Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2019-08-20, 23:44
Sign in to follow this  

Ban Appeal -CML-Norway

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Link to the source of punishment (report/post):  


Why the verdict is not fair: Whilst the invalid kill is for the most part valid. I feel that the Invalid Kill - (Ruleplayed) is not, in this case I believe that Invalid Kill - (Firefight) is a much more valid verdict. My reasoning behind this is that the OP took over 15 seconds to even attempt to comply, along with that it was in darkness. The first thing he did was use the maginifque emote upon coming out of cover which from the distance I was at with my Red Dot M4 looks very similar to a reload animation. Along with the fact that even after we initiated and the OP claimed he was trying to get his friend to comply, they kept moving away from us with their weapons drawn. In this situation I took a chance to fire after a clear and valid initiation in which the OP did not comply until well after the allotted time. Along with this the OP's friend up until the moment I executed very clearly had no intention on complying. This is no different from someone taking a chance and shooting someone with their weapon out in the middle of an active firefight, both people took a chance, but in the invalid kill firefight verdict, the person at fault never gave the victim any chances. In this situation I gave the person plenty of chances. The first was when he over heard my conversation and attempted to run. But I decided to wait and give him roleplay before initiating, but instead he ran. The second was when I told the two other men with him that they were free to leave and they did so, neither of them were harmed. The third chance was when I gave my demands, yet he hesitated for way to long, did not stop running, and still had his weapon out. In my opinion what I did constitutes a firefight, the minute the OP and his ally did not comply, it turned into a firefight making this a (Firefight) Invalid Kill. Along with this, I could also make the argument, that when he ran out from behind the tree he made the wrong hand gesture, as seen in this report 

If someone makes the same hand gesture after being initiated on, it isn't my fault that the target messed up and made an error and I kill him. While I could make the decision to wait and shoot after, at this point in time what I knew was this. We initiated on two men, who went none compliant, kept their weapons out and were backpedaling away. When shots started going out, I saw both people sprint behind a tree with weapons out with the man with the SCAR consistently peaking for a shot. When the OP runs out from behind the tree and immediately does the wrong emote that looks extremely similar to a reload animation, by simply looking at the precedent set by many other reports taking the risk is can be placed as two things. It isn't my fault he made a mistake, or it was in the middle of a firefight and is equivalent to a mis-ID. 

Additional statements/comments explaining your point of view: In conclusion, I feel that the 10 points 3 day ban was over-zealous in this case. While it is definitely true I should've given the OP more time, as I stated in my POV on the report my game froze up from the mass amount of fire and the large amount of people in close proximity, which led to my lag firing as soon as he stepped out from behind the tree and made the wrong emote.

My lag can be proven from the time at which the hit logs connect,

(03:21:28 | Player "Jacob Nguyen" (DEAD) [HP: 0] hit by Player "Vitaliy Makarovich" into Lungs(48) for 34 damage (Bullet_556x45) with M4-A1 from 45.0202 meters

03:21:28 | Player "Jacob Nguyen" (DEAD) [HP: 0] hit by Player "Vitaliy Makarovich" into Torso(1) for 34 damage (Bullet_556x45) with M4-A1 from 45.0202 meters

03:21:28 | Player "Jacob Nguyen" (DEAD) [HP: 0] hit by Player "Vitaliy Makarovich" into Torso(25) for 34 damage (Bullet_556x45) with M4-A1 from 45.0202 meters

03:21:28 | Player "Jacob Nguyen" [HP: 20.6879] hit by Player "Vitaliy Makarovich" into LeftArm(29) for 34 damage (Bullet_556x45) with M4-A1 from 45.0202 meters

03:21:28 | Player "Jacob Nguyen" [HP: 31.9079] hit by Player "Vitaliy Makarovich" into LeftArm(21) for 34 damage (Bullet_556x45) with M4-A1 from 45.0202 meters)

It doesn't seem possible for a M4 spray from 45.020 meters to have 5 rounds connect on one target all at the same time without any misses and all hit the upper chest at the exact same time. This can be shown in Laroches video as well, where you can see that all 5 rounds seemingly hit him at the exact same time. This is only seen when one of the two players is lagging substantially, which I was. Furthering my earlier point that by the time that he stepped out from the tree and made the wrong animation after non-complying, I mis-ID'd his initial animation. Before he was in the surrender animation, which in my opinion constitutes a Invalid Kill (Firefight) verdict rather than an Invalid Kill (Roleplayed) verdict which is often attributed to non-tense situation such as an invalid execution, where both parties are not under fire. And the offending party had plenty of time to chose to do the right thing. In this scenario, I made a split second decision to engage a target that to my knowledge still had the intention to No-Comply based of his movements, the speed of which he left cover, and his attitude leading up to the initiation. This is no different than someone in the middle of a firefight in Stary Sobor who shoots someone approaching behind his friends with his weapon drawn in the middle of a firefight. In both scenarios, the target is in a location where shots are being exchanged. The target had a choice to either leave, comply, or put both their hands up. And in both scenarios, lives on both sides are at risk.

What would you like to achieve with this appeal: Have the Invalid Kill (Roleplayed) replaced with Invalid Kill (Firefight), along with having 5 of the ten points removed. The three day ban is fair enough, however having that changed to a 2 day is alright with me.

What could you have done better?: In this situation I definitely could've waited till I was directly in danger instead of working of the instinct to protect myself and teammates. When I opened fire before lagging I was running from cover to cover, and from what I saw was the up until that very moment non-compliant OP running from out behind a tree turning to his right towards me and severson and doing the magnificent emote which looks exactly like a reload from more than 10m away. If I had focused more on being reactionary rather than proactive this situation wouldn't have occurred, and I understand now that while firefights are stressful, especially with that volume of fire, and not having radio contact with any of the people with you. It is up to me to police when and where I shoot, I just wish that I hadn't have lagged at that moment, and taken more time to identify exactly what the persons intent was when the ran from behind the tree just like in the case of a Mis-ID Firefight.

Edited by -CML-NorWayy
Forgot a sentence

Share this post

Link to post

Hello @-CML-NorWayy, sorry it took so long to get to your appeal.

Another group of staff members has reviewed the report again and agreed with the original verdict. The bottom line is that you killed a complying hostage, we understand the circumstances: we understand the latency caused by the firefight and we understand why the other party may have been mistaken as refusing to comply, and acknowledge these facts. However, we deemed that you and your party started firing too fast, making this kill invalid on these grounds alone; your plea for this kill to be commuted from Invalid Kill (Roleplayed) as Invalid Kill (Firefight) will be denied on the ground that no firefight was happening at the time, considering that the OP's party did not start firing back. It is the initiating party's job to make sure that the initiation is clear and unambiguous, and their responsibility to take care of any compliant hostage.

Appeal denied: Points remain.

Signed by: @Pontiff, @Banshee & @Samti

Share this post

Link to post
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...