+- VadaVaka (https://vadavaka.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Gamers Corner (https://vadavaka.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Forum: Half-Life (https://vadavaka.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+---- Forum: Counter Strike (https://vadavaka.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=20)
+---- Thread: SERVER REFORMS (/showthread.php?tid=1208)
Pages:
1
2
SERVER REFORMS - Beastie - 02-24-2004
TIME HAS COME...
to modify a few things on the CS server.
While most of us are having a great time doing what we do, we do need to address some issues and reform our policies.
Why is this? Because right now we have no boundaries, no rules. Admins are each enforcing their own version of what 'should be' on the server. Some get kicked or harassed for sniping while others do so for hours. Some players whine all night and day, and even admins are complaining out loud now and again!
We can certainly maintain friendly play and still all like eachother, but we need to come to some common understanding. We need to decide on some key rules right now, and abide by them to the end. Admins need to be precise and consistent in how they handle the various problems we face in day to day play. And we ALL need to whine just a little bit less. I will take first accountability.
Please read the following 3 propositions, and reply with a short post telling us which one you prefer. We don't need a long, drawn out list of pros and cons, we alreasy see them each and every day. After 5 to 7 days, we will take the numbers and adjust some server specs. We DO want YOUR opinion.
Proposition 1.
Straight CS, All Weapons, No Whining!
Here we will allow all of CS's presently offered weapons and items. No one will be slapped, kicked, banned, harrassed, or coersed into ceasing their actions by any player on the server; this includes admins! Here we will all simply adhere to the fact that CS is a game, and it is best played as the creators/maintainers have intended. Camping, sniping, flashing, smoking.... all is allowed, all is endorsed, all is just fine and dandy, EXCEPT for whining.
Under Proposition 1, admin roles will be to punish only afk's and whining. Closely unanomous map changes and removing blatent shameless cheaters is also okay.
Proposition 2.
Permanant restrictions on guns/behavior and no whining.
This is one that will have to be debated further if we choose to adopt it. As an example I will simply refer to what many servers have done: No Awp.
We can choose to remove Awp and Auto Snipe if we want, we can choose to lose the shield, we can lose all task-team-spawn-camping, etc.
I am not at this point offering suggestions on what to remove, I am simply offering the idea. WHat gets removed would be decided after and only after this proposition has been voted in.
Admin jobs here would be identical to that in proposition 1, in that only whiners, cheaters, and afk's would be punished. Map changes again are ok with good support. Admin jobs in this scenario would be one notch easier, as controversial weapons would simply be unavailable.
Proposition 3.
Admins Govern All, and no whining.
Here we would essentially go with what we have been doing. We let the admins decide when weapons should be restricted, and when people need to go. Here if an admin doesnt like your camping, he can ask you (politely) to stop. And if you don't, you will be camping on another server. In proposition 3, all admins will have the final say, and GRITS will back them in most, if not all situations.
This has worked on the RC servers for well over a year. The jobs of the admins are to maintain the general happiness of the group. If that means YOU need to go, then you will have to deal with it Without Whining! Tasks mentioned in the previous 2 propositions are expected, but sometimes an admin may have to enforce an unwritten rule. It may not be democratic, but in the end it will be validated because those in violation are simply being a nuisance.
You will notice that in each proposition description header, I have a common element: no whining. Many people leave CS after many happy months or even years because the shear amount of whining in the game becomes unbearable. Let me make it clear with my own personal thoughts... I dont care if he's camping, I don't want to know who is cheating, I never want to hear your assesment of somone's sexual preference, and while I don't much care for awpers, I REEAALLY don't care to hear you complain about it. Why don't I just mute everyone? Sometimes I debate it. Have I ever griped either in frustration or at another player? Of course I have, but will do my best no to do so again. Hold me accountable if you catch me being a hypocrite.
This whole thing is to prevent whining, not only in game but also in the forums, and on IRC (ok, so I wouldn't know about that one. But I can only imagine).
Also in emails, on msn, and everywhere else whining goes on. Right now, the ones running the servers know and accept that whining exists because the rules are undefined. Some can do certain things while others get punished for it. I am hoping that this little experiment will offer some idea of what rules you all want in place, and thus bring the complaints from an open forum to a dull roar.
To sum up, please re-read the choices, make a short selection, write it in, and don't complain.
