BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

[parish]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

Look parish it is an "optional" private server rule. Some servers may have it some don't. Its totally optional. Its your responsibility as a player to understand and follow a servers rules. If they have commanders don't fly, then its a no brainer if you fly as a commander expect to get kicked or banned.

You won't get reset for doing this. The worst that can happen is a server will ban you for hindering your own team by not commanding properly.

I'm not going to say I told you so but I hope that you learn to read the ROE more thoroughly next time.

In a very direct response to you HKS. I would like you to explain how the ROE that I supposedly can't understand says the following on one line:

2.3.1 Disallowed “In-House” Ranked Server Rules:

(b) Preventing any players from using certain vehicles such as jets, helicopters or tanks.

Which unless I did not major in English Lit in College (oh wait I did) says in no uncertain terms such a rule would violate the ROE. I see no clause in the ROE or in the EULA defining a Commander to be anything other than a regular player in the game. Therefore, those of us who can read things in the proper context, understand it to be the way I read it.

... and the following in another section:

2.3.2 Allowed “In-House” Ranked Server Rules:

(c) Players may not deliberately performing actions that hinder their own team (such as last-minute team-swapping to increase scores or statistics, excessive team-killing, destroying friendly vehicles, attacking team-mates,
deliberately placing themselves in a situation so they cause another player to team-kill them, using a vehicle while being the Commander that prevents them from performing any Commander functions (jet, etc.) or placing vehicles to block their own runways.

....

Now make a mental note that one line says you flat out can't have a rule like that, and the other says you can but only if it prevents a commander from performing any Commander functions. Are there Commander Guidelines written up anywhere defining what is constituted as having the capacity to perform the duties? No. So while they do conflict, the second is subjective and the first is definitive. Please stop trying to insult my intelligence by stating I can't read and understand it as it would appear I am taking it in context. I can make a valid argument for the way I read it and you can't. Perhaps you are the one who needs to work on your reading comprehension.

[« R²» HKS]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

Geez read the damn ROE its states it clearly in there as an optional rule in a private ranked server.
One more time for the slow learners

2.3.2 Allowed “In-House” Ranked Server Rules:

(c) Players may not deliberately performing actions that hinder their own team (such as last-minute team-swapping to increase scores or statistics, excessive team-killing, destroying friendly vehicles, attacking team-mates,

deliberately placing themselves in a situation so they cause another player to team-kill them, using a vehicle while being the Commander that prevents them from performing any Commander functions (jet, etc.) or placing vehicles to block their own runways.

Please can a mod lock this thread? This question has been answered and verified numerous times.

[imported_TheDragon]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

But it is against the BF ROE.

u have to read the WHOLE ROE
as you CAN kick commander for certain events

[Holle]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

Your right, you can't kick a commander for being in a tank, helo or jet. But you can kick a commander that is ignoring request and not being a team player.

[parish]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

Geez read the damn ROE its states it clearly in there as an optional rule in a private ranked server.
One more time for the slow learners

2.3.2 Allowed “In-House” Ranked Server Rules:

(c) Players may not deliberately performing actions that hinder their own team (such as last-minute team-swapping to increase scores or statistics, excessive team-killing, destroying friendly vehicles, attacking team-mates, deliberately placing themselves in a situation so they cause another player to team-kill them, using a vehicle while being the Commander that prevents them from performing any Commander functions (jet, etc.) or placing vehicles to block their own runways.

Please can a mod lock this thread? This question has been answered and verified numerous times.

and we come full circle to my OP...

2.3.1 Disallowed “In-House” Ranked Server Rules:

Server Administrators may not implement or enforce server rules on ranked servers that prohibit players from using any roles, kits, weapons, vehicles or other features of the game while playing on their server. Examples of such rules that would violate the conditions of use are:

(a) Preventing any players from being Commander or Squad Leaders.

(b) Preventing any players from using certain vehicles such as jets, helicopters or tanks.

(c) Preventing any players from using commander assets (artillery, vehicle drop, UAV or scans).

(d) Preventing any players from using certain weapons or items (such as flashbangs or C4) or enforcing a “pistol only” or “knife only” server rule.

It would appear you can only read one section and not the complete document. I would also ask this thread be locked as it would seem there is no such thing as a rational debate on this subject.

Whatever though dude, you win. I only hope you never have to navigate a real legal document such as a contract or something. If you do, get a lawyer to explain it to you so you don't give away your house due to a loophole. We could go back and forth forever on this, but I suggest you print the ROE and give it to one of your smart friends and ask them to explain how section 2.3.1 negates what is said in section 2.3.2. I only hope the revise the damn ROE so it makes sense. May I suggest the sentence that includes term "ANY PLAYER" have the words "EXCEPT FOR COMMANDERS" added?

