Ambrosia Community

Recycling => National Archives => Server Archives => Topic started by: Rawrplus on August 19, 2013, 10:52:59 pm

Title: [JB]Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 19, 2013, 10:52:59 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/OI1cT2L.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/jATYC7O.png)
1. There should always be a balance of 1:3 or 1:4 CT:T
2. Do not interfere commanding with voice chat / program (HLDJ).
3. Use of rude language is tolerated, as long as it's not offensive / insulting. Though, keep in mind, saying swearword after every sentence does not make you cool or anything
4. No cheating during /lr (last request)
5. Do not self-transfer to CT team, unless there isn't admin to do so. Make sure to keep the team balance.
6. Do not spam the server, do not script and do not cheat.



(http://i.imgur.com/hFIHj6T.png)
7. Do not block the door cells for your teammates
8. Do not give away your teammate's position
9. Do not spam the chat (for example in trivia)
10. If you feel like you have been freekilled, ask calmly in chat for a reason, why you were killed.
11. Do not free-kill your teammates, unless officer allows you to do it. *
12. If prisoner opens cells before 7:00 (and before officer does) it's automatically unrestricted freeday.
13. If u are inside a vent, after the timer is on 0:00 CT is allowed to kill you / admin to slay you.



(http://i.imgur.com/Agaw2Ox.png)
14. Make sure terrorists were judged fairly and there's no choice but executing them.
15. Officers are allowed to kill every prisoner wielding a gun, unless specific game requires them to.
16. If officers fail to command / open cells before 7:00, it is unrestrictred freeday.
17. Although there is no exact number of warning shots to be given, please be noob-friendly and try to give least 1 warning before execution.
18. Officers aren't allowed to kill people in vents (unless it's HNS day, Gunday or special day)
19. If officers wish a prisoner to leave the vent, he must give him a 30 second chance to get out, before he executes him (the timer is same for everybody, no matter when you entered it)
20. If a prisoner assassinates an officer, the other officer is allowed to kill the prisoner, only if he has directly seen the murder.
21. Officers are allowed to use glow menu only for free days or specific games which requires glowing. *
22. Officers must have decent English and microphone, so prisoners have no issues understanding them.
23. Prisoners must always understand what you've just said, if many had issues understanding, repeat the command.
24. Make sure to be friendly and remember, you should play for fun. Also remember, more benevolent you are about executing, more beloved you will be between prisoners and players!
25. Do not throw guns in unreachable places for others.
26. Officers can command any sort of gameplay (day) they want, also creating new ones. But make sure to explain rules of the specific day before playing it.
27. Officers cannot be biased (everyone is supposed to have equal chance of winning a game)
28. Special days are optional and should be played only when the map is coming close to an end.
29. Although boosting is allowed, CT can command with - If you boost, you'll die.
30. If officer goes inside a cage during cageday, terrorists are allowed to kill him without consequences, prisoners however can't leave the cage under any circumstances.







- Anybody enforcing a rule on server that isn't listed here, isn't official and can be ignored -



So what do you think. I think it's a lot more clear than the confusing current ones (http://www.ambrosia-servers.com/community/index.php?topic=8802.0), also should be a lot more fun to play in the server with these rules. Any suggestions on what to add / remove? Looking forward to seeing yours feedback guys.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: onyzz;; on August 19, 2013, 11:00:37 pm
Like it.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ray on August 19, 2013, 11:05:29 pm
Just 1 thing, why teamkilling as T aint allowed ? That's the best part of jail_snow_v2 :P

Also, cheating at LR leads to kick/quit/ban ?
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 19, 2013, 11:08:13 pm
Just 1 thing, why teamkilling as T aint allowed ? That's the best part of jail_snow_v2 :P

Also, cheating at LR leads to kick/quit/ban ?

I generally think that it takes away the fun when half of the server is killed just because of 1 annoying guy who doesn't even want to kill CTs but just to ruin fun of his teammates, kill them and drag out the day as long as possible.

I'd say cheating at /lr should simply result in a slay by admin. If a player constantly cheats in last requests when there are no admins online, there can be taken further actions against him.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 20, 2013, 12:40:32 am
I actually was thinking to go through the rules, but Rawr, thanks! I think this is clear and understanding list! G J! :)

*Edit

What about Officers cannot team kill each other?
I think it shouldn't be added, but I am sure someone would ask about it.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: P o p a y on August 20, 2013, 02:58:38 am
I would like to say that the rules that you have presented are aesthetically better to view and easier to understand.

We should rewrite them, but we shouldn't change the Main Content of the rules, since they are discussed and well functioning through out many years.

Good job,
Popay
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: SNap on August 20, 2013, 07:25:44 am
Very easy to read and understand in this order. Good job Rawr
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: TeeKaaY on August 20, 2013, 08:25:15 am
All I can say is that you did not make any major changes, general gameplay is the same.

My quick major suggestions:
*Vent always restricted for T and CT. It's automatically rebelling. CT is allowed to enter vent only to kill T.
*T is allowed to kill CT if the CT comes close to the T's knifing range. That is taunting.
*Remove that idiotic rule where CT are allowed to camp gun room. It makes the round so boring and long.
*Gun checking is not allowed.

Those are the changes I suggest.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Jake on August 20, 2013, 08:39:43 am
I like these rules man.

I'd glady swear and scream like no tomorrow without insulting anyone :DDD

;)
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 20, 2013, 09:09:54 am
All I can say is that you did not make any major changes, general gameplay is the same.

My quick major suggestions:
*Vent always restricted for T and CT. It's automatically rebelling. CT is allowed to enter vent only to kill T.
*T is allowed to kill CT if the CT comes close to the T's knifing range. That is taunting.
*Remove that idiotic rule where CT are allowed to camp gun room. It makes the round so boring and long.
*Gun checking is not allowed.

Those are the changes I suggest.

Taunting rule will not be added! It is way too far used as an excuse.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Jonathan on August 20, 2013, 09:16:45 am
We should make a section where we reconsider the number of sds
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 20, 2013, 09:26:27 am
All I can say is that you did not make any major changes, general gameplay is the same.

My quick major suggestions:
*Vent always restricted for T and CT. It's automatically rebelling. CT is allowed to enter vent only to kill T.
*T is allowed to kill CT if the CT comes close to the T's knifing range. That is taunting.
*Remove that idiotic rule where CT are allowed to camp gun room. It makes the round so boring and long.
*Gun checking is not allowed.

Those are the changes I suggest.

I did some minor ones though, which should make jailbreak more fast-paced and fun, while maintaining the general concept of jailbreak. This won't be hard to adapt to for players, while it provides some much needed changes to jailbreak.

Now, here's my feedback on your suggestions:
*1) Although I personally don't like the concept of vent either, some maps sadly leave us no choice, because of their vent placement but to use this rule, as in some maps, CT can basically cover went 24/7 and going inside it would be a suicide for Terrorists all the time, also because how slow you are moving inside a vent.
*2) We used to have the taunting rule before, but we have decided to remove it, because it simply caused too much confusion. Was the CT really taunting or did the T rebel? That's the question that came up often. In my eyes, we should maintain the old standards when, CT was taunting, some terrorists killed him and the commander even left him alive, because of what was CT doing. By taunting, both CT and T are trying their luck and to be honest, this isn't even a major issue and I can assure you, people will develop opinion on this in a course of a month. One of main goals I had when making these rules, was to give everybody freedom, with clear rules and not make people feel enforced to follow everything rule by rule.
*3) CTs aren't allowed to camp in gunroom, not sure where you've seen that one O.O
*4) Although concept of gunchecking slows down the game, often it's necessary if officers want to survive. I'd say gunchecking should be optional, where more skilled officers will just pay more attention to their suspect, whilst newer ones can easily guncheck and be safe.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 20, 2013, 09:29:29 am
We should make a section where we reconsider the number of sds

Yeah, that's a good point.  Will add a rule regarding it.



