Yeah man, fuck tha police! :p

Although really, it's not so much an issue with authority as it is being wary of giving authority to random people based on a dice roll. If you've played TTT enough I'm sure you're fully aware of the average intelligence of the player base. Giving the detectives enough power and special gadgets to make them become randomly selected "junior admins" means that every idiot you play with will be able to easily fuck up your game (and get away with it) at some point or another.

Just the other day I was in the same room as a detective and a bunch of other innocents who were doing nothing, and out of the blue the detective just started using his shotgun to pick off random people around him. All innocents. But nobody was stopping him, because he was the detective. Luckily, his abuse of that power resulted in him getting banned next round for RDMing. However, if he had been doing this abuse by using some special gadgets that allowed him to slow, disarm, or in other ways mess with players without killing them, then he would have been much harder to deal with, not to mention that improper use of such gadgets would be seen as not as big of a deal as blatant RDMing (although it would be equally annoying for the people he does it to). And I'm sure that would end up happening WAY more than detectives RDMing, for the aforementioned reasons. That's why I support the current decision about detective tools.

Ajunk: ask your doctor about Lamictal.

Except that normally when someone says that to you, you can instantly shoot them in the forehead and 9 times out of 10 it will be a traitor, if not just a dumb ass innocent who deserved it anyway. Now that detectives have been added, a lot of players who get that role like to abuse the power that comes with it and can get away with making such ridiculous demands as "drop your guns or I'll kill you" or "stay with this crowd or I'll kill you," and the rest of the innocents are expected to back him with whatever he does. Adding manacles would just add another way for detectives to fuck with people. Especially considering that most of the people who use it on you are going to forget about you or just leave you like that because it's funny.

I think you'll have to find another way to act out your BDSM fantasies, Qloos.

Personally I think it would make sense to replace the HUGE with the AK. For one, pretty much nobody uses the HUGE unless its the only gun they can find, they have a recoil control script, or they just haven't used it yet. Also, since the players are supposed to be a bunch of terrorists, it would make more sense for them to have AK's lying around than a big support weapon, which doesn't really have much of a place in an assassination game anyway.

It might be fair to increase the drawing time, but making it anything but one-hit-kill would make it completely useless.

Would be nice if that info was more easily accessible to the more "slow" admins... I've lost count of how many times I've seen traitors (including myself) get slayed or banned for "RDMing" when the round isn't over yet.

I like the game the way it is, therefore I'm terrible at it, and therefore I should not offer input that differs from what's already been said? Wow... not only was that a personal attack that completely uncalled for, it's pretty flawed logic and says more about you than about me. More like you're butt-hurt about someone disagreeing with your idea, and instead of coming up with a valid counter-argument, you try to neutralize his credibility by making an assumption (completely unrelated) about... his computer playing skills.

I know that you only wanted there to be 1 or 2 detectives. I knew that when I wrote the post. So I still stand by what I said. Having a bastion of innocence doesn't add more tension and paranoia, it adds a beacon of certainty that this game has been lacking - which was a huge part of what made it unique. Killing traitors and getting tested prove innocence, of course, but there are always those players who weren't around to see you get tested, or didn't see you kill a traitor and weren't convinced just by seeing the "inspected" message. And if they accuse you, you'll have to wonder if it's because they're traitors or if they were just totally out of it the whole round. If there's one player who gets to be an unquestionable beacon of integrity, the creepiness is gone and all innocents will be expected to take his side, even if he's shooting other innocents.

Additionally, having a designated detective player will even further encourage "dead-beat" gameplay. There will be many rounds in which the whole server is following around the detective everywhere he goes, whether he likes it or not, and so the round just keeps dragging on and goes nowhere because nobody will want to leave the big crowd (and if a traitor leaves to go snipe or plant a C4, you'll immediately know why that guy is leaving). You wont be able to live out your fantasy of luring away the detective and tricking him into checking a corpse so you can shoot him (which I do to innocents all the time). Everyone will follow him, wherever he gets lured, and whatever happens to him will be known right away. The whole game will CENTER on the detective.

