|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257448 is a reply to message #257400] |
Sat, 05 May 2007 14:02   |
 |
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| Kanezor wrote on Sat, 05 May 2007 08:54 |
You, sir, fail.
You fail at understanding the common reasonings behind playing in the same room:
- Some people are not allowed to have computers in their bedrooms (eg, two underage siblings, etc)
- Some rooms are shared by multiple people (eg, dorms)
- Practicality reasons might prohibit the computers from behing in separate rooms (wireless access points are very finicky, some rooms have a lot more screen glare, etc)
|
None of that justifies why those players should be allowed to choose their team when the general gaming populace are not.
Once again, Westwood specifically designed there to be an option whereby you can choose your team. It's called a clan game - the game you yourself said on teamspeak are "stupid". Maybe that's because your opponents would have a fair, equal choice too, instead of just yourself.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257479 is a reply to message #257310] |
Sat, 05 May 2007 17:53 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7431
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Also, not all of us are teenagers. I don't have to set up my computer in my master bedroom because we have a separate bedroom set up as an office. We have three workstations which are used at least once a week for 3 people to play Renegade simultaneously. We have also been known to set up a 4th computer in here to play.
Most of these questions are ones that should be answered by the committee put together to balance the ladder. I am trying to figure out why sometimes you can go in-game and no one's ladder rankings are there. There is also an important update that Silent Kane wants to release which fixes two rather important ladder-related bugs (names truncated at 9 characters and wrong map reported). It is important to me to have a rather fair ladder because I am still expecting any day now to receive a big box from EA with prizes to give out for the ladder.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257642 is a reply to message #257608] |
Sun, 06 May 2007 23:27 |
 |
Goztow
Messages: 9745
Registered: March 2005
Location: Belgium
Karma: 14
|
General (5 Stars)
Goztoe |
|
|
| gamemodding wrote on Mon, 07 May 2007 01:01 |
Not all teenagers only have a family computer.
For the ladder a formulae (as you well know) needs to be figured out. The way i would do it is:
Look at how much repairing the person has done.
Look at how much damage the person has done (to building, vehicles and people)
Look at how many people this person has killed.
Look at how many buildings/vehicles this person has destroyed.
Look at how many mines the player has disarmed.
^^All these are easily possible in the FDS server side.
Then, if any of those numbers are much bigger than the rest. the player shouldn't get very many points. If it is evenly spread out, the player should get a nice amount of points.
|
Let's not get back on this formulae in a public topic yet again. Your reasoning doesn't work: someone repairing arts a wholme game is more useful than someone that changes his task all game long anyway.
You can find me in The KOSs2 (TK2) discord while I'm playing. Feel free to come and say hi! TK2 discord
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257817 is a reply to message #257642] |
Tue, 08 May 2007 05:49 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
The solution is obvious, I think - enforce it manually. Presumably the ladder will have a place where players can report cheaters and the like (hands up if you want another Keetxx, lol) and admin(s) specifically devoted to dealing with them. Post screenshots/logs of someone teamchanging, admins review it and dish out a flat penalty of, say, -500 or -1000 (as long as it's more than you're ever likely to get from a standard game)
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257820 is a reply to message #257449] |
Tue, 08 May 2007 06:58 |
 |
Crusader
Messages: 319
Registered: February 2007
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| the17doctor wrote on Sat, 05 May 2007 17:06 |
Also, if you could chose your team, alot of people would chose NOD on maps where there is no base defences...
|
Yes, but sometimes there are people who are dedicated to only one team. When I say dedicated, they hate the other side. I am one of those people...I am Nod by default but I don't get to be Nod on every map.
I know it's tough for me to be GDI on Field cuz I love my Light tank in that map. But I don't fuss about it...sometimes I get frustrated when that happens (when I spawn as GDI on any map) but I don't complain.
If that is annoying, I leave the game. Also, before entering a game, check to see how many players are on each team. I jump right in if Nod has less players cuz that guarantees that I spawn as Nod.
IMO, teamchanging is a nasty business and regulations must be made to control it and eventually stop the practice unless it's for special circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257837 is a reply to message #257820] |
Tue, 08 May 2007 11:31 |
JPNOD
Messages: 807
Registered: April 2004
Location: Area 51
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| IronBalls wrote on Tue, 08 May 2007 09:58 |
| the17doctor wrote on Sat, 05 May 2007 17:06 |
Also, if you could chose your team, alot of people would chose NOD on maps where there is no base defences...
|
Yes, but sometimes there are people who are dedicated to only one team. When I say dedicated, they hate the other side. I am one of those people...I am Nod by default but I don't get to be Nod on every map.
I know it's tough for me to be GDI on Field cuz I love my Light tank in that map. But I don't fuss about it...sometimes I get frustrated when that happens (when I spawn as GDI on any map) but I don't complain.
If that is annoying, I leave the game. Also, before entering a game, check to see how many players are on each team. I jump right in if Nod has less players cuz that guarantees that I spawn as Nod.
IMO, teamchanging is a nasty business and regulations must be made to control it and eventually stop the practice unless it's for special circumstances.
|
The idea of picking your alliance for the game = awesome, but I don't think it should be and can be enforced in ladder servers.
