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.


Topics - Wrangham

Pages: [1] 2
1
The Chamber of Tears / Admin Shenanigans
« on: November 23, 2013, 07:50:27 pm »
I posted some thoughts about the 3.1.0 patch's effect on polearms in general discussion earlier today. I played a round or two on NA1 and alt-tabbed to see if anyone responded but could not find my thread. Mystified, I searched my forum profile's past posts and found my thread in the "game balance" section of the forums.

I only post now because of how disconcerting it can be to have some anonymous stranger manipulate your work, without asking for permission, giving a reason, or even leaving notice. There wasn't even a "topic moved" thread like other moved topics: http://forum.melee.org/general-discussion/moved-reimplement-the-keep-looted-weapons-next-round-feature/

Frankly, I do not understand the admin team one bit. Completely inane threads about "how to become a men" stay put and other topics are brutally censored. Small things like this erode the trust of the players and remind me of the deceit associated with the botched launch forums on "The War Z."

(click to show/hide)

Is some moderator going rogue a huge deal? Not really, you've only lose the insight of one guy who just assumes the worst and doesn't even post that often. But it's the first step on the road to giving all your future customers refunds.

2
Game Balance Discussion / Most Polearms Are Obsolete
« on: November 23, 2013, 05:56:14 pm »
edit: some joke admin hid this post in the game balance forum. I was looking for a general discussion on the power of polearms post 3.1.0, not offering advice to the balance team.

meanwhile this is "general discussion" and not "suggestions" http://forum.melee.org/general-discussion/reimplement-the-keep-looted-weapons-next-round-feature/

or this: http://forum.melee.org/general-discussion/buff-0-melee-weapons-and-reduce-stats-on-looms/


3
NA (Official) / Ban Arcadeus and Sup_Homie
« on: November 17, 2013, 11:11:13 am »
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BAN REQUEST FORM:
1. Name of your character involved

redacted

2. Name of offending character(s)

redacted

3. Time and server, as accurately as possible

redacted

4. Written description of what happened, the whole story. Also what happened before and after.

redacted

5. Why you think the offender did what he did.

Phantasmal or one of the many other admins with a healthy disregard for fair play can speculate as to their motivation better than I.

6. Multiple Screenshots

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


7. Names of players that can witness what happened.

redacted

edit: way to lock my other thread without doing anything. editing this post so it doesn't comply with your gestapo rules too.

4
NA (Official) / USA_IS_BETTER_THAN_THE_WORLD
« on: November 15, 2013, 05:06:50 am »
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Headshotted by an arbalest 20 seconds into the round, sat around for 6 minutes watching USA_IS_BETTER_THAN_THE_WORLD waste everyone's time.

5
Sell/Trade / S/T KAS and Great Long Bardiche. WTB Bamboo Spear + Bec
« on: November 12, 2013, 03:12:50 am »
Looking to sell or trade my +3 Knightly Arming Sword and +3 Great Long Bardiche. Preferably for a +3 Bamboo Spear and a +3 Bec de Corbin.

6
General Discussion / [NA] Philosophy Essay Competition
« on: July 18, 2013, 06:49:11 pm »
Bored in between rounds? Want to earn a quick 1,000 cRPG gold? Head on over to the ban request forum: http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-(official)/

Write a 250+ word essay on any incident. You must have been on NA1 when the complained-of incident happened. You do not need to have witnessed the incident in any capacity as long as you have some opinion about the nature of the ban request. Essays should focus solely on the nature of the ban request. Post here to receive your 1,000 gold. The player capable of writing the most essays before July 25, 2013 at midnight will win an additional prize of 10,000 cRPG gold!

Non-exhaustive list of suggested topics: what does it mean for christian society when we honor server rules not listed in Leviticus? What would Kant have to say about intentional teamwounding? Would Freud agree with the statement that ban requesters were not loved as children? What are the ontological ramifications for our cRPG avatars when their human players request admin action? Is there life after ban?

Remember the focus is on the nature of the request, not the request itself!

(click to show/hide)

7
General Discussion / RE: Admin Transparency
« on: July 16, 2013, 01:28:12 am »
EDIT: ADMIN RESPONSES

Listed below are the consolidated responses from admins concerning the scope of their authority and their understanding of the official server rules. I have edited the formatting of a few responses for clarity's sake. Please use this thread to consolidate the various (and conflicting) positions of admins on their interpretation of server rules and/or the apparently complete lack of oversight.

