i Just dont understand how this was my fault? can someone explain?? VDM no comp?

[CmStorm 0]

https://youtu.be/_ZgilZleqo4

[SPBojo 6863]

Video is private mate  

[CmStorm 0]

 

[SPBojo 6863]

My mans just trynna avoid hitting the fence going full speed, whomst banned this mans, fire em

[CmStorm 0]

so basically your aloud to ride someone's ass ( if your being chased your only aloud to go straight) is what i get from admin

waste of time to upload and submit over easy comp for something you have no control over, just worth breaking rules now a days lmao

[milos inflated dev2 ego 4445]

3 hours ago, CmStorm said:

so basically your aloud to ride someone's ass ( if your being chased your only aloud to go straight) is what i get from admin

waste of time to upload and submit over easy comp for something you have no control over, just worth breaking rules now a days lmao

req snr admin that should be mutual at most 

as in they banned you or they didnt ban the player in the hatch if they banned u there on drugs 

[-dante- 5148]

This is what I like to call “nobody’s fault”. You can argue both sides. You turned into the hatch, but the hatch was riding your side and you ran out of room due to the rocks. Could you have turned left instead? Yes. But you clearly didn’t see him there so you aren’t at fault. On the flip side the hatchback did not initiate the contact so they also don’t get fault/banned. 

[ZimZim 258]

how tf was this a ban LOL

[-dante- 5148]

28 minutes ago, ZimZim said:

how tf was this a ban LOL

It wasnt. Lol

[N9ne 429]

12 minutes ago, -Shawn- said:

It wasnt. Lol

What the fuck is the point of the post then if he didn't get banned.......

 

 

[David Miller 653]

It wasn't a report against OP, It was a report on the hatchback.

@ CmStorm  Players aren't allowed to intentionally hit, and as a result, destroy vehicles. You did nothing wrong in the clip, and can drive evasively, all you want as long as you are not intentionally hitting people. 

The problem with the video is the intent isn't clear. In the full situation, they pull around you multiple times and try to tase you, they don't seem interested in hitting you, and with this contact, it looks like the hatchback just didn't react in time, and not like he was trying to disable you. 

[ares 393]

Mutual.. On your side you were turning right to avoiding slamming into the barricade since vans can't go over it... on his end you swerved into his pathing and he likely couldn't react on time

 

Edit: maybe I should read the comments first because @ -Shawn-  literally said the exact same thing

[-dante- 5148]

7 minutes ago, ares said:

Mutual.. On your side you were turning right to avoiding slamming into the barricade since vans can't go over it... on his end you swerved into his pathing and he likely couldn't react on time

 

Edit: maybe I should read the comments first because @ -Shawn-  literally said the exact same thing

Those 827282638 questions you’ve asked me in discord are rubbing off on ya  

[ares 393]

20 minutes ago, -Shawn- said:

Those 827282638 questions you’ve asked me in discord are rubbing off on ya  

it was only 827282637, get it right 

[silton 4173]

Obviously the hatchbacks fault. The van did a minor swerve to avoid a wall hardly a massive maneuver. The hatchbacks were trying to rob him and are driving way to close especially with the pace advantage. 

"If your intention is to collide with another vehicle for whatever reason (To pit, disable, immobilize, troll, etc.) that's fine. However, if you collide with a vehicle on purpose and because of the collision there is an explosion/death, then you may be found accountable and may be banned. You initiate these maneuvers at your own risk."

Why write the rules like this if you're just gonna make shit up in your hate. God I hate the staff team/

[Mighty 1404]

9 hours ago, braindead said:

req snr admin that should be mutual at most 

as in they banned you or they didnt ban the player in the hatch if they banned u there on drugs 

Almost had to call in the #1 lawyer in the world. @ jig

[ZimZim 258]

5 hours ago, N9ne- said:

What the fuck is the point of the post then if he didn't get banned.......

 

 

idk I am mad confused now lol

[Shocktrooper 5]

6 minutes ago, ZimZim said:

idk I am mad confused now lol

Maybe he's mad he didn't get comped I think?

[N9ne 429]

36 minutes ago, ZimZim said:

idk I am mad confused now lol

I think @ I bought olympus for 50k  should be banned for this

[johnny goose 3336]

1 minute ago, N9ne- said:

I think @ I bought olympus for 50k  should be banned for this

buddy i got more clips thatll get you done and dusted by @ Rexo

[doubleueyeceekay 611]

5 hours ago, I bought olympus for 50k said:

buddy i got more clips thatll get you done and dusted by @ Rexo

who tf is your profile picture

[johnny goose 3336]

3 hours ago, doubleueyeceekay said:

who tf is your profile picture

Femboy uk

[CmStorm 0]

@ EVERYONE imma just drive straight and crash everytime i get chased cuz you ARE NOT ALOUD TO TURN 3CM IN ANY DIRECTION 

@ silton  YOU COULDNT HAVE SAID ANY BETTER, someone with a fucking brain chirst

[The Antichrist 237]

Yeah honestly... The people doing the robbing should be held to the higher standard.  They chose the situation and have control over it.  

This type of shit is what fucks new players over, and encourages circle jerking of twats who go around robbing new players.  They had no reason to be anywhere near him if they weren't attempting to hit him.  Pit maneuvers are done 'at your own risk' because it's your choice to try it, just like driving too close to people is 'at your own risk.'   People robbing usually have the money to cover comp.  People getting robbed more often do not.  Bad call. 

At the very least, they should have been forced to comp him if avoiding a ban was the mindset.

"No fault" is not a fair and balanced take.  "No fault" just means 'fuck you' to whichever party has the least amount of money.

[The Antichrist 237]

Rules like vdm in situations like this should be applied in a way more lenient to the defender than the attacker.  The attackers have time to plan and prepare.  The defenders do not.   Defenders are more likely to panic.  They clearly had 100% control of this situation, and clearly could have won it if they let it play out naturally, but instead they chose to be wreckless and try to force the man to vdm.  A ruling like this also encourages future robbers to not use the slightest amount of caution when driving close to other players and they'll just say some bullshit like 'no fault' after destroying new player vehicle after new player vehicle.  

@ -Shawn-   Fail call.  

If you choose to rob you take on the risk.  Plan better... no charities to the failures.  If you can't afford to pay for a vdm, don't drive that close to someone.  Simple as that.