Lying about proven status
Back-
I don't know about making this an official rule... I forsee a lot of misunderstandings, and therefore a lot of RDM. Unless someone comes up with some masterful wording, I suggest waiting on this.
I agree on this, it would be an easily exploitable rule and would make it extremely easy to RDM. -
Being able to kill someone because you THINK they're lying is completely against the way TTT is played. You are meant to have distrust for anything people tell you, you don't just take their word for it the same way you don't shoot them in the face because you don't believe them. It doesn't award people who have perception, it awards those that have a good hunch.
I said you KNOW they are not proven not THINK, big difference. -
When can you ever be 100% sure someone is lying about being proven? They could've attacked them before hand, got shot by them or could've been across the map sniping. Also if someone does RDM someone because they "KNEW" they weren't proven how can you prove that killing them wasn't justified or vice versa?Being able to kill someone because you THINK they're lying is completely against the way TTT is played. You are meant to have distrust for anything people tell you, you don't just take their word for it the same way you don't shoot them in the face because you don't believe them. It doesn't award people who have perception, it awards those that have a good hunch.
I said you KNOW they are not proven not THINK, big difference.
I know a good amount of Sherlock Holmes on the TTT server that will use this rule to call out anyone who says they're proven just because THEY didn't see them help kill the Traitor. Having this as a rule wouldn't solve any issues, it would just create them. -
When can you ever be 100% sure someone is lying about being proven? They could've attacked them before hand, got shot by them or could've been across the map sniping. Also if someone does RDM someone because they "KNEW" they weren't proven how can you prove that killing them wasn't justified or vice versa?
-
When can you ever be 100% sure someone is lying about being proven? They could've attacked them before hand, got shot by them or could've been across the map sniping. Also if someone does RDM someone because they "KNEW" they weren't proven how can you prove that killing them wasn't justified or vice versa?
Round starts on Office. 2 people next to each other, one a traitor the other innocent. The Traitor whips out a knife and the inno deagles him in the face. The inno claims to be proven due to killing him, another traitor claims he shot at him too, the inno knows this is false since he personally took down the traitor on his own.
I have seen this happen, hell it just happened to scoobs, he whipped out his knife and I shot him straight in the face.
Edit: Leet why do you do that? -
I think this should not be changed it ruins the point of TTT short and simple.
-
Here's an example:
- T attempts to kill inno, fails.
- Inno kills T
- T kills Inno, IDs both bodies and calls themself "proven"
This happened to me today and I can't remember if I was found out during this round, but I did get one free kill and at least a few people "knowing" I was proven. But in situations like this, I think that DNA and other evidence could lead to the false proven being found out.
Basically, a false proven should, in my opinion, only be suspicious because without other evidence, I agree with the previous posts - RDM, random call outs, and other problems would ensue with false provens being killable. There are enough smart people on the server to look past false provens. -
It sounds like pretty much everyone agrees.
-
Here's an example:
- T attempts to kill inno, fails.
- Inno kills T
- T kills Inno, IDs both bodies and calls themself "proven"
I do that all the time
-
Here's an example:
- T attempts to kill inno, fails.
- Inno kills T
- T kills Inno, IDs both bodies and calls themself "proven"
I do that all the time
I try to but it doesn't happen to me that often for reasons of I suck at half my T rounds