Canary: No oversight ensuring admin competence. Bro-coding is not against the rules. "The only (NA) admins who have assuredly been directed to the rules" are new.
(click to show/hide)

Shadowren: No oversight ensuring admin competence. Bro-coding is against the rules.
(click to show/hide)

IG_Saint: No oversight ensuring admin competence. Bro-coding is not against the rules. Do not "expect a lot of profesionalism [sic] from a bunch of unpaid admins in a mod."
(click to show/hide)

Granpappy: (Ignored question about oversight.) Bro-coding is not against the rules. Necessary to provide screenshots to adequately describe bro-coding.
(click to show/hide)

Kelugarn: Bro-coding is not against the rules.  "Making a thread bitching and moaning about how someone didn't take the game seriously enough is not going to get you anywhere."
(click to show/hide)

Muki: Bro-coding is against the rules.
(click to show/hide)

==================
Original Post below
==================

Yesterday, Kolee and Khmer purposefully threw a match on NA1 so their friend could win. The only admin on at the time, Granpappy, did nothing about it. Moments later, I described to Granpappy what happened as precisely as I could. Granpappy told me that the scenario I described was not against the rules, both in-game and again in a forum thread on the issue: "I'll let another Admin lock the thread for you Wrang"

Question 1: What measures are taken to ensure admins actually understand the rules?

http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-(official)/rules-and-guidelines-(please-read-this-before-posting)/

Admin Kelugarn on the issue: "Forcing duels in NA_1 and NA_2 is against the rules, and instances of bro-coding which negatively affect your team are also against the rules. . . This is game is about team play, intentionally hurting the performance of your team is no different from team killing and team wounding."

Why does Granpappy not understand that this kind of bro-coding is against the rules? Why do members of the community need to create threads to remind some admins that the rules exist?  Will Kelugarn be forced to admin the admins in perpetuity? More on Kelugarn to come!

=======================================

Frustrated by the only online admin refusing to take action on an obvious violation, I created the following thread in the ban request forum.

http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-(official)/kolee-and-angkorwat_of_chaos/

Question 2: Why was no action taken against Ragnar_Ulfson who "didn't see what happened either" yet continued to post no less than nine separate times in my thread?

How can admins expect the playerbase to take ban requests seriously when the majority of responses are irrelevant mudslinging? Admins selectively enforce rules, personally flaunt them, and do a disservice to the entire community-driven ban request section.

===============================

After I told Granpappy about Kolee and Khmer throwing the match, he did not take any action. He offered an excuse - "dueling is not against the rules." Except: dueling IS against the rules, except in limited situations where players consent to it. I have been playing cRPG for a while. I am a generally articulate and responsible player. I have never been the subject of any admin warn/ban/kick/mute/etc. And yet when I identify a problem to an admin, instead of being taken seriously I am treated with the most dismissive possible attitude. Granpappy even came to my ban request thread and added his own insipid commentary: "I'll let another Admin lock the thread for you Wrang"

What is the end result of all this? Kelugarn says "intentionally hurting the performance of your team is no different from team killing and team wounding," and then locks the thread, preventing any other players from contributing relevant commentary. Kolee and Khmer get off with a warning. Here are Kelugarn's three most recent admin actions for team killing and team wounding, you know, those actions that are no different than throwing a match:

Kelugarn gives a warning (bro-code throwing a match)
http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-(official)/kolee-and-angkorwat_of_chaos/

Kelugarn gives a 2h ban (teamwounding)
http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-(official)/ban-request-try_cikel/msg823421/#msg823421

Kelugarn gives a 16h ban (teamwounding)
http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-(official)/good-ol'-prayamantus/msg823901/#msg823901

Kelugarn bans and then unbans 2 players who are new to the community. Their first infraction ever.
http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-(official)/unban-faldemir/msg819730/#msg819730

Question 3: if bro-coding your team to defeat is the same as teamwounding why isn't the punishment?

Kolee and Khmer have been around a while. What is their prior ban/warn record? Why are they treated much more leniently than two new players? I guess the only positive thing to take away from this all is the admins don't expect veterans like Kolee and Khmer to understand the rules, probably because the admins don't either.

