Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

[Webs961]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

It comes down to what a group is trying to provide to the community. Are you trying to provide a fun gaming environment to the "majority" of the players out there, or are you trying to provide one for the "elite, pro, comp players" which is something entirely different.

Exactly. Back when I was an administrator with a Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory server network, we had a whole load of competitive players who made up the core of our regulars; it definitely wasn't a place for the feint of heart. Ironically, the network was called "Beginner's Park 3."

Ultimately, because we had about 3 servers, two of which I had a high degree of authority on, I could rest assured that I'd have to stop what I was doing and discipline someone. Believe me, if you are an administrator on a highly trafficked server and you wish to maintain a visible presence, you're going to be working quite a bit. Ultimately, we were forced to cater to our main base of above average players, causing a bit of an uproar from the less skilled player base. Sure, we lost some players because of that decision, but we wished to portray the image of being a hang out for the more highly skilled players.

And people here keep talking about the BFRoE. My main issue with this (having been involved with it for a while) is the actual lack of enforcement. EA does not have the staff to support being able to effectively collect evidence and punish the offenders; most of their time is spent helping people install their game, connect to the internet, and just get playing. The minute they [EA or DICE] start actually trying to enforce their policies, they get absolutely lambasted on every Battlefield site, here included because now "Big Brother" is stepping in.

(On a side note, I think I have a nice topic for my next debate thread.)

[BlueKnightro]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

First sorry for hijacking that other thread

Now for the topic at hand....
First if you think the way you administer a bf2142 server has anything to do with its popularity you are wrong. It is strictly location based nothing more nothing less. GHF and Swatt are top examples of poor server admins and yet they are extremely popular.
My problem with this whole thing is the example I gave in the previous thread…. you are banning innocent people who simply don't know any better. Even those that do know better and are being "disrespectful" a life time ban is way too harsh. As for the hackers if you have proof then by all means ban them forever, but please make sure you have solid proof not the lame high k/d ********.

Also the whole guilty by association in this virtual world is a poor excuse to ban anyone. I mean in real life if your best friend gets out of prison after a murder sentence and you hang out with him.... does that make you one?

[Wizrdwarts]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

Isn't WCK regarded pretty lowly around here? But I still see their servers being played a lot. Most of the time I play, their city maps server is around 50-64 people full and I join since it has a good ping, plenty of players, and I personally haven't had a bad experience with their admins before.

[SecrtSqurl]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

My problem with this whole thing is the example I gave in the previous thread…. you are banning innocent people who simply don't know any better. Even those that do know better and are being "disrespectful" a life time ban is way too harsh. As for the hackers if you have proof then by all means ban them forever, but please make sure you have solid proof not the lame high k/d ********.

Also the whole guilty by association in this virtual world is a poor excuse to ban anyone. I mean in real life if your best friend gets out of prison after a murder sentence and you hang out with him.... does that make you one?

1. You should not receive a lifetime ban for being ignorant of the rules. If you go to the clans website and apeal in a civilized manner, most clans will point you to their posted rules, and then will give you another chance.

2. A high kdr is never a reason to ban someone on our server. When 5 people that have over 1000 hours in the game each, say something, it is a reason to investigate further. If the decision is made to ban, BR footage is always looked at, and when/if the ban is appealed, the results will be discussed.

3. If your best friend is a murderer, I would not associate with you. Statistics say that the majority of people will return to prison after being released, and the odds are you will get caught up in his drama. You would only be able to blame yourself. Find new friends.

[fatmooseknuckle]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

i think there's a fine line w/ this "i pay, my way" situation and having 100% of the rules set forth by EA. we have certain rules set up to help support a PUBLIC server (eg. no baseraping, no hacking). in competition, i believe that all is fair in love in war. but that's competition, we're talking about keeping a full PUBLIC server. we abide by the BF ROC. the problem lies w/ the servers that have rules that test the boundaries of ROC (eg. weapon restricted, kit restricted). i wouldn't want to pay a monthly fee to EA directly to let them tell me how to do things. little things like language filters would bother me. provided nobody make any direct attacks or racist comments, all language is permitted. i'm sure EA would put the cap on that.

