Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
=VG= BLuDKLoT

VETERANS-GAMING SERVER RULES:

51 posts in this topic

read and accept rules, good work.=i think to punish a player if he make a TK from provide , it,s better to forgive, then to punish him, because nobody like to kill Companions, that,s my feeling.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HUA.
Fully re-briefed.
Excellent Mortars explanation; am looking forward to better use of this devastating asset against those evil, bloodthirsty bots!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roger.

hmm, I can't seem to be able to stop laughing at Dave's signature
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok Its time to bump these rules to the top. Way to much TKing and Main camping lately.

And yes there is a Main / Stat padding rule.

NO RAPING MAINS! NO SPAWN RAPING! NO STATS PADDING!

NO RAPING MAINS UNTIL LAST FLAG!! (COOP MAINLY, BUT THIS APPLIES TO ALL, JUST DON'T DO IT.)

1. You willfully attack or lead the attack on the opposing (RBOT) teams main base or main spawn area before all previous flags have been captured, or block/divert the opposing (R-BOT) team by building deploy-able assets on any choke points within 500 meters of the opposing (R-BOT) teams main area before all previous flags are captured = WARN or KICK! (3rd Offense will get you BANNED!)

Below is a link to server rules :)

http://www.veterans-gaming.com/vg-plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?16257
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could we perhaps have an update for the rules, anno 2016? Some of the stuff is outdated, e.g. locked squads are actually allowed now given a few criteria.

Also, players are sometimes confused as to the priority of their squad

Mech inf vs APC
Tank vs APC vs Armor
who gets the asset?
Are BRDM's considered armor? (officiously yes)


Do we just adapt the Deployment rules, which already look like the ones we are enforcing now?

A concrete update of the rules can avoid a lot of confusion in the future and help admins to have a better and less ambiguous reference.

Thoughts?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://veterans-gaming.com/vg-plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?16257
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We are posting in the thread of the first list now. TEDF linked the second. There are three, actually.
First list: http://www.veterans-gaming.com/vg-plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?141.0
Second list: http://veterans-gaming.com/vg-plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?16257
Third list: http://www.veterans-gaming.com/page.php?108

They seem pretty clear to me, but I added a link to the expanded versions in the first post of this thread for clarity. No Locked Squads is still a rule, it merely has exceptions now. Anyone confused about whether a vehicle is armor or APC can talk to TEDF.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From first list:
SPECIFIC SQUADS HAVE FIRST PRIORITY!

From second list
APC/IFV/ARMOUR squads have a priority over mech inf squads regarding use of an asset, if the vehicle is not in use/unable to be manned then mech inf squads can use the asset.


Controverse Rule in my opinion.

For the sake of TEAMPLAY, that should be changed to Mech INF have priority against APC/IFV only.
How many times i saw a firesupport request but the tank, apc, ifv's hanging around, where no friendly infantry was.
In a MechInf squad, the apc/ifv crew work together with the troops. Requesting groundfiresupport in mumble doesn't work well because the apc squads, having their own scenario, killwhoring the frontlines.

Also, pls same rule for CAS assets like mortars.
NO SPAMMING MORTARS! USE THEM TO SUPPORT GROUND FORCES AND ONLY WHEN CALLED!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fastjack =VG= LAN_WROTE ...

Also, pls same rule for CAS assets like mortars.
NO SPAMMING MORTARS! USE THEM TO SUPPORT GROUND FORCES AND ONLY WHEN CALLED!




Have to disagree with this one.
1. Nearly no one ever lazes or calls in air support which means that enforcing this rule for CAS would mean that pilots would have to sit in the main during the entire round.
2. It's next to impossible to enforce that rule on admin level during the rounds due to many maps having lot of air assets. Sooner or later people will get bored, take off and start killing stuff and then admins would have to make a choice - either to close the eyes and keep playing or spend the rest of the round spamming commands at people.

We have to keep in mind that in the end this is COOP, not Deployment. Fire support doesn't get called out often. That's why we have looked the other way on the mortar part as well.

I do agree with the Mech inf squad part tho. Current rule setout would cause unnecessary debates between mech inf and armor squad whether the certain asset is available or not.
Personally, I have given the permission to create 1 mech inf squad that gets one of the 2 man apcs/IFVs and nothing else and in cases when there's only 1 asset available, which ever squad gets created first wins.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I get your points TEDF with maps with high amount of asset but i still have this stone in my stomach.

