BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

[PHPT]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

the nerfing has to stop at some point, player common sence has to kick in

Nerfing one thing makes everything else stronger, and quite frankly, nerfs are only a problem if they go too far and something gets made just about useless. The only thing I can think of that's truly useless right now are the AA turrets against jets, which is getting addressed next patch.

Problem is that once people get used to using something that's blatantly overpowered, they start getting this delusion that it's not because hey... they do die with it sometimes!! Then when a patch comes and nerfs it, and they're finding that linking that stupid Sirlin article 200 times didn't keep the devs away from their favorite toy, they start to whine.

In the case of helicopters/jets, BF2 has tried to keep a "semi-circular balance" going where everything is at a disadvantage to something else, and right now, there's not much a jet's at a disadvantage to except maybe the USS Essex, and attack choppers are only vulnerable to well-coordinated humvee spamming and... well... jets.

[Brindled]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

The real problem here is that so many BF2 players (actually, people in general) that have a very hard time with the idea of respect. If you're playing on a server that has local server rules, it's up to you to respect them. Disrespecting those rules doesn't make you cool. It makes you an ass. If you don't agree with those local rules, fine. No one is making you play there. There's lots of other servers.

i think gimp hit the nail on the head. funny how that, in generalised terms, applies to the whole world; respecting others and all that encompasses.

ps. logan, you might want to visit bf2rs's website for clarification. looks like they are done w/ us here at tbf2.

[old sch00l]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

Thing is though, AA is not usless against jets/heli, if your pc can cope and timing is right, you can win! 15-2 after 15mins using AA only is ok

I do think the position of some aa on certain maps i.e. central on dragon feels usless/ trees everywere etc.

[JarEme]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

People don't respect nonsense. Never have, never will. That's what those private rules are.

People play Battlefield, not TG Presents Battlefield.

[Older-OMO]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

The rules are primarily intended for the management of the ranked server program by official BF2RS admins and others who manage ranked servers. End-users should be aware of them if they want to file a grievance against a server for allowing, encouraging or endorsing behavior and gameplay contrary to the rules. Some are black and white, some are vague to allow for interpretation. Servers don't have to comply with any of the rules if they are willing to accept the risk that they may lose it. Regardless, trying to interpret every scenario possible is not the function of the doc. If you are unhappy about getting kicked or banned, post it at the BF2RS forums. You can always blow it off and find another server.

Not sure why so many people are going on about this. The majority of those rules were part of the game at launch. You can't expect them to anticipate every possible scenario before launch. For the most part, the majority of servers are limited in the activities they can restrict based on compliance with the first 2 sections. Most of the complaining is about the private servers that have a very limited scope in the rules thay can use. They pay for the right to have them, why do so many people care if they have additional rules that may limit some behavior. If you don't like the rule go to another server. If you think they are violating a rule, report them if it bugs you that much.

[wolfi]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

So who should follow the rules? I got admin rights on a 32 player ranked server of a friend's clan and we have some 64 player maps in our rotation. So do i have to follow the rules and take the 64 player maps out of our mappool? So what does this clan pay for then? This is confusing and annoying. Please tell me if i should follow all those gameplay killing rules :p
I wont stop jihad jeep tactics if its helpful for our team..

[Brindled]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

go here, it might give you more clarity to read there instead of here.

http://www.bf2rankedservers.com/forums/

[FierceTeapot]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

fricking nazi rules.

It appears anything you dont like can be an 'exploit'. lets get one thing clear. An exploit is: Taking advantage of a coding error in the game. Thats what it always was in BF1942.... The designers designed jumping the way it was because in all fairness, its fun. Its hardly an exploit, as hitting your space bar is not exploiting anything. We can all do it - it AINT HARD!

Prone hopping is most probably an exploit as no-one did it until some numpty worked out it could be done. I think the designers didn't appreciate someone might prone jump jump prone... But is just simple jumping such an exploit? No.

Proper exploits are the good old getting inside buildings and shooting through the walls. Thats an exploit (also known as glitching). And it remains in BF2 as it did in BF1942 - but have Dice fixed it? No.

Instead they program in a lame 'you cant jump and shoot at the same time' which just plain sucks. Because even if you dont hop you will most likely miss the ability to jump over a wall and instantly start firing... Trust me.

[old sch00l]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

tbh i'm gonna be ****ed if I carn't throw the medic bag as far, who knows what the patch will bring

[WarGimp]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

fricking nazi rules.

Good start. Didja catch my bit about respect in an earlier post?

It appears anything you dont like can be an 'exploit'. lets get one thing clear. An exploit is: Taking advantage of a coding error in the game. Thats what it always was in BF1942.... The designers designed jumping the way it was because in all fairness, its fun. Its hardly an exploit, as hitting your space bar is not exploiting anything. We can all do it - it AINT HARD!

Thank you for your authoritarian defininition of the term exploit.

Unfortunatly, it's wrong.
Why follows.

Prone hopping is most probably an exploit as no-one did it until some numpty worked out it could be done. I think the designers didn't appreciate someone might prone jump jump prone... But is just simple jumping such an exploit? No.

