Groentjuh's Server Forum Index Groentjuh's Server
 Forums of Groentjuh's server 
 CalendarCalendar   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   DownloadsDownloads 
 RegisterRegister   Log inLog in 
The time now is Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:34 pm
All times are UTC + 0
View posts since last visit
View unanswered posts
Calendar
 Forum index » General Discussion » Pulse's Server Forums
Concerns about rules
Moderators: Pulse's moderators
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topicMark the topic unreadView next topic
Page 1 of 2 [19 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Author Message
djinghis
Newbie poster

Joined: 25 Sep 2014
Posts: 523
 Concerns about rules
My assessment

^rPlayer Rules:^w

1. Players are not allowed to insult other players.
- Any kind of racism is not tolerated. Players are not allowed to whine, flame, moan or condemn other players in-game.

even refs (especially Element) are guilty of this and immune to the rules, after chat filter was introduced, their is no need to mute someone for colurful language, and this rule needs to be re-written.

2. Players are not allowed to exploit the map or the terrain.
- This includes:
* Shooting over hills with catapults, or weapons with similar characteristics, if the map design does not allow it.

This one is a doozy, not only has it not defined "hill" as a map may use props to block off an area, it has contradicted itself in that doing something in a map obviously means the design of the map allows it.

* Staying on top of a building to attack it or to gain unfair advantage by doing so. This can only be excepted if the roof of the specific building is directly and easily accessible, regardless of player race.

"regardless of player race" the races are vastly different as a beast can get to areas humans can't and humans have ridiculous advantage once on-top of buildings. This rule should not exist as for 7 years XR has had a chance to either script bump off zones or make proper collision for buildings. Hell, I've even make buildings un-climbable via map scripts.

* Avoiding map limitations using glitches, e.g. getting over grimm's wall.

Map creators should assist their maps and use the invisible blockers or script off zones.

* Abusing the terrain to get to places other players canít get to.

Ember jump seem allowed by some refs and not others.

* Utilizing damage blow-back (i.e. being hit by a behemoth) to reach otherwise unreachable areas. In case a player finds himself in such a spot he is to take the most direct route the same way back.

This just never happens, players are too tempted to take a more beneficial route, and once again - mappers need to make proper zoning.


3. Players are not allowed to take the commander seat to start a game and afterwards leave the commander seat again.

4. Players are not allowed to talk in a language except English.
- Foreign languages can only be used in global chat for no more than a few sentences. It is allowed to contact other people in your own language, afterwards please make use of /msg or spectator chat.

Constantly broken by mostly Germans, also some refs seem to think it's ok for them.

5. Players are not allowed to impersonate other players or use other playersí clan tags and/or icons.

Clan mates do this all the time, seems only pertinent when a player cries to a ref about it that this rules ever enforced (daemon).

6. Players are not allowed to camp at spawn locations with siege units.
- Camping suggests that the unit is not attacking and waiting for someone to come close to kill them.

This makes no sense, you can't camp even if you're not attacking?

- Excessively spawning as the behemoth unit, solely for defensive purposes, will be considered camping.

Due to spawn times not meaning shit anymore on pulse, and it being more beneficial to mix it up i.e spawning with blaze/temp then respawning behe when they get close - it is so easy to circumvent this rule - besides, this rule is rarely enforced devaluing the camping rule even more.

- This rule does not apply at the end of a game when going siege is practically the last way to defend.

Way too vague, for instance - a human base can be end game by simply killing a shield despite having all tech and 30 other towers - it takes about 1 minute of beasts are organized. So how does a ref evaluate what's end game?

7. Players are not allowed to switch teams after the game has started.
- This can be excepted if either team is heavily outnumbered.

8. Players are not allowed to run scripts or codes which directly or indirectly affect server performance.

How do you know anyone is running a script at any given moment? how do you prove it? how do you enforce it? is this rule just for show?


^rCommander rules:^w

9. Commanders are not allowed to place buildings to gain unfair advantage.
- E.g. building garrisons or sublairs behind walls to make players spawn on the other side.

