Where art thou admins?

[DUKE DICKBUTT]

Today, I was really surprised when there was no admins in a 1900 vs 1400 battle during NA prime time.  We had an issue come up, with some blatant equipment on flags.  We asked the offending team to destroy it, but nothing happened of course.  Tried doing some admin chat, but I guess that doesn't work if admins aren't there.

Anyway, it was during this battle: http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=battlesparticipated#!?page=battledetail&id=3196

Of course, hosp will probably jump on the "YOU WON, WHY ARE YOU COMPLAINING?" train, but I would prefer the rules be upheld whenever at all possible not just when it is convenient for the admins' faction.


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

[Malaclypse]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

It's hard to tell if the flags are actually covered in all but the last picture, and even then it's still kind of hard to tell due to the angles at work in the photos. The emphasis seems to be on one flag in particular.

The first photo has said flag appearing to be left of the siege shield at the top right of the frame, next to a small green bush on the right and a darker green bush on the left Whether or not it looks like it is under the tower is inconclusive from the angle given. There's a dead Destrier in the background of it and the distance from the flag to the wood pile looks a lot different compared to the next photo.

The second photo gives us another understanding of where the flag is in relation to the landmarks from under the tower (the wood pile, the bushes, the dead Destrier) and it appears if we can see the top of the flag imposed over the bottom "lip" of the tower from this angle upon zooming in 300-500%. It definitely looks like the flag is outside of the tower if only by a thin margin.

The third photo gives us yet another perspective. We can see the siege shield from the other photos in the left half, and the bushes as well. The flag definitely appears to be under the tower. So we have one inconclusive photo, one photo where it looks like it's over the lip of the tower, and one where it looks like it's definitely under there. Hardly leaves us with anything solid, really need a video to say for certain.

In any case it's plainly visible- if it is indeed under the tower (which has been left unclear) it's right on the edge and should still be able to be put down via the F key. AFAIK the siege tower doesn't actually disable the flag from working; spawns can still be set at even flags completely covered beyond sight- I know from having done it before- so it stands to reason that it can still be disabled like any other flag; this, of course may be an erroneous assumption on my part, but it would also be quite hard to disprove as the issue may be that the siege tower could be holding people within it which are included within the detection radius of the flag, thereby disallowing the disabling of said flag.

Also, at least one admin was there (goat).

[Jon Agony]

(click to show/hide)

Today, I was really surprised when there was no admins in a 1900 vs 1400 battle during NA prime time.  We had an issue come up, with some blatant equipment on flags.  We asked the offending team to destroy it, but nothing happened of course.  Tried doing some admin chat, but I guess that doesn't work if admins aren't there.

Anyway, it was during this battle: http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=battlesparticipated#!?page=battledetail&id=3196

Of course, hosp will probably jump on the "YOU WON, WHY ARE YOU COMPLAINING?" train, but I would prefer the rules be upheld whenever at all possible not just when it is convenient for the admins' faction.


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

[DUKE DICKBUTT]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

It's hard to tell if the flags are actually covered in all but the last picture, and even then it's still kind of hard to tell due to the angles at work in the photos. The emphasis seems to be on one flag in particular.

The first photo has said flag appearing to be left of the siege shield at the top right of the frame, next to a small green bush on the right and a darker green bush on the left Whether or not it looks like it is under the tower is inconclusive from the angle given. There's a dead Destrier in the background of it and the distance from the flag to the wood pile looks a lot different compared to the next photo.

The second photo gives us another understanding of where the flag is in relation to the landmarks from under the tower (the wood pile, the bushes, the dead Destrier) and it appears if we can see the top of the flag imposed over the bottom "lip" of the tower from this angle upon zooming in 300-500%. It definitely looks like the flag is outside of the tower if only by a thin margin.

The third photo gives us yet another perspective. We can see the siege shield from the other photos in the left half, and the bushes as well. The flag definitely appears to be under the tower. So we have one inconclusive photo, one photo where it looks like it's over the lip of the tower, and one where it looks like it's definitely under there. Hardly leaves us with anything solid, really need a video to say for certain.

