Holding the flag in ctf

considering the amount of times I've told you it's against the rules I think you were pretty aware

holding the flag to make a game last longer instead of playing the objective and winning the game is not fun for the people who actually play the objective. just pisses them off. the people who did it in 1.0 were part of the reason the server died.

 

The way I see it, you're still technically completing the objective. The objective is to either capture the flag, or prevent the other team from doing so. By holding the flag, you're actively preventing the other team from capturing your flag. Sure, it's sometimes considered a douche-like thing to do, but it's not breaking any currently known rules. The only sort of "official" hint that something like this is punishable was provided in a single post by @SoCool21 in a previous thread, unless I missed something.

Here is a screenshot:


Unfortunately, this is incorrect. It is actually pretty reasonable to hold onto the flag if you want to have more experience and level up. If you hold onto the flag, CTF can end up being the longest gamemode, and the best for gaining these kills, experience points, and ultimately levels. You'd be pretty dumb not to if you cared the least bit about your stats. If you don't care, then obviously you'll enjoy the game like normal. This also does not break the "abusing issue" rule, because this is not an issue. It is intentional for the opposing team not to be able to cap if you have their flag. Trolling is also something this is not, because the intention is not to irritate or provoke the other team, but to raise your stats. Like I said, you're still playing the objective by doing this. Now that we've established that it doesn't break any of those rules, let's summarize.

Rules that holding the flag doesn't break:
1. Common sense.
2. Abusing issues.
3. Trolling.
4. Any other known rule.

Rules that holding the flag does break:
1. N/A or some secret rule.

So you see, the only thing that would prevent anyone from currently doing this is a staff member using their personal opinion and executing their authority to punish for something that isn't actually breaking the rules. We have not been made completely aware of this being against the rules or not, it has not been announced, and there is no rule stating that Brawl reserves the right to change/add rules without notice. Therefore, if you were to be punished for doing this, it would be completely uncalled for. Of course, we're talking about the staff here. Some of them are perfectly capable of ignoring this fact and taking it upon themselves to punish for this.

This is just my opinion, and I know that it'd probably be good for a staff member to comment on this. Regardless of what I say, staff have the final word in the end, and It's really hard to argue with one, especially without getting on their bad side.

 

the only way you're completing the objective by holding the flag is if the other team already has your flag as well. this prevents them from capturing your flag. however, when your flag is returned and you have the opportunity to capture it easily, holding it in this situation is just delaying the game purposely. some people don't want the game to last forever, and you're going against how the game mode was meant to be played.

doesn't matter if the sole purpose is to raise stats, by doing so you're ruining the game for other players. in other words, by holding the flag when you're easily able to capture it you're unintentionally "trolling" your team.

ruining the game for others is a pretty good reason to be punished if I'm being honest

 

Please, tell me exactly how the original creators of COD intended the game to be played since you know for sure.

Unintentional trolling is the easiest thing to do. Almost anything could be considered "unintentionally trolling" as long as someone is there to complain about it.

It's honestly growing tiresome arguing with you on every thread I reply to so I'm going to keep my responses to you short from now on seeing as there's little I can do for you.

 

Ice Bear does think that the creators of COD intended for people to play the objective rather than purely for kills and stats.

 

you really need me to explain the objective of 'capture the flag'

sure if it's one or two people you're annoying, if you're going against the objective and pissing off half the server then yeah something should be done about it

 

Obviously, and yes. Please.

Oops.

 

the objective of 'capture the flag' is to capture the flag
there you go kiddo, hope that helped

 

Ice Bear says if the game is the game is meant for players to play the objective than shouldn't they capture the flag rather than holding it because the main point of capture the flag is to well, to capture the flag not hold the flag to increase your stats? Not capturing the flag or not making the effort to is not playing the objective.

 

I was there in that game and tbh there was no way anyone on red could get the blue flag... We were camped be DewLimit, JAYGT and many other people with all exits heavily guarded. However I do see how this may be a problem sometimes.

 

Thanks, it helped. I've never looked at it this way. You've opened my eyes.

 

So you agree even with that sarcasm that you should not hold the flag just for kills and xp? What point are you trying to make are you just trying to justify holding it or are trying to say technically it is not against the rules and that it is just an unspoken rule that varies staff to staff?

 

I'm saying that there's nothing wrong with holding the flag currently, and that it isn't actually against the rules right now. There's no rule against it, and since the whole "common sense" and "trolling" thing is up for debate, there's not really a definitive way to determine if it is against the rules. This all depends on the staff member. Someone could be holding the flag and get unlucky enough to be in the same game as a staff member who disagrees with it, while someone else could be in the opposite situation. I don't think it should be punishable, especially if it isn't actually in the rules. If it were in the rules, then there would be nothing I can do about it, but it isn't, so any punishment is unjust. I understand that it can be considered not doing the objective, but it also can be. I think staff should not punish for this unless it manages to become an official rule. My past few posts have been a little less than constructive, so I apologize for that. I was being an a** just for the sake of it.

 

Ice Bear does agree that it shouldn't be punishable if it is not against the rules Ice Bear thought you wanted to encourage this behavior.

 

What rule is it breaking? Because I'm pretty dang sure there is no rule it is breaking. I'm pretty sure there is no rule that implies that "You must always play the objective in every Brawl game" or whatever. I personally think if any staff threatens to kick a player for not playing the objective is in a sense, abusing power. They have no valid reason or right to threaten any player in this situation as there is no official rule. Staff are supposed to enforce the rules, not personal bias. And think on this, if the staff were to kick every player that didn't always play the objective in War (or any game for that matter), there would barely be any, if any for that matter. Not everyone goes 100% in playing the objective.

tl;dr Not playing the objective is not against the rules as there is no rule supporting this argument and because of this the staff have no right to threaten players not playing the objective.

 

I don't think you read anything else on this thread
one of the main reasons war 1.0 died was because nobody played the objective, making everything repetitive and overall making people quit. not playing the objective ruins the game for many people, which is why it's against the rules even if there is no specific rule set for it. I've been told this by staff members who hold a lot more credibility than both you and corcustos so there really is no point in arguing. if anything you're just going to get the rule added to the list.

 

opinion =/= fact

oh you...

until then...

 

SMODs and mods do in fact hold more credibility then two randoms

still against the rules according to staff so there is no 'until then', try it and be punished lol

 

You obviously don't understand. I'll break it down for you.

Opinion: It's against the rules.
Fact: It's not against the rules.
Glorified Opinion: A staff member saying that it is, when it isn't.

Obviously, it's up for debate whether or not it falls under "common sense", but the common sense rule is just a scapegoat if you ask me. And yeah, you're right, regardless of how wrong a staff member may be, they're actually right because they can exercise authority. If it's listed as a rule, there's nothing to argue against, but it's not. Either staff should to stop falsely punishing people or add it as an actual rule. Both will work.