clarity on basing rules and other motd topics

[rusty]

Parts of the MOTD feel incomplete or just simply ignored by the greater community and I'm curious for opinions on these oddities.
 

Quote

Players may not be killed for "loitering" or standing still.

This rule seems to be ignored constantly, not really much else to say. So many KOS signs say "being annoying (broader way of saying loitering as far as I can tell)" "loitering in x" etc.

 

Quote

Props that inhibit normal movement are not allowed for defence (ie slippery props or incredibly tight spaces)

Is this rule just outdated? At any given time it feels like 4 out of 5 bases on the server has "incredibly tight spaces". This can't be talking about crouching tunnels as those are outlawed in another rule, so what is this talking about? If restricting movement to a single axis isn't inhibiting normal movement, what is?

Furthermore, what is with basing in general on the server? Every base that isn't made by the new guy on the block is this effectively unraidable by single players, depending on design some are just flat out unraidable by any metric of skill, rather just being in the right place at the right time. I'll explain a little about what I mean by "unraidable": The golden standard of basing appears to be movement restricting hallways with fading "windows" on top of each fading "door". When it's a hallway that allows only 1 player to be in contact with a fading door, these fading windows on top allow defenders to wait at the window for when the player starts picking, then open the window and presumably headshot due to the angle. This is cool and all, but... how's this raidable in any sense? Remember this is a 1 player wide hallway. You can make a window to where the only person who can see in is a person picking, and a person picking can't really shoot back in time since they likely won't be looking up anyway. Even if multiple people are raiding, it's just a conveyor belt leading to a grinder. If you don't start picking, the defender just sits back and waits.

Personally, I believe the solution is adding a time restriction on fading windows, but that's just going to be stupid to moderate IMO. A better solution to me is removing fading windows entirely and re-defining fading doors to ensure that they are doors that lead somewhere so they don't just turn into fading "doors" but on top. Now you're going to ask, how do I defend or whatever blablabla. I believe 2 stage barriers:

However, the same approach can be followed via a top opening too. To avoid this, an additional rule about top openings would be the simplest solution. If that is too far, at the very least attackers know where you will shoot through from the top, so I still consider it an improvement. This also hints towards being a more fair solution for horizontal defenses as again, attackers at the very least know where you will shoot from. However, these can still be made in such a way in which They strongly limit where you can be seen from when shooting, but regardless of how that is done, they retain the benefit of at least letting attackers know where you will shoot from. This is just my interpretation however, I'm sure there's more creative people.

Kidnapping

There is no rule to specify standards for a jail. I believe this needs to be stated because time and time again, people are kidnapped and basically propblocked into a corner of a base. If this is intended then uhhhhh... ok

Cars/Carjacks

There appears to be nothing to specify whether it's legal to sit inside a car while carjacking. Here, let me try stealing your car, but you can't hurt me without risking destroying your own property. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) I understand you can just unlock the car and move it, but that runs the risk of them giving you a 20 minute wait at the mechanic, and really I'd like to just be able to "@ x jacking my car while inside it" rather than wait for them to do something else that warrants a ticket. I'd also suggest a reminder on the ability to kick people out of your car as  I doubt many people check !vcmod. (It says I can there, not sure if it's disabled/works yet) On the topic of this:

Quote

Do not sit within destroyed or flaming vehicles.

This implies that you shouldn't sit inside cars, but only if they're flaming/destroyed? You can sit in a car when it's not destroyed but can't once it is destroyed? Doesn't a destroyed car still shield you from bullets? If not, shouldn't the rule specify not hiding in undamaged cars?

I think I covered everything I was curious/"upset" about here. Feel free to critique/ignore as you see fit. As for the silent bunch of people who dismiss this out of "xeno is purposely shitposty stop caring", I believe most of you are thinking more about the relaxed RDM rules, missclicks wink wink. I mean this towards making raiding less "rng" since really it just feels like you have to catch people AFK/look at the right place at the right time to raid them.

 

Edited February 20, 2021 by rusty
invalid point

[Kil]

the Do not sit within destroyed cars is a rule so players cant abuse the invincibility.

[Bubba]

37 minutes ago, Kil said:

the Do not sit within destroyed cars is a rule so players cant abuse the invincibility.

To add to this, sitting or hiding in a car is counted as Failrp so just call a sit if you see people abusing it.

[rusty]

3 hours ago, Kil said:

the Do not sit within destroyed cars is a rule so players cant abuse the invincibility.

The point I wanted to get at with the car invincibility was the rule was vague. I think it should be reworded since undestroyed cars also provide invincibility. This could interpret the rule as it's only a problem if the car is destroyed.
Other one is also misinterpretation, I am talking about when some of the raiders die in a raid and then come back after 120 seconds, but before the defenders have killed all attackers/died themselves. I misread that as implying to only the defendants of the base.

 

2 hours ago, Bubba said:

To add to this, sitting or hiding in a car is counted as Failrp so just call a sit if you see people abusing it.

I honestly wasn't sure if it was so that's better to know.