Today's changelog

Rule 25 added.
RUle 26 added.
Fixed spelling error in rule 13.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Lagger on August 20, 2013, 10:04:52 am
Good job mate.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ultor on August 20, 2013, 10:10:30 am
That's a nice font/style for the sub-titles ur using. Anyway, about the rules. First of all, the vent rule must be more clarified as it will cause confusion. For instance, if a T went in vent and he left it after 30 secs given by the officer, does that mean officers are allowed to entre the vent anytime they want without giving any further 30 secs? Also, there is a very impoertant aspect of the vent in which must be added. This is a part where it says that if a T camps in unreachable vent by the CT and the time is below 0:00, an admin has the right to slay them. Why? Simply because they are delaying the game (take jb_moviekick as eg).

The taunting rule. This is an extremely important rule that must be added; due to the fact that CTs always try to show off by going inside the cage. Pretty stright forward, if a CT goes inside the cage, Ts are allowed to kill him without dying.

In order to make jb a joyful place, CTs must be chosen wisely. I seen alot of admins transferring kids,friends,etc. which is one of the main reasons why jb had became boring... Therefore, a
I suggest adding a very strict rule in which must be obeyed by admins/VIPs.

I would recommend adding a rule about SDs in which delivers the meaning that An admin will have the option to do few SDs (1-3) only if the whole gameplay was fun. This will improve the relationship of the players as it will encourage teamworking in order to achieve the opportunity to play a sd. Also, it improves the quality of games (creativity) for the CTs.

Other than that, I personally think that those rules are equally balanced and will possibly improve the gameplay; especially the one where it allows the use of rude language which is the main element of bringing fun to jailbreak. Good job.

Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Critical on August 20, 2013, 10:13:35 am
That's a nice font/style for the sub-titles ur using. Anyway, about the rules. First of all, the vent rule must be more clarified as it will cause confusion. For instance, if a T went in vent and he left it after 30 secs given by the officer, does that mean officers are allowed to entre the vent anytime they want without giving any further 30 secs? Also, there is a very impoertant aspect of the vent in which must be added. This is a part where it says that if a T camps in unreachable vent by the CT and the time is below 0:00, an admin has the right to slay them. Why? Simply because they are delaying the game (take jb_moviekick as eg).

I like this rule and it should be added!
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 20, 2013, 10:25:25 am
I think i'll simply put a rule that staying in vent after 0:00 will result in getting you killed / slain.

The taunting rule, definitely a no. CT should do it at their own risk and in my eyes it's one of fun elements in the game. Also, as I stated to tonykaram (if you've read my reply). Some officers punish for killing taunting officer, some don't. I think it's best to give players freedom in their choices.

CT must of course be chosen wisely, but still, everybody should be given a chance to be a CT.

last suggestion is already added, check the rules a bit more closely please
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: TeeKaaY on August 20, 2013, 10:28:32 am
Believe me those rules I stated were being ised on another server and back then it used to e full all the time. I guess it depends on the maturaity of the players, in here most players on the server are just simple kids. You can do nothing about that.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 20, 2013, 10:34:23 am
Believe me those rules I stated were being ised on another server and back then it used to e full all the time. I guess it depends on the maturaity of the players, in here most players on the server are just simple kids. You can do nothing about that.

Ambrosia also used to be full, what mainly causes the server emptyness isn't even the current rules or gameplay, but the fact server is a bit laggy.

Staying in vent after 0:00 will get you killed rule added
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 20, 2013, 10:38:48 am
Rawr, you should add for terrorists that if a CT goes inside the cage and prisoners are also in there, regardless of what command is made for them, if they see a CT in the cage, they are allowed to kill him without any consequences, but they cannot leave the cage if the CT leaves it.
Prisoners shouldn't be killed for trying to get a CT who goes inside the cage and goes back out right away.

Also guys, taunting rule as Rawr explained shouldn't be added as I said, it is mostly made as an excuse to rebel when ever prisoners see fit. Also in some occasions CT must pass the prisoners in close range for them, with taunting rule it won't be possible at all.

Vent rule, the trickiest rule whatsoever in the whole JB. If a vent time is given - 30 seconds, then OFficers can check the vent that one time no matter if a new prisoner has gone inside the vent, he can still be killed.
Every time an officer wants to check the vent, they must give the warning first. This shouldn't be done of course 100 times per round, but only when CT suspects a prisoner to be in the vent. Rawr if you could modify this in a rule, would be appreciated.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 20, 2013, 10:52:15 am
Rawr, you should add for terrorists that if a CT goes inside the cage and prisoners are also in there, regardless of what command is made for them, if they see a CT in the cage, they are allowed to kill him without any consequences, but they cannot leave the cage if the CT leaves it.
Prisoners shouldn't be killed for trying to get a CT who goes inside the cage and goes back out right away.

Also guys, taunting rule as Rawr explained shouldn't be added as I said, it is mostly made as an excuse to rebel when ever prisoners see fit. Also in some occasions CT must pass the prisoners in close range for them, with taunting rule it won't be possible at all.

Vent rule, the trickiest rule whatsoever in the whole JB. If a vent time is given - 30 seconds, then OFficers can check the vent that one time no matter if a new prisoner has gone inside the vent, he can still be killed.
Every time an officer wants to check the vent, they must give the warning first. This shouldn't be done of course 100 times per round, but only when CT suspects a prisoner to be in the vent. Rawr if you could modify this in a rule, would be appreciated.

Added cage rule, edited vent rule.

Thanks for suggestion :)
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: PaNiCღ on August 20, 2013, 10:58:32 am
Gd job rawri i like it.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: 'PL' on August 20, 2013, 11:20:10 am
Do not add any taunting rules, for 2 years ambrosia were changing the jailbreak constitution. I dislike monthly changes of rules because some certain individuals can't handle server adaptation. It took me time too to understand why quickgaming, aog and sm had different rules and perspectives but at last I got over it. I suggest you guys do the same
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ultor on August 20, 2013, 02:55:00 pm
By the taunting rule, meant the rule in which u call now the cage rule. I have read ur post very carefully, and I suggested edition to the sd rule if u read mine carefully :D
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 20, 2013, 03:10:49 pm
By the taunting rule, meant the rule in which u call now the cage rule. I have read ur post very carefully, and I suggested edition to the sd rule if u read mine carefully :D

In my eyes a special day or two at the end of a map is enough.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 20, 2013, 03:54:51 pm
I like this rules rawr. But i want just few small changes to be done but i will talk with Ray about them and then invite Rawr to a steam chat as it is better to discuss it on steam then make 100 posts.

Ty m8.



Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Heyo on August 20, 2013, 04:18:20 pm
Why don't you have an admin meeting which also includes older players (ex admins and old members)? Maybe they could help if they wanted to... They could give their views and suggest things
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: P o p a y on August 20, 2013, 04:51:23 pm
Why don't you have an admin meeting which also includes older players (ex admins and old members)? Maybe they could help if they wanted to... They could give their views and suggest things

+1. Good point. Call a Meeting with Valuable members only who can really help not to chit chat. :)
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: RoCk^^ on August 20, 2013, 04:56:10 pm
I like this rules rawr. But i want just few small changes to be done but i will talk with Ray about them and then invite Rawr to a steam chat as it is better to discuss it on steam then make 100 posts.

Ty m8.