8
General Discussion / Video Contest - Grand Prize 250,000 cRPG gold!
« on: July 14, 2013, 07:23:32 pm »
I find myself logging in less and less, frustrated with the "bro-code" and commonplace delaying which has taken over the server pretty much every time I try to play some mount and blade. To lighten my weary spirit I am hosting a contest in which cRPG players make lighthearted videos of a fictional event.*

The video can be any length/style and will be graded based on creativity, craftsmanship, humor, and general quality. On or about July 31st I will choose one winner and award its creator with a grand prize of 250,000 cRPG gold.

Please post a response to this thread with a youtube link to your video. See the spoiler for details on what the video should portray:

What the video should show:
(click to show/hide)

* the event I will describe is fictional in nature and any similarities to factual occurrences are purely by coincidence. Members of Raven are disqualified from receiving the prize but may submit videos in the spirit of competition.

Suggested style of video: Picture book style sequence of images with narration, flash animation, live action, etc. Anything goes as long as its entertaining!

9
NA (Official) / Kolee and AngkorWat_of_Chaos
« on: July 14, 2013, 06:03:27 pm »
Both players (red team) stood still and gave a little upblock salute as Sherben (green team) walked directly next to and past them and then 1-shot 3 red team players in the back of the head. Granpappy was on the server at the time. I brought the issue up with him but he ignored me. Approximately 11:50am eastern time.

edit: Granpappy seems to think they were "offering duels" which is not the case. There were several players on each team remaining and none of the players I mentioned attempted any kind of duel at all. Also offering duels is very clearly against the posted rules UNLESS BOTH players consent. I have even been informed so by Granpappy himself in the past and told to go to NA3 if I wanted to duel.

edit: Goes without saying that I would prefer an admin other than Granpappy review this, thank you.

10
Suggestions Corner / NA1 admin elections
« on: June 20, 2013, 06:20:04 pm »
Every Monday post an admin election thread. Give the poster with the highest "+" total admin for 6 months (obviously admins can't run again until their term is up.)

Repeat and profit from a 24-admin team of players accountable to the playerbase.

------

The last time I posted a suggestion all the players who conceivably might be negatively effected flooded the thread. Please do not comment here if you are an admin.

11
General Discussion / Robert Namo - leeching and exploiting
« on: May 09, 2013, 09:36:38 am »
edit: This was posted in the ban request section. I asked Robert Namo to admit to leeching and exploiting only so admins would have additional evidence on which they could base their ban. I have not asked for an apology. It is clear whatever admin moved this is simply "punting" to avoid dealing with the real problem.

The facts: 5/9/13 approx ~1:00am CST.

Robert Namo deliberately ignored an enemy (from his same clan) directly adjacent to him. That enemy used an arbalest to shoot Robert Namo's teammate, then proceeded to reload while still within 6 inches of Robert Namo who continued to ignore the enemy and even partially blocked that enemy from return fire. Robert Namo was not afk during this time. My description of the events above is my only evidence; I have no screenshots or video of the event. I know admins generally do not take action without pictures or a description which can be corroborated by combat logs. Admins on at the time were Cannery and Dexxtaa.


violation #1 "NOT OK: Bypassing the autobalance"

Refusing to kill your clanmates is bypassing autobalance. Autobalance picks the teams, not Robert Namo.

violation #2 "NOT OK: Running around without no weapon. Not contributing is leeching, naked runners don't contribute."

Ignoring the only enemy within 100m, who you're practically touching, and is completely defenseless while reloading the slowest weapon in the game? At least a naked runner would have some kind of value as a distraction.


I am posting this request to give Robert Namo an opportunity to clean the stain on his honor by acknowledging his treachery and accepting fair admin punishment for flaunting the official server rules. This is also an opportunity for the admin team to do something about the supplantation of the official rules with an unofficial "bro-code" that is obnoxious at best and game-breaking at its worst.

PS I am not posting because I am upset about losing a multi. I got valor that round. I am upset that players get away with ignoring server rules and having zero respect for their teammates.

