Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

771 Ranked servers break ROE No TKpunish

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: 771 Ranked servers break ROE No TKpunish

    773 now and counting.

    Originally posted by wagerone
    Nobody cares about tk punish. The gsps dont want to lose money from server rental so the server admins can do what they please.
    That is basically the case. GSP's are worried about the money so they won't shut down K&P servers so they won't shut down a server that has tkpunish off.

    Originally posted by Bunnyhop
    problem with auto TKpunishes is usually the people punished don't deserve them.

    Like an idiot driving his jeep into your tank...the tank driver takes the TK hit for it (and the hit for any passengers in the jeep)...that's -4 x # of people in vehicle WITHOUT the punish...if the punish is enabled...double that.
    Remember a tk only equals -4 unless you get team damage as well which can add another -2 but even if the person punishes it doesn't affect your score at all. So a punish doesn't = -4 it merely adds to the number of punishes before you either get kicked or banned. However because a lot of people still think it affects their score, that is why they still get so pissed off about it when they get punished.

    Originally posted by machstem
    Oh, I see and understand the problem..I just don't think it IS a problem..you know!?
    It definitely is a problem because players are using it as a griefing tool to get players kicked and banned from the server. Ask any admin and I'm sure a lot of players have also been kicked or banned because of some tard abusing the punish system.

    When it comes down to it, it should be a decision that admins can make for themselves that tkpunish be either on or off. I think its worse to have FF off than tkpunish on because of the possibility for people to exploit by C4'ing themselves up on top of buidlings you normally can't get on. If they allow FF off but stil require tkpunish to be on when in that situation, tkpunish is obsolete when FF is off and to stil require it on is rediculous.

    However as it stands it is part of the ROE. I'd like to see all the server owners from these 773 servers get together as a united front to get this rule changed so tkpunish is optional again.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: 771 Ranked servers break ROE No TKpunish

      Originally posted by <<R2>>Capt.HKS
      I'd like to see all the server owners from these 773 servers get together as a united front to get this rule changed so tkpunish is optional again.
      Well we tried the 'collective reasoning' approach in the Server Owners forum, and got our threads locked ....

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: 771 Ranked servers break ROE No TKpunish

        Originally posted by <<R2>>Capt.HKS
        However as it stands it is part of the ROE. I'd like to see all the server owners from these 773 servers get together as a united front to get this rule changed so tkpunish is optional again.
        Or, just leave the settings you want and try not worrying about it.

        I think all settings/rules should be optional, or nothing at all. The fact that the ROE have been "iffy" since the beginning, and that they've changed around at several points during the time it was released, makes me think that there never should have been a "ranked" and/or "unranked" version of their server.

        Anyway, all I am saying is that most of this is trivial. I do however believe that if you want something to change, you prove your point..and you've done justly.

        PEACE

        Originally posted by epoch
        Well we tried the 'collective reasoning' approach in the Server Owners forum, and got our threads locked ....
        Sounds about right

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: 771 Ranked servers break ROE No TKpunish

          Don't get me wrong though. I think the ROE chaps do a great job, presumably without reward.

          I just think there has to be room for debate if server admins/owners don't agree with certain things. Just cos the ROE say's something, doesn't necessarily mean it's right.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: 771 Ranked servers break ROE No TKpunish

            Originally posted by epoch
            Don't get me wrong though. I think the ROE chaps do a great job, presumably without reward.

            I just think there has to be room for debate if server admins/owners don't agree with certain things. Just cos the ROE say's something, doesn't necessarily mean it's right.
            Yeah, but the owners and admins have been complaining about it since day 1, and the enforced rules are still there. They should be there as guidelines.

            PEACE

            Comment

            Working...
            X