(click to show/hide)
Also, at least one admin was there (goat).
I'm not here to question the mechanics involved in the rule, merely asking that rules get upheld.
Ignoring the intricacies of what's okay and what's not: from what you posted in screenshots it's really inconclusive where this flag is in the first place, which I pointed out under the spoiler within a spoiler (though I did label it Don't Even Read). Each of the three photos offers a different vantage point, each which appears to tell a different story.
You did link the wrong battle initially, but the right one now (battleroster&id=3195)- you can tell because of the names involved, basically (Adoptagoat on your side, Papasmurf on the other, Stormcrow and Deltah on your side- only battle that matches from today is that one).
Also, you ignored the part where I clearly pointed out that at least one admin was present, outside of the spoilers- unless Adoptagoat has lost his admin or something in which case my bad.
You couldnt put it down, I was alone ontop of it at one point and spamming F, no dice.You probably couldnt put down because of people in proximity, there was always someone standing right above the flag in tower itself. I put the flag up and down no problem after tower was built.
You probably couldnt put down because of people in proximity, there was always someone standing right above the flag in tower itself. I put the flag up and down no problem after tower was built.
I don't know about the admins or other players, but I personally feel like the devs have no interest in strat which kinda means that we are just left to fend for ourselves and deal with broken buggy shit as best we can and since siege gear is broken as fuck and people cant just move towers off flags it seems like more leniency is being allowed if it seems like it wasn't placed there maliciously.
As I said in a different thread, I was fighting for hospitaller in the battle in question and there was no talk of maliciously placing the siege tower over flags. Hospitaller had too many items in their inventory and couldn't access bolts and contruction material for the first ~15 minutes. Once it was accessible, there was a mad dash to build the seige tower and as such it wound up at spawn. Could it have been avoidable? Yes. But I do not believe it was done on purpose.
I touched a 7 year old mexican kid yesterday, but I didnt know He was under 18. Good logic right?
I touched a 7 year old mexican kid yesterday, but I didnt know He was under 18. Good logic right?
However, the attackers never tried to stop attacking so the defense could take out the tower. For future reference, if the attackers want something looked at, they need to stop attacking.
Also, ban goat for being a bad admin!!!
Also, on a slightly more serious note. I was in a fcc V occ battle a few days ago, and they tried to use a catapult. This teleported a building into their spawn and landed on top of their flags. I would guess that this wasn't their intended action, but should they have been banned? Good logic right?
Also, on a slightly more serious note. I was in a fcc V occ battle a few days ago, and they tried to use a catapult. This teleported a building into their spawn and landed on top of their flags. I would guess that this wasn't their intended action, but should they have been banned? Good logic right?
As I said in a different thread, I was fighting for hospitaller in the battle in question and there was no talk of maliciously placing the siege tower over flags. Hospitaller had too many items in their inventory and couldn't access bolts and contruction material for the first ~15 minutes. Once it was accessible, there was a mad dash to build the seige tower and as such it wound up at spawn. Could it have been avoidable? Yes. But I do not believe it was done on purpose.
In regards to the VE v OCC battle, you are selectively forgetting that OCC built a siege tower first that the house attached to. Not intended, but should OCC archers have climbed onto the house portion (not the siege tower itself or in it) and started shooting arrows? No. I then built a catapult to shoot the siege tower down. But instead it took the house away from them so they couldn't abuse it. As a side effect, however, while the catapult was not on the flags, the house ended up being over them. There should or could have been admin intervention then. In the next big battle, Dach threated to ban anyone who made a catapult, which is a smart play.
Basically what I'm saying is that I want more admins or more involved admins. I want rules enforced, if there are going to be rules, and I want us to be able to avoid selective adminning. But all if you guys in this thread are trying to debate that this is not a good thing. But of course the two biggest debaters are from Hero Party and Chaos. The first, when formed, had a Dev and two admins, the second with a Head admin and another admin. Oddly enough, those are the two clans I am subtly accusing of selective adminning. But of course, you guys seem to be enjoying your one sided admin decision.
In regards to the VE v OCC battle, you are selectively forgetting that OCC built a siege tower first that the house attached to. Not intended, but should OCC archers have climbed onto the house portion (not the siege tower itself or in it) and started shooting arrows? No. I then built a catapult to shoot the siege tower down. But instead it took the house away from them so they couldn't abuse it. As a side effect, however, while the catapult was not on the flags, the house ended up being over them. There should or could have been admin intervention then. In the next big battle, Dach threated to ban anyone who made a catapult, which is a smart play.
