Exploiting Appeal

[Guest]

(mod on LOA here)

 

my opinion is that if you can't defend yourself from it (because you can't shoot through mayor windows) it shouldn't be allowed, also obviously not everything is on the rule book, but have some common sense, if you think what you are doing is ULTRA unfair to the person you are doing it to theres a chance that it is not allowed, grenades aren't supposed to do damage through walls...

 

-1 for full unban

but NEUTRAL for ban reduction

 

Even if its a shitty/unfair thing to do, the fact that a report for arguably something even worse that he did right now got denied should not make it so he gets banned, in his own words,

"If you want to change the rule that’s fine but why do I get punished for the sudden change of rule"

+1 for full unban

Edited March 25, 2023 by Guest

[1-800-Suicide]

HELLO TITSRP STAFF. 

I have personally had a conversation with the owner and founder of the server when someone killed me as mayor with grenades through the window. If i can recall he said that he didnt feel like it was bad enough to force los. This resulted in that person not being banned but it is understandable that people would think it is exploiting. However precedent dictates that it is not an exploit to throw a grenade at things like a window and the damage going through.

Thank you for the read and Silver get on wow

Edited March 25, 2023 by 1-800-Suicide

[The Horse]

1 hour ago, Rubik said:

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/284534267600568320/1089034917876355173/Garrys_Mod_x64_2023-03-24_23-55-37.mp4

 

Can someone explain what's happening here? Is he in the base below you and throwing a grenade at the ceiling? 

he is in the room under me throwing sticky grenades at the ceiling to try to kill the other person because he had a hit on them and killed me instead. so its also RDM

also id like to point out to that in his old report he said "I told Rubik to fix ziggs and what exactly what is wrong and how to fix it. He said he will fix it but I should make a bug report if he forgets. It was not my intention to throw through the wall because if I was why didn't I just throw them exactly where he was," meaning he KNEW what he was doing was wrong and thought so enough to tell the devs to change it. 

Edited March 25, 2023 by The Horse

[Tene]

9 hours ago, Drakos said:

Plus, other people have been banned for the same offence of abusing the lack of line of sight for explosives on certain areas of the map, and more than just one.

can u give an example im not very up to date but ive not really heard of anyone being punished for holding a c4 thru a wall (allowed from precedent) or abusing the lock of line of sight for explosives..

 

 waittt sooo what is exploiting here?! its an intended feature for the same reasoning silver has stated - kdog changed it to do less damage as a nerf due to complaints, instead of entirely removing the functionality, so it is an intended feature and using it in this way isn't exploiting....

 

1 hour ago, GoatNuts said:

(mod on LOA here)

 

my opinion is that if you can't defend yourself from it (because you can't shoot through mayor windows) it shouldn't be allowed, also obviously not everything is on the rule book, but have some common sense, if you think what you are doing is ULTRA unfair to the person you are doing it to theres a chance that it is not allowed, grenades aren't supposed to do damage through walls...

gas grenades do damage through walls, because its gas, which is common sense. an explosive on a thin wall should also do damage, courtesy of common sense, along with the other fact mentioned earlier...
if he used gas grenades instead, is it allowed? there's no way of defending urself against the grenade, you just have to heal, which is exactly the same as the sticky grenade, so what is the issue?


this has been allowed for a long long long time, and the only time ive ever heard someone complain was succ's forums post last year, which again, lead to a NERF, not a removal, so its an intended feature.

 

 

10 hours ago, The Horse said:

old staff don't speak for current staff.  only 2 staff in the old post are currently active. and one that approved of it and while discussing it one of them said they agree with me that this was different and exploiting. 

but if current staff haven't made the playerbase aware that a rule has been changed when their only knowledge of said 'rule' is old staff, they do speak for current staff.. completely disreguarding what old staff have said because the new staff team disagree with it isn't very smart, especially when you're punishing players over the new staff team's decision making, which hasn't been made public. If he/the playerbase have all been informed by old staff that it's allowed, they will treat it like its allowed until told otherwise. If he had been told otherwise (a verbal), he most likely would have stopped, and if he hadn't then sure I can see the decision to ban him being valid.

Yes what the current staff team says goes, and it overrides what old staff have said (sometimes), but when the playerbase isn't made aware of the new changes, you can't punish them heavily over it, and have to take the old staff's decisionmaking into account.

 

 

9 hours ago, Drakos said:

this wasn't punished heavily because of the offence, it was punished heavily because it was you. 

so it really isn't a big issue then, and is more bias than anything(?). i understand punishing harder for repeat offenders, but this isn't a repeat offense for this, and it wasn't decided upon as being an exploit until seemingly right now, so punishing heavily because it was him repeatedly offending doesn't really work when HE wasn't made aware of it being punishable until you guys banned him for it without warning. Repeat offenses should only scale if they're literally repeating the offense just to repeat the offense and keep breaking rules. If it's an entirely different scenario/context with entirely different rules that have been disagreed on for years, how can you punish him heavily for repeated offenses if its a completely different thing?

Was this handled via a sit? Because it honestly seems like Silver wasn't able to give his reasoning behind it, as a lot of his reasoning is very valid, and it's quite clearly not a transparent rule, as it's not written anywhere and the only discussions of it have lead to it simply being nerfed instead of removed, which seems valid enough reason to keep using it, as kdog could obviously remove the functionality (as he can decrease the damage it does through walls), but chose not to.
"Do not insta deny this I am very interested on why all of a sudden my punishment jumped from a verbal to a week ban with no explanation saying that my sit was "Hello you exploited you will get a week ban" "
This makes me think he was given a verbal, and behind closed doors it was agreed that it is infact an exploit so he was punished harder. If the rule isn't changed until AFTER the incident, how can you expect players to abide by the NEW rule that hasn't even been developed yet. Does this not fall under double punishment? You gave him a verbal, completely changed the rule (old staff, myself included have said in the past its allowed) and then punished him harsher. Not cool at all and definitely not how punishments should be given out from a staff team perspective. How is he meant to know he can't do it if the staff at the time hadn't even made up their mind on if he could?