Also, if you've played TTT lately, you might notice that the ratio of innocent wins to traitor wins these days is around 4:1. The question is, do you really think this is a time where it should be made even easier for the innocents? I challenge you to answer that without using more childish insults.

I think having ANY players who are confirmed, undeniably innocent right from the get-go would ruin the essence of TTT. When you're innocent, it says "Who can you trust, and who is out to fill you with bullets?" If the first part of that question has an answer, then half the mystique is gone and so is the gameplay. It's fun when all of the innocents distrust each other and sometimes end up killing each other out of paranoia, or isolating themselves and then getting killed by a traitor where nobody is around to see. Having standoffs where multiple people are pointing their guns at each other, not knowing who to expect, is intense, exhilerating, and unique to TTT's gameplay. Do you really want to take that away?

Also keep in mind what average players are most likely to do as detectives. It will probably promote shitty gameplay. People will abuse their detective status, and make the whole rounds center around worshiping them. They'll then feel comfortable fucking with people and shooting at people who they don't really expect, because anyone who shoots back at them will immediately be an assumed traitor or RDMer. People will also make a strategy out of ass-kissing whoever the detectives are, which will severely alter the overall tone of the game.

TTT is also filled with those uncertain moments where you see two people shooting at each other and don't know what to do... you don't know which one to shoot, because there's a 50/50 chance you're either killing a traitor or aiding a traitor. You could try and figure out which one you should help, or you could wait till it ends, and see if the survivor inspects the corpse, runs away, or turns to shoot you. Whereas if a detective is shooting at someone, it's always obvious which one you should help. Obvious = not TTT!

So they perma-banned you for killing innocents when you were a traitor?

Wow. Hooray for servers that are run by people who don't know how the game works.

I'm glad you finally see the light about this issue, Xbye.

I've gotten a lot of my friends interested in TTT, and even when I explain the gamemode to people who don't have Gmod they still find it interesting. However, after playing it for a few months, we can all agree that this game's biggest flaw is the fact that it's a Garrys Mod gamemode. The average intelligence and maturity levels of Garrys Mod players really hurt it. Ontop of that, the psychological nature of this game requires a certain amount of emotional maturity that a lot of kids don't yet have. A large chunk of mainstream Gmod players are the guys with low self esteem who fancy their intelligence as their best quality, and are also very insecure about it.

When one of those guys plays as a traitor in TTT, and you kill him after letting him shoot first, it's not that big of a deal: he lost a gun fight; it's fair. But if you figure him out without him noticing, and you're clever enough to kill him without warning him first, you've just burned his soul. In his world, to let it go and accept it as a fair defeat would be to admit that he was outsmarted by a stranger (even if no one actually thinks that). And so then he tries to save his underdeveloped ego by finding ways to call foul, and trying to make up new rules in hopes that other players will make the game easier for him by dumbing themselves down to his level, instead of just allowing himself to spend more time playing the game and learning about the psychological aspect.

Unfortunately, a lot of those children have ass-kissed their way into becoming admins, and thus those rules are now official on many TTT servers.

And thus, the term RDM was invented. Not to be confused with "rdm" (which stands for "random deathmatch," or killing people indiscriminately as an innocent), "RDM" stands for "killing a traitor after figuring him out without him noticing, and not warning him or letting him get the first shot off before you eliminate him. Because I'm an admin (or friends with an admin, or just a sore loser) and thus you're not allowed to make me lose without my warning or consent!"

