03-06-2020, 12:47 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-06-2020, 12:56 PM by matt_st3 (Strongrule).)
(03-06-2020, 12:42 PM)Nicol Bolas Wrote:(03-06-2020, 12:39 PM)Foxka Wrote: These contradict each other lol
But again, non malicious mass rdm should not be met with a perma
As my last bit of input here, unless a new thread is made, The guideline section is referring to regular RDM between innocents. Further down it also describes crossfire as slayable in the context of t-on-t rdm. I will admit that the crossfire rulings probably need cleaned up a bit. Will work on that sometime soon thank you for bringing it to my attention.
Which will of course be a nice discussion and not a dictation I presume. Because I will be wholly opposed to the ruling that has been used for years to my knowledge and is common sense to be suddenly changed after the discussion was shut down. I assure you foxka and I are somewhat aware of the rules
But yes now that I read a message I missed, this isnt the place a new thread should be made it seems
Matt_St3 / Strongrule / Spartan001295
Forum Admin - Resigned TTT Admin
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[00:04] matt_st3 (Strongrule) [traitor] has damaged Taliban Tom [detective] for 4.9999999349555e+14 HP with an unknown weapon