This can be fixed with proper zoning with maps but is quite difficult, and it's one of the more destructive exploits. Basically the commander is at fault, but players should be slayed if they continue spawning at that point as they are ruining the game at that point too.


10. Commanders are not allowed to bail.

Gamers writing rules using gamer terms is just unprofessional, abandon/disconnect/account-switch/retreat-to"spec" OFC some instances commanders have a case i.e overwhelming stack where a concede vote fails, but I don't see it as a punishable offence when they are going to lose anyway and possible lose elect votes the next time they want to command - not to mention the well earned ridicule. rule needs removal and common sense can take over.

11. Commanders are not allowed to spawn as siege units.

A ref (element) made up his own rule about this, low player base means either commander can spawn siege. Obv one of the worst refs going around, but I don't see why commanders can't spawn siege "if the game design allows it" (see what I did there?) Smile

12. Commanders are not allowed to place buildings on top of players.

13. Commanders are not allowed to place buildings on top of flags.
- It is allowed to build buildings surrounding the flag.

14. Commanders are not allowed to place gateways at locations that cannot be reached by players.

This is technically impossible as a gate follows the same rules as all buildings (apart from spawn-able proximity) "they can only be built on path-able terrain i.e wherever workers can access. and wherever workers can go - players can easily. OFC the rule fails to mention the exception being you can place a gate within a cluster of buildings that the human commander needs to sac one to access.

15. Commanders are not allowed to destroy their team's technology to end a game.

I disagree, as sometimes you find the other team farming stats like going for tech when the main building is easy to finish off. also if you are trying to gather stone for a last minute sneak. Or you don't like your team wasting gold by spawning siege and having a negative effect. The mechanics are in place to handle the situation - impeach etc - but then again, where common sense is lacking - Europeans need rules.

^rConcerning Votes:^w

16. Players are not allowed to call kick votes for no reason.
- If no reason is specified after a kick vote has been started, it will be stopped.

Just another pointless rule as refs stop votes even with a reason - even a very good reason.

17. Players are allowed to call message votes as long as they do not break Rule 1.
- A message vote can be stopped by a referee without any given reason.

18. Players are allowed to call impeach votes during the warm-up stage.
- Once the game has started players should use the elect commander vote instead. However, impeach votes can still be used if it's necessary to get rid of a commander right away.

This isn't even a rule - duh.


- Referees can take action as they see fit if a newly elected commander does not wish to remain in the commander seat.


^rConcerning Referees:^w

19. Respect the referees and their decisions. In case the rules are unclear concerning any of the topics above the referees will decide how to apply them.

20. Referees will punish you if you break any of the rules or if you misbehaved in a way that might not be literally listed in the rules.

21. Referees are not allowed to use their powers solely for personal gain or to give themselves an unfair advantage over other players.

22. Referees may be kicked from the server by other referees if they do not reveal their real nickname when asked to.

Element is the biggest breaker of the rules he is supposed to enforce also it's hard to respect someone who's called me a "nigger", "hopes I get brain cancer" "raped my family" to name just a few insults. But ofc every remaining player in savage knows he has immunity from jmz for some reason.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2017 5:21 am
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
Brad Troika
Newbie poster

Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 45
Re: Concerns about rules
My assessment

Quote:
1. Players are not allowed to insult other players.
- Any kind of racism is not tolerated. Players are not allowed to whine, flame, moan or condemn other players in-game.

even refs (especially Element) are guilty of this and immune to the rules, after chat filter was introduced, their is no need to mute someone for colurful language, and this rule needs to be re-written.


Chat filter is obviously incapable of stopping racial slurs (colorful language??). Rule should be enforced.

Quote:
2. Players are not allowed to exploit the map or the terrain.
- This includes:
* Shooting over hills with catapults, or weapons with similar characteristics, if the map design does not allow it.

This one is a doozy, not only has it not defined "hill" as a map may use props to block off an area, it has contradicted itself in that doing something in a map obviously means the design of the map allows it.


When I was ref hill meant "terrain you can't walk on". Props afaik are exempt from this rule.
Quote:

* Staying on top of a building to attack it or to gain unfair advantage by doing so. This can only be excepted if the roof of the specific building is directly and easily accessible, regardless of player race.

