Rule Clarity

[Toddd 67]

To start off I would like this situation to be more clear in the rules.

Situation: I advert Raid, someone is in range to kill me. They are in a party of the base that I am currently raiding. Since they are in a party I kill them because they do not have to advert counter if they are in said party. Which warrants this rule "You may kill the owner(s) of base/CPs and or people who are interfering/countering." Also, I am not sure if this is entirely correct but since they are in a party wouldn't it also be considered "their" base. Which warrants this rule "You may kill the owner of the base you are raiding/CP if they are in the raid area."

I believe that I was in the right for killing them since they do not have to advert counter and since they had the ability to kill me if I started raiding.

These rules need to be more clear considering no one knows what "raid area" means. I believe the rule should state "You may kill the owner of the base you are raiding/CP if they" have the potential to kill you. I believe the other rules should state You may kill the owner(s) of base/CPs and or people who are interfering/countering" or have the potential to interfere/counter. These may not be full-proof but it's a start.(edited)

 

 

 

NEW

 

5 minutes ago, Brianoo said:

To start off I would like this situation to be more clear in the rules.

Situation: I advert Raid, someone is in range to kill me. They are in a party of the base that I am currently raiding. Since they are in a party I kill them because they do not have to advert counter if they are in said party. Which warrants this rule "You may kill the owner(s) of base/CPs and or people who are interfering/countering." Also, I am not sure if this is entirely correct but since they are in a party wouldn't it also be considered "their" base. Which warrants this rule "You may kill the owner of the base you are raiding/CP if they are in the raid area."

I believe that I was in the right for killing them since they do not have to advert counter and since they had the ability to kill me if I started raiding.

These rules need to be more clear considering no one knows what "raid area" means. I believe the rule should state "You may kill the owner of the base you are raiding/CP if they" have the potential to kill you. I believe the other rules should state You may kill the owner(s) of base/CPs and or people who are interfering/countering" or have the potential to interfere/counter. These may not be full-proof but it's a start.
 

Signed: RazerBlade

 

 

 

NEW

 

 

[aidanpoppas123 512]

-1

 

I don't really see a need to change it to what you're saying. Saying you can kill them if they have the potential to kill you doesn't really clear anything up, it seems more confusing. The whole "have a potential to" thing could be taken in so many ways and nobody would really know what to do in that situation. They could make the raid area more clear, but other then that I don't think this suggestion should be implemented. 

[eXg IPL4YG4MES 204]

Anyone that has the ability to counter has the potential to kill the raider, so that wouldn’t work. 

Edited June 7, 2021 by Celestialitus
Grammar :/

[Shin_Tsukimi 2,246]

Denied.

Raid area is already within the rules, use common sense on this sort of thing.

A good way to determine is if they're close to the base or not. The road is not close, the other side of the sidewalk is not close, but if they're on the sidewalk running towards the base going right for it then yes, you can prolly shoot them.

Edited July 4, 2021 by Shin_Tsukimi