BnG darksiding rule and close teleport

[Abnaxus]

BnG is one of the only schemes where you can win by playing cheap and skill, the only thing that seperates lame/cheap shots is the rules.

Actually, it's the players, you shouldn't need rules to play fair and well.

[Ramone]

There are two rules in the bng rules which are wrong in my experience and opinion of bng.
First of all darksiding is stated as not being able to shot your enemy. This is incorrect.
...
Darksiding is when the player in the hide does not have any possible shots with grenade or zook.

I think this is just a misunderstanding, cause the rule says exactly the same what you are saying Chicken:
"- Darksiding is not allowed. A darkside is considered a place where you can't hit OR be hit with a nade."

If it would be more clearer it can be changed to:
"- Darksiding is not allowed. A darkside is considered a place where it's impossible for you to hit OR be hit with a nade."

You know i still think it makes much more sense to forbid to move into a position from which you can attack your opponent but he cannot attack you...

I think there's no place on a map where U can attack with a nade and cannot be attacked at the same time..

It's simple as that, I guess everyone would agree about this one, no?

Id like the close teleport rule to be define by the length of 1 grider because i think that is the distane a full power 4sec grenade falls after 1 or 2 movements.

1 length of a girder? Huuuh.. This looks too close for me, it's not even "mini-bng" it's like "micro-bng" lol
Like this?:  (see attach)

btw, shouldn't this topic be in "Schemes" page instead of "TUS Discussion" ?
(lol, there are like 4 or 5 topics with BnG rules running at the same time, maybe we could make a board just for BnG rules XD  )
"The most complexly things are usually the most simple things".. Always were, always will..

[chakkman]

Considering darksiding as not being able to hit or be hit with a nade is a completely new aspect actually Ramone. Chicken23 and others argued like it was darksiding when you can't hit your opponent/he can't hit you with a nade or zook. To me your rule makes much more sense than the nade or zook thing, as the scheme is called "BnG" and not "Bazooka" or something.

I also still wait for the explanation why it should be senseful to get your worm into a hide from which you can't attack, nobody could explain that so far... people rather trust in rules that seem to be written into stone, while in the leagues i have played i have never come along the "darksiding is considered moving in a place where you can't hit or be hit by nade/zook".

[TheKomodo]

BnG is one of the only schemes where you can win by playing cheap and skill, the only thing that seperates lame/cheap shots is the rules.

Actually, it's the players, you shouldn't need rules to play fair and well.

Actually unfortunately it's the rules, if the rules are specificly written to prevent repeat shots or hiding under cover repetitivly zooking, or throwing nothing but 3s nades and cheap 4s nades that are practically straight shots, then it wouldn't happen.

Yes, you SHOULD'NT need rules to play fair and well, but unfortunately most gamers are desperate people who would do anything to try and win a game, and I don't care what anyone says because it's true about practically every game on the planet, I play another 3 games actively online and it's all the same.

[Resonance]

I also still wait for the explanation why it should be senseful to get your worm into a hide from which you can't attack, nobody could explain that so far... people rather trust in rules that seem to be written into stone, while in the leagues i have played i have never come along the "darksiding is considered moving in a place where you can't hit or be hit by nade/zook".

There is no sense moving to a place where you can't attack, unless you intend to turn it into a hidey hole from which you can attack. There would have to be an agreement on a reasonable amount of turns to achieve this whereby it's possible for the opponent to hit you.

[chakkman]

You mean a hole like Chicken23 picked as hide in that game?

[Chicken23]

I could attack. I was bouncing lg 5's and hitting you. I did the damage. The point about the darkside rule was that you were arguing because you could not hit me easly. You were saying i was breaking the rules. I was not because i could attack you from my hide.

My argument is that is does not matter if you can hit me or not. It matters if i can't hit you. If i can't hit you then its illegal regardless of how hard it is for you to hit me. It may be considered lame or cheap but its within the rules when you teleport to a hide which you can attack from even if its harder for you to attack me. Why should i stay in a pit and let someone repeat me with bouncy 4 sec lame nades?

[TheKomodo]

I could attack. I was bouncing lg 5's and hitting you. I did the damage. The point about the darkside rule was that you were arguing because you could not hit me easly. You were saying i was breaking the rules. I was not because i could attack you from my hide.

My argument is that is does not matter if you can hit me or not. It matters if i can't hit you. If i can't hit you then its illegal regardless of how hard it is for you to hit me. It may be considered lame or cheap but its within the rules when you teleport to a hide which you can attack from even if its harder for you to attack me. Why should i stay in a pit and let someone repeat me with bouncy 4 sec lame nades?

chakk, sorry, but he's got you there, there is NOTHING you can say that can defy this...

No offense.

[chakkman]

That doesn't convince me one bit as when you take a look at ANY other scheme, rules are made to prevent players from getting theirselves into positions where their opponent can't attack them. E.g. the disallowed glitch on t17 where you port yourself on top of the map, the anti-blocking rule on roper, anti permanent block rule in shopper and so on.

I give you an example: You get yourself into a position from which you can bounce shoot a nade and you are able to hit your opponent, but hes not able to hit you, so he shoots the terrain for 5 or 6 turns to make it possible to hit you. Isn't that extremely lame? Wasn't the case with you Chicken, as i hit you (altho with big luck). Just an example of how a game could look like according to your rule.

[TheKomodo]

Yes I agree, what you are saying Chicken done, in my opinion is lame, but if you were throwing repeat 3s nades and rolling 4s nades, then I think what he done is right and pretty fair.

And this isn't about other schemes it's about BnG.

[chakkman]

Yes I agree, what you are saying Chicken done, in my opinion is lame, but if you were throwing repeat 3s nades and rolling 4s nades, then I think what he done is right and pretty fair.

Please don't turn this around man... they were 1st to accuse us of throwing lame rolling nades, we just asked if what Chicken did wasn't darksiding after they complained about our nade shots. If our shots were lame or not also is in the eye of the beholder, see for yourself if their hides didn't enforce roll shots. Seriously we were playing just like in any other league game and no1 complained about it.

[TheKomodo]

I am not turning anything round I am stating the facts that are being told in front of me, at the end of the day you were both playing like noobs so deal with it lol.

[Chicken23]

The point of the thread is about the darksiding rule. Currently its not very clear on tus because you thought my hide was illegal when it wasn't.