Con's
People pick there side which all there buddys are on (stacked teams anyone)
Pro's
Loyal to the brotherhood of nob
One ranked one on nob and one on gdi
I think they shouldn't have added the option of "preffered side"
Because it doesn't work? or its not noticable and being Nod would be awesome. Plus you could get a rank 1 for Nod and GDI.. at the other hand in terms of ladder you had this already WOL ( Overall rank 1 and ranked 1 nod and gdi combined most pts would be rank 1
Either way I would like to see a testout of this, doubt it ever happens thoug, maybe a good concept for renegade 2
WOL nick: JPNOD
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257841 is a reply to message #257817] |
Tue, 08 May 2007 11:47 |
JPNOD
Messages: 807
Registered: April 2004
Location: Area 51
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| MaidenTy1 wrote on Tue, 08 May 2007 08:49 |
The solution is obvious, I think - enforce it manually. Presumably the ladder will have a place where players can report cheaters and the like (hands up if you want another Keetxx, lol) and admin(s) specifically devoted to dealing with them. Post screenshots/logs of someone teamchanging, admins review it and dish out a flat penalty of, say, -500 or -1000 (as long as it's more than you're ever likely to get from a standard game)
|
Me and Lurker used to teamstack but we just did it because we enjoy playing on the same team, and can pull of teamwork others cant.
I have seen abuse by not just players but alot of mods aswell.. If the ladder wants to become serious bussines again then it shouldnt be just the people that "'teamstack" or teamchange but also the mods that kick for repairing/ flame apc. Because these things alter the gameplay aswell which makes another team win. WOL ladder went downwards after 2003 anyways.. when people got mod rights people started kicking just to win for there own selfish desire.
I prefer the old days were you needed to shout in teamchat to get
a rush going and show that as a "worthypointwhore" that not you could just pointwhore but also could lead a rush with teched arty's or apc's and nukes. And convince your team that experience after playing countless of games payed off afterall.
Now its more the kicking if someone doesn't join a rush or if someone on the other side has a mod and the others dont.
WOL nick: JPNOD
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257899 is a reply to message #257841] |
Tue, 08 May 2007 23:51 |
|
Goztow
Messages: 9745
Registered: March 2005
Location: Belgium
Karma: 14
|
General (5 Stars)
Goztoe |
|
|
| JPNOD wrote on Tue, 08 May 2007 20:47 |
| MaidenTy1 wrote on Tue, 08 May 2007 08:49 |
The solution is obvious, I think - enforce it manually. Presumably the ladder will have a place where players can report cheaters and the like (hands up if you want another Keetxx, lol) and admin(s) specifically devoted to dealing with them. Post screenshots/logs of someone teamchanging, admins review it and dish out a flat penalty of, say, -500 or -1000 (as long as it's more than you're ever likely to get from a standard game)
|
Me and Lurker used to teamstack but we just did it because we enjoy playing on the same team, and can pull of teamwork others cant.
I have seen abuse by not just players but alot of mods aswell.. If the ladder wants to become serious bussines again then it shouldnt be just the people that "'teamstack" or teamchange but also the mods that kick for repairing/ flame apc. Because these things alter the gameplay aswell which makes another team win. WOL ladder went downwards after 2003 anyways.. when people got mod rights people started kicking just to win for there own selfish desire.
I prefer the old days were you needed to shout in teamchat to get
a rush going and show that as a "worthypointwhore" that not you could just pointwhore but also could lead a rush with teched arty's or apc's and nukes. And convince your team that experience after playing countless of games payed off afterall.
Now its more the kicking if someone doesn't join a rush or if someone on the other side has a mod and the others dont.
|
Sorry but that depends what server you play on. I've never seen one of our mods kick someone because they didn't join a rush. I have seen people kicked for obvious teamhampering, though, after explaining what they did wrong.
You can find me in The KOSs2 (TK2) discord while I'm playing. Feel free to come and say hi! TK2 discord
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257934 is a reply to message #257928] |
Wed, 09 May 2007 07:30 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
Fastconn used to be the most prime example of kicking people who didn't do what the moderators wanted. There was a time when I'd agree with it, now I don't unless they're intentionally hampering. It all comes back to the point I'm making in the first place: it's a public server, thus: teams are random. if you want choice of teammates, play a clangame, because that's what a clan game is.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
[Updated on: Wed, 09 May 2007 07:30] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: An opinion piece - in regard to the public-server ladder [message #257962 is a reply to message #257958] |
Wed, 09 May 2007 13:41 |
 |
futura83
Messages: 1285
Registered: July 2006
Location: England
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Viva la Resistance! |
|
|
| Blazer wrote on Wed, 09 May 2007 19:54 |
It sounds like the best solution is to make it so that you can only change teams within the first 2 minutes of a game. After that, if you change teams, you should get NO ladder points.
Implementing this would be tricky but not impossible, it would probably require jonwil adding a new console command via scripts.dll, that would toggle a players ladder-points accumulation - This way regulation bots can set a specific player(s) ladder points to zero.
It may also be possible with the code that SK wrote, so that it has a console command to simply flag a player, and once flagged it would report them with zero points to the ladder server.
|
But should you do it so that it adds the points they have accumulated prior to that change?
This is a signature. Reading this is wasting your time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
.
