Sorry if this topic has already been covered, but there have been people questioning the rule for the past two days, and I desired to seek out the true answers. So here goes:
REVENGE KILL: The question at hand is this, if an under 10 hour player (we will call him Bob) comes up and kills me (first kill) I get a revenge kill, correct? Now, the same player (bob) comes up and kills me again, (second kill, hes still under 10 hours) do I get a revenge kill for the second kill, and so on? Or do I only get 1 revenge kill total, period, no matter how many times "bob" kills me henceforth?
SLAMS: This is a pretty easy question. If I place a slam, and a UNDER 10 walks into my slam, and its clear that it wasn't intentionally meant to kill the under 10 player, (or any particular player for that matter, that's the beauty of slams) can I still be held liable? Example: If I place a slam at the "Big Bank" and a under 10 runs into my slam, am I liable for said homicide? My thoughts on slams is, if a player runs into a slam, its said players fault, as said player wasn't looking where they were going.
PROVOKING: If an under 10 hour player is walking behind me, following me, with a devastating weapon drawn, such as a revolver or crossbow, continuously pointing the weapon at me, do I have the same right to dispatch them as a cop would? Would it fall under "provoking"? There has been instances where an under 10 hour player was continuously DMing, it was clear that they wanted to DM, but other players had to wait for the first shot to be fired, even though the under 10 was pointing a weap at them, placing the over 10 player at a severe disadvantage.
UNDER 10 VS. UNDER 10: If two under 10 hour players are DMing, and both players are enjoying themselves, does the rule still apply? Or is it more in conjunction with the rule that COPS can DM until one of them asks the other to stop? Now obviously in this situation the rule has to be broken by the first under 10 hour player shooting the other under 10 hour player in the first place, but if nobody is complaining, can the rule be enforced on a case by case basis?
In conclusion, I fully understand that the rule is in place to keep over 10 hour players who have more money and weapons from PERM-Dming under 10s. But as of late, we have had some under 10s taking advantage of this rule. I'm sure there have been other situations that I'm not privy to, so if I am missing something, or anyone has a different scenario or question to add, please do so. As previously stated I apologize for rehashing an old topic, as its probably been covered before, but i'm not finding a thread that covers the "Under 10 Rule" 100%.
Thank you for you attention to this matter.
REVENGE KILL: The question at hand is this, if an under 10 hour player (we will call him Bob) comes up and kills me (first kill) I get a revenge kill, correct? Now, the same player (bob) comes up and kills me again, (second kill, hes still under 10 hours) do I get a revenge kill for the second kill, and so on? Or do I only get 1 revenge kill total, period, no matter how many times "bob" kills me henceforth?
SLAMS: This is a pretty easy question. If I place a slam, and a UNDER 10 walks into my slam, and its clear that it wasn't intentionally meant to kill the under 10 player, (or any particular player for that matter, that's the beauty of slams) can I still be held liable? Example: If I place a slam at the "Big Bank" and a under 10 runs into my slam, am I liable for said homicide? My thoughts on slams is, if a player runs into a slam, its said players fault, as said player wasn't looking where they were going.
PROVOKING: If an under 10 hour player is walking behind me, following me, with a devastating weapon drawn, such as a revolver or crossbow, continuously pointing the weapon at me, do I have the same right to dispatch them as a cop would? Would it fall under "provoking"? There has been instances where an under 10 hour player was continuously DMing, it was clear that they wanted to DM, but other players had to wait for the first shot to be fired, even though the under 10 was pointing a weap at them, placing the over 10 player at a severe disadvantage.
UNDER 10 VS. UNDER 10: If two under 10 hour players are DMing, and both players are enjoying themselves, does the rule still apply? Or is it more in conjunction with the rule that COPS can DM until one of them asks the other to stop? Now obviously in this situation the rule has to be broken by the first under 10 hour player shooting the other under 10 hour player in the first place, but if nobody is complaining, can the rule be enforced on a case by case basis?
In conclusion, I fully understand that the rule is in place to keep over 10 hour players who have more money and weapons from PERM-Dming under 10s. But as of late, we have had some under 10s taking advantage of this rule. I'm sure there have been other situations that I'm not privy to, so if I am missing something, or anyone has a different scenario or question to add, please do so. As previously stated I apologize for rehashing an old topic, as its probably been covered before, but i'm not finding a thread that covers the "Under 10 Rule" 100%.
Thank you for you attention to this matter.