"regardless of player race" the races are vastly different as a beast can get to areas humans can't and humans have ridiculous advantage once on-top of buildings. This rule should not exist as for 7 years XR has had a chance to either script bump off zones or make proper collision for buildings. Hell, I've even make buildings un-climbable via map scripts.


In my view if T1 can reach it without shenanigans then it should be allowed.

Quote:
* Avoiding map limitations using glitches, e.g. getting over grimm's wall.

Map creators should assist their maps and use the invisible blockers or script off zones.


Until they do the rule should stay.

Quote:
* Abusing the terrain to get to places other players canít get to.

Ember jump seem allowed by some refs and not others.


Ember jump is utilizing damage blow-back imho and shouldn't be allowed.
Quote:

* Utilizing damage blow-back (i.e. being hit by a behemoth) to reach otherwise unreachable areas. In case a player finds himself in such a spot he is to take the most direct route the same way back.

This just never happens, players are too tempted to take a more beneficial route, and once again - mappers need to make proper zoning.


This happens from time to time, and until mappers solve it, it should be a rule.

Quote:
4. Players are not allowed to talk in a language except English.
- Foreign languages can only be used in global chat for no more than a few sentences. It is allowed to contact other people in your own language, afterwards please make use of /msg or spectator chat.

Constantly broken by mostly Germans, also some refs seem to think it's ok for them.


Personally I'm not bothered, but if others are and they ask them to stop, refs should enforce.

Quote:
6. Players are not allowed to camp at spawn locations with siege units.
- Camping suggests that the unit is not attacking and waiting for someone to come close to kill them.

This makes no sense, you can't camp even if you're not attacking?


You can camp when you're attacking. If you can hit enemy buildings from spawn, you shouldn't be forced to leave spawn.

Quote:
- Excessively spawning as the behemoth unit, solely for defensive purposes, will be considered camping.

Due to spawn times not meaning shit anymore on pulse, and it being more beneficial to mix it up i.e spawning with blaze/temp then respawning behe when they get close - it is so easy to circumvent this rule - besides, this rule is rarely enforced devaluing the camping rule even more.


Excessively for me means that the same person spawns over and over again, not 3 times in a row. I agree that it's less and less enforced and I think it should be enforced more.

Quote:
- This rule does not apply at the end of a game when going siege is practically the last way to defend.

Way too vague, for instance - a human base can be end game by simply killing a shield despite having all tech and 30 other towers - it takes about 1 minute of beasts are organized. So how does a ref evaluate what's end game?


I agree.
Quote:

9. Commanders are not allowed to place buildings to gain unfair advantage.
- E.g. building garrisons or sublairs behind walls to make players spawn on the other side.

This can be fixed with proper zoning with maps but is quite difficult, and it's one of the more destructive exploits. Basically the commander is at fault, but players should be slayed if they continue spawning at that point as they are ruining the game at that point too.


I completely agree.

Quote:
10. Commanders are not allowed to bail.

Gamers writing rules using gamer terms is just unprofessional, abandon/disconnect/account-switch/retreat-to"spec" OFC some instances commanders have a case i.e overwhelming stack where a concede vote fails, but I don't see it as a punishable offence when they are going to lose anyway and possible lose elect votes the next time they want to command - not to mention the well earned ridicule. rule needs removal and common sense can take over.


Which common sense should take over? The common sense of the players who declined to concede, or the common sense of the commander who overrules them? Or the common sense of the server who elect Segea into comm?
The rule is fine, problem is that with the current state of not enough commanders it's hard to enforce without sentencing the server to 30 minutes of warm-ups.
Quote:

11. Commanders are not allowed to spawn as siege units.

A ref (element) made up his own rule about this, low player base means either commander can spawn siege. Obv one of the worst refs going around, but I don't see why commanders can't spawn siege "if the game design allows it" (see what I did there?) Smile


Element might be shit, but afaik the rule existed way before he got ref.
I would like to have a number for the "low player base" like 8 players playing.
I also think that comms should be able to spawn siege for offense, not defense.

Quote:
14. Commanders are not allowed to place gateways at locations that cannot be reached by players.