All I am saying is that I dont like people gettimg banned for things that they didnt do to abuse the system. Such as hospitaller with the seige tower or you with the catapult. Especially with strat bugged the way it currently is.
If I build a weapon rack and when I throw in the 5th block it bugs out and bans the entire enemy team, one that would be hilarious, but do you think I should be banned?
There are instances of "the other side" abusing scenery as well. One that comes to mind is the siege of Caraf Castle. When TKoV brought the wall down with the catapult, archers could stand in the wall and shoot from the cover without being seen. I think it is safe to say that both sides have abused these features and the fingerpointing will get no one anywhere. I was in the hosp TS for both siege tower battles and I assure there was no malicious talk in TS about placing it to block flags.
The flags are reachable under the siege tower as well (I could set my flags on them when I was on the ground). But the flags on the siege tower seem to have a completely vertical field of interaction (to clarify, I could set flags when I was at the very top of the siege tower trying to pick up my arbalest).
Sadly, NA has become a fest of "well the other side did X, so we are now justified to do Y". Shamefully, after being shot up from that glitch in Caraf castle numerous times, when SS attacked that castle and took down that same wall I was there with the rest of the Pew-Pewers, raining fire from the safety of the scenery.
Look through the forums for hom many ban requests I have made. I believe it was one, like 2 years ago. Ask an admin to look up my ban history. As far as I know its 0. I dont like people gettimg banned unless it is cut and dry. I have talked to admins about how dumb the ban request forum is, especially third party ban requests. Yes some people need a time out, but I dont agree with a lot of the bans that take place. If an admin would have said attackers stand still while they break the seige tower, I would be fine with that other then the clock loss. Yes maybe there shoyld have been some pink text but its hard to moderate things like that.
The issue is that you don't know exactly who built it, and unless someone fesses up or there's some evidence, no one can really be punished for it. You can't just ban the Hospitaller leaders for it, and you can't just ban the entire team for it, the only thing that can be done is prevent it from happening again in the future.
This whole discussion is silly and everybody arguing about people being banned, please calm the fuck down.
So if hospitaller didnt break their seige tower and effectivly forfeit the battle because they arent fightomg, you suggest banning them all? Yeah sounds fair.
Look through the forums for hom many ban requests I have made. I believe it was one, like 2 years ago. Ask an admin to look up my ban history. As far as I know its 0. I dont like people gettimg banned unless it is cut and dry. I have talked to admins about how dumb the ban request forum is, especially third party ban requests. Yes some people need a time out, but I dont agree with a lot of the bans that take place. If an admin would have said attackers stand still while they break the seige tower, I would be fine with that other then the clock loss. Yes maybe there shoyld have been some pink text but its hard to moderate things like that.
Say I sign up for FCC and feel like doing a little trolling, so when the battle gets going I wait until nobody's at the flags and throw down some csites. Team FCC gets warned not to do it anymore, they break it, and the battle goes on. I wait until everything's died down, everyone is refocused on the battle, and I throw down more garbage on the flags. Kesh gets banned for being the commander, even though he has no real control over what I do.
Trolls win. :lol:
Say I sign up for FCC and feel like doing a little trolling, so when the battle gets going I wait until nobody's at the flags and throw down some csites. Team FCC gets warned not to do it anymore, they break it, and the battle goes on. I wait until everything's died down, everyone is refocused on the battle, and I throw down more garbage on the flags. Kesh gets banned for being the commander, even though he has no real control over what I do.
Trolls win. :lol:
And no one is saying ban the entire team. Issue a warning and tell the offending team to break the offending object. Wait one minute. If no one listens, tell them its now first priority. Threaten to kick or ban the commander of the battle, probably by clan, if not by actual party owner, if he does not personally do it. It should be the entire team's responsibility to play fairly, but if no one is responsive, then make the parties with ownership responsible.
I mean, all I am really looking for is some pink text and some follow through. Mistakes happen, but they seem to keep happening to certain parties more than others. Clans who are mindful of the rules are getting screwed the worst, when it should be the other way around. Bring on some flying carpets. Keep people in check.