Exactly! I'm glad that the guy who actually made this mod can understand. As someone said earlier, real RDMers are obvious enough that you can figure them out without requiring a witch hunt and a bitch-fest that lasts the better part of the following round. If the only guy who claims you RDMed him is the traitor, then that alone doesn't make you an RDMer. More likely it means the dead traitor is Xbye a sore loser. That's really all there is to it. And yes, it's true that sometimes RDMers get lucky and kill traitors, and yes it's true that being a traitor and getting killed within 15 seconds of the round starting is really frustrating. What I'm asking is that those kills do not be officially recognized by admins as RDMs, in order to cut down on the bitching, and stop making every innocent feel like they're required to be pussies until it's their turn to be traitor. In other words, let the whiners whine all they want but let their complaints fall on deaf ears, with their complaints being answered with something along the lines of "No, you were a traitor and he was an innocent. Save the bitching for when you get killed by one of your own." If an innocent kills another innocent, then they can try and work out whether it was a paranoia kill, an accident, or an RDM. It works well if when a traitor is killed by an innocent, it's not open to official discussion whether that innocent broke a rule by killing him. I liked tGB's idea as a replacement term...call it "kinda lame" or "lucky kill." But don't suggest that someone needs to be punished for winning. When you play Counter-Strike, do you tell the admins to kick the terrorists for planting the bomb without reasonable suspicion?

The funny (yet sad) part is that nowadays, people seem to cry RDM only when they get killed as traitors. The new definition of RDM is "a traitor being killed by an innocent who is not a regular or admin of the server, and not liking it."

What's all this shit about "proof" and "evidence?" TTT isn't about American police officers in a small town patrolling around and being completely unaware that there is a murderer dressed as one of them. TTT is about a group of terrorists who know that there are traitors among them and want to kill the traitors before they get killed. You're not civilized, professional and lawful men. You're a bunch of paranoid bad guys who put their self preservation as their highest priority, and you don't have time to give your buddies the benefit of the doubt because you already know that some of them are out to get you! You shouldn't have to hesitate before shooting someone whom you're sure is about to shoot you, because you're more worried about dying than wrongfully killing a teammate! When we're with a friendly crowd and we play the game that way, it's much more fun.

Honestly, some of the most fun times I've had on TTT were late at night when there were less than 10 people on and no admins. Or if there were admins, they were the cool ones who know the difference between an RDMer and a crafty innocent, and can appreciate people making occasional mistakes, all because they actually like this gamemode for what it is and know how to make it fun, and they don't suffer from severe emotional problems like certain... other people we know.

I don't think a sit out vote would work, because, as someone else already mentioned, it would be greatly abused and people would use it on EVERYONE who kills them. I think the game mechanics are fine the way they are, and I don't think any alteration of them would be necessary or even useful to combat the RDM issue we are discussing. The main problem is the players, but more specifically, the ones who enforce the rules on the servers (or try to).

The other day, as I was playing, I discovered another side effect of the problem we are discussing. There was a guy on a server who was just killing people randomly. He'd walk up to people and just shoot them in the head, and it almost seemed like he was a traitor, except that he killed traitors too. He killed more innocents than traitors. In other words, he was actually a real RDMer. However, when I started telling him why he shouldn't do that, and how he could get banned for that, a whole bunch of other people just exploded and started screaming at me for crying RDM "every time" I got killed as a traitor (and I wasn't even a traitor that round). That's right: The term "RDM" has been falsely used so much, and people have falsely cried wolf so much, that now the real RDMers mostly get ignored because people have gotten too used to the fact that when people cry RDM, it's because they failed as traitors and want the winner to be punished (and 99% of the time, that is the case).

Like I said, the problem is in the players, not the game design. I was playing on one of the TDR servers earlier, and for a lot of the players (mainly the popular kids, AKA "regulars"), every single time they die as traitors they will say something like "I'm gonna go get the admin" or "that was such an RDM." In fact, there have already been two incidents in which I've been temporarily banned from a TDR server because I killed a traitor who just so happened to be one of the popular kids of the group, so then he went and bitched up a storm about it to an admin, used "being a regular" as leverage for his credibility, and got me banned for "RDMing" based on his word alone. It was a 5 minute ban, but still pretty damn stupid and shows that there is a serious problem with the way things are now (by the way, if anyone ever encounters any douchebags by the names of MidKnight, Mr. Fuckles, [nL]proxE or Megatron, please feel free to give them a smack).

