Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

[=IMO=PFCBerkeley]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

There is a key part of those rules that gets glossed over by many admins. The words prolonged and sustained.

Well for the spawn raping one sure, BUT the one that is actually relevant to this discussion is the outlawing of arty or planes killing on the carrier which is clearly stated is a rule admins can make.

[TheGhost]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

Well for the spawn raping one sure, BUT the one that is actually relevant to this discussion is the outlawing of arty or planes killing on the carrier which is clearly stated is a rule admins can make.

Well you may argue this as nothing more than semantics, but the rule says no arty or bomb runs. Using the cannons to take out the AA or even to take out vehicle assets on the carrier is not technically a bomb run.

It would be nice if the ROE were worded a bit better and provided clearer definitions than just these little one line blurbs, and that goes for the entire ROE not just this particular section.

[=IMO=PFCBerkeley]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

Yea I am gonna have to say that saying the use of guns on the plane rather than bombs is a bit of a stretch in my mind. I agree that most things should be given clearer definitions, but I don't think that that particular one really needs to be.

If you look at the actual form of the rules it says directly above these two rules (and the others that follow it):

This would include but not limited to:
§ Artillery fire or bombing runs on main (uncapturable) bases may be prohibited.
§ Prolonged or sustained attacks on main (uncapturable) bases (i.e. spawncamping).

Which would in fact rule out the use of guns as a get around of this rule. The wording implies that admins are allowed to make similar rules, as long as they don't break other rules in the process.

[<}US{>BlackHawkPilot73]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

Yeah anything that attacks you is free to be attacked

only where there is no base rapeing script:cussing:

[TheGhost]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

My only real problem with uncap rules is when playing on maps where only one team gets an uncap. The uncap rules are there because they are supposed to promote fair play. However when you combine a server with overly strict uncap rules with a map where only one team gets to benefit from those rules, you end up with a very unbalanced and unfair situation which is the exact opposite of what those rules are supposed to achieve in the first place.

[HowieMandel]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

its been said, but yes you can ban and kick for excessive uncap base raping. Guess EA/DICE realize its lame too. Imagine that. The guys that MADE the game feel its lame. Wacky stuff.

[TheGhost]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

its been said, but yes you can ban and kick for excessive uncap base raping. Guess EA/DICE realize its lame too. Imagine that. The guys that MADE the game feel its lame. Wacky stuff.

Interesting theory there chief, except that on official servers it is perfectly legal. It's not that they think it's lame, it's that they allow people to set rules about that aspect. Similar to how they prefer for FF to be on, but they allow people to turn it off on their servers. Stop pretending you have the high ground here. If people like you would learn to just man up and not cry every time they were killed we wouldn't need so many retarded rules.

[vets.Sarge]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

Yea I am gonna have to say that saying the use of guns on the plane rather than bombs is a bit of a stretch in my mind. I agree that most things should be given clearer definitions, but I don't think that that particular one really needs to be.

If you look at the actual form of the rules it says directly above these two rules (and the others that follow it):

This would include but not limited to:
§ Artillery fire or bombing runs on main (uncapturable) bases may be prohibited.
§ Prolonged or sustained attacks on main (uncapturable) bases (i.e. spawncamping).

Which would in fact rule out the use of guns as a get around of this rule. The wording implies that admins are allowed to make similar rules, as long as they don't break other rules in the process.

Who on earth uses bombs to destroy the essex?!

[imported_Phenomenomenon]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

Any server rules, baseraping or otherwise, are only as sound as the discretion of the people who are in charge, and therefore, inherently flawed.

The concept of exchanging a game controlled level field of play for a human controlled level field of play is foolish and will only bring grief and abuses.

If it's a level field of play why should we strive for anything else? On a level field of play everyone has the same options. Everyone can grab any gun, or any vehicle, and attack any flag. The cold, impartial, natural law of game code is a far better standard of fairness than the discretions of an admin.

The best servers I've been on had rules about like this.
Do what though wilt, but don't TK, and no whiners.

The game polices itself. If you're getting raped or anything else, own up to it. Just adapt and let the chips fall where they lie people. We'd all have so much more fun if we let go of these contrived concepts of ingame ethics and just go at it.

[OCl]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

I don't believe in baseraping.

If there are many defensive deployments like the Essex then, why do people whine like there is no next revive. And it isn't an excuse to say,'' But fighting is meant in the battlefield, not in an uncappable base.'' Well, sorry, but the whole map is a battlefield, and come back next time as an anti-tank or go to the next Essex on the other side of the carrier, so pilots can't kill you so easily.

[imported_Wreck]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

There is a key part of those rules that gets glossed over by many admins. The words prolonged and sustained.

Exactly. So making a pass with the cannons every once in a while on an uncap is even okay on no baseraping/camping servers.

[imported_Phenomenomenon]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

Originally Posted by TheGhost
There is a key part of those rules that gets glossed over by many admins. The words prolonged and sustained.



Exactly. So making a pass with the cannons every once in a while on an uncap is even okay on no baseraping/camping servers.

This reinforces my previous point as these rules are set up to fail in attempts at fairness. I can't believe they even have subjective terms like prolonged and sustained in the ROE. Who get's to decide what is prolonged and what is brief, what is sustained and what is temporary? This attempt at legislating a war game is just rediculous.

[JMLufkins]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

I see it as fair game. just cause it's an uncap doesn't mean anything. it's part of the advantage that that side has since it has a responsiblity to capture 5 other bases.

Does the USA side bomb the runway/heli pads on the other side?

If you can't do one you shouldn't be allowed to do the other.

[vbl]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

It wouldn't be accessible OR have defenses on it if it weren't meant to be attacked.

[unununium]

Re: Is taking out the uss Essex baseraping?

The only time base raping really ****es me off is if they don't have all the flags and especially if they don't have nearly all the flags.