I just recently learned from someone's post that you can shoot the zep when you are protecting for points. Now I was in a game where there was no red and I was defending, both engines were out when I joined and when I got to the zep it was almost at the base so I hit it. My reasons were these:

- no red so no game to ruin
- the zep is so close to the base I couldn't change the outcome of the game even if I only shot the zep for now on
- again zep so close to the base even if 7 morafs showed up it would have ended the same way

So is it cool to grab points that way? In this unique situation I think it's fine but where is the line between ok and traitorous. I figure if nothing else changes except the fact I get points it would be ok but you would have to have a situation pretty close to what I had to ensure that is true.

i did it one time and i got banned for 5 minutes. no one was there. same scenario. Does that still happening?

Nachoo wrote: i did it one time and i got banned for 5 minutes. no one was there. same scenario. Does that still happening?

No someone said (I thought Dent or Bellsaj but I could be wrong) that the engines get you banned but the zep is ok, just bad form since you are trying to protect it. I didn't get a ban or even a warning on the screen I shot it maybe 100 times. Would have shot it more but the guilt kept making me back off...

I'd say that was fine. I have teamed up with the red team in glitch games and shot the zep to. If the game puts a zep in any other game mode the game doesn't end until the zep is dead. The zep won't bomb either so the game doesn't end until its dead. Usually I will tell the other players to call a truce and we all go shoot it. It Just isn't cool to join a zep game that every one is playing and as soon as the engines are down stop playing the mission and kill the zep. These guys shoot reds and play the mission right until they get the message that engines are down. I won't be playing zep games any more until it is fixed.

If we start making rules for what you can or can't do when there aren't other players for whom you could wreck a game, then I think we've dropped off the edge of Reason.

Personally, when I'm alone in a game, I'd rather take the time for a landing on Mt. Duckwing, or practice inverted limbo (or crashes) through the bridge. One time in a DF mission, someone (sorry, forgot who it was!) had me diving after bombs from high altitude. Another time, we shot each other and lined up a bunch of tanks.

Or if I'm really itchin' for an adrenaline rush, I'll quit and try to get into a game that has the requisite reds and blood.

Manfred

Manfred wrote: If we start making rules for what you can or can't do when there aren't other players for whom you could wreck a game, then I think we've dropped off the edge of Reason.

Personally, when I'm alone in a game, I'd rather take the time for a landing on Mt. Duckwing, or practice inverted limbo (or crashes) through the bridge. One time in a DF mission, someone (sorry, forgot who it was!) had me diving after bombs from high altitude. Another time, we shot each other and lined up a bunch of tanks.

Or if I'm really itchin' for an adrenaline rush, I'll quit and try to get into a game that has the requisite reds and blood.

Manfred

Yeah that's what I thought and why the guilt kept stopping me...so hard it's like a point piñata and no one would care but I see your point. I do the drop and chase ever since Paul got me onto it. I have only seen it once and took some shots at it but never hit it. GreyGhost said he shot someone else's bomb and it blew so it gives me hope well if I ever see it.