Regards,
Monster
^^ when you change small things in rules can u pls add them as normal post so we dont need to read all 30 rules again to check the small changes but if there is no admin and an officer was in knife range and the prisoners slashed him he will kill them without any warning shots
because there are many players who wont read this post and new rules and keep playing on the old rules
Thanks
RoCk^^ The jail breaker
PS : not faking jlz clan   :D
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Critical on August 20, 2013, 04:56:41 pm
Why don't you have an admin meeting which also includes older players (ex admins and old members)? Maybe they could help if they wanted to... They could give their views and suggest things

+1. Good point. Call a Meeting with Valuable members only who can really help not to chit chat. :)
Would be good  8)
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Red Wolf on August 20, 2013, 08:36:55 pm

(http://i.imgur.com/jATYC7O.png)
1. There should always be a balance of 1:3 or 1:4 CT:T
Red Wolf: So if theres no balance and admin on. Admin should be reported?
2. 30.[/color] If officer goes inside a cage during cageday, terrorists are allowed to kill him without consequences, prisoners however can't leave the cage under any circumstances.
Red Wolf: If theres a command leave backwall u die, the officers outside the cage can kill the T who left backwall?
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 20, 2013, 08:40:18 pm
Why don't you have an admin meeting which also includes older players (ex admins and old members)? Maybe they could help if they wanted to... They could give their views and suggest things

+1. Good point. Call a Meeting with Valuable members only who can really help not to chit chat. :)

^ This. I agree with this highly.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: ~RoN on August 20, 2013, 08:48:55 pm
Why don't you have an admin meeting which also includes older players (ex admins and old members)? Maybe they could help if they wanted to... They could give their views and suggest things

+1. Good point. Call a Meeting with Valuable members only who can really help not to chit chat. :)

^ This. I agree with this highly.
that would be great i agree.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: NexT on August 20, 2013, 08:56:48 pm
get these rules in a red color because almost everyone brakes them. Rule 15. Rule 17.

add rule which is once an admin asks for CT do not spam with me .. spamming with "me" won't let him pick you faster

and why not add a rule which says not allowed to make more than 2 special days in a map .. sometimes they do like 4 or 5 just .. once there is 10 minutes left do special day only 2 and if the 2 special days are done map didn't change either you change it either put back the old cts and play normal

Loves,
NexT
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: onyzz;; on August 20, 2013, 09:02:04 pm

(http://i.imgur.com/jATYC7O.png)
1. There should always be a balance of 1:3 or 1:4 CT:T
Red Wolf: So if theres no balance and admin on. Admin should be reported?
2. 30.[/color] If officer goes inside a cage during cageday, terrorists are allowed to kill him without consequences, prisoners however can't leave the cage under any circumstances.
Red Wolf: If theres a command leave backwall u die, the officers outside the cage can kill the T who left backwall?

1st: hmm, no.
2nd: also no.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Duke Devlin on August 20, 2013, 09:24:45 pm
Good job Rawr, this is what I would expect when I view a topic with jailbreak rules
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 21, 2013, 10:09:36 am
The problem is that if we make a meeting we will waste too much time for talking nearly nothing. Because all which what something to be changed in the rules are allowed to post their suggestions here. If you think that something in the rules should be changed just post it here. Then all suggesting stuff and making 3 hours.




Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 21, 2013, 10:13:41 am
Monster, it's your job to make the meeting and pin point discussion topics for everyone in the meeting. Right now you want to change something in what Rawrplus made, no one knows what, because you never posted what, therefore, this leaving us with question mark whether that will be right to do so.

Also there are many subjects to talk about.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 21, 2013, 10:39:34 am
What i wanted to do is make the edits and then post it here so you can see them and say if you like them or not.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 21, 2013, 02:34:42 pm
What i wanted to do is make the edits and then post it here so you can see them and say if you like them or not.

I'd recommend a meeting, so you can hear out opinions of certain long-time mebers on specific rules  ::)
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: NexT on August 21, 2013, 03:13:12 pm
actually a meeting should be done always not only for this time .. a meeting should be like at least 1 time a month to discuss everything about not only 1 server about all servers
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Jason Bourne on August 21, 2013, 04:04:33 pm
Edited them a little

1. A ratio of 1:3 or 1:4 should be maintained. (CT:T)
2. Use of rude language is tolerated, as long as it's not offensive / insulting. Though, keep in mind, saying swear words after every sentence is not cool
3. No cheating during /lr (last request) [For instance using healing spots/taking another weapon or doing something you didn't choose for your last request]
4. Do not self-transfer to CT team, unless there isn't admin to do so. Make sure to keep the team balance (Rule 1).
5. Do not Spam/Script/Cheat and try to maintain peace in the server
6.You should follow the general server rules in jailbreak.


7. Do not block your teammates.
8. Do not give away your teammate's position. This is referred to as "Ghosting" and is not tolerated.
9. If you feel like you have been freekilled, ask calmly in chat for a reason, why you were killed. (If you get no response or feel that the kill was unjust and you didn't receive a fd to ask an admin or V.I.P)
10. Do not free-kill your teammates, unless officer allows you to do it.
11. If prisoner opens cells before 7:00 (and before officer does) it is automatically an unrestricted freeday.
12. If you are inside a vent, after the timer is on 0:00 CT is allowed to kill you / admin to slay you as you are delaying the game.



13. Make sure terrorists are judged fairly and you are impartial to all in your decisions.
14. Officers are allowed to kill prisoners if they aim directly at them with gun or attack them without warning (doesn't mean you always have to kill them)
15. If officers fail to command & open the cells before 7:00, it is an unrestrictred freeday.
16. Although there is no exact number of warning shots to be given, please be friendly and try to give at least 1 or 2 warning shots before execution.
17. Officers aren't allowed to kill people in vents (unless it's HNS day, Gunday or special days, or if it is a normal day he can say vent 30 seconds to warn the terrorist to get out)
18. If officers wish a prisoner to leave the vent, he must give him a 30 second chance to get out before he gets in and executes him (the timer is same for everybody, no matter when you entered it)
19. If a prisoner assassinates an officer and the other officer witnesses the kill he can kill the terrorist without warning.
20. If a prisoner wields a gun inside the vent the officer can kill him without warning.
21. Officers must have decent English communication skills and good working microphone, so prisoners have no issues understanding them.
22. Prisoners must always understand your command. Repeat it a few times and then warning shot them or ultimately kill them.
23. Make sure to be friendly and remember, you should play for fun. Also remember, more benevolent you are about executing, more beloved you will be between prisoners and players!
24. Do not hide guns in the map.
25. Officers can command any sort of gameplay (day) they want, while also trying to create new ones. If you are trying out a day make sure to explain rules of that specific day before playing it.
26. Officers cannot be biased (everyone is supposed to have equal chance of winning a game)
27. Special days are optional and should be played only when the map is coming close to an end.
28. Although boosting is allowed, CT call a command saying - "If you boost, you die."
29. If officer goes inside the cage terrorists are allowed to kill him without consequences, prisoners however can't leave the cage under any circumstances unless the officers tell you to do so

Edit
Didn't make changes in the rules just made it a little easier to understand
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: DonJowy on August 21, 2013, 04:39:06 pm
Jason can you please color the rules you changed ? Because im not willing to read all the rules again and see whats the difference between yours and rawr's.
+ Something to add. If it was bunnyhop/silent/handicap/punishment or any tricky day and the CT goes inside , the Ts are allowed to stand up/make noise/stop bhopping/stop following the CT commands to kill the other Ct which went inside of the cage.
And HS should add the SDs rules. I see players creating rules such as no camping in some SDs which isnt written ANYWHERE in the jailbreak rules.
Good job.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 22, 2013, 07:43:16 am
If you want a meeting then we will have to w8 for me to retuen back to bulgaria so i can make the meeting. Which i dont know when will happen. But it will be at least in a week or 2. That is why i want to discuss it with Ray and Rawr and to post what changes i think should be made then you will say id you like them or no. I dont want something that much just few things to be added which have to clear out some rules and few rules which does not exist anymore and they should exist.


Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 22, 2013, 09:08:37 am
I thought there wont be so many things but when i started reading the current rules i saw that too many things are missing and new players can never know that they exist if they are not in the rules. Ye i know the rules and i dont mind it but for the new players they can never know that the following exists. Also i did this now because i had some free time and i havent talked with Ray or Rawr because they werent online.


Rules which should be added:

You can edit them as they are too long i am just copy-pasting them from the old rules topic.


1. If a Prisoner inflicts damage to an Officer he can be killed immediately. (this is needed because if the T takes dmg to the CT with nade he can get killed)

2.  Officers must state orders before they open cells. If they state orders after opening cells, it is anautomatic unrestricted free day.