12
Suggestions Corner / Enforce Gold-Only Transactions
« on: April 19, 2013, 02:53:20 am »
Edit: Illuminating data on people who have -1'd the OP. If you wonder why people are against this suggestion, look at how it might affect their wallet:

Dach - 8 offers on marketplace, all asking for X item + 55k gold, without rhyme or reason except to ensure a tidy profit.
Kafein - one of 5 players with a trade booth. Simplifying the market would ensure that his trade booth would no longer have a purpose.
Mwiw - 22 offer on marketplace, all asking for X item in exchange for his near worthless Danish Greatsword.
Falka - "plenty of ppl got fucked up by market sharks, but it's their own fault to some extent."

==================

The goals of a marketplace system should be to:

1) Facilitate item/heirloom point transfer between players;
2) Encourage possessing things of value;
3) Encourage fairness and arms-length dealing.

The current marketplace system achieves only the first, most basic goal of a trade system. I propose a new, intuitive and easy to code overhaul of the marketplace:

Players should only exchange items/loom points for an amount of gold and the 5% tax on item exchanges should be lowered to 1%.

===PROS===  
- Eliminate the "lazy tax"

One problem with the current system is that understanding the implications of accepting any given offer requires a near encyclopedic knowledge of prior transactions and patch histories. Players are unable to sift through the labyrinthine amount of offers and requests, let alone draw a meaningful set of conclusions about item value from that data. Instead, both offerors and requesters understandably and lazily ask for another ~50k when they list an item.

To illustrate the difficulty in determining the actual value of an item, here is a look at some offers of a +3 Awlpike, the alphabetically highest item in my last searched category:

Bec de Corbin + 55k gold
Long Spear + 30k gold

Now the flipside. Requests for an Awlpike:

Bec + 19k gold [36k lazy tax]
Long Spear - 97k gold [127k lazy tax]

- Very easy to determine the relative value of items.

A gold-only system very clearly shows which items are valuable and helps players decide where to invest their heirloom points. An extreme example that most players already know: don't put heirloom points into crossbows and danish greatswords. But there are other over-supplied items as well. A simple price listing would reveal them with a glance, instead of hours of clicking through links on the market site.

- Reduce marketplace offer spam.

Currently, standard practice for someone trying to sell or purchase an item is to post a dozen offers or requests listing numerous combinations of heirloom points and gold. Each of these listings:

A: Require the listor to estimate the value of the item they wish to trade. A little experience with the system shows that players are not the most objective appraisers. Try the Awlpike example with any other item!

B: Require the listor to estimate the value of the other item they wish to trade for.

C: Add enough extra gold to ensure they won't feel cheated if someone accepts their trade.

D: Represents an identical valuation. Instead of players able to just list gold, that quantity has to be some creative amalgamation of gold, heirloom points, and items, carefully calibrated to meet the ideal.

===CONS===

- Some players resent change. Players who have invested hundreds of hours into figuring out how to game the market will not like this change.

- Some players think the devs are removing everything from the game and that more complexity is always good. This change will bring about simplicity.

- This change will complicate the ability of players to gift heirlooms by trading rocks or straw hats. But there is an easy workaround. Just make a post in the marketplace declaring your intention to trade to so-and-so player and then do it quickly. It isn't like there are many players spamming refresh on the marketplace waiting to grab a deal that an admin will just revert anyways.

- This change will require some additional coding. However the code for gold-only transfers is already in place.

===Reduce the Tax===

The 5% tax rate is probably too high for pure gold transfers. I suggest reducing it to 1-2%. I suspect but cannot prove that 99.99% of gold taken out of the system is done so via item repairs and not the tax on transactions so reducing the tax should not affect gameplay.

tl;dr The marketplace system is the Gordian Knot of cRPG but the devs are Hercules.

13
I have a +3 Bamboo Spear and a +3 Knightly Arming Sword which I don't use often. Ideally I'd like to trade them for a Great Long Bardiche and an Iberian Mace but am open to creative offers.

14
Buy / +1/+2/+3 Long Axe for LP+Gold
« on: April 13, 2013, 11:17:36 am »
Will pay 2 LP + 250k gold for a +3, less for the others.

15
WSE2 Beta / Horizontal Bars flashing across screen [fixed]
« on: April 11, 2013, 01:22:07 pm »
I've just started trying WSE2 and I seem to get light-blue horizontal bars flickering across my screen. I have tried tinkering with my graphics settings in-game to no avail. Please let me know if you need any more information from me or if this issue has already been solved. Thanks!

Pages: [1] 2