Machine translation used I have recently been playing on emerald as well as soltech. My main time of activity is during the overpopulated hours of emerald and I often participate in small group fights. I have a question about this server. Regarding the local rules. Number One Do not attack sandalers Number Two Do not cut the link to the main battlefield. These are not stipulated in the Terms of Use. But they seem to be recognized by many players in the emerald. And these majority ideas have pressured me and other players to follow the local rules many times. But is that right? At least one teammate of these rule-wielders has destroyed a Thunderer with a Liberator or Lightning after it almost cut the link to a warp gate, and has hurled numerous Nanites at Thunderers and players in retaliation for having their main battlefield link severed. To me, these claims are contradictory and seem too much to be true. Isn't it against the rules to enforce local rules in the first place? And it is unreasonable to expect newcomers to the server to be forced to follow the local rules when those who want the local rules to be followed are not taking the initiative to follow the local rules. There is no doubt that everyone wants to play a good game at least. However, it is not the same to force people to play in a certain way without official or written local rules. At the very least, some people want endless battles with a large number of players, while others want to fight for territory, taking and being taken. But the current small-group-emerald server seems to me to be imposing an interpretation that is convenient for me on others. At least if you are going to follow the local customs, but if you are going to fight in a way that reveals your true nature when the time comes, I want to fight the way I think is right. I would like to hear your thoughts and developments on the local rules. But I am using machine translation, so I can probably read it, but my reply is uncertain.
On Lithcorp server, 2013 onwards, NC and TR were fed up with the dominance of VS. We formed an alliance of cross faction outfits. It was unenforceable on the ground. Someone, somewhere will always shoot what they're allowed to shoot. See enemy, shoot enemy. ---- P.S. This is also why Polish pilots had a higher efficiency than RAF pilots in the same equipment. Sync the guns shorter. Aim for the man, not the plane despite it being "Not the done thing".... https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/the-polish-pilots-who-flew-in-the-battle-of-britain
May I ask how these local rules are being ordered and enforced? To lead is by example not fear. ---- So, taking the example of "Do not kill sunderers" If you're in a squad, platoon. Are these rules being ordered? Because that's perfectly acceptable. You can just leave. Are solo players being bullied into following these rules? Teamkilled, harassed, etc. This is not ok. Are these rules just shouted in /yell and everyone is "Told" to accept them or suffer?
Sorry for the long post. Many local rules are said by the enemy. I learned "don't destroy the sunderer" and "don't break the link to the main battlefield" from yell when it looked like it was going to be an even bigger mess after I broke the rule without knowing the rule in question. I can't read chat without machine translation, so I don't read what doesn't seem relevant to me. But clearly, after cutting the link that was necessary for the fight in the center and after attacking the sandalers, there was a lot of chat flow and enemy text flow, so I translated it and found that the local rules were being enforced and equivalent text flowed. Just to say no in advance, many players are typing these as a request. If that is the case, I welcome it too. However, some local rule enforcers are forcing them on the assumption that everyone knows about them. I do not intend to deny the perception that is somehow formed among users. I just don't like the fact that there are people who pretend that they have the power to enforce the rules and that if you don't follow them, you will be exposed on yell and made to feel bad about it. If you are still telling all players to follow the rules, it's still persuasive. But when I see things like being hard on the enemy team and soft on the friendly team, or when I see things like the enemy team pointing out that it doesn't matter if they attack the Sunderer or the player because they didn't do it, it doesn't add up. Also, it is not that my attacks are not severing links in overpopulated areas with harsh nanites, and since I am a solo player, there are many situations where I would not be able to do anything without the help of others. However, it is not at all fair for us to retaliate to the fullest extent possible because we failed to prevent the last stronghold before the link was broken. It was the enemy who chose not to defend, and it seems to me that there is room for improvement for the enemy who continued to fight at the central base and ignored his inferior allies. It is not the same as just blaming others for it. It is not enough effort on the part of the individual or team who blamed others. To be clear, if these factors are taken into account, the local rule from an outsider's point of view is an extremely unreasonable and overreaching act. The person imposing the local rules is not the operator, and the local rules are not the text. They are not the operator, and the local rules are not written down in the rules. It is an overzealous autonomy. Of course, the environment at Sandalar is harsh. I myself use Thunderer, so it is frustrating when I want to enjoy myself in infantry battles, but can't. Still, in my case, the local rules are imposed on me. Still, in my case, there are situations where I am not satisfied with the local rules being imposed on me. ◽️ when the defenders use Sunderer for capture point defense. (also architectural respawn) When the ◽️ installed Sunderer's anti-personnel armament is used Most people are dead weight, but there are very rare people who actively put Sunderer into defense. Such people make it virtually impossible to take if the enemy is serious. There have been many times when the timer has advanced to the halfway point, but the defending Sunderer has gone on a rampage and we have been unable to take it. It seems to be fun to spend hours taking them by virtue of not destroying them, but it is not fair for the defending Sunderers to overrun you forever, and I don't think you can progress without destroying them. And even more so, the defenders may deploy anti-personnel Sunderers and use armaments, and that is very unfair. Also, for me, the Sunderer's attacks are centered on launchers, anti-vehicle knives, and anti-vehicle grenades. I think these three are well within the range of being able to drive them back. Is it so much to be half-threatened to go all the way and retaliate with nanites? I wonder. However, the situation in the emerald is changing since I mentioned this issue on the forum. There has been an extreme increase in the number of players who will not resign to nanites most of the time and will attack one sandaler with the worst and most unreasonable attacks imaginable. I think it was not a good idea for me to be identified as a bad guy myself without any reason and said a few extra words. However, I can clearly say that it is not correct to want to expose, threaten, and demonize others based on local rules.
Primetime, unless you're in a squad, platoon and told not to, kill it. If you're bullied, teamkilled, abused in /yell with "report xxx he's cheating", etc refer to... https://help.daybreakgames.com/hc/e...hat-are-the-rules-of-conduct-in-PlanetSide-2- If anything used upon you counters the above real rules then use. https://help.daybreakgames.com/hc/e...w-do-I-report-Toxic-Behavior-in-PlanetSide-2- ---- Enjoy your game!
The concrete and clear answers you have given me will clear up my worries. I will read it carefully and make use of it in the future. Thank you once again. (clap one's hands.)