3. If the cells aren't opened by 7:00 because of the prisoner blocking the cell doors, it's not a freeday.

4. Officers can not camp in the gunroom, unless it is a Free day or Hide and Seek day.

5. Officers can kill prisoners in the gunroom, or in a restricted area without a warning even if the prisoner has a Free day or is playing Last Request.

6. Guns cannot be hidden in the gun room. You have this rule and that which i posted is the official but i think we better change it to something like:

CTs are not allowed to mess the guns in the gunroom. Because like on gray town then just throw the guns on the other side of the gunroom and whenthe vent guy jumps there arent any guns that he can pick so they just kill him which is unfair.

7. CTs are allowed to give only empty guns to the Ts.

8. Officers can Gun Check a prisoner if he thinks that the prisoner has a gun.
If the officers sees that the prisoner has a gun, officers has to warn the prisoner to drop it.
If the gun is not dropped in 5 seconds, an officer has the rights to kill him.

9. On Free days if an officer is sure that a prisoner has a gun, the prisoner can be killed with no warnings.

10. Use of HLDJ is strictly prohibited unless a game requiring music is being played, or it is a free day.
If it is a free day and somebody complains about the music, the officer MUST turn it off or risk being gagged and transferred back to terrorists.

11.  Prisoners cannot give away positions of their team-mates. It is considered ghosting and could result in a kick/ban.

12. If an officer started commanding, other officers must not interfere in his commanding (talking in mic) or this will result in slay or transferring back to prisoner team.

13. The officer can be an officer for one map only, unless there are no other options available or the player has been an officer for less than 15min.

14. I think you have to allow the boosting from the cage as well because it is part of the fun game.

15. Officers are allowed to use their glow rights to a prisoner only when he has a Free day or they are playing a game where glow is required.

Cts are having fun with this glow and what you just see in the cat is You have been glowed in red then on the next line You have been glowed in blue. So this is annoying also 1 time a CT wanted to kill e but i was hiding in the cage behind my team mates and he couldnt find me so he just gave me a FD which glws me and them killed me. This is unfair and destroys the fun. As we were all having fun that the CT couldnt see my name and kill me. All were typing hahahha. While i was joking with the ct saying to i am not in the cage i am in the gunroom and will kill you soon.

- Also Rawr can you change 3 other things:

On rule 5 change it from "admin" to "admin/VIP"
On rule 7 change "door cell" with "cell door"
On rule 11 from "Free-killing" change it to "Team-killing"



Maybe add this:
 
1. Officers cannot kill prisoners for opening the cells because it is an unrestricted freeday as the cells were opened by terrorist. This rule also applies even if an officer stated that Cells cannot be opened.

2. Officers are not allowed to kill their team mates or this will result in slay/transfering back to prisoner team. I actually think that this should be added because CTs should try to end the day not to kill each other. They have to cover not search for cars and go to kill the commander as this can easyly ruin the day.

3. When an officer makes a race he does not need to state that cheating is not allowed
Example: In a pool race you must use the pool and must not go around it
In the case of high spray cheating is allowed unless the officer states that you cannot access some parts of the map to do the high spray
Example: Officer says do a high spray on a wall and there is a ladder that makes you go higher and therefore help you on the high spray,
if the officers says do not use the ladder you cannot use it




As long as we have this rule: - Anybody enforcing a rule on server that isn't listed here, isn't official and can be ignored
All this should be added or they are just not part of our rules anymore.



And rawr removed many other rules but i agree with them being removed. As i think we will have more fun without them and also some of them are just not followed by anyone.




Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ray on August 22, 2013, 09:20:59 am

I agree with all. Specially the last 3.
i just wanted teamkilling as T allowed XD
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 22, 2013, 11:14:15 am
Quote
CTs are not allowed to mess the guns in the gunroom. Because like on gray town then just throw the guns on the other side of the gunroom and whenthe vent guy jumps there arent any guns that he can pick so they just kill him which is unfair.

To be honest, this is not necessary. CTs can if they have to due to rebelling, particularly in greytown remove few guns from the opening hole of the vent. In other sense, pick a gun and go out, not start screw about with them.

Also a lot of rules were not written, but we still played by them. I think some rules are easily learned inside the game. Like CTs shouldn't mess with guns, as well new players going CT can be told not to.
I rather have a smaller consistent size list of rules rather than a big one, which people won't bother to read. I know a lot of people who never actually read the rules for just that reason, but it also proves that they have learnt most of it in game.

Quote
Cts are having fun with this glow and what you just see in the cat is You have been glowed in red then on the next line You have been glowed in blue. So this is annoying also 1 time a CT wanted to kill e but i was hiding in the cage behind my team mates and he couldnt find me so he just gave me a FD which glws me and them killed me. This is unfair and destroys the fun. As we were all having fun that the CT couldnt see my name and kill me. All were typing hahahha. While i was joking with the ct saying to i am not in the cage i am in the gunroom and will kill you soon.

Again, don't see a necessary rule here, rather that CTs should be aware that it's for FD's and team games only.

We have this rule:

"Any rule not listed here is not a JB rule!"

If we remove it we wont contradict ourselves.

Another suggestion would be, leave Rawrplus rules as official and old rules as still active, but just behind it, so if anyone is interested to study the list the he has that ability.

Sometimes the less is better and more is worse, and vice verse.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 22, 2013, 01:04:40 pm
I agree with sami, many rules you mentioned are rather unnecessary and I don't see them in need to be added, as many of them are even pretty self-explanatory.

Here's a quote of Monster's rules, so people don't have to scroll up and down.
Quote
1. If a Prisoner inflicts damage to an Officer he can be killed immediately. (this is needed because if the T takes dmg to the CT with nade he can get killed)

2. Officers must state orders before they open cells. If they state orders after opening cells, it is anautomatic unrestricted free day.

3. If the cells aren't opened by 7:00 because of the prisoner blocking the cell doors, it's not a freeday.

4. Officers can not camp in the gunroom, unless it is a Free day or Hide and Seek day.

5. Officers can kill prisoners in the gunroom, or in a restricted area without a warning even if the prisoner has a Free day or is playing Last Request.

6. Guns cannot be hidden in the gun room. You have this rule and that which i posted is the official but i think we better change it to something like:

CTs are not allowed to mess the guns in the gunroom. Because like on gray town then just throw the guns on the other side of the gunroom and whenthe vent guy jumps there arent any guns that he can pick so they just kill him which is unfair.

7. CTs are allowed to give only empty guns to the Ts.

8. Officers can Gun Check a prisoner if he thinks that the prisoner has a gun.
If the officers sees that the prisoner has a gun, officers has to warn the prisoner to drop it.
If the gun is not dropped in 5 seconds, an officer has the rights to kill him.

9. On Free days if an officer is sure that a prisoner has a gun, the prisoner can be killed with no warnings.

10. Use of HLDJ is strictly prohibited unless a game requiring music is being played, or it is a free day.
If it is a free day and somebody complains about the music, the officer MUST turn it off or risk being gagged and transferred back to terrorists.

11. Prisoners cannot give away positions of their team-mates. It is considered ghosting and could result in a kick/ban.

12. If an officer started commanding, other officers must not interfere in his commanding (talking in mic) or this will result in slay or transferring back to prisoner team.

13. The officer can be an officer for one map only, unless there are no other options available or the player has been an officer for less than 15min.

14. I think you have to allow the boosting from the cage as well because it is part of the fun game.

15. Officers are allowed to use their glow rights to a prisoner only when he has a Free day or they are playing a game where glow is required.

Cts are having fun with this glow and what you just see in the cat is You have been glowed in red then on the next line You have been glowed in blue. So this is annoying also 1 time a CT wanted to kill e but i was hiding in the cage behind my team mates and he couldnt find me so he just gave me a FD which glws me and them killed me. This is unfair and destroys the fun. As we were all having fun that the CT couldnt see my name and kill me. All were typing hahahha. While i was joking with the ct saying to i am not in the cage i am in the gunroom and will kill you soon.