Thank You,
Beastie
***All has been approved and endorsed by GRITS***
SERVER REFORMS - FreeFall - 02-24-2004
I'll help out with the campaign for prop 1. :P
SERVER REFORMS - [CAKE]anonymity - 02-24-2004
Call me a fence sitter, but I want combinations of all three propositions. If someone is using an AWP (for example) and it comes up to the admins that it needs to be changed then the admins will have to decide. I know GRITS doesnât like it, when one of the admins bans the awp without telling anyone. When it goes to the admins, most of the admins have to agree on the course of action, no sr admin should have veto power over anyone except possibly GRITS/VAD. Is there anyway possible to do a vsay that only admins have the ability to read and to vote? Its an easy way to see the results. I want to leave all the guns and shields in the game. I donât think anyone of us has played long enough to know how each item affects the game. I think the dev team have quite a lot more experience in dealing with this stuff then we do. All the weapons have their advantages and disadvantages; it should be up to the player to adjust. If someone is awping, you can try blinding them, or using an auto sniper to try and get them down quite a bit. Shields, again blind or use an HE nade.
Beastie I'm all for the no whining, I think as ricochet players we are above that, even though I myself have whined on many occasions. As admins I think we have to decide which is a whine and which is a legitimate logical complaint. "He killed me with the AWP", probably a complaint
"He killed 90% of our team with the AWP" probably a legitimate complaint.
SERVER REFORMS - Guest - 02-24-2004
Agreed. I think it does need to be aired on admin_chat before restriction at least rather than after the event. You'd never catch me or gwar do it any other way... *cough*.
SERVER REFORMS - jabbahunt - 02-24-2004
I have to vote for #1, with modification,. I'd prefer no awp until we as admins understand it better and understand the hacks. We can get that by visiting other sites as well. The other weapons I have no problem with.
SERVER REFORMS - soulsolution - 02-24-2004
i would vote for Proposition 2...get rid of the awp\auto snipers and the shield..it would balance the game out that way...1 person cant kill 90% of the team with the sniper's and people cant be lame and just sit in a corner with a shield waiting for people to run out of ammo
SERVER REFORMS - evil_admin - 02-24-2004
I like the no whining part :-)
SERVER REFORMS - RushJet1 - 02-25-2004
No whining??
That's not fair.
WAAH!
SERVER REFORMS - Wanksta - 02-25-2004
Quote:i would vote for Proposition 2...get rid of the awp\auto snipers and the shield..it would balance the game out that way...1 person cant kill 90% of the team with the sniper's and people cant be lame and just sit in a corner with a shield waiting for people to run out of ammo
Prop 1 For me
I like the shield alot cuz its alot of fun to use. If it were in real like u couldnt go uip to a Terrorist and say to him u cant use that weapon cuz he'll blow ur face in.
*wanksta applauds beastie for layin' down the law*
SERVER REFORMS - Guest - 02-25-2004
hmm, i like the 2nd one, because awps can be cheap with less people. plus the 1st one encludes no banning or kicking so i dunno
for no i like 2nd
SERVER REFORMS - _Acid_Head_ - 02-25-2004
Just remove the auto snipers.
SERVER REFORMS - g-boy - 02-25-2004
I just don't like players camping when they're team has the objective... ie, terrorists camping when they should be planting bomb, or ct's camping when they should be rescuing hosties. So I guess a form of prop 2.
SERVER REFORMS - FreeFall - 02-25-2004
prop 1 but not so strict about it. . i mean, I like prop 1 the best but if there was a vote in game to turn off the awp or something. . .and it wins then take the awp off. . BUT only for that game, so basically, Can't we just have little votes when we encounter something we don't like in the game?
SERVER REFORMS - kermit - 02-25-2004
see, i want a western version of cs where the models wear cowboy hats and have winchester rifles and s&w six-shooters. and you can ride piggy-back on other players and have a "yeeeehaw...geddyup!" radio command. that's all i have to say...sorry.
SERVER REFORMS - FreeFall - 02-25-2004
isn't firearms supposed to be like a future western setting or something? or am i htinking of something compeltely different?
SERVER REFORMS - Guest - 02-25-2004
.asm,Feb 25 2004, 08:19 AM Wrote:see, i want a western version of cs where the models wear cowboy hats and have winchester rifles and s&w six-shooters. and you can ride piggy-back on other players and have a "yeeeehaw...geddyup!" radio command. that's all i have to say...sorry.Wouldn't take *THAT* much modification... oh and as far as camping goes... if your team are running and dying, sometimes the only way to succeed is by waiting it out .... I have been known to win a round or two that way, and if it's for the team, then people shouldn't really care (except if they're not on my team I supposed :-D)
SERVER REFORMS - _Acid_Head_ - 02-25-2004
Getting used to the AWP and shield is necessary, it takes time to learn how to avoid being a victim, but it pays off, I'm sure you guys have seen me mcwtfpwn those shields several times:P
SERVER REFORMS - Beastie - 02-27-2004
Is that it? No other thoughts or votes?
Ok thanks, guys. I am sure GRITS will be reading this thread over a few times before making any official counts.
