Rule question

[Noah_Hero]

I am always telling people who are not in CMD that they should wear a helmet when they want to leave base because of AWE rule number 8 "Play your role" because I always thought that this implies that a normal soldier has to be equipped with a helmet because @Amentes once explained it like this. But yesterday @Stanhope told me that not wearing a helmet in the field goes confirm with the rules because it is not clearly mentioned there.

 

So my question obviously is if I am wrong telling people that they have to wear a helmet or if it is correct to do so.

Would appreciate an official statement from the Staff-team to end this one rule discussion that way too often happens.

[Blue-958-]

Common Sense Rule, a frontline soldier SHOULD wear a helmet, many people, such as myself, will sling one because of this.

Tbf I've been domed just as many times with a helmet as without.

[Noah_Hero]

19 minutes ago, Blue-958- said:

Common Sense Rule, a frontline soldier SHOULD wear a helmet, many people, such as myself, will sling one because of this.

I think so too but that´s why I am asking since Stan is a member of the Staff-team...

(And I am not sure how "should" is meant in english but in german it is meant as "must if possible" and that´s how I also use it in english and especially when reading the rules. But I think a "must" is always the better choice for rules because it makes them undiscussable.)

[Amentes]

Protective gear in general, really.

 

Even if you are HAT and sitting two clicks out from an AO, with the way Ambient works, you're still "frontline."

 

Personally, I never take anything less than level 4 if I'm on the ground, and when I see someone die from a Small Velocity to the head while not wearing a helmet, I don't think of it as him being dead. I think of it as me losing my backup. Which is why I'm always crusading on them helmets

[Noah_Hero]

2 minutes ago, Amentes said:

Protective gear in general, really.

 

Even if you are HAT and sitting two clicks out from an AO, with the way Ambient works, you're still "frontline."

 

Personally, I never take anything less than level 4 if I'm on the ground, and when I see someone die from a Small Velocity to the head while not wearing a helmet, I don't think of it as him being dead. I think of it as me losing my backup. Which is why I'm always crusading on them helmets

As you know I am totally on your side with this but is this officially included in rule number 8 or is it just your personal "crusading"?

[Copey]

Wear a helmet.

There's your answer

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using a phone app that is really irritating because it constantly advertises itself.

 

 

[Miczils]

While we are at the topic of asking about rule clarification.

What about vortex and co splitting on AWE, i was told by different people that Vortex Pilot and Co-Pilot shouldn't split in anything bigger than a medium transport helicopter. 
But at the same time often i see either vortex 1 flying a jet and vortex 1 co flying a transport heli, or them both flying jets. 
Some people say that it's all-right if the PlatCO/ASL ask for it, some people say that Vortex shouldn't split because a co-pilot shouldn't fly something alone. 

Just in before, i know how it works in real life, i just wonder how the rules on AWE are.
 

[Noah_Hero]

31 minutes ago, Copey said:

Wear a helmet.

There's your answer

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using a phone app that is really irritating because it constantly advertises itself.

 

 

I am always wearing one but not all people do so...

And thanks for the answer. But is this an official statement from staff-team? Or to say it other: Does this OFFICIALLY means that it is implied into Rule number 8?

 

If yes I suggest to lock this topic to prevent a rule discussion.

If no I would like to have an official statement.

[Noah_Hero]

23 minutes ago, Miczils said:

While we are at the topic of asking about rule clarification.

What about vortex and co splitting on AWE, i was told by different people that Vortex Pilot and Co-Pilot shouldn't split in anything bigger than a medium transport helicopter. 
But at the same time often i see either vortex 1 flying a jet and vortex 1 co flying a transport heli, or them both flying jets. 
Some people say that it's all-right if the PlatCO/ASL ask for it, some people say that Vortex shouldn't split because a co-pilot shouldn't fly something alone. 

Just in before, i know how it works in real life, i just wonder how the rules on AWE are.
 

Vortex Pilot and Co-Pilot split as Wing-Mans for example but all of this is up to CMDs descision.

[Amentes]

Copey being one of the three people who have final say on AWE/EU#3, I think you can take that to the bank Noah.

[Noah_Hero]

14 minutes ago, Amentes said:

Copey being one of the three people who have final say on AWE/EU#3, I think you can take that to the bank Noah.

Good point.

Than I'll just copy this link for further crusading with you.