- Also Rawr can you change 3 other things:

On rule 5 change it from "admin" to "admin/VIP"
On rule 7 change "door cell" with "cell door"
On rule 11 from "Free-killing" change it to "Team-killing"



Maybe add this:
 
1. Officers cannot kill prisoners for opening the cells because it is an unrestricted freeday as the cells were opened by terrorist. This rule also applies even if an officer stated that Cells cannot be opened.

2. Officers are not allowed to kill their team mates or this will result in slay/transfering back to prisoner team. I actually think that this should be added because CTs should try to end the day not to kill each other. They have to cover not search for cars and go to kill the commander as this can easyly ruin the day.

3. When an officer makes a race he does not need to state that cheating is not allowed
Example: In a pool race you must use the pool and must not go around it
In the case of high spray cheating is allowed unless the officer states that you cannot access some parts of the map to do the high spray
Example: Officer says do a high spray on a wall and there is a ladder that makes you go higher and therefore help you on the high spray,
if the officers says do not use the ladder you cannot use it

1. is obvious and doesn't need specific rule for it.

2. that is stated in my rules list already

3. that's also pretty obvious

4. I think I stated it, tho if I forgot to, Ill add it.

5. obvious one as well.

6. sami explained it already

7. CTs are allowed to give guns to everybody, when it's needed for a game. I don't see why this should be a rule at all. It's like if I created a rule stating, CTs are allowed to move forward and command.

8. Gunchecking is part of jailbreak that doesn't need to be mentioned in rules. I also feel like there shouldn't be specific rules for gunchecking as officers should handle the situation and using specific rules for it will only create confusion.

9. That's true, but I don't think it's necessary to add it there, as it's obvious when they are trying to attack them.

10. I stated that rule already as well.

11. Once again, it's inside the rules list I've posted.

12. Same story, stated in rules ::)

13. I think officers could be allowed for more than 1 map, but admins should try to keep diversity between them.

14. My rules suggestion states that it's allowed, in cells as well (not only in cage). I like the point of team cooperation for assassination of officer. Not only it makes friendly environment between prisoners, but also rewards you for playing as a team.

15. Will add.

Yellow rules,
1. I have a rule dedicated for opening before 7:00. I think officers are aware that once somebody opens a cell, they logically can't kill him outside of gunroom as it's unrestricted freeday.

2. I dislike the concept of teamkilling in general, which I added to prisoners. I don't see officers teamkilling each other, though if it's necessary to add..

3. I actually liked the idea of cheating and the fact, officer needs to state cheating is not allowed. I mean, officer has to be accurate in every command throughout the entire jailbreak, so why should be one stupid game an exception.



I know the rules I posted may not cover every single aspect of the mod but they are simple and easy to understand.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 22, 2013, 01:10:48 pm
Quote
2. I dislike the concept of teamkilling in general, which I added to prisoners. I don't see officers teamkilling each other, though if it's necessary to add..

3. I actually liked the idea of cheating and the fact, officer needs to state cheating is not allowed. I mean, officer has to be accurate in every command throughout the entire jailbreak, so why should be one stupid game an exception.

Sometimes CT's team kill each other, I don't mind it as long as they can control the situation, if they can't then again it's pretty obvious, don't do it. Don't think it needs to be added as a rule.

on the 3rd, spot on, I like the cheating factor as well, if CT doesn't state no cheating, smarter prisoners could take advantage of it.

It's the ingame rules what counts more, on certain situations we don't do certain things and vice verse.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 22, 2013, 01:14:19 pm
Quote
15. Officers are allowed to kill prisoners if they directly aim at that with gun or attack them without warning (doesn't mean you always have to kill them)

Quote
21. If a prisoner wields a gun inside the vent, officer is allowed to kill him without warning.

Rawr, make this as one rule, it is pretty explanatory:

15. Officers are allowed to kill prisoners if they have a gun in their hands no matter where they are - cage, vent, cell etc.

Something like that. Prisoners shouldn't have guns unless they need for a specific game.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 22, 2013, 01:21:37 pm
Have added rule about glow menu (new rule 21.)

and edited prisoners wielding a gun rule (rule 15.)

Thanks for feedback sami / monster.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Weed Farmerr on August 22, 2013, 01:52:44 pm
Rawplus ,i think that Monster wrote all these rules because if a new new new player would like to read the rules of Ambrosia Jb server he wouldnt be able to know what to do in all the situations so you cant say 5-6 rules are obvius.In my opinion why not to add some more rules in yours like 10-20.I remember when I starded play Jb I had to learn 50 Jb rules in Popay's topic..So you could add some of Monster's rules in yours
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 22, 2013, 03:35:06 pm
Rawplus ,i think that Monster wrote all these rules because if a new new new player would like to read the rules of Ambrosia Jb server he wouldnt be able to know what to do in all the situations so you cant say 5-6 rules are obvius.In my opinion why not to add some more rules in yours like 10-20.I remember when I starded play Jb I had to learn 50 Jb rules in Popay's topic..So you could add some of Monster's rules in yours

Roughly 20% of total players actually read rules. Myself as an example, I learned rules just by playing.
I added some of monster's suggested rules, but things like you shoot somebody you die hopefully don't have to be mentioned ::)
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 22, 2013, 05:06:37 pm
You have to see the bigger picture this time. Too many rules just degrade the gameplay. Of course fairness in game is what we seek for, but we shouldn't exceed that.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: TeeKaaY on August 22, 2013, 05:20:15 pm
You have to see the bigger picture this time. Too many rules just degrade the gameplay. Of course fairness in game is what we seek for, but we shouldn't exceed that.

You sir should receive a reward for what you said. Don't overthink guys, plain and simple is the way to go.
My advice look at how prisons are run in real life and try to get the rules from there, ofc not all of them.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 22, 2013, 05:42:30 pm
Yup, simplicity is the way to go.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Jonathan on August 22, 2013, 06:40:16 pm
- No Map Exploits if there is a gltich with the map please do not do the glitch.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 22, 2013, 07:08:54 pm
- No Map Exploits if there is a gltich with the map please do not do the glitch.

I don't see an issue with boosting
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Jonathan on August 22, 2013, 07:21:34 pm
- No Map Exploits if there is a gltich with the map please do not do the glitch.

I don't see an issue with boosting


Wasnt it disallowed before ?
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 22, 2013, 07:38:35 pm
Does that mean it has to be disallowed now?
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 22, 2013, 07:46:17 pm
You have to see the bigger picture this time. Too many rules just degrade the gameplay. Of course fairness in game is what we seek for, but we shouldn't exceed that.

You sir should receive a reward for what you said. Don't overthink guys, plain and simple is the way to go.
My advice look at how prisons are run in real life and try to get the rules from there, ofc not all of them.

Glad there are more people thinking the same way.

@John, don't think of it too much, you can always as an Officer command starting each day, that if you boost you will die. In some maps it doesn't really affect Officer work at all unless they are still sleeping in the gunroom.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 23, 2013, 12:31:11 am
But JB is based on the rules so you cant just say it is obvious. Why it should it be obvious but not writen down. I dont see big differences in reading few lines more. I had read the old rules so many times no matter if they were so long. And when we post the new rules which you made i am sure all the current players will read them and some new players as well. Because there are some special cases when someone is freekilled but actually he isnt then rules just show that for example he had a gun on the FD and the CT killed him. Ye he killed him because the rule is saying that the CT is allowed to do that not because it is just obvious. Rules are readed 1 time. You dont have to read them every time so that you can say omg they are long. You just come waste 5 min and read them. Then you leave the topic and never come back to it. So rules should be not too long and not too short. This arent too short but they are short. If we do this changes then they will become normal. And normal is the best because the current one are long while the old one were too long. So everything should be well explained.

 Also samu there arent any rules which arent written down. At least i cant say any. Can you tell me such a rule. Also if it isnt written then it isnt a rule. It is just like a law of a country and we follow it, breaking the lows gets you punished. So everything should be there.



Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 23, 2013, 01:32:50 am
Quote
Because there are some special cases when someone is freekilled but actually he isnt then rules just show that for example he had a gun on the FD and the CT killed him. Ye he killed him because the rule is saying that the CT is allowed to do that not because it is just obvious.

I do believe this is very obvious. Imagine a real prison with guards and prisoners, do you really think that by all means that guards will need to tell anyone who doesn't have the authority that they are not allowed to carry or touch any gun? Specially if a prisoner is handling one, they will not tolerate it. It is so obvious, why we have to explain every bit.

You are supposed to be a prisoner, gun less! There are hundreds of examples why many things are so obvious.

I will show you the list with explanation why the old rules are so obvious:

Quote
1. All rules must be obeyed or you will be slayed/kicked/banned.

Rules are for reason and people who abuse them can be punished in whichever way Admin or High staff see fit. Don't think this rule is even necessary. Everyone in real life knows, you break a law and you will be either fined or you will serve time.

Quote
3. Free killing is killing a prisoner for no reason.
Doing this repeatedly can get you kicked or banned.

In red: again unnecessary. Break rules, you will be punished simple.

Quote
- CTs cannot attack or kill prisoners for no reason,
even if the prisoner has and throws flash or grenade if it doesn't inflict any damage to officers.

- Officers must always give warning shots to prisoners before killing, unless the prisoner attacks and inflicts damage,
a prisoner aims a weapon at an officer, or a prisoner is rebelling. This rule does not also apply while playing games or it is Punishment day.

- If a Prisoner inflicts damage to an Officer he can be killed immediately.
If the prisoner damages with a grenade he can be killed too, this is also a weapon and can inflict damage!

- Officers that constantly free kill will be slayed/transferred/kicked/banned.

This is just constant repeating. Simply - Inflict damage to any of the officers and you can be killed without a warning! I don't see any need for explanation of what type of gun or nade you use.

Quote
- Officers cannot kill prisoners for opening the cells because it is an unrestricted freeday as the cells were opened by terrorist.
This rule also applies even if an officer stated that Cells cannot be opened.

This rule should be changed. Since we know that prisoners will try to open the cells if they can, why not do this: If a prisoner opens the cell after an Officer has stated not to open them, prisoner can be killed, but it will be an unrestricted freeday.

Quote
6. - If a Prisoner is shooting/aiming with a gun to an Officer from a vent,
the Officer can kill prisoner without a warning.

Again, prisoners shouldn't have guns and inflicting damage already says you can kill offending prisoners without a warning.

Quote
7. Officers can not give prisoners any weapons unless they are doing a game where a weapon is required.

And again, prisoners should not have weapons at all times unless necessary for a certain command from an officer. This can be included in one simple rule.

Quote
8. Officers can always tell prisoners to drop their gun if they think they have one,
if the weapon is not dropped officers must do a gun check before killing the terrorist.

- Officers can Gun Check a prisoner if he thinks that the prisoner has a gun.
If the officers sees that the prisoner has a gun, officers has to warn the prisoner to drop it.
If the gun is not dropped in 5 seconds, an officer has the rights to kill him.
However if the prisoner aims at any officer with it, the officer can kill the prisoner without warnings.

In red: Do you see what I mean? We read 5 same lines all the time.

Quote
10. Officers can go inside the cage however they cannot shoot while being inside of it. Also when inside the cage the Terrorists can kill the Officer/s that are inside without any consequence. Even if the officers say: "If you leave the back of the cage or if you move you die." The prisoners can disobey the command to kill the CT/s which are inside the cage and other officers can't do anything. If the officer/s which was inside the cage leaves it then prisoners are not allowed to follow him and try to kill him or they risk of being killed for rebeling. If an officer is doing that often he can be slayed/transfered back.

Rawrplus made this 4x shorter with the same meaning. We don't have to explain everything in details, we still need that fun factor, it's not the law. Even our official server and forum rules don't go into such small details.

Quote
11. All officers must have a good/understandable microphone and they must use it during game play.
Voice changer is not allowed and if you use one you will be slayed/transfered/kicked/banned.

- Officers need to remember that prisoner microphones are muted.
If an officer asks a prisoner a question, they need to give them time to type an answer.
RED: I don't get it, when this was made as a rule and why? I rather have kids who use voice changer and sound bit older than listen to small womanly voice which gives me headaches, I am sure everyone would agree with me on this.
Yellow: Common sense here, if anyone expects prisoners to answer straight away in a split second then they are daft.

Quote
12. Use of HLDJ is strictly prohibited unless a game requiring music is being played, or it is a free day.
If it is a free day and somebody complains about the music, the officer MUST turn it off or risk being gagged and transferred back to terrorists.

Don't like this: "Strictly prohibited", HLDJ gives some fun factor. Sometimes server seems so quiet between Officer commands that it feels so shallow. Don't get me wrong, there is the right and wrong time, but again, common sense. Don't think this needs to be a rule, if someone interferes with HLDJ constantly and been asked to stop, he can be simply punished. Common sense.

Quote
13. Prisoners cannot give away positions of their team-mates. It is considered ghosting and could result in a kick/ban.

I would really like to change this. I remember having said this long time ago. Prisoners can team up against officers making them a trap or leading them in the wrong way or if they don't like the prisoner who is hiding find him easily which can make the game a lot quicker than Officers trying to find the remaining T who are delaying the gameplay. The thing what I'd like here is that prisoners cannot tell the position of anyone missing, but only show them and the rule for ghosting should be added for dead prisoners as not to ghost.

Quote
15. If an officer started commanding,
other officers must not interfere in his commanding (talking in mic) or this will result in slay or transferring back to prisoner team.

- Officers or prisoners should not use rude words, during game play, it might result in slay/kick.

Again, pretty obvious. About the rude words, why not? It's Jailbreak, not a kindergarten.

Quote
18. Officers are not allowed to kill their team mates or this will result in slay/transfering back to prisoner team.

Such unnecessary rule. I do believe I said this before, if CT can command they can team kill each other. Or team kill the commanding officer and take the command from him. Also a distraction which helps prisoners to rebel. Fun factor again.

Quote
19. When an officer makes a race he does not need to state that cheating is not allowed
Example: In a pool race you must use the pool and must not go around it
In the case of high spray cheating is allowed unless the officer states that you cannot access some parts of the map to do the high spray
Example: Officer says do a high spray on a wall and there is a ladder that makes you go higher and therefore help you on the high spray,
if the officers says do not use the ladder you cannot use it

As Rawrplus made new update on this, cheat factor is good fun unless an officer says not to cheat. Fun factor!

Quote
20. If the CT that is commanding says, when I say run to the cage then you go to the cage.
   Then don't go to the cage until he says run to the cage. Because at the start he said when I say run.

Common sense. If you listen to officer then you would see the difference.

Quote
21. If an officer says "head to head" Terrorists can interpret it as "shoulder to shoulder" and should not be killed

This should be an officers job to explain to people who don't do as what he means. This rule is just out of the line.
Quote
23. CT can do any game they want as long as it completes this requirements:
- It is a fun and enjoyable game for the majority of the players
- It gives to all T an equal opportunity to survive
- The game can't be confusing
- It is properly explained to the T
If the CT is not completing all of these steps then he can be transfered back T

Repeating again.

Quote
25. Any rule not listed here is not a jailbreak rule.

I doubt that this rule is even needed. Officers make rules of the games they create etc.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 23, 2013, 01:37:03 am
Rawr and others, since I know you won't bother reading my previous post, how about adding to rules or think about these changes:

If a prisoner opens the cell after an Officer has stated not to open them, prisoner can be killed, but it will be an unrestricted freeday.

Quote
13. Prisoners cannot give away positions of their team-mates. It is considered ghosting and could result in a kick/ban.

