
Moderators: Suggestions helpers, Developers


And a few more reasons SHOULD be hit reasons. Trespassing (get out of my house or be killed), car jacking, and a few others.Car jacking is valid hit reason. Just as 'damaging your vehicle.' is valid reason, attempting to steal your vehicle is even worse, therefore why shouldn't it be valid?
Faraon78910 wrote:Look at this from roleplay view. X player ordered a hitman to kill you. Hitman wouldn't kill/shoot you if X player hadn't placed a hit contract. X player is the reason you're going to get hurt. Therefore, you may place hit contract on X player.Car jacking is valid? Well shit, time to hit a bunch of people!
And a few more reasons SHOULD be hit reasons. Trespassing (get out of my house or be killed), car jacking, and a few others.Car jacking is valid hit reason. Just as 'damaging your vehicle.' is valid reason, attempting to steal your vehicle is even worse, therefore why shouldn't it be valid?
Trespassing - I'd say this is valid reason as well. This is literally Pagati's 'leave base' hit system. Even some groups have had rule if you don't leave their base after warning, you may receive a hit contract. However ask admin just to make sure
I'd say every action that hurt you, is going to hurt you or attempts to hurt you is considered valid hit contract reason.

Faraon78910 wrote:Look at this from roleplay view. X player ordered a hitman to kill you. Hitman wouldn't kill/shoot you if X player hadn't placed a hit contract. X player is the reason you're going to get hurt. Therefore, you may place hit contract on X player.x player wouldnt place a hit on me if i didn't hurt him, got it ?




Hero.Dark wrote:-1 i will go with Negative! because hit back not invalid hit, and it's allowed to hit back, So i agree with faraon and karu's vote, I suggest you think before make a suggestWell it's valid for now and the reason i made this suggestion is same u saying!

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests