney little kid when your crew leaves you and everyone that is active dislikes you. It's not my fault your buddy decided to interfere with my pk.

_________________________________________

reply to Pkftw:

dude again with the insults. grow up and act mature please. nothing is being made up.

i have SS's of you killing him right when he logged in while i was stiull DEAD. you cant cure the dead broski can you?

_________________________________________

I'm not insulting you i'm telling you how it is, theres a difference. Sometimes the truth hurts. Also when i first saw him he was standing by you near the south middle building of argo, yeah the one without a door that you can't spawn by, lets keep up with the lying see where it gets us, and you weren't dead when i first saw him it looked like you were making out to be honest. On another note even if i had killed him right when he logged in that woulda been his first death not his last, which makes everything your saying irrelevant and/or lies.

_________________________________________