Declined [JB] Consider non-looping taunts as AFK (1 Viewer)

[Nergal Nergalton]

As the rules currently stand, when a warden gives an order to AFK, only looping, stationary taunts (EX: Kazotsky Kick, Mann-robics) are allowed. This allows guard to kill REDs doing "non-AFK" taunts like the Schadenfraude for example. In my opinion, I feel this rule should be relaxed to allow non-looping taunts to be considered AFK. To me, it just feels unnecessarily strict and just screams nitpicking (and a good majority of BLUs don't even bother to kill REDs for doing non-looping taunts), and restricting non-looping taunts doesn't really provide any real benefit. I can't figure out for the life of me how whether or not a taunt loops is enough to determine it's status as an "AFK taunt" or "non-AFK taunt"; to me, a non-AFK taunt should only refer to taunts that actually forcibly move you, like the Conga.

I know what you would think then; lethal taunting. The warden can simply restrict lethal taunting, and even if they don't, all it takes is staying out of tauntkill range of the REDs (which is pathetically easy for most tauntkills as they require BLUs to be right up to the tauntkilling RED, meaning they have to purposely bait in order to be killed by it, and even the Heavy's finger gun taunt is easy to dodge and stay out of its range if you're actually paying attention).

As I previously said, most BLUs don't even bother to kill REDs who do stationary non-looping taunts (including lethal taunting) even when they are told to AFK, so what is the point of restricting these taunts?

 

[Kron]

Beat me to it- completely agree with this.

 

[Gale]

They just aren't afk at all, since to constantly do them you would have to retaunt and retaunt. Not to mention the increased caveit of making lethal taunts afk, and looping moving taunts? When they move you. This feels so nice that you can just allow it at the start of a round instead of confusing so many reds now.

 

[_Black]

 

[crubf]

View attachment 34307

yep exactly. so make all taunts either afk or not afk. simple

 

[crubf]

ive always thought it was rly stupid that only looping taunts were considered afk. ive seen so many ppl get caught out and confused when they see looping taunters being considered afk but they do like a laugh taunt and theyre gunned down. like a dog. restrict all of them or not imo (personally id just make all taunts considered afk, thats just me tho, i like fun)

e: obviously taunts that force move u forward wouldnt be afk. is that contradicting what i said? u could say yes if ur a weird contrarian type or you just want to pretend to be smart

 

[Nergal Nergalton]

They just aren't afk at all, since to constantly do them you would have to retaunt and retaunt. Not to mention the increased caveit of making lethal taunts afk, and looping moving taunts? When they move you. This feels so nice that you can just allow it at the start of a round instead of confusing so many reds now.

1. You still have to press your taunt key to do a stationary looping taunt, which in extreme technical terms isn't exactly "AFK." If a RED is moving during their taunt, either automatically (Conga) or by choice (Mann-robics), that's...moving away from the spot they are supposed to be AFK on. It should be easy to figure out what the difference between moving during a taunt and not moving during a taunt is.
2. Simply restrict lethal taunting. That's it. This suggestion isn't going to ban wardens from restricting lethal taunting. Even then, tauntkills are so easy to dodge, even the Pootis Pow taunt. If a BLU is dying to them, 90% of the time they're simply just not paying attention.
3. No offense, but I personally don't really understand how allowing stationary non-looping taunts to be counted as AFK is going to "confuse" REDs. A lot, and I mean a LOT, of REDs I've seen actually believe non-stationary looping taunts to be AFK and tend to complain if they are killed for it.

 

[Kron]

1. You still have to press your taunt key to do a stationary looping taunt, which in extreme technical terms isn't exactly "AFK." If a RED is moving during their taunt, either automatically (Conga) or by choice (Mann-robics), that's...moving away from the spot they are supposed to be AFK on. It should be easy to figure out what the difference between moving during a taunt and not moving during a taunt is.
2. Simply restrict lethal taunting. That's it. This suggestion isn't going to ban wardens from restricting lethal taunting. Even then, tauntkills are so easy to dodge, even the Pootis Pow taunt. If a BLU is dying to them, 90% of the time they're simply just not paying attention.
3. No offense, but I personally don't really understand how allowing stationary non-looping taunts to be counted as AFK is going to "confuse" REDs. A lot, and I mean a LOT, of REDs I've seen actually believe non-stationary looping taunts to be AFK and tend to complain if they are killed for it.

Playing a bit of the devils advocate even though I very much agree with everything you've brought up here:

If point #3 is the case then I feel as though we could have expanded that thought process to the tauntwalking suggestion brought in by _Black just yesterday. If the reds would be confused by that, why wouldn't they be confused by this?

Just reiterating I completely support this idea that all non-moving taunts should be considered AFK.

 

[CutePyro0]

I think taunts that are considered not AFK taunts but still are techically AFK for example conga should be counted so i voted yes

if blues don't like lethal taunts they can just ban them as they currently do

 

[SirKrookodile]

No thanks.
All this means is that heavies can attempt to taunt kill while afk and get away with it since it's technically afk. Like the only reason somebody would want this is to attempt taunt kills.