Aside from that, I've noticed that many admins (on all servers, unfortunately) tend to abuse their powers of "enforcing" the RDM rule, and use it solely as a means of getting revenge on the people who skillfully and stealthily defeat them when they are traitors: in one case, a traitor went straight to calling me an RDMer when I killed him 10 minutes into the round, and even though multiple people backed me up, he said "well this time, the butthurt is an admin" and basically forced me to spend the better part of the next round convincing him how I knew he was the traitor. This is where this game mode is heading. This is a great game, but these people with these rules are going to turn TTT into a game like jailbreak or roleplay where the players have to spend more time arguing about kills than actually playing.

Well hey, I was just on the TDR server a few minutes ago, I killed one traitor, and some random other guy started screaming at me over the voice com about how it was "obviously an RDM," I asked him if he was even there, and how he knows, and when he failed to give a good answer, I told everyone that he's obviously a traitor too, and guess what? Someone else killed him and it just so happened that he was! Later on, someone else tried to kill me because he saw me inspecting a corpse so I shot back and won...except this time it happened to be an innocent instead of a traitor. So then I got banned with the message "broseidon you need a break to think about how to not rdm."

Seriously, what is with the maturity and average intelligence levels on this server? I killed one traitor, outed another one, then fought back against an RDMer and I got banned, and I don't even know by who (most likely one or both of the dead traitors were butthurt and bitched about me to an admin who just joined, and then he made a stupid decision based on their word alone). For fucks sake, I wasn't even warned...it literally came out of nowhere. I guess it's a crime to be good at this game as an innocent. Apparently only traitors are allowed to enjoy the game, and innocents are supposed to be like prey animals who just waddle around and wait to get killed.

Another important point to bring up is how you people are overusing and abusing the acronym "RDM" to the point of it losing its meaning. Say to yourself out loud what "RDM" stands for. Most importantly, keep in mind what the "R" stands for.

When an innocent kills a traitor based on intuition or sincere belief that the person is a traitor, it is NOT random. Even if the traitor expresses that he isn't satisfied that he made enough mistakes to deserve it, it's still anything but random. It's not an RDM, and the person who did that is not an RDMer. I understand that it can be frustrating to have your plan unexpectedly fail, but placing skilled (or even lucky) intuitive players into the same class as minges and griefers is really low, and just screams "sore loser."

And I must say, Harry's poker analogy really hits home. How fun would poker be if nobody was allowed to look at the other players' faces, and everything anyone said was relayed to the other players through a soulless text-to-speech program?

Edit: And how fun would poker be if whenever someone said "Call it" and won, the players immediately broke out into a huge argument about whether or not the winner had sufficient evidence to call it, accused him of being a "random better" and lectured him about how horrible and destructive poker would be if people were allowed to incorporate perception, intuition and other human elements into their playing?

Actually, so far it doesn't seem like any of the servers have been doing anything wrong. All of the admins I've encountered seem fine and only use their powers to deal with the most obvious mingiest DMers. I mean to warn about a very small but very loud vocal minority that only plays TTT because they need an FPS in which they get to shoot people without being shot first, and spend the whole game just waiting for their turn to be traitor. These people don't care for the mental and social aspect of the game and I can already tell they seem to have made quite a presence on the forums.

As far as "rules" and "fun" goes, think of this:

Scenario 1
There are eight innocents and two traitors. Right at the beginning, Traitor1 starts to follow Frank as he goes through buildings and down streets. Frank becomes wary of this, and decides to go into a dark alley to see if Traitor1 will follow. He does, and Frank kills him, then IDs the body and announces to the server that he just killed a traitor. Meanwhile, other people are still getting into groups and searching around, and sometimes accusing each other. Traitor 2 snipes someone, and the body is found. Frank is feeling like he's on a roll, so he shoots another guy who he thinks was Traitor 2. A small crowd goes to inspect the body and they find out that he was an innocent. Frank made a mistake based on paranoia mixed with overconfidence. A player named Joe starts saying that it must be Frank, and that he didn't really kill a traitor early on, and some other reasons. The rest of the crowd is also very paranoid, and they end up gunning down Frank. Then they realize he was innocent, and the blame is then switched to Joe; now everyone is saying that he is the traitor and that's why he "tricked" everyone into killing Frank. So a big shoot out occurs. A lot of people die, but it turns out they were right: Joe was the second traitor.

