+- Halo Space Station Evolved (https://projectunsc.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) (https://projectunsc.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Player Complaints (https://projectunsc.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=36)
+---- Forum: Finished Applications (https://projectunsc.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Thread: Complaint against Garth Pawolski (/showthread.php?tid=1133)
Complaint against Garth Pawolski - Cussiek - 05-27-2019
Log screenshots attached for evidence. All times EST.
Timeline:
5/26/2019 - ~9:00PM, join HSE server as URF character Calvin Kulevar.
5/26/2019 - ~1000PM, UNSC faction conducts unannounced raid of URF Thorn.
5/26/2019 - ~1015PM, Garth Pawolski, a ranking officer, spotted engaging URF forces on Thron with a M41 SSR launcher. Hits Kulevar, taken out of round due to splash damage.
5/27/2019 - ~12:30AM, same round. G. Pawolski and other UNSC faction characters leave Bertels en masse via life boats. By now, Streltsy has respawned as ONI guard Tyrannius Burian.
5/27/2019- 12:30AM-1AM, UNSC faction characters are repeatedly denied access to ONI VT9 base. See Screenshot 0.5.
5/27/2019 - ~1AM, UNSC faction characters found in ONI base after shutters closed. The three guards move in and are demanded to surrender IMMEDIATELY UPON SITE. See screenshot 2.5. Notice that ONI Guard Sceemer was hit despite despite not firing his weapon.
5/27/2019 - 1AM-1:30AM UNSC faction - specifically G. Pawolski - proceeds to fire rockets from an M41 SSR launcher, along with small arms fire, and heavy arms at ONI forces immediately after demanding surrender. No responses given, no time given. See Screenshots 3-5.
5/27/2019 ~1:30AM. IC options exhausted, Streltsy logs Admin complaint. See Screenshot 6.
Summary:
G. Pawolski was encountered on two occasions sporting heavy weapons in a meta-gaming way. An M41 SSR launcher was used for close quarters combat because, as was quoted in Discord's Halostation server - "I mean yeah I use the rocket launcher I'm not saying it isn't busted (5/26/2017 10:31PM)" and "no big secret its stupid good (5/26/2019 10:31PM)." This was not once but twice, on two separate occasions (~1015PM 10/26/2019 and ~1:15AM 10/27/2019). Rockets were carried solely for the purpose of being 'busted' in the terms of IC damage with no other IC reason noted - no antitank purposes, no designs for antiair. This was not against heavily armored targets. This was not against covenant forces. This was against - one (1) URF regular and one (1) ONI security guard. According to the player's paraphrased reasons, it was solely for the purpose of metagaming - using overbearing weaponry known to knock players out of the round without IC justification purely to win an engagement. Therefore, I move to have the player momentarily blacklisted from UNSC roles. I won't ask for a ban but I want some punishment for using blatant, LRP metagaming to 'win the game' against other players trying to enjoy a roleplaying experience. This is poor sportsmanship, poor play style, and poor conduct.
RE: Complaint against Garth Pawolski - Karmac - 05-27-2019
I mean I just took the rocket launcher because I felt like using it that round
I think that's actually either the second or third time I've used it exclusively actually
Normally I just use the shotgun, it's not like I took it at the start of the round knowing who I'd be fighting
I simply stated on the discord that I understand it's not a very fair weapon, and talked extensively with other discord users explaining the fact
With that belief are you just going to report me for metagaming every round I pickup a rocket launcher?
sidenote: notice the part in the literal first screenshot where we ask you to surrender and it is immediately followed with your buddy dropping a grenade? I shot him because I heard him prime it, which is why it blew up
I took that as your response to my request
RE: Complaint against Garth Pawolski - Cussiek - 05-27-2019
(05-27-2019, 06:48 AM)Karmac Wrote: I mean I just took the rocket launcher because I felt like using it that round
I think that's actually either the second or third time I've used it exclusively actually
Normally I just use the shotgun, it's not like I took it at the start of the round knowing who I'd be fighting
I simply stated on the discord that I understand it's not a very fair weapon, and talked extensively with other discord users explaining the fact
With that belief are you just going to report me for metagaming every round I pickup a rocket launcher?