[

Your right, you can't kick a commander for being in a tank, helo or jet. But you can kick a commander that is ignoring request and not being a team player.

Exactly my point all along and thank god someone else gets it. Having a rule that commanders must perform duties is one thing. Having a rule that commander flat out can't get into a vehicle is againt the ROE. What is the sense of having a mutiny button if it serves no purpose? Why kick someone or ban them when you can simply mutiny them and take away command?

Thank you for your reply I am really happy you can see the issue problem as well.

that's why the ROE it total ********. Nowhere does it say now, that you can or can't kick a commander who is flying/driving/gunning/fighting.

It says no restricting players, but it also says no hindering your own team.

The ROE is too ambiguous, need to be clear and concise.

Glad I am not the only one who gets this. Thank you.

[imported_jsr]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

commanders should command, not play the game to try and whore more points.

No one is saying an active commander is as effective as a full-time one, but the bottom line is, many times simply no one will step up and command.

Now if you consider the fact that sometimes you get stuck on a team where maybe you and two other guys running around capping all the flags, while the other 15 or so players are all "helping" with their 3/17 sniping....

Your team needs a commander and as one of the only players on a team that is doing anything productive, you need to be mobile as well.

[x_knight_x]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

commanders r very useful since they can issue uavs and drop supplies

[gh0st]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

If commanders should have their face in the commander screen all game, why can they hold T and issues orders like arty, supplies, ect?

I command often and when I do, I'm with 1 or 2 squads moving WITH them, dropping them *the squads that using teamwork* the UAV and supplies. I'd much rather drop a UAV on a squad I know is working towards getting flags, then to put a UAV on hotel in karkand just so the non-teamwork players know where to spam their nades to.

I see no problems moving with squads, at all. I don't use tanks or fly when commanding, but I see no problem riding in light vehicles and/or moving/attacking with fellow squads.

I'm sorry i can do it and you can't but that's no excuse to ban me or say I'm violating some make-believe law.

Sry to say, maybe some of you RoE ppl are cool, but I hate the RoE and think it's pretty lame to be honest. We don't need more rules we just need commen sense.

Thx for ruining the game whiners.

[« R²» HKS]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

It would appear you can only read one section and not the complete document. I would also ask this thread be locked as it would seem there is no such thing as a rational debate on this subject.

No you can't read the whole document. You can't get past one section only to see its allowed in another section which over rules what you are talking about which has been confirmed by most here as well as IndianScout.

Whatever though dude, you win. I only hope you never have to navigate a real legal document such as a contract or something. If you do, get a lawyer to explain it to you so you don't give away your house due to a loophole. We could go back and forth forever on this, but I suggest you print the ROE and give it to one of your smart friends and ask them to explain how section 2.3.1 negates what is said in section 2.3.2. I only hope the revise the damn ROE so it makes sense. May I suggest the sentence that includes term "ANY PLAYER" have the words "EXCEPT FOR COMMANDERS" added?

I obviously don't lack any comprehension skills, I suggest you take your own advice.

Exactly my point all along and thank god someone else gets it. Having a rule that commanders must perform duties is one thing. Having a rule that commander flat out can't get into a vehicle is againt the ROE. What is the sense of having a mutiny button if it serves no purpose? Why kick someone or ban them when you can simply mutiny them and take away command?

Its not read the ROE again. Its an optional rule decided by server admins. We don't have kick votes turned on for various reasons. Kick vote bug, whenever anyone went commander someone would always mutiny whether they were doing a good job or not, players disrupting the server saying wtf did you put up a kick vote on me for? Plus I have never seen a successful kick vote on a large server before, they just never work anyway so why have it enabled when all it does is cause grief and disrupts gameplay.

Thank you for your reply I am really happy you can see the issue problem as well.

Glad I am not the only one who gets this. Thank you.

No your just not the only one that doesn't get it even though its been explained to you numerous times and even confirmed again by IndianScout you still don't get it.

Look a similar debate like this has been done to death also. AKA stopping people say from bombing an uncap. One side like your says but server admins aren't allowed to restrict vehicle use, the other side like mine says read the damn ROE its an optional rule allowed on private ranked servers. That is no different to what your arguing about. We can't restrict the use of vehicles other than a commander but we can restrict where they are allowed to attack like an uncap.