I would really like to change this. I remember having said this long time ago. Prisoners can team up against officers making them a trap or leading them in the wrong way or if they don't like the prisoner who is hiding find him easily which can make the game a lot quicker than Officers trying to find the remaining T who are delaying the gameplay. The thing what I'd like here is that prisoners cannot tell the position of anyone missing, but only show them and the rule for ghosting should be added for dead prisoners as not to ghost.

Quote
25. Any rule not listed here is not a jailbreak rule.

I doubt that this rule is even needed. Officers make rules of the games they create etc.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: P o p a y on August 23, 2013, 02:44:20 am
Sami, Officers can make the rules of their games, but that it is written down that CTs can make their own rules only about the game, where there is fair competition for everyone and equal chance to win. The last rule is complying about the Game play of JB not about the games of JB, so it must be written in my opinion - "Any rule not listed here is not a jailbreak rule".

Regards,
Popay
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 23, 2013, 09:25:59 am
Sami why did you make this post. Did i ever said that the current rules are better and if they were better why do you think i would like them to be changed with this one. I said that some things are better explaned and we never worked with common sence because some ppl just dont have it and they will start asking stupid questions like the rules dont say that when i aim a gun at a CT i will die ye it is common sence but it isnt in the rules which means that he can complain about it and it will be a valid complain. As i said rules are read 1 time so it doesnt matter if they are just a bit longer. Because if you can read this which rawr made for 4 min if you add some more changes which I want you will be able to read it for 5 min so does it really matter. You are acting like you have to read the rules 5 times every day. They wont happen so long that no one will read them.

Rules should exmplain everything. It is the same with the other ambrosia rules. Like for the Admins abusing rule see what we have in it:
http://www.ambrosia-servers.com/community/index.php?topic=8.0 (http://www.ambrosia-servers.com/community/index.php?topic=8.0)

2. Do not use the administration commands for your own benefit or use them on other admins.
Administration rights have been given to you by server leaders in order to keep the server clean and protect it from cheaters and rulebreakers. It is strictly forbidden to use the administration powers and commands given to you for your own purposes, such actions would result in punishments issued by the development team. Also using admin rights on other admins is strictly forbidden even if it's a joke, it won't be tolerated by the High Administration.
Please, do not abuse your administration rights, else you shall be punished or the rights could be revoked.



Couldnt Raven leave just the first line. Well maybe he could but he explained everything. Arent the rules long, well they are but still they are needed. Because it was going to be much easyer if he did the rules just in 5 lines but he spended  6 lines just for 1 rule.


I am not saying that we need rules as much explaned as our current one but that we need a bit more explaned then the one which rawr posted.



Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 23, 2013, 10:15:21 am
I don't know why, but I find the rules in JB and rules for admins completely 2 different subjects. Admin job isn't supposed to be fun, Players in JB need to have fun.

When people say a lot of them haven't even read the rules, you think about it.
The only reason I did the big list is to show you what this "explanation" for you seems to be, when every line repeats it self, there are many rules which are just common sense. I am sorry, I will never agree with this. You can write down the rules, as I said, make smaller version of rules as in front, like I did some time ago and have the full list of rules at the back .

Also, the more rules there are, the more complaining, whining, hating kids there are. Haven't you noticed?
No one used to complain about FD, now for almost 2 years straight - there is crying for it constantly.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rawrplus on August 23, 2013, 03:01:29 pm

Quote from: Monster
But JB is based on the rules so you cant just say it is obvious. Why it should it be obvious but not writen down. I dont see big differences in reading few lines more. I had read the old rules so many times no matter if they were so long. And when we post the new rules which you made i am sure all the current players will read them and some new players as well. Because there are some special cases when someone is freekilled but actually he isnt then rules just show that for example he had a gun on the FD and the CT killed him.

Every server is based on rules, isn't it? Also, why can't I say something is obvious and unnecessary to be listed on the rules? There are things which should be listed in the server rules - which I agree on and keep on adding them, but some are straight out over the top and unnecessary. I mean, CT is allowed to kill T when he attacks them? Why do we need rule for that? What do you expect Terrorists complaining that CT counter-attacked instead of starring in air like mental? I'm not saying my rules cover every aspect of jailbreak, but just enough for everybody to understand.

Quote
Rules are readed 1 time. You dont have to read them every time so that you can say omg they are long. You just come waste 5 min and read them. Then you leave the topic and never come back to it. So rules should be not too long and not too short. This arent too short but they are short. If we do this changes then they will become normal. And normal is the best because the current one are long while the old one were too long. So everything should be well explained.

I'm pretty sure they aren't. I don't think anybody on the earth, who's new to jailbreak would read rules only once. Either people are active enough to learn rules properly, or they're too lazy to learn them at all. There's no such middle way.

I'm sorry, but when you have kids reporting others for everything, you can't make rules such complicated as you seem to wish. The entire purpose of me re-writing the rules was to get rid of the old complicated rules and I refuse to make them as complicated as they were.
Don't get me wrong, I'm completely up for adding rules and updating them but let's no go overboard with them when it comes to updating them. They should cover important things of jailbreak, but they are supposed to be a bulletin, not a bible.



Also, you seem to mix up two things into one not so tasty cocktail. Guidelines for admins and players. For players, they should be easy enough for them to enjoy, but sophisticated enough to keep gameplay under control. Admin rules are something completely different and is not supposed to be fun, as sami stated.

You could see, how much sami could point out from your old rules and you still could see how many I even was from your suggested rules.
The rules you want to add are unnecessary, confusing and will only make unnecessary issues which sort of defeats the purpose of why I even posted this topic in the first place.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Jonathan on August 23, 2013, 06:11:27 pm
Disable this silly rule :

- Using Voice changer isnt allowed.

http://www.ambrosia-servers.com/community/index.php?topic=15831.msg208207#msg208207 (http://www.ambrosia-servers.com/community/index.php?topic=15831.msg208207#msg208207)
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 23, 2013, 08:31:17 pm
I think I mentioned this in my list too. Who's idea was it?! Voice changer -.-
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 24, 2013, 12:28:03 pm
This rule appeared when we got few reports of ppl talking like robots with voice changes and annoying everything but admins cant put them back because this is allowed as voicechanger is allowed. So after the reports we added the rule that voice changes isnt allowed because ppl are abusing it and talking like monsters or talking like a new born kid or like robots or like anything you can imagine.


And about the rules i never said we should make them complicated. Just add few more lines not that much. Also can you tell me which rules form that i suggested did you add. Or you didnt add anything yet?



Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: NexT on August 24, 2013, 02:04:07 pm
My opinion is do not remove the voice changer rule ..
server will get spammed by voice changers ... why do you need it removed ? you don't need voice changer to have fun or to be CT ..

keep the voice changer rule in my opinion


Loves,
NexT
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ray on August 24, 2013, 02:17:13 pm
Yes, keep voice changer rule because some of the admins including me know the voices of the banevaders. Like emx for example.
Voice changer will hide him.
New IP ? Steam_ID_LAN ? + voice changer impo to catch.

Also it's annoying. So keep it
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Pim on August 24, 2013, 02:27:40 pm
Yes, keep voice changer rule because some of the admins including me know the voices of the banevaders. Like emx for example.
Voice changer will hide him.
New IP ? Steam_ID_LAN ? + voice changer impo to catch.

Also it's annoying. So keep it

new ip + steamid lan + someone who doesn't care about rules and uses voice changer anyways? gl finding that out :D
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: NexT on August 24, 2013, 02:36:33 pm
Yes, keep voice changer rule because some of the admins including me know the voices of the banevaders. Like emx for example.
Voice changer will hide him.
New IP ? Steam_ID_LAN ? + voice changer impo to catch.

Also it's annoying. So keep it

Thats one bad thing you said over there :D ban evader won't even care about rules :D
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 24, 2013, 06:00:18 pm
You are missing the point. Voice changer has nothing to do with proof of a banevader, people can make higher or lower tones with their own voice and taking voice as a proof of someone's voice isn't enough to tell it is that person. It is not enough proof to know someone's voice. Also let them use voice changer, more suspicious that way. Besides if someone is having a horrible voice we can simply put them back. I struggle with people who are still young and their voices just give me headache, I much rather prefer that they use voice changer so we don't have to suffer.