[Copey]

It's pretty simple, if you're going to be shot at, wear a helmet. If you plan on. Sitting your ass in base not going anywhere, sure wear a beret or something like that.

 

Apply common sense - and yes, I know that will be hard for some of you

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using a phone app that is really irritating because it constantly advertises itself.

 

 

[Noah_Hero]

1 minute ago, Copey said:

It's pretty simple, if you're going to be shot at, wear a helmet. If you plan on. Sitting your ass in base not going anywhere, sure wear a beret or something like that.

Thought so too but just wanted to make sure it is like this because of the conversation with Stan yesterday since he told something else.

 

2 minutes ago, Copey said:

Apply common sense - and yes, I know that will be hard for some of you

That's why I am for undiscussable rules that fit all circumstances but that'll be another thread. And the argument that then there would be too much rules is a nonsense argument in my eyes because you should expect from people that they know all rules if they want to play on a server...and if not: talk to them, warn them, kick them, ban them.

[fir_nev]

3 hours ago, Copey said:

Wear a helmet.

There's your answer

 

Bet everybody seen this before...

 

Spoiler

 

 

[Colsta]

I'll quote my answer to you on another topic.

 

21 hours ago, Colsta said:

Then you have 20 rules that nobody reads. Like before. Clarity and simplicity should suffice. If it doesn't, it falls to the staff's discretion as stated.

 

In addition to the staff's discretion, stuff like this falls under the CO's discretion.

 

As Copey said, common sense. If you want to spend more time dead than alive, be my guest, don't wear a helmet. Just keep in mind you're jeopardizing your team and others' enjoyment.

[Noah_Hero]

9 minutes ago, Colsta said:

I'll quote my answer to you on another topic.

I know that this is your answer because you yesterday postet it also as reply to something else but as I said above:

3 hours ago, Noah_Hero said:

the argument that then there would be too much rules is a nonsense argument in my eyes because you should expect from people that they know all rules if they want to play on a server...and if not: talk to them, warn them, kick them, ban them.

But as it seems that this is no option for you. Why then not start to make the rules you now have undiscussable and more clear? (Just for example add in the fact that people must wear helmets to number 8 => because as mentioned on top not even all staff-team-members know about this; change the "should"s to "must"s => this would prevent a lot of discussions; etc.)

Or is this too much off-topic again? If yes: No Problem I wanted to open a new thread for this anyways instead of talking about this here.

 

[Copey]

Okay I'm going to put this nicely.

 

The rules are fine as they are.

If people wish for every event to be thought of in the rules, tough. It isn't happening.

If people interpret should as to mean may, or can; then I will interpret staff discretion to mean kicked from server.

 

The rules are simple, they are easy to follow; and failure to display behaviour in line with the spirit of those rules means you might as well have broken them.

If people want to deploy to an AO without appropriate protection, expect an earful from me.

 

 

 

It's really quite simple.

 

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS 3t using a phone app that is really irritating because it constantly advertises itself.

 

 

 

 

[Noah_Hero]

24 minutes ago, Copey said:

The rules are fine as they are.

Fine and undiscussable is a difference but ok if you say so.

 

24 minutes ago, Copey said:

If people wish for every event to be thought of in the rules, tough. It isn't happening.

Basically you need everyday to remind someone of the rules that we now have...

 

24 minutes ago, Copey said:

If people interpret should as to mean may, or can; then I will interpret staff discretion to mean kicked from server

Nice to hear then I´ll from no on always tell you when someone does so you can kick him. (btw. I like the way how you seem to be doing rule enforcement according to this.)

 

24 minutes ago, Copey said:

The rules are simple, they are easy to follow; and failure to display behaviour in line with the spirit of those rules means you might as well have broken them.

I follow the rules. I even always have them opened when I am playing on AWE in case of being not sure about something or mainly if someone else brakes the rules to quote the rules for him. And for the displaying of wrong behaviour I even filled out a player report once in a case where someone definitly broke the rules with the intention to do so... but well nothing happened. Not even a warning was given.

 

24 minutes ago, Copey said:

If people want to deploy to an AO without appropriate protection, expect an earful from me.

Nice, will call you when I see this behaviour next time.

[Teddy]

Locking the thread before it gets out of hand/off topic as what needs to be discussed has been discussed and Copey has provided a good answer.