FF off is a huge problem imo. i think servers should be required to set FF at 100% to keep a ranked status. i would even agree to a slight reduction for larger servers as to cut down on tk's, but eliminate rdx bunny hoppers. i believe that servers w/ 32 players or less should be required to sustain 100% FF to retain a ranked status, w/ no more than a reduction of 10% for 34-48 players & 20% for > 48%. the more players there are, the more likely you will incur team damage. this slight allowance might be a great incorporation to future patches and/or bf franchise games.

it all comes down to the admins' level of competence. if you are one of those players who is complaining because you are getting banned for killing an admin, you need to find a better place to play. there are a lot of poorly admin'd servers out there. and ya, some of the "less desirable" clans out there run more popular servers. that is because it goes by the average amount of players. so if you run a 64 player server, you are bound to have a higher average number of players than a 32 player server. general rule of thumb...i said GENERAL, the 64 player maps are mostly populated w/ sub par players. they're a noob haven. while this number is estimate, i believe you will all get the point.

90% of the players have 10% of the skill, 10% of the players have 90% of the skill

[=NfB=MyBad1]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

I am a new[er] admin, but I have played for a longtime. As a player I found servers that gave you a sense of fairness. I know it sounds corny, but, some places just exude something that makes you feel welcome.

The players for the most part know whats expected of them, and the basic rules are clear and fair.

Let's face it, like it or not there are always some sort of rules. So as a player, I have been kicked and banned for winning, or killing the server owner, and so on. Those places die out. Even the clan members get tired of the crap.

Sometimes it tough to bite your tongue, but just like in "real" life, sometimes you have to. Just like being an admin.

I really hate to have to kick, or ban someone, but sometimes for the greater good, is has to be done.

I think most people really down deep, know whats fair, and what works. Even after a couple of years it's still a fun game.

Although one thing about =WCK= there no crybabies server is fun as well. You really got to be on your toes!

[madmotoman]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

I think that the way a server is run directly relates to the population of a server. Yes, having players that idle a server helps. Yes, players tend to join on servers that are already populated. However, if a group is doing a terrible job running a server, the word spreads throughout the community and over time, that server will see less and less players joining until it does not populate at all.

This is exactly what keeps servers alive, people who look at the big picture of running a server. Not just yielding to the people who whine about it being to strict or unfair. But to run one the way it is meant to be run, making sure the masses are enjoying it, not just s few. Actually spending all the time necessary to run one correctly and in a fair way. And it does take a great deal of time and effort to run a server with diligence and fairness in mind. A server won't last very long if all it does is run with know one making sure it is run with out smacktards ruining the game for all who play.

[Quemical]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

What do you guys think of servers that don't allow Orbital strikes at all?

The lamest thing i've seen so far is a server that in the title says "NO PK ROCKETS ALLOWED"

Also, i find it funny how a certain clan says "No Crybabies allowed" Yet they ban anyone who is a good player.

[TrooperJac]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

I think any extra rules applied to servers are daft.

The most common ones are

"no baserape"
"no spawnkilling"

Now I can sort of see the reason for these and they don't really apply to me because I'm almost never in an enemy base. The problem is how they are interpreted and for that reason they shouldn't exist. Example - in an enemy base taking out assets and get discovered - Lambert some guy as he's shooting me = banned for baserape :shock:

Then there are the fX!*!?G silly rules.

No RDX abuse - whatever that is
No APMs on flags! - why not?
No Pistols = WHAT :shock:
No Bunnyhopping - you're not allowed to jump?
No Grenade Spamming - throwing two grenades is OK but three is taking the XXXX
No Walker Whores - how long before a pilot becomes a whore? :thatsbad:

These are but a few - we have all seen daft made up rules. No need.

[sempf]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

I personnally think there should be rules like no baserape, no spawnkilling, no pk rockets. this makes the game more fun and there comes higher skill in. On the other hand i dont like the rules like no shooting into the base. this makes people camp in the base just getting kills and not trying to get any flags, this is a game killer. if you suck that bad to get out of the base, fine, but dont camp and try to get a good kd by abusing the rules.
pk rockets distroy the game in my opinion. they require barely no skill, and do loads of dammage if you didnt noticed them coming. most of the better players dont like pk rockets, so if you dont allow them they join your server more often than others.
also i would never kick for hacking unless there is proof. i wont kick for having a name on pbbans, but rather check ingame/batterecorder footage if he switches targets immidiatelly on batterecorder. if that is possitive, you can ban him whatever, but never before you have that proof.

[Shurikane]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

What do you guys think of servers that don't allow Orbital strikes at all?