Voice changer was never in rules and it should stay that way. Unnecessary rule once more.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: TeeKaaY on August 24, 2013, 08:56:42 pm
Sami I am gonna give you a kiss (K)

The point that most of you guys don't get, is that Guards have weapons and they command the Prisoners. Your rules are restricting any Prisoner movement. The rules should facilitate to some sort the life of the Prisoners. Give them some slack. But again don't go to far with this.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Daniel on August 25, 2013, 04:18:23 am
4 pages with long replies, i couldnt read it all. But I can suggest something, think about the basics, think about those basic rules which are needed for a good/non-strict gameplay. After that, see the reports and complaints and see what is needed to add and what it is not.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: 'PL' on August 25, 2013, 07:26:59 pm
Well that silly voicechanger rule came when tasha and sammi joined jb. At points they accused kitty,girly and tommy for using voice changer. So the current administrators of that time invented a rule for voice changing. Any new person having a female contralto voice type, since voice changers cannot produce natural female level is suspected of voice changer. There was not logical thought on why it was needed
If somebody is wondering how it got in jb.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 26, 2013, 08:28:44 am
Guys we had many ppl with robot voices and stuff like this which are more annoying then anything. If we remove the rule that voice changer isnt allowed then when someone comes and starts talking in a strange way which is annoying what can we do about it. You will tell him this voice is annoying everyone remove it. And he will say why should I remove it? Rules are saying that voice changer is allowed so i am using it at the moment. And nothing can be done.


Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on August 26, 2013, 12:37:57 pm
It goes under the rule, clear microphone. I believe the rule about microphone should be updated. Clear, people can understand and good voice. Annoying ones cannot be CT. This is how you can have 2 bunnies with 1 shot. I said it before, rather they use the voice changer than we have to hear annoying small voice. Some voices are better than others, gotta admit that.

Also how will you know for sure that they are using voice changer? Me for example had a microphone and most people said it sounded like radio, again I am sure some thought im using voice changer.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: onyzz;; on August 26, 2013, 06:32:40 pm
It goes under the rule, clear microphone. I believe the rule about microphone should be updated. Clear, people can understand and good voice. Annoying ones cannot be CT. This is how you can have 2 bunnies with 1 shot. I said it before, rather they use the voice changer than we have to hear annoying small voice. Some voices are better than others, gotta admit that.

Also how will you know for sure that they are using voice changer? Me for example had a microphone and most people said it sounded like radio, again I am sure some thought im using voice changer.

that also avoids kids to be ct, as their voice is also pretty annoying ._.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: P o p a y on August 26, 2013, 06:40:02 pm
Kids Voice annoying ? Are you kidding me?

80% of the VALUABLE persons of Ambrosia are Children who fulfill this community. You are not even active in jailbreak mate, so you don't know what's going on. It's not their fault they are 12 years old and have a gentle voice, don't forger you were 12 in the past.

Nothing negative against you but your statement will irritate a lot of players.

Regards,
Popay
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: onyzz;; on August 26, 2013, 07:24:50 pm
Kids Voice annoying ? Are you kidding me?

80% of the VALUABLE persons of Ambrosia are Children who fulfill this community. You are not even active in jailbreak mate, so you don't know what's going on. It's not their fault they are 12 years old and have a gentle voice, don't forger you were 12 in the past.

Nothing negative against you but your statement will irritate a lot of players.

Regards,
Popay

1. i'm not actually inactive in jailbreak, as i play there everyday ._.
2. If they get irritated it's their problem, but in my opinion and maybe some other persons, they are indeed annoying.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: MonsteR on August 27, 2013, 11:18:57 am
Nothing can be done agains ppl having a high voice. So lets not discuss it anymore. This ppl are part of the server.

Anything else you want to discuss about the rules?


Regards,
Monster
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on September 15, 2013, 09:22:56 pm
What is happening with this?
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Fisu on September 16, 2013, 08:29:24 am
I never really understood the rules. After this topic, I even know some rules, which I never really heared about. WTF xD Thanks Rawr.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ray on November 09, 2013, 02:01:26 pm
Bumped


I'm interested in editing rules that will fit with the server.
I decided to make a meeting to discuss these changes.
It will be on TS3, next week, Friday 15/11/2013, From 19:00 GMT+0 Until 21:00 GMT+0
Everyone is invited.
If you spam on TS3 or if you try to corrupt the meeting, you will be kicked from the meeting.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: P o p a y on November 09, 2013, 02:05:23 pm
Count me in. I suggest sami<3 to be there as well ( since he and I wrote the previous rules ) we can share experience, opinions and agreements or disagreements for the future edition of them.

Thy,
Popay
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: 'PL' on November 09, 2013, 02:06:26 pm
I COME
I NO SPEAK
I LISTEN
I PROMISE
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Rubix on November 09, 2013, 02:16:26 pm
Bumped


I'm interested in editing rules that will fit with the server.
I decided to make a meeting to discuss these changes.
It will be on TS3, next week, Friday 15/11/2013, From 19:00 GMT+0 Until 21:00 GMT+0
Everyone is invited.
If you spam on TS3 or if you try to corrupt the meeting, you will be kicked from the meeting.
Guess thats me out then :(
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ray on November 09, 2013, 02:39:02 pm
Bumped


I'm interested in editing rules that will fit with the server.
I decided to make a meeting to discuss these changes.
It will be on TS3, next week, Friday 15/11/2013, From 19:00 GMT+0 Until 21:00 GMT+0
Everyone is invited.
If you spam on TS3 or if you try to corrupt the meeting, you will be kicked from the meeting.
Guess thats me out then :(
Aha :D we'll see ^^
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on November 09, 2013, 06:55:31 pm
If I cannot attend for any reason what might occur my suggestion in which I strongly believe in is that the old rules should be replaced exactly with these ones. Rawrplus did a fantastic job on this and I have to agree 100%. There might be few bits added and tweaks needed, but in overall these are perfect simple rules for everyone to understand. In these 2-3 years playing I have understood that over complicating rules will lead to many misunderstandings, many unwritten rules to be written so the cycle goes on and on. It's time that JB have decent and polished rule list which should be sustained as it is and most things which could be small and irrelevant to the rules should be dealt in the server by admins on their own approach. After all you have to be able to decide and chose what's right and what's wrong in other words, can't do it, don't be an admin.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: ~RoN on November 09, 2013, 10:13:47 pm
count me in too will be there.  8)
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: DonJowy on November 11, 2013, 06:30:30 pm
I COME
I NO SPEAK
I LISTEN
I PROMISE
I UNDERSTOOD A WORD !
Count me in (please somebody remind me because i forget so damn much :'( )
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: EL1TE on November 12, 2013, 01:58:18 pm
Like it aswell , nice rules !!  ;D
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ray on November 15, 2013, 06:09:42 pm
Bump, meeting in 50 mins
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: terraboN on November 15, 2013, 06:10:35 pm
Can i come? Been some time since i have been in the JB side of things.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Lagger on November 15, 2013, 06:28:50 pm
Would like to come and hear what you guys have to say, even thought my mic is broken so I won't talk :p
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: M-16(THE_BEST) on November 15, 2013, 06:34:16 pm
comming also :D
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Kasabiii on November 15, 2013, 06:38:25 pm
1 thing , there shouldn't be something called vent time , think about it in real life if the prisoners goes anywhere but the command they will be punished :P
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: TerminatoOr on November 15, 2013, 07:21:18 pm
1 thing , there shouldn't be something called vent time , think about it in real life if the prisoners goes anywhere but the command they will be punished :P

Well, I dont think that such rule will help us... since it will make rebelling harder and harder...
"Vent Time" rule is just fine.. no need to remove/modify it from my opinion.
Title: Re: Rawr's re-edition of rules (suggestion)
Post by: Ed on November 16, 2013, 05:39:58 pm
Accepted and made official.