| 1 |
I
forget
what
it's
called,
but
we've
had
a
game
type
for
a
long
time
where
everybody
has
full
vision
of
the
map
and
you
can't
built
antis.
.
.
It's
called
something
along
the
lines
of
mutually
assured
destruction,
after
the
principle
by
which
nations
that
have
nukes
do
not
use
them
in
fear
of
by
in
destroyed
by
retaliatory
strikes.
I
forget
the
exact
name
if
that's
not
it.
|
1 |
I
forget
what
it's
called,
but
we've
had
a
game
type
for
a
long
time
where
everybody
has
full
vision
of
the
map
and
you
can't
built
antis.
.
.
It's
called
something
along
the
lines
of
mutually
assured
destruction,
after
the
principle
by
which
nations
that
have
nukes
do
not
use
them
in
fear
of
being
destroyed
by
retaliatory
strikes.
I
forget
the
exact
name
if
that's
not
it.
|
| 3 |
Calling that "spec cheating" is weird. Cheating implies a rule is broken. There's nothing being broken if the mode is changed for the lobby and everybody is equally impacted by the change. Cheating implies that a change was made to benefit a specific player/team, most likely done in a covert fashion.
|
3 |
Calling that "spec cheating" is weird. Cheating implies a rule is broken. There's nothing being broken if the mode is changed for the lobby and everybody is equally impacted by the change. Cheating implies that a change was made to benefit a specific player/team, most likely done in a covert fashion.
|
Opinion on "no spec cheat" rule?