ok rutab, i agree with that assessment of hipfiring. so if mods realized i was playing to win in that game how can it be hipfiring and how can it be a violation, that is a logical disconnect that i still cannot freaking fathom
you can shoot quickly at the start of the day with full intent to win. Most people argue that you can't have a read that early into the day, which is why they get reported for hipfiring.
I for one think lucid was right to say hipfiring isn't GT most of the time. The people doing it aren't usually playing against their win condition, they just don't care about the outcome, which fits much better in trolling
Shooting without claims is not hipfiring, at all, for the 100th time
Shooting without reads is hipfiring
A hipfire is shooting because you can, on whoever you want, imo
If you have reads, then you aren't really hipfiring, because you're aiming for the mafia
deletedover 9 years
and whether someone actually has reads or not can only be inferred based on the things they said in the game, which, to be honest, isn't something they should have to do just to make sure they get a violation. haven't you ever asked for selfvotes as clear and hammered based on your own reads, even without outting them? were you trolling the guy you hammered just because you didnt say why?
the only difference between that scenario and hipfiring is that, in that scenario, town gave you carte blanche to decide who dies without being forced to out a read, whereas hipfiring only requires the approval of the game engine. it's why people are so sore when people do it; the idea that that guy only got to decide who dies because he randomed a role upsets people because they didn't get to argue their case, or whatever, and therefore they just claim the person that shot "didnt have any reads"
deletedover 9 years
Not enough content generated to garner a read, realistically. So that isn't an excuse.
deletedover 9 years
Sheriff can easily he was just "shooting for hooker", when the game barely started.
And it works too, scum reports sheriff for hipfiring and its a no vio
I wasn't ignoring you. Preaching I suppose depending on what you mean, but regardless
Like you said hipfiring is a game action. There's no reason why a game action needs to be given it's own violation, else there should also be a "checking someone as cop 3 times in a row" etc violations. There's no reason to give hipfiring special treatment.
I think trolling does work, because a troll doesn't care about winning or losing, similarly, when people hipfirw they don't care about the outcome. If they wanted to lose, then they could be given a gamethrowing vio by definition. But I prefer looking at what's wrong with their attitude than with what they do when giving violations, and in that way, avoid giving violations to people who "hipfire" in a way that will get them the win. And I feel like, if a hipfire violation were to be made, people who hipfirw but aren't trolling or throwing will be given violations more frequently not less
Mafia is a game of deception. You need to be unpredictable or you will get rolled as either alignment. I also find mafia are a litlte less guarded d1 because they aren't usually expecting a shot so they slip more too.
u didn't know they were hooker when u shot them, u didn't care either. that's the argument against hipfiring. that's where the "without reads" part of this new-fangled definition came from
deletedover 9 years
but if you shot a pr instead, it would be considered game throwing? you had no intent to win if you just hipfire
and again, i dont think shooting without claims is game throwing , it's shooting without reads
I've shot without claims before, sometimes I hit PR, sometimes I hit mafia, but I had reads, so it's not game throwing
@Bill, but why was the gun hipfired in the first place?
deletedover 9 years
unless you believe hipfiring should be GT, which was the original thought until lucid decided he didn't want that happening because of the training comp players getting a ton of GT vios.
the site is how old and this is still an argument. it shows we need a clearer rule on this.
And yeah, Bill is on point there - it was the de facto rule by lucid. We could make a separate violation for the action of hipfiring that would have lenient punishments or those akin to trolling (which would satisfy lucid).
well, they basically don't want hipfiring to be as severe as GT but it also shouldn't fall under trolling and doesn't really make any sense, so the solution would be to come up with a violation in the middle.
trolling and gamethrowing aren't on the same scale so that's impossible
deletedover 9 years
like bronto said, lucid didnt want people who hipfired getting slapped with a 24 hour ban. trolling became the de facto hipfiring violation due to severity of punishment, not due to actually fitting into the spirit of the rule.