Scenario 2
There are eight innocents and two traitors. It was established early on (partially by the butthurt Traitor 1 from the previous scenario) that anyone who kills anyone is an RDMer, even if they kill a traitor, unless they have reasons that conform to the template of proof. Traitor1 is following Frank through corridors and up staircases and it starts to get really obvious, but Frank knows of the new rules so all he can do is ask Traitor1 why he's doing it and tell people that Traitor1 is following him. He then goes into a dark room to see if Traitor1 will follow him there, and he does, but Frank is still not allowed to shoot Traitor1, so instead Traitor1 gets the first shot off on Frank and gets an easy kill. Frank then gets to sit out for about 15 minutes while everyone else does nothing but talk to each other, yell at each other, and throw accusations at each other while awkwardly jumping/dancing around. But none of their manually induced paranoia is actually being acted upon, because that's against the rules. Aside from the traitors killing a few stragglers, nothing happens among that big group of innocents for a really long time, because everyone knows that they aren't allowed to shoot traitors unless they see them kill people, use traitor weapons, or do other obvious traitor things, and neither of the traitors are dumb enough to be seen doing that infront of innocents, so the round goes on forever. The traitors basically have it really easy and it's a total no-brainer, but at the same time, they don't get to experience the joy of tricking innocents into killing each other because those innocents know that they'll get banned if they allow deception and perception to be part of the game.

I understand, my post was pretty long so you probably didn't read the whole thing.

Eeny, keep in mind that if someone is shooting everyone who is damaged and everyone who is the least bit suspicious, obviously they would be killing lots of innocents as well, and they should be getting kicked for that (if they continue to do so after being warned, of course). Notice that I never said we should be nicer to innocents who kill other innocents.

Where in my post did I glorify "taking a wild guess?" That certainly isn't what I meant. I talked a lot about perception and intuition, but I can't see any part where I said that it's also cool to just shoot random people hoping that one of them will be the traitor (like I said, that is already considered RDMing and should still be treated as such). And can you quote the part where I said I shot a guy just because he was injured? It doesn't look like I forgot to mention that I also gave him plenty of time to explain himself before I made a judgment.

I'm just saying that I think players shouldn't be forced to explain themselves for winning, no matter how lucky or unexpected it seems. Unless you're talking about something like multiple desert eagle headshots through a wall from across the map.

As of yesterday, some of the people playing this gamemode (which I've been liking A LOT, due to its uniqueness and its emphasis on the darker sides of human communication) have been trying to impose this crazy concept that traitors can be RDMed. Instead of arguing with all of them ingame, I'm going to offer my 2 cents here.

Let me tell you guys something: Being an innocent and killing other innocents as if it's a deathmatch game is RDM. If you are a traitor, and an innocent kills you, it should NOT be considered an RDM. If you are not satisfied by the ease at which your plan failed, that doesn't make it an RDM. If it comes as a surprise when you get killed, that does not make it an RDM. If an innocent kills you, and you can't think of any way that he found you out, that doesn't make it an RDM.

Let's say you're running across a field and suddenly you get sniped in the head. Or you're running down a hall, you turn a corner and a guy shoots you in the face. You think "Oh wow, that totally came out of nowhere, how could he have known? What a lucky bastard. I feel really frustrated, and in my blind fit of rage and disbelief, I'm going to assume that he's just some idiot who's shooting at random people and just so happened to hit a traitor."