Proper exploits are the good old getting inside buildings and shooting through the walls. Thats an exploit (also known as glitching). And it remains in BF2 as it did in BF1942 - but have Dice fixed it? No.

Exploiting is not confined to only bugs (code errors). I can also be used in referance to using mistackes or oversights in game mechanics. This is the case for pronejumping (aka Dolphin Diving). There's no error in the code. I funtions as intended. The error is purely in the mechanics design.

Instead they program in a lame 'you cant jump and shoot at the same time' which just plain sucks. Because even if you dont hop you will most likely miss the ability to jump over a wall and instantly start firing... Trust me.

Who says they haven't fixed it?

Mesh holes (the bug you described) are rather hard ta find. When you've got a couple thousand munchkins lookin for anything they could potential exploit, of cource they're going to find something the handful of disiplined (and usually really bord) testers missed.

When they're found and reported, it gives Dice a chance ta close up the holes in next patch. Expect a couple Kark holes to be closed.
If not, then complain.

[« R²» HKS]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

Don't take this as a slam, more as constructive criticism. Between the 26500 and the 4400 people that actually registered on this board and the BF2RS boards and the 1.3 million copies sold (that figure is about 6 months old), only about 2% of the BF2 population even knows these rules exist.

How is BF2RS and EA actually going to enforce rules that more than the majority of people are not going to know about. I know you could argue that just the admins need to know this, but in reality, it would be more work than it is worth for them to have to babysit and inform the 98% of the people out there that they need to read a manual on game ettiquette before playing on their server so they know what is and isn't proper to do.

If EA wants the masses to know about this, they should probably have the url available to see on their little advertising screen. Not everyone goes to the EA site, TBF2 or BF2RS site or is even aware that the latter two even exist (again, look at the registered numbers).

I'm not saying it is good or bad, but the general public is probably going to get pretty p*ssy when they get kicked for something that they were not aware even existed. And that miscommunication does happen quite often.

This is something that concerns us. We have not yet still to this day been provided with any info from our host regarding any applicable ranked server rules like the TOS/RSA/ROE Of course we all signed our lives away on the EULA when we installed the game but that was what 8months or so ago now.

The lack of information and the ranked server myths floating around doesn't make it easy for the average player to know what the rules are or were and that they have even been changed.

If more people knew what can and can't be done on ranked servers I wouldn't get so many people saying you can't have the rule on a ranked server its against the EULA. Like a couple of nights ago, we warned a guy for attacking an uncap in a plane without having all flags 1st (one of our rules) He wasn't kicked mind you only warned. So then he spits the dummy and says "I'm going to report your server for breaching the ranked server rules" I said "what rule" he said "no attack uncaps rule is not allowed on ranked servers" I said "www.bf2rankedservers.com good luck" and he left immediately. Hopefully he went their an educated himself on the ROE and that egg is probably still stuck on his face. Though is this his fault? I don't think so. It has to do with all the myth's about the do's and don't and that the information is not readily provided to all players.

I think the idea of having a link to the EULA/TOS/ROE/RSA in-game to all players is the easiest way to communcate any rules and or changes to rules.

EDIT:
Also if rules are going to be changed we should have to resign off on these rules, so then there would be no excuses and again we are bound by the correct rules because it would be a sad day when we need a lawyer just to play a video game.

[LoganX]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

Nobody's addressing it because it's not relevant. If you'd bother to read the damn ROE, you'd see that.

I did read the damn RoE you a$$hat but it doesn't say anything about FF.
I friggin quoted section 1.4 in my other post.
That's why I'm asking here. So how about an answer to my question instead of telling me that it's irrelevant.
I asked a simple question about something that is vague is the RoE.

Thanks for the uplifting words Brindled but I don't like being brushed off like my question is not important. goofball72 could have simply pointed me in the right direction instead of talking down to me from his high-horse.

...The way I play the game, really isn't affected by the rules. But, generally speaking, I feel the community and the makers of it have gone a bit off the deep end, and I am saying that as nicely as possible without using words I'd rather use.

Alot of what I dislike about this game probably stems from the fact that I was a BF42/BFV/DC player and this game is a bit off the path from what I was used to in the BF series, if any of that makes any sense. Which is probably why I don't feel as hooked on this game as DC.

If you weren't one of the hardcore players from DC, all of what I said is probably lost on you. Same probably goes for plenty of the hardcore 42 and V players.

You've hit the nail on the head. For me also anyway.
I'm already starting to dislike the direction BF2 (vanilla) is heading and I blame the stats system for that.
In BF1942/BF:V/DC we didn't have to worry about "global" competition.
We didn't have to worry about every Stat-Whore-junkie crawling out of the pit just so they can learn every cheap way to "win" the game and have their "Name in lights" at the top of the leader board.
We played for fun.
Sure there were "local" stats that server owners could put up.
Sure there were leagues/ladders, but they also suffered from the same exploitive gameplay tactics that we see now. Why? Because people will do anything and use any tactic to win. It's our nature.
But the general community didn't have to deal with that if they didn't want to.

With BF2 we are all 'forced' to deal with people using exploitive tactics because now the game has been built up around a global stats system.