The point of this is these are "optional" rules decided by server owners/admins. They are quite within their right to have these rules as "clearly" spelt out in the ROE. You as a server admin parish don't have to run these rules. You can't be reset for not following these optional rules. You can however be kicked or banned if you don't abide by these rules if a server has these optional rules on their server.

[parish]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

No you can't read the whole document. You can't get past one section only to see its allowed in another section which over rules what you are talking about which has been confirmed by most here as well as IndianScout.



I obviously don't lack any comprehension skills, I suggest you take your own advice.



Its not read the ROE again. Its an optional rule decided by server admins. We don't have kick votes turned on for various reasons. Kick vote bug, whenever anyone went commander someone would always mutiny whether they were doing a good job or not, players disrupting the server saying wtf did you put up a kick vote on me for? Plus I have never seen a successful kick vote on a large server before, they just never work anyway so why have it enabled when all it does is cause grief and disrupts gameplay.



No your just not the only one that doesn't get it even though its been explained to you numerous times and even confirmed again by IndianScout you still don't get it.

Look a similar debate like this has been done to death also. AKA stopping people say from bombing an uncap. One side like your says but server admins aren't allowed to restrict vehicle use, the other side like mine says read the damn ROE its an optional rule allowed on private ranked servers. That is no different to what your arguing about. We can't restrict the use of vehicles other than a commander but we can restrict where they are allowed to attack like an uncap.

The point of this is these are "optional" rules decided by server owners/admins. They are quite within their right to have these rules as "clearly" spelt out in the ROE. You as a server admin parish don't have to run these rules. You can't be reset for not following these optional rules. You can however be kicked or banned if you don't abide by these rules if a server has these optional rules on their server.

It's ok bud; I'm done wasting my breath on you and this. I only wish you could have actually debated the thing with me rather than regurgitating line after line of the same crap over and over again and actually presented a rational defense for the “optional” rule even being in place. I tried on numerous occasions to get you to intelligently discuss it, but I guess it was just beyond your scope. A lot of rules exist today that have been changed and ratified because in the original iteration, they were either too restrictive or flat out wrong. Things never change if no one has the balls to stand up and say how stupid something is and try to fix it.

In the end I will Command any way I damn well please on any server I am on at all times and the "optional" ROE addendums won't prevent it or hinder my style of play. If I get kicked I will still think they (the person who kicked me) are a pansy *** who can't chew gum and walk at the same time like the rest of us. I take pride in the fact that I can do more than one thing at the same time and that means more to me today than it did when this conversation started. You made my point for me and for that I owe you. Perhaps you will be lucky enough to end up on my team while I am commanding on some server and see how it’s really done. You might learn something from someone with the genuine ability to process information while being an active part of the fight. Or maybe you won’t and you will continue to go on blindly thinking something can’t be done well because you do not have the ability to do it.

In the end it boils down to one very simple concept which I hope you can grasp. Even if you don’t have the skill or ability to do something it does not mean others can’t. It’s a big world and if you go through it with the mentality you have you won’t experience much.

Peace

[« R²» HKS]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

Dude there is no debate at all. Your understanding of the ROE is simply wrong. No ifs, buts or maybes. There is nothing to debate because the ROE is quite simple to understand for most of us.

I suggest you avoid our server then because if we catch you as a commander in a vehicle you know what is going to happen next.

[Sweetpea]

Re: BF2 ROE Update realization... w00t

I fear being intellectually "pwned" as I type this. However, I can appreciate both sides of the argument; both forbidding and allowing commanders access to vehicles.

IMO the "in-house" rules allowing admins to kick commanders for hindering their team (ie. flying) are in place to protect the general BF2 playing public from abhorrent commanders (those that can't chew gum and walk at the same time... ). Bad commanding lessens the enjoyment of everyone else on that team; the ROE protects against that.

To continue IMO, the reason it was covered in the "in-house" section, was to allow admins the ability to exercise discretion regarding kicking the commander. If it fell under the first section covered by the OP, admins would be bound to apply the ruling uniformly (allowed/not allowed in vehicles). There would be no wiggle room. A practical admin would observe the commander in question and make a call on whether or not the commander was adequately fufilling his duties while engaged in active fighting. If he was doing his job as commander and rolling about in armour (employing the armour effectively as well), then all the power to him.

Unfortunately, as is clearly evident on this board and in almost every round ever played in BF2, there is a surplus of retarded players, and the ROE is there to combat that. All the while attempting to limit the powers of abusive admins to that of a benevolent dictator...