Maybe you're right. He might have just been doing that. Or maybe he was outside of the building in the dark when he saw you burn that body, and waited for you to get far away before he took the shot because he knew that your shotgun would beat his rifle up close. Maybe he looked in a window earlier and saw you holding a silenced pistol, but couldn't get you from where he was so he didn't kill you right then and there, but decided to do so next time he saw you. Maybe he was outside and heard the sound of a Mach10 firing, and didn't see the announcement of a corpse being identified. Then he saw you run out with a Mach10. And instead of shooting you right away, he snuck in to where you just were, saw that you were running away from an unidentified body, but he lost track of you because you were already gone. Then he saw you somewhere else 5 minutes later and took the shot. Either way, give him the benefit of the doubt! You can express frustration, and you can ask how he figured it out, but don't immediately go straight to throwing out accusations and overusing the term "RDM" to the point of meaninglessness!

What makes this gamemode exhilarating, interesting and truly unique is that it's a game of perception and deception. And the players who excel at it are the ones who have gotten good at both, and know how to use it all when they are traitors and innocents.

There are ways that traitors can give themselves away besides just being seen killing someone, or being seen with a traitor weapon. Keep in mind that other people can see you in a way that you don't see yourself, and for those of you using mics, your voice also sounds different to other people than it does inside your head. Maybe you were overzealously accusing other people of being traitors, and at a certain point, it got a bit too obvious. Or you started yelling that you were being shot at by someone who was standing right next to me in a room doing nothing. Maybe someone listened to your voice for a long time, and intuitively picked up on it through your patterns of speech. You might not be as good at lying as you think you are. Which brings up another point of what makes this gamemode amazing: it's the only game that forces EVERYONE who plays it to be evil. You aren't just playing as a stealth class in a game. You actually have to lie to other humans. You have to deceive them. You have to create illusions, you have to manipulate them, and you have to be GOOD at it! You have to make sure that your deception is better than someone else's perception. Also, keep in mind that innocent players can be deceptive too: Sometimes it pays to go attack a traitor without previously announcing your suspicion.

One time, I saw a guy come around the street corner and he was wounded. I hadn't seen any bodies yet. I asked him why he was wounded (it was early in the round and no traitors had been called out yet). He said something along the lines of "I just walked in the...there were these...they uh..." basically, he was tripping over his own words and having a really hard time making something up on the spot. I let him talk for a little while longer, then I shot him dead before he could do it to me, and examined his body and guess what? He was a traitor. THEN I found the unidentified bodies later. But I got screamed at for doing an "RDM" because I didn't first talk to him for 2 minutes and then bend over a corpse and give him a chance to "cleverly" shoot me in the back of the head. I knew at the time that there was a chance of me being wrong, that that adds even more to the excitement: the uncertainty, and the risk you take with every shot you fire. You might misjudge and shoot the wrong guy, or you might hesitate and get shot by the guy you were suspicious of.

There are people who think that they are the only ones allowed to have fun, who fail to accept defeat, and when they lose, they take it as a direct attack on their souls and sincerely believe that they have been wronged and that the winner should be punished. Of course, everyone wants to think that they have the perfect plan, that they are masters of deception, that there is no way that they could fairly lose, and if they do, someone is breaking a rule and deserves to be banned. Server owners, please be wary that some of them might try to ass-kiss their way into becoming admins (and that DOES sometimes happen).

This is game requires using parts of your brain that no other game does. But there are already people who are trying to take that away, who want to make rules that suppress those elements so everyone must dumb themselves down. I've seen people literally tell others that they should get banned if they kill a traitor without "evidence" or "proof." What proof? You mean I have to find your fingerprints and record a fraps video of you killing someone, then send that video to an admin before I'm allowed to hunt you down and kill you? Or you want me to explain exactly how I knew it was you, and convince you to your satisfaction that it conformed to your template of "reasonable suspicion" while you argue with me about it, and in the process we inevitably ruin the game for everyone because now everyone is required to spend more time arguing than playing and having fun. I urge all present and future admins of this game's servers to please not require any players to do this. Many great gamemodes have been ruined this exact way, and many of you know exactly which ones. Don't let it happen to this one. Not this time.