This is technically impossible as a gate follows the same rules as all buildings (apart from spawn-able proximity) "they can only be built on path-able terrain i.e wherever workers can access. and wherever workers can go - players can easily. OFC the rule fails to mention the exception being you can place a gate within a cluster of buildings that the human commander needs to sac one to access.


I agree with the second part, I don't know enough for the first part.


Quote:
15. Commanders are not allowed to destroy their team's technology to end a game.

I disagree, as sometimes you find the other team farming stats like going for tech when the main building is easy to finish off. also if you are trying to gather stone for a last minute sneak. Or you don't like your team wasting gold by spawning siege and having a negative effect. The mechanics are in place to handle the situation - impeach etc - but then again, where common sense is lacking - Europeans need rules.


Again, whose common sense? Yours or the players'?
The examples you wrote are ways to win the game, not lose the game, I haven't seen this rule ever enforced for those reasons, but you might want to change the text to be more clear.

Quote:
16. Players are not allowed to call kick votes for no reason.
- If no reason is specified after a kick vote has been started, it will be stopped.

Just another pointless rule as refs stop votes even with a reason - even a very good reason.

So the rule is fine.

Quote:
18. Players are allowed to call impeach votes during the warm-up stage.
- Once the game has started players should use the elect commander vote instead. However, impeach votes can still be used if it's necessary to get rid of a commander right away.

This isn't even a rule - duh.


Yes, it is.

Quote:
22. Referees may be kicked from the server by other referees if they do not reveal their real nickname when asked to.

Element is the biggest breaker of the rules he is supposed to enforce also it's hard to respect someone who's called me a "nigger", "hopes I get brain cancer" "raped my family" to name just a few insults. But ofc every remaining player in savage knows he has immunity from jmz for some reason.


I haven't seen element break this rule. Also the rule is fine.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2017 10:44 am
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
eLeMenT
Newbie poster


Joined: 08 Dec 2016
Posts: 93
Location: Complaints Desk
Djingshit, no one but yourself (and brad I guess) cares about what you think. However, despite the fact that you're a forum dweller, it is important to remember you have the short term memory of a dead kangaroo.

http://server.groentjuh.eu/viewtopic.php?t=959

JmZ wrote:
I would consider a script which slays comm-as-siege above a certain limit (e.g. 5v5).

I am against many scripts because the ones currently in existence are too strict (a piece of code can't reason over an action, everything matching some very simple over-matching criteria is considered actionable). So we either write better scripts than groentjuh, or we don't have them.

It is better to have a lenient script than an over-powered/over-matching one. If a script misses an action, a ref can deal with it. If a script takes action when it shouldn't have, it is too late.

_________________


PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 1:47 pm
  View user's profile Send private message    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
djinghis
Newbie poster

Joined: 25 Sep 2014
Posts: 523
Just for everyone's information, the thing that posted above has little understanding of anything regarding common sense and its words should not be taken with any seriousness.

rules are not rules until they are listed under the rules.

And brad, I'm not sure what you mean by your first point. if you have chat filter on, the racist and offensive words are masked completely, how is that not capable?

PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 2:49 pm
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
Brad Troika
Newbie poster

Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 45
Chat filter is incapable of replacing the "no racism" rule for 3 reasons:

1) Chat filter is inconvenient to use. It includes swear words alongside slurs, swear words most people would be fine with, and instead of replacing words with "###" or random characters it uses words like "holmes" or whatever making chat confusing at first and after a short learning curve still racist.
2) Chat filter is easy to circumvent by putting a dot or a space inside the slur or using msg votes or changing your nick.
3) Chat filter can't handle bigotry outside of slurs. If someone says all black people should die or that every Russian person is primitive chat filter can't handle that.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 9:59 am
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
djinghis
Newbie poster

Joined: 25 Sep 2014
Posts: 523
Quote:
even refs (especially Element) are guilty of this and immune to the rules, after chat filter was introduced, their is no need to mute someone for colurful language, and this rule needs to be re-written.