You also act like bans aren't an every day thing. What we have is a bullshit system that plays favorites. In fact, its devolved into a meta game of seeing who can get who banned. Look at shit like this:
http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-%28official%29/ban-request-47843/
http://forum.meleegaming.com/na-(official)/unban-request-zeenerd/
Everyone wants to see what they can get away with. See who I can trick into hitting me more times, so they get banned. See which admins are their friends and will watch out for them. See which admins will shorten a ban behind another admin's back. Unfortunately, in my opinion, that's spreading into Strategus.
Also, I'm surprised adoptagoat did not say anything then as there was chatter in both TS and in game. I suppose he is not always the most active admin, although I do remember him threatening to ban people for wasting lives at the end of the very last battle of Strat 3, which was at his fief, I believe. But that just goes to show what can happen when rules are selectively enforced. So bad on Adoptagoat for this one, bad on Shik and Tydeus on the one I mentioned before that was well documented. This is, of course, in contrast to Canary very quickly warning the defending team to not climb on aerial constructs in the battle his clan was attacking in and then not telling the Chevalier on his side to climb down when he got up there.
Canary actually did tell him(in TS) to get down, and told the rest of the team not to ladder up there after he realized he was up there.^
I still say there is nothing wrong with asking for consistent adminning before it becomes a way to meta game in Strat. Perhaps, in the future, we could have a rule where admins can't enforce against the enemy team except for the most blatant violations, especially if there are more neutral admins present. I don't want to see another CyrusHRE episode or maybe even something worse.
Basically what I'm saying is that I want more admins or more involved admins. I want rules enforced, if there are going to be rules, and I want us to be able to avoid selective adminning. But all if you guys in this thread are trying to debate that this is not a good thing.
But of course the two biggest debaters are from Hero Party and Chaos. The first, when formed, had a Dev and two admins, the second with a Head admin and another admin. Oddly enough, those are the two clans I am subtly accusing of selective adminning. But of course, you guys seem to be enjoying your one sided admin decision.
Alternatively, you can just get rid of the rule. I mean, this one hasn't been THAT big of a deal yet, but then we're just going to see how far it can be taken.
The issue is that you don't know exactly who built it, and unless someone fesses up or there's some evidence, no one can really be punished for it. You can't just ban the Hospitaller leaders for it, and you can't just ban the entire team for it, the only thing that can be done is prevent it from happening again in the future.
But you see, the defenders in said situation were the offending party, and should be responsible for destroying the construct. They will most likely take a few more losses during the reasonable period of time they have to break it, but that is their punishment for building it in the first place.
pretty sure youd get a pretty epic ban if anyone saw you doing it, which someone prolly would considering how many people are around and how obvious it is when someone has a c-site in their hands and considering (at least on FCC side) only certain people are ever supposed to spawn with c-sites.
The attacking team did not break any rules, and should not have to wait. You see, it is accountability of both the players and the admins I am asking for her. I am suggesting an escalating series of actions that the admins should take, starting with a general warning and outlining a reasonable amount of time to take corrective action. This series of actions should, however, become abbreviated with repeat offenders.
If you "mistakenly" build on flags in five battles in a row, there's no reason you shouldn't be banned for at least some period of time. And again, it's impossible to prove intent on the confines of the internet, unless they use text chat to blatantly admit they are doing something wrong.
It's not hard to moderate it it all. When you die in Strat, you can just unclick the ready to spawn box and go look at whatever you want. Throw some show names cheat on, and you can even assign the people nearest the offending object to destroy it.
Canary's stuffI've never said blanket punishment, but I don't think its the worse idea to to assign responsibility to one member of the faction who's battle it is. Just say "Kesh, its your job to kill that ladder now," if no one listens to the general warning put into pink chat. I mean, if you issue a blanket warning, hopefully people will just double check that no equipment is in violation of the rules. It takes half a second as you leave your spawn. Even if there is no piece of offending equipment and you issue a statement, you have issued a valuable reminder, and no one is actually getting punished or banned. However, I think everyone involved in Strategus should be aware of the rules. Perhaps a link to the appropriate thread could be added by Harald to the Battles page saying "please read the rules in this thread first, before applying to any Strategus battles." At that point, there is no excuse for not knowing the rules. One of the worst parts of the CRPG is the lack of documentation in easy to find places. You can start playing CRPG, but other than the newly added tips page, there is no easily accessible documentation. You wouldn't even know to go to the forums to find everything.
The server admins have two jobs: Enforcement and Punishment. In this situation they can not enforce the rules effectively and without direct witnesses (and screenshots/video) there will be no punishment.
Bring a catapult baby! Problem solved!
Bring a catapult baby! Problem solved!