Uploaded April 2017 | Updated September 2026, 9 hours ago
Do you follow a code of ethics in Rust? In this video, I try to do two things. I first offer a framework for understanding why the Rust community considers certain tactics to be unsporting, unethical, or cheap. I also give you my analysis of why it seems like there is a widespread hypocrisy surrounding the discussion of ethics in the Rust community.
Some players are honest rogues (like me) and really follow no system of ethics. They do what they want and do not complain when others do what they want. It seems like most players do consider some tactics to be unsporting, though.
Generally, any strategy that gives a low skilled player an advantage over high skilled players will often be called cheap. The five strategies that people in the community complain about the most are:
1) Killing Nakeds
2) Roof Camping
3) Door Camping
4) Zerging
5) Offline Raiding
The reason why so many in the community see these tactics as cheap is because they allow bad players to defeat good players.
That's generally the framework for Rust ethics, but there does seem to be a pervasive hypocrisy in the community. For example, I was having a discussion with someone who is good at PVP and likes to roam in a trio and he was trying to convince me that killing solos and nakeds is fine, but that zerging and roof camping is not. What it really came down to was that this guy is fine with any unfair Rust tactic that is good for roaming in a trio and against any unfair Rust tactic that is bad for roaming in a trio.
I am not suggesting that it is not possible to make an argument for why killing nakeds is OK but not zerging, but it does seem like most Rust players are not bothered with trying to be consistent-- they just want people to follow the standards that are best for their playstyle.
What are your thoughts on Rust ethics? Is anybody able to make an argument for why one unfair tactic is fine but not another?
Do you follow a code of ethics in Rust? In this video, I try to do two things. I first offer a framework for understanding why the Rust community considers certain tactics to be unsporting, unethical, or cheap. I also give you my analysis of why it seems like there is a widespread hypocrisy surrounding the discussion of ethics in the Rust community.
Some players are honest rogues (like me) and really follow no system of ethics. They do what they want and do not complain when others do what they want. It seems like most players do consider some tactics to be unsporting, though.
Generally, any strategy that gives a low skilled player an advantage over high skilled players will often be called cheap. The five strategies that people in the community complain about the most are:
1) Killing Nakeds
2) Roof Camping
3) Door Camping
4) Zerging
5) Offline Raiding
The reason why so many in the community see these tactics as cheap is because they allow bad players to defeat good players.
That's generally the framework for Rust ethics, but there does seem to be a pervasive hypocrisy in the community. For example, I was having a discussion with someone who is good at PVP and likes to roam in a trio and he was trying to convince me that killing solos and nakeds is fine, but that zerging and roof camping is not. What it really came down to was that this guy is fine with any unfair Rust tactic that is good for roaming in a trio and against any unfair Rust tactic that is bad for roaming in a trio.
I am not suggesting that it is not possible to make an argument for why killing nakeds is OK but not zerging, but it does seem like most Rust players are not bothered with trying to be consistent-- they just want people to follow the standards that are best for their playstyle.
What are your thoughts on Rust ethics? Is anybody able to make an argument for why one unfair tactic is fine but not another?
