Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Well you have forced other thinhs on ppl whither they wanted it or not.Like what? Care to elaborate? A lot of the features implemented had public votes to see if players wanted it.
Any way. I dont see what harm would be in, agreing in some basic simple standard rules.
No 203s in 1st 30 secs etc
Can't be bothered to quote so i say it again, 2 days is not enough and this wont last long... I agree with zoxxe ideas, dont worry i didnt miss any of them.The thing is, it all depends on the players. We can't force them to play other maps, so we're trying to get enough people together to try to encourage players to play different maps. It's been working pretty well over here on the NA side. On Monday's and Tuesdays for the last 2 weeks we've player AA3 Alley, AA3 Impact, SF Blizzard, SF Water Treatment, mAAp City Block, mAAp Square, SF PCR, 285 Interdiction, AA3 Shantytown, and some others I can't quite remember.
You say you played 13 maps in 2 days, well done with your achievement, but what makes me angry is your opinion to leave everything as it is as you see 2 day progress...
As far as individual server rules, the majority of them could easily be implemented globally. The majority of the ones I've seen are don't be an ass, don't spam for the first 30 seconds and stuff like that. Those should be standard rules.I don't like the idea of forcing a bunch of rules on server owners though.
I'm just thinking here in terms of ease of implementation. Remove or empty banlist periodically on Assist and let server admins present a case against a player for a ban issued by Assist admins. It's a whole lot simpler than allowing access for server admins to ban for 2 weeks wherever they see fit. What happens after the 2 weeks is up? They could just ban again. Whereas if it's more of a public witchhunt and non-biased neutral Assist admins can accept/deny the case for a ban, it's a lot simpler. Might bring more people to this website as well.
After an additional minute of thinking, here is the solution I propose. It is simple and solves the most important aspect (server admins having too much power):Not a bad idea, but the problem I see arising is how exactly will we know how long a server admin has banned a player for? We can't actually prevent them from permanently banning players(at least not that I know of) so we'd have to trust server admins to follow the rules, and not everybody visits AAO25 either.
Allow server admins only to give temporary bans (e.g. max. 2-weeks). Permanent bans may be given only by assist admins (after appropriate proof is given, etc., using standard complain path).
Of course it's not perfect, but I think it would be quite good first step.
I actually agree with this. It's the reason why I can't play BF2 and BFBC2 anymore. Too much trollololol =\That's a bad idea. What about kicks and bans for violating certain rules that are not universal on all servers? Like Hospital 203 spam? A global ban would be a bit ridiculous.
AA is even worse since the playerbase is smaller. There should be a section of forum where admins of servers are allowed to provide reasonable proof for a ban and if there really is cause for it, it should be a global ban anyway.
i would like to see an obi on this map.Yeah I'm completely revamping the map. (the terrain will stay the same). It will have an objective and random spawn points for assault.
such a long distance map without obi.. it's the only way to bring movement in the round..
is this possible to do?
Otherwise i like this map and would play it often if there would be an obi.
Hi Killa, with a Radio Tower II would it be possible to simply bin C, and have A and B as random objectives? I think it might be fun to limit such a server to 16 players and keep it to 5 minute rounds. It's getting the map down to fun five minute rounds that's importantI've never dealt with random objectives, but I'll add it to my list and take a look at it eventually.
i've read the description on the official website and i know there's a disclaimer, but still, the price is not fair, they simply priced the game as much as many other indie ones, there's so much better stuff (better as for the greater time and commitment put into them) that will go unnoticed just because this sort of thing will catch the hype.Not fair? Who decides what is fair? It's up to the individual consumer and nobody is forcing you to buy it. They can charge whatever people will pay for it. It's capitalism.
You guys just can't handle my epic rain.I don't like that idea. I don't want to have to set the world quality to low just to play the map. Why not just change it to a xweatherEffects? Sure it'll look crappy, but I'll take crappy looking over unplayable. If a Phenom II @3.66 GHz and a 7950 (which is way overkill for this game) can't run this map, there's a problem.
Maybe lower the number of particles? (though it won't be realistic with the sound)
Don't remove it, that would make the map a boring sound camper haven. The emitters should be set to quality so if you choose low quality world settings, they should disappear.
Help keep Assist going. Donate to cover our server costs.