I didn't mention racism or bigotry, and I didn't mention replacing the rule - I stated "re-written". My point about the chat filter is if you "personally" are getting upset at offensive words - then use the filter. XR's biggest mistake (like many) was to make it on by default - thus ppl immediately test the shit out of it with obstrugation or w/e the word is. Like many of the rules and the loose way they're written, it leaves too much for interpretation.

eg: I said "jew" after I was killed by TRA, and immediately muted by element, now you need to ask yourself what is so offensive about the word "jew: as ppl say "you're a nazi" or "you're a Hitler" all the time without a mute. Compare the words used in the same context.

Jew = mute.
nazi = no action.

So leaving idiots to interpret the loosely written rules inevitably leads to idiotic decisions. And not to encourage bigotry or flame wars, but their are more destructive things in this game - like game ending exploits.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 12:56 pm
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
djinghis
Newbie poster

Joined: 25 Sep 2014
Posts: 523
Re: Concerns about rules
My assessment

Quote:
18. Players are allowed to call impeach votes during the warm-up stage.
- Once the game has started players should use the elect commander vote instead. However, impeach votes can still be used if it's necessary to get rid of a commander right away.

This isn't even a rule - duh.


Yes, it is.


Saying what ppl are allowed to do and not what they are not allowed to do does not define what a rule is, it's a guide or suggestion, their is no possible way you can argue this, it's not a rule. If it were a rule, then you could say "players are allowed to eat chocolate but should eat more fruit instead" - see where I'm going with this?

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 1:03 pm
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
Brad Troika
Newbie poster

Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 45
djinghis wrote:
Quote:
even refs (especially Element) are guilty of this and immune to the rules, after chat filter was introduced, their is no need to mute someone for colurful language, and this rule needs to be re-written.


I didn't mention racism or bigotry, and I didn't mention replacing the rule - I stated "re-written". My point about the chat filter is if you "personally" are getting upset at offensive words - then use the filter. XR's biggest mistake (like many) was to make it on by default - thus ppl immediately test the shit out of it with obstrugation or w/e the word is. Like many of the rules and the loose way they're written, it leaves too much for interpretation.

eg: I said "jew" after I was killed by TRA, and immediately muted by element, now you need to ask yourself what is so offensive about the word "jew: as ppl say "you're a nazi" or "you're a Hitler" all the time without a mute. Compare the words used in the same context.

Jew = mute.
nazi = no action.

So leaving idiots to interpret the loosely written rules inevitably leads to idiotic decisions. And not to encourage bigotry or flame wars, but their are more destructive things in this game - like game ending exploits.


You're right, you didn't mention racism/bigotry, and you did say re-written, now I'm just confused what the hell do you mean/want?

What's offensive about the word jew is that you identify someone's race without meaning or reason implying that it's relevant when it's not (unless the context was asking each other about their heritage, etc.)

Nazi can be an appropriate identification (albeit hyperbolic) of someone's behaviour, is your problem that you consider it an insult and therefore they should mute people who say that?

As for the wording of the rule and not being clear I would partially agree but I don't think there's a problem with interpretation. As I interpret it the rule is not a complete ban against saying anything negative to anyone but, as it describes in the second line it's against going into a temper tantrum and continuously blaming individuals, or berating team, essentially what Hugo and achilles are usually doing after losing.
As for racism, the rule is very clear.
I haven't seen this rule misinterpreted so far, what happens imho is that refs don't care, or as you said they're guilty of it, which is a problem, but the problem isn't in the wording of the rule.

As for the wording of the rule about impeachment, I really don't see a problem with it. Players can call impeach vote in warm-up, during match elect should be used instead, unless comm is deleting tech, etc..
I also haven't seen a problem with refs misinterpreting it.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 3:16 pm
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
djinghis
Newbie poster

Joined: 25 Sep 2014
Posts: 523
"Nazi can be an appropriate identification (albeit hyperbolic) of someone's behaviour"

If you think associating someone with mass genocide is appropriate and somehow more acceptable than associating one with a peaceful people and religion, then I guess I'm wasting my time trying to convince you. I'm sure Jewish ppl would prefer to be called Jew rather than nazi - wouldn't you agree? - or maybe you don't care what they think.
By context, eg: out of context, spur of the moment, out of the blue. the context of the insult was that it was unexpected and unrelated to any previous dialogue. Muting someone for calling someone a jew and I tested him over the next few matches by calling random ppl nazis and hitler without consequence.

It's the kind of twitter reaction Trump would have, but to be fair, Donald Trump has Aspergers.

And like I said before, rule 18. is not a rule, suggestions belong elsewhere.

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:25 am
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
Brad Troika
Newbie poster

Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 45
I'm not gonna go into more deeply into whether nazi or jew is a worse insult because it's off-topic, the rule is quite clear about it and I agree with it. Nazi might be an insult, but calling someone a jew (without specific contexts) is bigotry.
If you want to discuss it further I'm sure you'll find me in game.

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 5:49 am
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
djinghis
Newbie poster

Joined: 25 Sep 2014
Posts: 523
Player Rules:

1. Players are not allowed to insult other players.
- Any kind of racism is not tolerated. Players are not allowed to whine, flame, moan or condemn other players in-game.


1. Continual and persistent Racism, Sexism, Ageism and Religious Intolerance and Vilification in chat and/or naming will result in a mute, this is especially unacceptable when a player is trying to bypass the existing chat filter with contextually understandable wording i.e replacing letters with numbers or symbols. Furthermore, a player with clan tags/icons/banners or profile pictures deemed inappropriate will be required to change account or deleted said content, and if this condition is not met, they will be kicked from the server.


I've thought about a reduction in the rule to make it easy for the current refs, as a lot of them have reading difficulty, but then I thought about the areas not even in the rules at all - that needed to be added. This is what I believe the rule should say, and whats in bold is obv important and in red is the punishment - as these rules lack consequence.

Let me know what's missing


PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 11:37 am
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
Trigardon
Newbie poster

Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 372
djinghis proposing rules he's going to break anyway.
_________________


PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:29 pm
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
djinghis
Newbie poster

Joined: 25 Sep 2014
Posts: 523
Re: Concerns about rules
My assessment

Brad Troika wrote:


Quote:
2. Players are not allowed to exploit the map or the terrain.
- This includes:
* Shooting over hills with catapults, or weapons with similar characteristics, if the map design does not allow it.

This one is a doozy, not only has it not defined "hill" as a map may use props to block off an area, it has contradicted itself in that doing something in a map obviously means the design of the map allows it.


When I was ref hill meant "terrain you can't walk on". Props afaik are exempt from this rule.


This is what I'm talking about, "afaik". you especially as a ref should know and players obv need to know. But you say "terrain you can walk on" if you can walk on terrain - how is that an exploit of terrain? surely walking is not a crime Smile
The wording of this rule is so bad it's hard to look at it and improve it, so the best bet is to start fresh.

This should really be a stop-gap until proper map admins are introduced and can regulate proper anti-exploit maps. Maps are actually not that difficult to fix, it takes little time with a bit of thought eg: http://server.groentjuh.eu/viewtopic.php?t=613

2. Players are not allowed to exploit the map or the terrain.
- This includes:
* Shooting over hills with catapults, or weapons with similar characteristics, if the map design does not allow it.


2. Players are not allowed to use catapult or other trajectory weapons to shoot over terrain or built up areas that are not traversable. An exception to this rule is shooting over destructible objects ie. Grimm walls. Continual efforts to exploit in this manner will result in that player being slain. If the opposing team loses buildings as a result, a referee may compensate the lost resources (stone/gold).

This I feel covers cause and effect and eliminates the vagueness of "map design".

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:13 am
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
djinghis
Newbie poster

Joined: 25 Sep 2014
Posts: 523
Re: Concerns about rules
My assessment

Quote:
6. Players are not allowed to camp at spawn locations with siege units.
- Camping suggests that the unit is not attacking and waiting for someone to come close to kill them.

This makes no sense, you can't camp even if you're not attacking?

- Excessively spawning as the behemoth unit, solely for defensive purposes, will be considered camping.

Due to spawn times not meaning shit anymore on pulse, and it being more beneficial to mix it up i.e spawning with blaze/temp then respawning behe when they get close - it is so easy to circumvent this rule - besides, this rule is rarely enforced devaluing the camping rule even more.