As for my own vote, I will place one for #2. I can deal with whatever is left on the server or taken off. I just want the boundaries drawn and the rules in stone. Even if we change the removed items list monthly, I personally like the set-up the best.
Later all.
Beastie
SERVER REFORMS - Blazed - 02-27-2004
There is one way to settle this, play America's Army instead ^_^
SERVER REFORMS - Gump - 02-27-2004
I don't know if I'm too late to the party, so if I get a vote, I'm for prop.1
I don't have much of a problem with alternative types of playing (camping, hiding, etc.), but if it bothers everyone on the server that much, just have a boot vote enabled.
SERVER REFORMS - PIX - 02-27-2004
I vote to leave the game intact.
SERVER REFORMS - fritoman - 02-27-2004
I dislike the boot vote kick because I have been on servers where there is a bunch of dumbass little kids that think it is fun to bring up a vote and the other dumbasses will vote to kick because they think it is funny to see someone booted, I myself have been kicked like that and it pisses me off
SERVER REFORMS - Guest - 02-27-2004
agreed. admins rule the world.
SERVER REFORMS - FreeFall - 02-27-2004
do we often have dumb as little kids on Vads. . .usually I see just you people on there. . and a couple others who aren't dumb-asses
SERVER REFORMS - Guest - 02-27-2004
There can be, especially when admins are not around. That's why the problems come.
SERVER REFORMS - [CAKE]anonymity - 02-27-2004
Admins arent the only ones who can do a vote kick?
SERVER REFORMS - Guest - 02-27-2004
[CAKE Wrote:anonymity,Feb 27 2004, 10:32 PM] Admins arent the only ones who can do a vote kick?Vote commands are level 1... which can be a standard level of access given to the public. At the minute, I do believe that the default access level is actually 0, ergo, they haven't actually on Vad's server.
SERVER REFORMS - SoulEvan - 02-28-2004
If I'm not too late, I'll cast a vote for proposition 2. :blink:
The problem with having things be so admin friendly to the point where they can change the going-ons during game-play is that it causes uproars over issues similar to what Cactus "whined"(heheh sorry bud) about on the other thread. There's no argument towards banning a weapon just because someone comes along and is able to "kill 90%" of a team with it. The killing machine could just as well be the TMP as it could be the AWP.
The only things I do have problems with are the automatic-sniper rifles. Or the "auto-awps" as I call them. Anyone with any sort of pointing sense can consistently own anyone that has skill which rivals the moon's reliability to wax or wane.
Cheers!
:wacko:
SERVER REFORMS - Guest - 02-28-2004
SoulEvan,Feb 28 2004, 10:00 AM Wrote:If I'm not too late, I'll cast a vote for proposition 2. :blink:I think that having played CS for a bit ... once you become truely skilled then there are certain weapons that you can handle, others that you really can't stand... sniping is one of those things that a lot of skilled players dislike because they can't get close enough to show off their skill:) I'm glad that I can keep them at bay sometimes, but my aim sucks enough not to kill them consistently.:)
The problem with having things be so admin friendly to the point where they can change the going-ons during game-play is that it causes uproars over issues similar to what Cactus "whined"(heheh sorry bud) about on the other thread. There's no argument towards banning a weapon just because someone comes along and is able to "kill 90%" of a team with it. The killing machine could just as well be the TMP as it could be the AWP.
The only things I do have problems with are the automatic-sniper rifles. Or the "auto-awps" as I call them. Anyone with any sort of pointing sense can consistently own anyone that has skill which rivals the moon's reliability to wax or wane.
Cheers!
:wacko:
SERVER REFORMS - GRITS - 02-28-2004
While I think of it as a challenge to grenade a sniper in the safety of his nook (which is usually the same place every round), I enjoy too many of the maps that are sniper havens and when snipers are on I usually end up leaving...it is just no fun when 5 shots later the whole team is gone. Whether I am on the same team or not. And the purpose of the server is still to have âfunâ with friends. It is hard enough to complete your mission as a CT on militia without a sniper planted on the roof. Inferno should not be a sniper map but it turns into one with certain people. I do not think it is fun to play with habitual snipers. Those players need to be on league servers not Vadâs, where arenât playing just to check our stats. I hate to permanently remove weapons but I think that is going to be the best temporary solution. We can always unrestrict and lock the server. If we want a awp-included game. Now the question isâ¦do we just restrict the awp?
oh and the whiniing thing....doesnt bother me so much because I think it is fun to hassle them about whining but I do think it is a kickable offense if it persist.
how do you guys feel about intentional hostage killing (not the spastic kind I do)? and flash banging etc your own team on purpose. I see both of these things happen often. I personally slap players for every hostage they kill on purpose it is just bad sportsmanship. If the terrorist did it they end up winning the game if they hold out long enough.