 

[Nergal Nergalton]

No thanks.
All this means is that heavies can attempt to taunt kill while afk and get away with it since it's technically afk. Like the only reason somebody would want this is to attempt taunt kills.

1. Say "No lethal taunting" then to restrict them.
2. I've already explained that the Heavy's finger gun taunt is easy to dodge, and most BLUs that die to them are simply not paying attention.

 

[SirKrookodile]

1. Say "No lethal taunting" then to restrict them.
2. I've already explained that the Heavy's finger gun taunt is easy to dodge, and most BLUs that die to them are simply not paying attention.

A good heavy can actually hit finger guns pretty well and land prediction shots. And it's impossible to be keenly aware of every single red at all times. Most blues die to an insane pootis pow at some point. It just overcomplicates orders by forcing a warden to say "no lethal taunting" when by all means you shouldn't have to. It's far easier for the warden to say "You may taunt.". Than having every warden to be forced to tack on "No lethal taunting" onto every afk order.

 

[Nergal Nergalton]

A good heavy can actually hit finger guns pretty well and land prediction shots. And it's impossible to be keenly aware of every single red at all times. Most blues die to an insane pootis pow at some point. It just overcomplicates orders by forcing a warden to say "no lethal taunting" when by all means you shouldn't have to. It's far easier for the warden to say "You may taunt.". Than having every warden to be forced to tack on "No lethal taunting" onto every afk order.

No offense but I don't see how saying "no lethal taunting" is going to "overcomplicate" things. It's three simple words that a lot of wardens I see say anyways even though the current AFK rule (right now) makes lethal taunting KOS. It's no different than saying "Medics no healing" and "Scouts no throwing projectiles", two things that require wardens to explicitly prohibit them to make them KOS (as the current AFK rule doesn't mention anything about them, and thus are seen as AFK unless restricted by the warden).

While I appreciate that this suggestion is getting feedback, no argument is going to convince me that it's "hard" to dodge a Heavy's finger gun taunt. If a BLU is too preoccupied with chasing another RED within relative range of a RED Heavy, they'll probably be moving in an unpredictable fashion, making it hard to land a tauntkill unless by sheer luck.

 

[CutePyro0]

"Scouts no throwing projectiles", two things that require wardens to explicitly prohibit them to make them KOS (as the current AFK rule doesn't mention anything about them, and thus are seen as AFK unless restricted by the warden).

swinging your malee is not afk this also would apply to throwing your balls as that is a manual action unlike healing which is toggle option

 

[Nergal Nergalton]

swinging your malee is not afk this also would apply to throwing your balls as that is a manual action unlike healing which is toggle option

It's more of a gray area to be honest, although I don't tend to kill ball-throwing Scouts unless they were prohibited from doing so or the ball hits a guard.

 

[ItsNotCalassic]

As much as I can try to support this, this just seems like it’ll introduce a lot of unnecessary reports of new players, because they are unaware that the laugh taunt is now considered “afk” or that I’m able to lethal taunt whenever.

Yes, you can restrict lethal taunting, but by that logic, if you want people to do nonafk taunts, just give the order to do so.

Let’s not overcomplicated well known phrases to then which they become obsolete due to new rules.

 

[Nergal Nergalton]

As much as I can try to support this, this just seems like it’ll introduce a lot of unnecessary reports of new players, because they are unaware that the laugh taunt is now considered “afk” or that I’m able to lethal taunt whenever.

Yes, you can restrict lethal taunting, but by that logic, if you want people to do nonafk taunts, just give the order to do so.

Let’s not overcomplicated well known phrases to then which they become obsolete due to new rules.

This happens with pretty much every major rulechange, in that regulars aren't gonna immediately be used to the new change, which is why we are lenient and give players time to adjust to the new rules for a week or two after it's implemented. We were able to adjust to being allowed to ghost delayers, so while I appreciate this feedback, I feel regulars would eventually get used to this too, if it were to be implemented.

 

[ItsNotCalassic]

This happens with pretty much every major rulechange, in that regulars aren't gonna immediately be used to the new change, which is why we are lenient and give players time to adjust to the new rules for a week or two after it's implemented. We were able to adjust to being allowed to ghost delayers, so while I appreciate this feedback, I feel regulars would eventually get used to this too, if it were to be implemented.

It’s less off a rule change and more of a unnecessary redefining what AFK means even further. This reminds me of the recent suggest of crouchwalking should also imply tauntwalking, when both are completely different phrases.

If I want reds to afk on the red line, they shouldn’t be able to do other taunts such as spam laugh taunt or do lethal taunts. The language of AFK shouldn’t be further changed.

 

[Bambi]

AFK means away from keyboard, if I’m doing a non looping taunt that means I’m pressing buttons on my keyboard repeatedly and not afk.

Just change the term “AFK” to something else, because at this point afk doesn't even mean “away from keyboard” anymore

 

[Dr. Meatloaf]

Idk man I feel like if we make this a rule and wardens then want to stop people from doing these taunts to prevent delay they will pretty much have to tell reds to not taunt. I think it’s unrealistic for wardens to say something like “afk freeze no doing non-looping taunts” that just seems like a weird confusing order. I don’t want to force wardens to restrict taunting so I’m voting no.