Edit: How is this rdm btw its a literal raid, nothing about it is rdm
Double Edit: Why didn't you try and heal yourself until the very last few seconds? You waited until you were at 50hp, hearing him grab more sticky nades and about to throw it before even making an attempt to heal. People talking about no counters when he has 200 med syringes and armor packs in his inv, along with healing items in his hotbar which he waits until the final nade to try and use.

I am (maybe) an old staff member who has told many people that this is allowed, Silver included, because that is the mindset that both the old staff team and majority of current players who have been around for a while. The reasons provided all show that both the old staff and playerbase have a completely different view on this than the current staff team, with the playerbase only being aware of what the OLD staff have said, as the new staff hadn't made it public of their new opinions until heavily punishing someone over it, without them being aware of the new change.


 

Edited March 25, 2023 by Tene
11

[Mori]

39 minutes ago, The Horse said:

"I told Rubik to fix ziggs and what exactly what is wrong and how to fix it. He said he will fix it but I should make a bug report if he forgets. It was not my intention to throw through the wall because if I was why didn't I just throw them exactly where he was," meaning he KNEW what he was doing was wrong and thought so enough to tell the devs to change it. 

 The post I linked touched on both of the subjects Sticky grenades and the ziggs swep grenades. I am not using ziggs in this instance in fact ziggs dont even shoot grenades anymore. I used Sticky grenades in the post I linked ago and the staff members were like thats how explosion works and using explosions is not cheating.

Edited March 25, 2023 by Mori

[Crabroll]

I wouldn't call this exploiting so previous history of exploitation should not play a part of punishment here. This is moreso having the knowledge of how different weapons work in gmod and using a mechanic that is nerfed to an appropriate amount. As linked in changelogs, since it is known that nades have a radius which can damage people through walls, it was handled (even if temporarily) and not outright banned as a mechanic. If this mechanic was not outlawed initially, how can someone be punished for it and for it to be called a exploit? 

 

From the comments and what I have seen elsewhere, this ban seems more based off the fact that silver has a long history on the server and expectations placed upon him rather than the act/situation itself. I personally see this as a pretty shit thing to do as what can u do against someone throwing a grenade at your floor but not something more deserving than a warn if not just a verbal leading to more clarification to the rules itself. ---> (Edit) I contradict myself. If this was brought to attention before, and sugar has already put out a nerf, does this not imply it was "reported as exploit/something unfair" and it was changed and acknowledged? If so, how can someone be punished for doing something that it is meant to do? -> no punishment required... 

 

Also IIRC, the ziggs used to be able to be thrown THROUGH the wall and not at a wall. I think that was the "exploit" and not ziggs exploding on a wall and causing damage to radius. Ziggs and molotovs can be thrown through the wall when u kiss the wall and throw them. 

 

+1 on unban , will decide what to do about situation later

Edited March 25, 2023 by Crabroll

[�� It's Ya Boi Green ��]

If sugar just nerfed the damage on it and not fully removed it, wouldn't that be completely allowed and ok to use? Also going by the last report that was made on him and got almost insta denied, it would be fair to assume that this would be allowed. At most he should have probably been given a verbal for this or just not even talked to, since it is literally an intentional feature to the sticky grenades. +1 on unban

[toosii]

2 hours ago, It's Ya Boi Green said:

If sugar just nerfed the damage on it and not fully removed it, wouldn't that be completely allowed and ok to use? Also going by the last report that was made on him and got almost insta denied, it would be fair to assume that this would be allowed. At most he should have probably been given a verbal for this or just not even talked to, since it is literally an intentional feature to the sticky grenades. +1 on unban

Green and @Tenehave pretty much summed up what I was going to say so I don't feel the need to type out a long response.

This has been known for a while, and the feature was not removed it was just nerfed to reduce explosive damage thru walls. If this was exploiting or not allowed wouldn't it just been completely removed?

I think Silver should be unbanned, especially with what happened with the previous report. If this is something that the higher ups want to be not allowed anymore it should be added to the MOTD.

+1 for unban

 

EDIT I am not staff anymore I did not realize this lol, I will keep this response up though because regardless the points made are valid. If staff feel the need to you can remove or hide this reply, sorry

Edited March 25, 2023 by toosii

[Coconut Overflow]

Hey Silver! I was with you when this happened and watched the whole thing transpire. In my opinion, this is getting blown out of proportion. Nothing was lost or gained, (besides horse dying of course). I understand that this might be considered an exploit, but how are players supposed to know this? Heck, I didn't even know this until it happened, because it wasn't written down anywhere. If this is such a lethal problem, why wasn't it solved back when it was nerfed the first time? I'm not saying that Silver was in the right to do this, but I don't believe a week ban suffices for what he did. Especially if he was told by older staff that it was okay. We need to look at this as a way that we can improve our server, instead of punishing him for it. Education over punishment is the mindset we should always have, and this really counteracts that. MOTD needs an update on grenades/lethal equipment/raiding ents through walls.

+1 for unban
+1 for warn for rdm.

Edited March 25, 2023 by Coconut Overflow

[Crabroll]

Coconut put into words my thoughts exactly