sidenote: notice the part in the literal first screenshot where we ask you to surrender and it is immediately followed with your buddy dropping a grenade? I shot him because I heard him prime it, which is why it blew up
Firstly: Military personnel do not get to use a rocket launcher 'because they feel like it.' Secondarily, this is an MRP server - using rocket launchers designed for anti vehicle duties against infantry when you have no reason to suspect you'll be going against vehicles is just cheesy. At the ONI base, I'm willing to cut slack because of the Warthogs, even then. You used the rockets against an infantryman twice as is shown in Screenshot 2.5. Of which, the first shot hits Screemer before he primes the grenade. Thereby meaning, he was under attack when you called of surrender.
Secondly: The number of times you've used the rocket launcher in the past is immaterial to the incident.
Thirdly: The fact you prefer using the shotgun is immaterial to the incident.
Fourthly: The fact that you acknowledge it is a weapon with extreme power only adds to the charge you used it solely for the purposes of metagaming. You weren't engaging vehicles. You weren't engaging heavy infantry. You were engaging regular infantry - of which one was a friendly.
Fifthly: I'm not going to report you for using a rocket launcher. I'm going to report you for using a rocket launcher designed for AT and AA purposes against lightly armed infantry on more than one occasion.
RE: Complaint against Garth Pawolski - Karmac - 05-27-2019
Okay so, I'm in the wrong because I used the only weapon I had on me against hostiles? Again, I didn't select it at the start of the round knowing what I'd be going up against. I don't understand how engaging hostiles with the only weapon I had, that would in fact be effective against said enemies, is me being in the wrong here.
And again, you'll note in the screenshot that immediately after the rocket is fired, he throws the grenade, which did infact explode. I know what I did and why I did it, he primed it, so I saw that as your response to my request and fired, that's all there is to it.
RE: Complaint against Garth Pawolski - Mclovin - 05-27-2019
(05-27-2019, 07:30 AM)Karmac Wrote: Okay so, I'm in the wrong because I used the only weapon I had on me against hostiles? Again, I didn't select it at the start of the round knowing what I'd be going up against. I don't understand how engaging hostiles with the only weapon I had, that would in fact be effective against said enemies, is me being in the wrong here.
And again, you'll note in the screenshot that immediately after the rocket is fired, he throws the grenade, which did infact explode. I know what I did and why I did it, he primed it, so I saw that as your response to my request and fired, that's all there is to it.
did you hack into the IWO or was there a officer to let you have the guns?
RE: Complaint against Garth Pawolski - Karmac - 05-27-2019
I'm pretty sure somebody hacked it that round, don't remember who though.
RE: Complaint against Garth Pawolski - Cussiek - 05-27-2019
(05-27-2019, 07:30 AM)Karmac Wrote: Okay so, I'm in the wrong because I used the only weapon I had on me against hostiles? Again, I didn't select it at the start of the round knowing what I'd be going up against. I don't understand how engaging hostiles with the only weapon I had, that would in fact be effective against said enemies, is me being in the wrong here.
And again, you'll note in the screenshot that immediately after the rocket is fired, he throws the grenade, which did infact explode. I know what I did and why I did it, he primed it, so I saw that as your response to my request and fired, that's all there is to it.