The lamest thing i've seen so far is a server that in the title says "NO PK ROCKETS ALLOWED"

Both of them break the ROE. A ranked server is not allowed to forbid the use of any weapon. The best it can do is limit the usable area of an orbital strike - most commonly by demanding commanders to launch them anywhere except at the enemy's uncap.

[iQue]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

What do you guys think of servers that don't allow Orbital strikes at all?

The lamest thing i've seen so far is a server that in the title says "NO PK ROCKETS ALLOWED"

I know it breaks the ROE but I can't help to love those servers... it just improves the gameplay tenfold

:evil:

[visionseizures]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

i disagree with the whole "admins affect how popular a server is" i play on alot of good servers where admins are hardly even visible, yet they are always full no matter what time of day or night i go to join. this whole "news spreads throughout the community" thing does not exist, only around 1/4 of the 2142 player actually look and play on forums, most of them lone wolf and most of them couldn't really care about the server as long as they aren't lagging and aren't getting owned by obvious hacks.

as for weapon restrictions. i think the "No rockets" its bs.the only time when rocketing someone is easy is when they are stood next to a static object and aren't running around. apart from that rockets take aim and skill just like all the other guns, if so slightly more skill. if you are rocketing someone running away from you you have to time judge and distance the rockets so each rocket goes abit further than the other so that you can keep damaging the player you are aiming at, same goes for if the person is running closer to you but you have to decrease the distance instead.

hell i've been banned from a server for using 2 rockets before and that was because it was the admin i killed with them.

if you are complaining about rockets why not complain about grenades too? they're the same, orbital strikes... they're the same too. surely you must think UAVs the mini UAVS and the netbat system is also unfair and noobish too?

i mean seriously fair enough you obviously don't know what a rocket looks like when its flying towards you and you obviously don't know how to avoid being hit by them. but that doesn't make them noobish what so ever.

and FYI all that "skilled" players only visit no rockets servers statement is incorrect, i've been playing this game in comp for coming up to 2 years now, and all the really skilled players i know stick to servers like GHF BOG TNA where the admins are chilled out and where you are not restricted on your kits. infact in a comp match rockets are vital for breaking stale mates. so please stop with you inaccurate bashing of the pk's

thanks...

[Abs0lute_Zero]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

and FYI all that "skilled" players only visit no rockets servers statement is incorrect, i've been playing this game in comp for coming up to 2 years now, and all the really skilled players i know stick to servers like GHF BOG TNA where the admins are chilled out and where you are not restricted on your kits. infact in a comp match rockets are vital for breaking stale mates. so please stop with you inaccurate bashing of the pk's

He's right in that there are very skilled players using PK's, though as of recent I will only use PK's in a match, because using them in a pub to kill off the noobies is just kinda lame... I find it funny when i see a good shooter spamming pk's around a corner waiting to kill someone :shakehead:

as for weapon restrictions. i think the "No rockets" its bs.the only time when rocketing someone is easy is when they are stood next to a static object and aren't running around. apart from that rockets take aim and skill just like all the other guns, if so slightly more skill.

Actually rockets in general may be the easiest and lamest excuse for a weapon in this game... Its very easy to rocket someone standing out in the middle of no where, and maybe scroll once or twice if you think hes gonna move... I think the whole rockets thing is for another thread though...

[sempf]

Re: Debate: Proper Server Administration [Cool heads only]

i dont want to feed the debate about pk rockets but it is a fact that in eu no skilled person touches pk rockets unless he gets them in a kit he picked up, and even then i barely see it happen. pk rockets are worse than nades in my opinion. with nades you need to get the arc right, try to not have them bounce of anything and so on. it is infinitely more harder to be a good grenader than be a good rocketer.

also personnally i'd say that there should be no orbital strikes on servers with low maximum players. there are people who play there because they cannot play the game with more players and a orbital strike/emp strike kills fps. the biggest drop of fps i noticed last weeks was in a orbital strike when it went from 100 fps to 5. there were only 6 guys on the server, and that is for me the only moment i get 100 fps. every player more on the server makes me get far less fps. first it goes with big jumps and it goes lower and lower till on servers with 32 people i get 45 fps max. this is a reason for me to have orbital strikes to be not allowed on servers.

i think good admins make servers be more popular than others, but than it depends on how popular the game is and what people understand as good admins. i have seen servers die out because of admins banning to much people. at the end everyone watched out for that server and the popularity fell down a lot. also the argument that people dont know what is going on aint a good argument because loads of players join on the people who play bf a lot and know what the good and bad servers are.