I think when a few more of the highly anticipated Mods come out were going to see a huge amount of people (mostly core BF fans) migrate to the Mods and leave Vanilla BF2 to the Stat-Whores.
I know I'll be there.

[Ruschak]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

The exact reasons I don't play America's Army is starting to wear on me with this game, and I am sure you understand me when I say that.

The way I play the game, really isn't affected by the rules. But, generally speaking, I feel the community and the makers of it have gone a bit off the deep end, and I am saying that as nicely as possible without using words I'd rather use.

Alot of what I dislike about this game probably stems from the fact that I was a BF42/BFV/DC player and this game is a bit off the path from what I was used to in the BF series, if any of that makes any sense. Which is probably why I don't feel as hooked on this game as DC.

If you weren't one of the hardcore players from DC, all of what I said is probably lost on you. Same probably goes for plenty of the hardcore 42 and V players.

I feel the same way man hopefully things will get better.

[Fear Itself]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

Well this is odd. I have been reading and following along to the controversy both in this forum and in BF2RS forum.

IndianScout,

You first indicated that maintaining a rule such as the requirement that players must join a squad on a ranked server was in violation of rules set forth by EA in the ROE. You protested that the squad rule violation but the ROE did not specifically state your interpretation.

“Richmc” responded to your post indicating that he had spoken to an EA Representative about the conflicting interpretation. The EA spoke person provided an answer allowing for the private ranked servers to allow for a rule requiring a player to be in a squad.

Shortly after the controversy EA submitted a revised ROE. The revised ROE was posted in the BF2RS forum of which rule 1.6 was listed as follows:

1.6 Server administrators may not explicitly or implicitly (by actions) enforce restrictions on roles or kits that players can use while on your server.

This would include but not limited to:
§ Commander
§ Squad Leader
§ Spec Ops
§ Forced to Join Squads

Afterwards it appeared that the controversy continued. It was known that several complaints were logged to EA about the rule change. Then I read in the BF2RS forum that the rule in question above had been removed. The post which had been authored by you listed as follows:

From feedback EA and our program has been getting there are 2 rules modifications..

1. This rule has be included in the ROE so you may enforce Commanders not doing their job.. This ruling maybe followed by a kick or ban...

§Commander flying or in a vehicle instead of commanding

2. 1.6 players must join a squad has been removed...

thanks

Indian

Now here is the dilemma: How can you state the following: “the new ROE states you dont have to be in a squad either.. so you if you force the issue you will be in violation again..” I think common sense should be applied here. The ROE lists the restrictions for maintaining a ranked server. If the rule in question was implemented and then promptly removed then it would clearly state that it is not in conflict with the ROE.

In addition: I believe that your continued affirmation in this matter may violate rule 1.10 which is listed as follows:

§1.10 Server administrators will not go to ANY public or clan ranked server and threaten or bully any clan or clan administrator.
• § Admins are to only observe and report back to their department head
• § Admins will not contact or interfere in clan ranked servers
• § Admins will at no time contact any trusted provider
• § Admins at no time will state rules if they see violations
• § Admins who do not follow this procedure will immediately be fired
• § These rules do not apply to contract servers we have with trusted providers

I believe it is in your best interest to keep your opinions directed at your department head and not posting your opinions in forums without sufficient support from EA. Remember without sufficient clarification it is only “your” opinion.

I too believe that maintaining a rule of joining a squad is appropriate. Thus the reason it had been removed from the ROE. Again I believe that common sense is a more appropriate reasoning then the hostilities towards one person or one clan.

I along with other players seek out servers who encourage a rule requiring a player to be affiliated in a squad. It maintains a level of team play which if you remember was a key point of advertising by EA promoting BF2.

Fear Itself

[shiremct]

Re: BF2RS RoE Updated - Server Admins READ

I am still to this day frustrated by the ticket ratio being limited to 100%, and just having stumbled onto this thread and these rules, I am more baffled than ever.

So the rules have gone through several changed regarding servers running large maps with few players, or at least the wording of such rules have changed.

The reasoning was originally that playing on servers with more tickets gives those players and unfair advantage and the ability to get more points faster. While it may be true that it would be much easier to get badges and awards, I dont see the link to higher scores per time unit.

The example of the "high score server" where someone stated that how is getting a score of 100 over 30 minutes any different from getting a score of 50 over 15 minutes, aside from the wait caused by load times. Similarily, if I scored 50 in 15 minutes with ticket ration set to 100%, than how is that any different than scoring 100 in 30 minutes with ticket ratio set to 200%?

Too often the rounds end, what seems like, prematurely. Of course, the real solution that I would love to see is not a possibility which would be NO uncappables, but capping 'heiarchy' (sp?), such that perhaps the airfield could not be captured until certain other flags had been captured already and more in-depth victory mechanics (essentially better game-types--what we have now is team-deathmatch, nothing more, nothing less. Besides the vehicles they provide, flags dont even matter unless you lose them all). So since victory conditions and mechanics of BF2 are very crude and less-than-fullfilling, I would at least like to be able to play the round a little longer, with the same intensity and number of people, before waiting for the next map to load.

Why is this so wrong?