So you're telling me this - "I only packed a rocket launcher, and only a rocket launcher, because I didn't know what kind of enemies I'd be facing. Therefore, I didn't pack a rifle, I didn't pack a sidearm. I only packed rockets." Correct me if I'm wrong, also correct me if the logic doesn't add up. I can't understand why if you didn't know what you'd be fighting why you'd take a weapon that's niched for AT and AA duty. That sort of logic is how we got ODSTs rolling out 14.7mm sniper rifles for door-to-door ship breaches. Ultimately, this sounds like you put yourself into a situation that forced the use of a rocket launcher solely with the intention of ganking people; it's no different from people joining in as Assistants in other servers and going straight for a toolbox to swing at random people 'because there might be a traitor/ling/etc.' There is no reasonable ignorance claim there, there was no effort to pack anything but a rocket launcher because 'it's busted' in the terms of IC damage. The intention was purely meta with no character input. Furthermore, there was an approximate two hours time frame after you'd been in an engagement with URF insurrectionists and Covenant forces - again armed with light weapons - which might've told you that maybe, just maybe, you'd be fighting infantry not vehicles. Hence, why not go for a rifle and a sidearm; the armory wasn't locked, you had multiple allies you could have asked for a sidearm from; yet you refused. You decided to stick with a rocket launcher and only a rocket launcher with the expectation of fighting an enemy that'd given no evidence of heavy armor or need for a rocket launcher. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Furthermore, I know what I saw as well. What I saw, what I posted from the logs, was someone who broke into a literal X-Files location, screamed "SURRENDER NOW," immediately fired a rocket launcher at a guard with a grenade in his hand, and then defends himself by saying he heard a grenade prime. From what I saw, and what my screenshots show - you took no action to de-escalate. You took every effort to ensure that you were just outright taking people out of the round. You took every action to be an aggressor. You, with others assisting, used tools to tunnel through a secret, unknown escape passage solely because of OOC knowledge. You did not give IC considerations a second's glance as you were purely motivated to win a game.
For the sake of argument - let's say he did prime the grenade, let's say he threw the grenade first. Let's say, after being told on more than one occasion that it was a restricted location that wouldn't even allow refugees in, you weren't the aggressor. What does that change? You still put yourself into a situation that was outright meta - you still packed nothing but rockets solely to just one-hit-punch other characters out of the round. You still broke into an ONI Research base after being warned to leave verbally on more than one occasion. What changed? The core of the complaint is metagaming - which the evidence still shows you wholeheartedly doing.
As an alternative punishment request, just remove the UNSC's access to heavy weapons. If we're going to have people who can't make proper decisions when it comes to RoE, IC interactions, and IC loadout, make it for them.
RE: Complaint against Garth Pawolski - Karmac - 05-27-2019
I just don't understand where in the rules it states you can only use a weapon for the specific purpose some random person tells you it's for. This is the equivalent of reporting someone for using a shotgun to try and snipe vehicles "because that's not it's intended purpose and you're satan for trying to do so". This legitimately just looks like you're super mad that I shot you with a rocket.Â
To refute your point further, me not being the aggressor would not change the fact that one of the ONI guard was trying to make an attempt on my life, how am I in the wrong for attempting to disable them for such actions? Additionally, you seem so focused on believing I wanted to take you out of the round that you failed to notice none of the ONI guard were actually killed, we patched the both of you up after securing you and had no intention of murdering any of the three for no good reason.
I just don't think you're looking at this situation rationally and are just overly insulted by the fact I used a weapon that exists within the game, is mechanically able to be shoot at things that might not be their intended targets, and has no clearly defined rule stating I cannot use it for such purposes. You also seem so intent on believing we assaulted you for no reason other than "unga dunga didn't open gate", when we were on the run from UNSC forces, had no way off-planet, and the only nearby safe haven aka the ONI base, was filled with people willing to shoot one of our men for standing OUTSIDE the base. We had plenty of reason to break in and take over, which you could argue was not our intention, but again, we offered chances to surrender and killed no one, so I'm not sure how you could see it otherwise.
RE: Complaint against Garth Pawolski - BDpuffy420 - 05-28-2019
There no rule saying you can’t use AT on foot soldiers, however breaking into IWO to get said gear isn’t okay. This complaint shall be used in the final verdict of @Karmac appeal.