In any case it's plainly visible- if it is indeed under the tower (which has been left unclear) it's right on the edge and should still be able to be put down via the F key. AFAIK the siege tower doesn't actually disable the flag from working; spawns can still be set at even flags completely covered beyond sight- I know from having done it before- so it stands to reason that it can still be disabled like any other flag; this, of course may be an erroneous assumption on my part, but it would also be quite hard to disprove as the issue may be that the siege tower could be holding people within it which are included within the detection radius of the flag, thereby disallowing the disabling of said flag.

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.  If you really want to go into detail, yes, you can still put the flag down.  I fully understand the mechanics involved. But it causes extra effort on the non-offending party's side to work around it and could possibly alter the outcome of the match or cause more losses than necassary.  We've seen this in both this battle and the one with Heavenly Kingdom where both Shik and Tydeus failed to do anything about it. From what I have seen so far in my strat life, rules, for the most part have only been enforced when an admin's interests are involved whether it be an involved admin's faction, allied faction, implied allied faction, etc.  Or, let me put it this way, admins seem to do their jobs better when their interests are involved.  I'd like to see this type of stuff cracked down on, before it becomes a bigger issue or even a normal occurrence.  If that's too much to ask, then just get rid of the rule, before it becomes a weapon via selective enforcement. I feel that's not too much to ask.  However, as mentioned earlier, in this particular case, there were no admins present.  So I'm also asking for an increased admin presence.  I mean, this was during prime time, and we didn't even have one admin present.

Also I think I linked the wrong battle, there were so many today that I forgot which was which.  Must've been this one: http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=battlesparticipated#!?page=battleroster&id=3195

[Malaclypse]

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.

[DUKE DICKBUTT]

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.

The pictures are bit hard to tell, but actually are good enough due to a little something we call scale.  The flag is clearly under the large vertical post.  I will work on my photography in the future, but I was busy playing the game.  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.

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.

[Turboflex]

You couldnt put it down, I was alone ontop of it at one point and spamming F, no dice.

[Harrys Oil Can]

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.

[Turboflex]

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.

Nobody was around me but now that I think about it, it's possible I couldn't because of people above me in the tower (but this a function of illegal tower placement in first place).

[oprah_winfrey]

We are in a really odd spot where rules are being potentially broken due to strat related brokenness. If the seige tower was operational it could have been moved away. I also was in a battle a few days ago (OCC I think) where the enemy (FCC I think) yanked a building across the map with a catapult that landed on their flags.

[GOBBLINKINGREATLEADER]

I would like to echo Turboflex's comment and say that yesterday in this battle I made a flag cap attempt with two of my Frisian homies (Cikel, Badoon) versus Hospitaller--we're all cavalry. We got all of the flags down except for the last flag under the tower which I tried to get down for around 10-15 seconds but could not. This is either because it was not possible or because someone was standing inside the tower, exploiting the siege tower being on top of the flag.

(click to show/hide)

It seems like siege towers are becoming really fucking common these last few days. I've seen 3 or 4, 3 of them very close to, partially covering, or totally covering flags. Halfway-breaking rules and expecting leniency is becoming the meta-game.

[Kelugarn]

Until it is determined that flags 100% cannot be lowered with a siege tower over them admin's can't really say anything. Even then the best we can do is ask them to break it, and if they refuse we can't really go off and ban the whole team for not wasting their time to break a large siege tower.

I'm not saying they're legal by any means, it's definitely shades of gray right now. However, it's definitely safe to say that if we catch someone building over flags they're going to be out of the battle.

[Matey]

There is indeed a stated rule for strat against placing siege equipment on flags. Also, the day before all these battles I recall the enemy having a siege tower directly on one of their flags and if i remember right, Canary gave them a verbal warning against such things but that was as far as it went. they didnt tear it down or anything; and no admins followed up. 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.

[oprah_winfrey]

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.

[Matey]

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.

Nor do I, but I wasn't even talking about the tower that this post is about. I was talking about the tower the day before that they did get a warning for which was blatantly on top of a flag, though once again, I don't think it was done maliciously. My point is that the rules have so little meaning when the game is so broken and the devs so silent.