On maps like muttrah, where the cas rapes the fortress and the small village part called mec mainbase at roundstart with the excuse to take out the AA assest (ZPU's).

Another excample Beirut. Multiple times i was infantry and encountered my first enemy bot one flag away from IDF main because of HAVOC. Beirut is for me an absolute teamplay killer and not whorse to play as infantry anymore in my opinion.
The proof for me was as i saw the kills in the scorelist. I took calculator and compared havoc kils vs. kills of all other players.
Havoc made 97% of all kills.

Barracuda layer with cobra. Killed the gameplay totally. Made this map totally to easy. No intensive firefights with rifles and machine guns, no intensive infantry fights because of cobra intercepting everything.

I see it from this side. 2 players have fun and the rest can handle the leftover.

Yes its coop and not deployment but coop replaced the training mode and people should learn how to play PR (doesnt matter which mode) seriously and not Arcadestyle.

With playing seriously i mean play together as a team (TEAMWORK).
Combined operations, infantry, armor and aircrafts working as a team but seems to me that this dream ended with PR introducing an high amount of assets on all maps or assets that shouldn't be on the map.




0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen several people making a squad, where the squad leader are refusing to communicate with his/her team. Could you add in a rule, where if the SQL fails to communicate to his squad, either using his MIC or writing, that he should be resigned? It's getting very annoying that admins ain't doing anything against incompetence squad leaders, simply because it ain't stated in the rules ( Even though I consider it to be a common knowledge, to resign someone who's refusing to do his/her job as a SQL )

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We cannot force people to use mics.

Maybe he is a Daddy and a baby sleeping in background and he's playing relaxed a round PR or language barriers.

We cannot force people to talk only in english.

But it exist a general rule for this based on common knowledge. 

Change Squad or make own Squad and do it better.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like what FJ says though because those assets are for mech infantry not for doing assaults, they can be used both ways I guess but it be cool to have a amtrack assigned to my squad like in real life would be fun I think but they always running off to go kill everything lol 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is, that as long as someone who's refusing to communicate, are SQL, it makes it harder to work together with said squad. PR is all about teamwork, but if a SQL, in charge of APC/CAS/MECH INF / INF, fails to communicate with the other squads, surely that would make it much harder, and go against the very foundations of PR. ( Teamwork. ). Sure, if his a dad with a baby in the background, he can't speak, but he can at least write. Or, if he can't do either, he shouldn't be in charge of leading a squad, as he clearly can't communicate to this squad.

TL;DR - PR is a teamwork based war simulator, meant to be as 'realistic' as possible. As long as we have Squad Leaders who fails to communicate with the other squads, the other squads will be punished, as they can not count on proper support.

(( I legit do not understand how this is not seen as something logical? Most servers ( Especially in deployment ) will straight up resign you if you are not responding as a squad leader, yet in Veterans it's okay? Why should 'our' standards be lowered? )

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most admins already punish unresponsive squad leaders if their incompetence hurts general flow of the round, eg. completely unresponsive asset squad leaders or an entire inf squad requesting the resignation of their SL for not doing his job.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Acromarts said:

I dont think I've ever seen an admin resign a SQL or anything like that. That would mean sometimes I should resign whole 4 out of 9 possible squads. That doesnt make sense to me. This is COOP server and people often join us because they want more relaxed ambient than there is on deployment. They should be resigned/kicked only if they start messing with the assets, raping main or something like that. You cant make someone talk, he/she might not have confidence to speak english or doesnt know english at all. Sure, they can make their own squad, for example, "Italian Infantry", but maybe they just want to be in other squad following players that they think know how to play the game. I'd say that only problem is too many SQL or should I say 1 man squads. 

If you dont like how your SQL work, either join/make another squad or talk with an admin about why would you like him to be resigned.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't try to micro-manage COOP players via admin-commands. We have a lot more relaxed rule-set than Deployment because 60% of the players ,of any given time, have no clue what they are supposed to do. Resigning SqL for disagreements with strategy will result in no positive outcome. Admins/Moderators are policing the server not commanding them. We are players firstly, admins secondly.

@acro: I never resigned someone for incompetence unless he is TRANS/CAS. It's a bottomless barrel...

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0