- This rule does not apply at the end of a game when going siege is practically the last way to defend.

Way too vague, for instance - a human base can be end game by simply killing a shield despite having all tech and 30 other towers - it takes about 1 minute of beasts are organized. So how does a ref evaluate what's end game?


6. Players who excessively re-spawn as a siege unit of either race around spawning areas will be considered camping and slayed if a warning via chat from a referee is not adhered to.

* Eliminates the "end game" nonsense exception that is impossible to decipher
* Included all siege units. Camping is more of a problem with ballista and summoner in actual fact, now that XR have ruined behemoth.

* This also means that camping spawn flags is acceptable as you can't enter "re-spawn" flags, and I feel that spawning the biggest and best units at flags to defend them is part of the game. And yes, lots of players have double standards when it comes to this, they complain and yet do the same thing. And I guess adding to the flag issue is jmz spawn times or lack of, as you can kill a behe and that player can spawn again before you cap the flag.

I don't believe in this rule at all as it is so easy to get away with, I've camped full games while refs are around without them even noticing or caring. If a team or majority of a team decides to camp, they inevitably lose, besides, the rabid whores are the ones that cry about camping the most I've noticed, and they still refuse to change their tactics and use ranged weapons to deal with it. As for the behe camping, it's a matter of using behemoth to your advantage, nerfed a little in 1.1 where they introduced some retarded rock scattering effect that stunned you and reduced the physics of behe blocking, but still possible to use them as a transport hub.

CounterStrike had a nice measure of dealing with campers, a referee was able to beacon said camper so that all stealth was null, and they became easy targets. It could be an easy to implement feature in savage with another marker and a msg "you have been marked due to your camping" essentially marked until said player dies as obv respawning shouldn't remove the marker. The marker could be 3 times larger for example and only visible to the camper and the opposing team and ofc not interfering with existing markers.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2017 6:50 am
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
Brad Troika
Newbie poster

Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 45
djinghis wrote:
1. Continual and persistent Racism, Sexism, Ageism and Religious Intolerance and Vilification in chat and/or naming will result in a mute, this is especially unacceptable when a player is trying to bypass the existing chat filter with contextually understandable wording i.e replacing letters with numbers or symbols. Furthermore, a player with clan tags/icons/banners or profile pictures deemed inappropriate will be required to change account or deleted said content, and if this condition is not met, they will be kicked from the server.

Seems like a strange change from the original. Insults and berating should be put into the "continual and persistent" group while racism, sexism, etc. should be outright banned.
djinghis wrote:
2. Players are not allowed to use catapult or other trajectory weapons to shoot over terrain or built up areas that are not traversable. An exception to this rule is shooting over destructible objects ie. Grimm walls. Continual efforts to exploit in this manner will result in that player being slain. If the opposing team loses buildings as a result, a referee may compensate the lost resources (stone/gold).

In general I agree that it's a better phrasing of the original, but it misses one thing: the non-traversable part only applies to terrain, not objects. (like grimms walls or other scenery)
djinghis wrote:

6. Players who excessively re-spawn as a siege unit of either race around spawning areas will be considered camping and slayed if a warning via chat from a referee is not adhered to.

Your version permits camping and only punishes excessive spawning. While I agree with some of your points about countering camping the point of banning camping is that it's not fun to play against, it's frustrating and it's an unfair advantage (especially with behemoth). Right now I definitely prefer the current rule, even with the nonsensical "end-game" exception.
Quote:
...it is so easy to get away with, I've camped full games while refs are around without them even noticing or caring.

While I really appreciate that there's a discussion about the rules, and you made some good points, I think the problem with the current situation is not in refs misinterpreting vague rules. The problems are not enough refs, refs not caring or refs not knowing their own rules.

Considering that neither jmz or any of the refs decided to comment on any of your proposals or corrected either of us I think that proves my point.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 2:05 pm
  View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail    Mark this post and the followings unread Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 2 [19 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topicMark the topic unreadView next topic
 Forum index » General Discussion » Pulse's Server Forums
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

[ Time: 0.0837s ][ Queries: 18 (0.0045s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]