NA2

[Phew]

So basically, the easiest fix would be to get an NA admin who plays almost exclusively siege (like phew or elindor) on a regular basis, and give them the power "that no one wanted" to change the map rotation to accommodate the current server population.

Elindor made most of the maps that are actually properly-sized for NA, so I can't think of anyone more qualified to control the rotation. I doubt he wants to police griefers/leechers in an admin role though (nor do I), although I could be wrong. The jobs should probably be separate anyway.

[Jona]

Elindor made most of the maps that are actually properly-sized for NA, so I can't think of anyone more qualified to control the rotation. I doubt he wants to police griefers/leechers in an admin role though (nor do I), although I could be wrong. The jobs should probably be separate anyway.

Well they can be separate, but what I really meant to say is give us an NA2 admin already (since every single admin only goes to NA1) so that they can change the map whenever it gets to a bad one (based in population).

NA2 rotation has had the same treatment as EU2 for the past years, with some minor changes sometimes done by shik.

Bottom line is, siege map rotation or even maps are not the reason "NA2 is dying", if it were we would see the same happening in EU. Clearly, this is not the case.

I dont see how EU servers being active proves the maps are okay for NA use. The whole point is that EU has way more players making larger maps okay. NA however has very low population by comparison so larger maps are indeed population killers. Sorry, but just because they work for EU doesnt prove that they are flawless maps that NA should embrace. The entire point of this argument is how NA needs a separate map rotation with a smaller playerbase in mind.

[Jacko]

Well they can be separate, but what I really meant to say is give us an NA2 admin already (since every single admin only goes to NA1) so that they can change the map whenever it gets to a bad one (based in population).

I dont see how EU servers being active proves the maps are okay for NA use. The whole point is that EU has way more players making larger maps okay. NA however has very low population by comparison so larger maps are indeed population killers. Sorry, but just because they work for EU doesnt prove that they are flawless maps that NA should embrace. The entire point of this argument is how NA needs a separate map rotation with a smaller playerbase in mind.

Give you an NA admin already? People 'earn' admin, by being trustworthy enough to handle the responsibilities. If you are up for it, apply in the NA admin thread: http://forum.meleegaming.com/general-discussion/na-servers-game-admins-wanted/60/

There has been several post, in different parts of the forum, for new scene people, EU and NA. Only EU guys responded.

No one has any problem implementing a custom rotation for NA, but it has to come from you guys. Elindor has shown himself willing enough to help, and I'm sure Fips/Teeth and him can work out somethingi if they want to.

[Tydeus]

Things like this are easily done in IRC. Fips is always around so you might try getting in irc and talking there if you're interested in helping with something like this.

[Jona]

Give you an NA2 admin already? People 'earn' admin, by being trustworthy enough to handle the responsibilities. If you are up for it, apply in the NA admin thread: http://forum.meleegaming.com/general-discussion/na-servers-game-admins-wanted/60/

There has been several post, in different parts of the forum, for new scene people, EU and NA. Only EU guys responded.

No one has any problem implementing a custom rotation for NA, but it has to come from you guys. Elindor has shown himself willing enough to help, and I'm sure Fips/Teeth and him can work out somethingi if they want to.

Fixed for you.

We have enough NA admins, imo. But none who play siege primarily. We just got more admins who applied in that recent thread who only play battle. All I am saying is we could really use someone who is mainly in siege. And I am not asking adminship to be given to myself, either.

[Elindor]

I agree Jacko that the map rotation (being the same between EU and NA) is not the catalyst that brought NA2 to such average low numbers...the question is whether some maps in that rotation due to their size, etc are now making things worse because NA2 is ALREADY low in pop.  That's all.

Anyhow, yeah I am willing to help construct an NA siege rotation if the devs decide that that is an acceptable and plausible route.

[Tojo]

Give you an NA admin already? People 'earn' admin, by being trustworthy enough to handle the responsibilities. If you are up for it, apply in the NA admin thread: http://forum.meleegaming.com/general-discussion/na-servers-game-admins-wanted/60/

There has been several post, in different parts of the forum, for new scene people, EU and NA. Only EU guys responded.

No one has any problem implementing a custom rotation for NA, but it has to come from you guys. Elindor has shown himself willing enough to help, and I'm sure Fips/Teeth and him can work out somethingi if they want to.

Jona i dont agree with your lightning speed axe, but i certainly agree with your stance on NA2 

i am pretty active in siege and play almost every night during primetime I applied to be an NA admin (wanting to help with NA2 and Na7) No one contacted me or seemed in the least bit interested in interviewing the people who applied. Why dont you atleast give the poll to change maps, so that even if there is no admin the handful of players on NA2 can change the map to a more suitable one.

[Canary]

We have enough NA admins, imo. But none who play siege primarily. We just got more admins who applied in that recent thread who only play battle. All I am saying is we could really use someone who is mainly in siege. And I am not asking adminship to be given to myself, either.

I think the problem isn't just that admins don't play siege, it's that hardly anyone is playing siege, let alone any admins. We have at least two admins who would primarily play in siege already, they've just been inactive or playing elsewhere some of the time because the server has been so empty. It hasn't been completely abandoned by the team; many of us are easily reachable with problems, if you care to contact us about specific people causing trouble at a given moment, and would oblige switching over to spectate the issue.

We're not giving siege-only players admin power on the single basis that they would play on the server.

i am pretty active in siege and play almost every night during primetime I applied to be an NA admin (wanting to help with NA2 and Na7) No one contacted me or seemed in the least bit interested in interviewing the people who applied. Why dont you atleast give the poll to change maps, so that even if there is no admin the handful of players on NA2 can change the map to a more suitable one.

Haven't stopped looking at NA admin candidates, more contact will be given eventually. Still not a guarantee that anyone else will be assigned, though, at least for now. (Right now I believe NA has more total admins than EU does, including the EU players with admin here who never join our servers. Still screwy, even though we also have several inactive admins, because our population is much smaller than EU)


Polls have a lot of issues. People tend to abuse them, which can be particularly bad in the case of low-population servers where a small group of friends can practically guarantee a passing vote. What's worse: a map that has mismatched balance for the small teams or a map poll going up every couple minutes keeping everyone from getting a chance to have a multiplier, assuming the votes keep adding up?

[Rumblood]

Admins on NA1 don't have any problem switching over to NA2 to deal with a map or player issue. Several of us also provide our Steam information so that we can be contacted even when not playing and also are willing to login to help out when we are able. Try either option, or of course, hit up irc.

[partyboy]

TLDR:   Combine Strategus ticket and spawn system with Siege flags and make it into a Conquest/Domination mode like in Battlefield where the team to not run out of tickets first, with deaths and holding less ground draining tickets, wins.  Use a limited amount of very high quality maps instead of 100+ on battle or siege.  Put the objectives over different terrain so there are forts and cover that need an infantry push, or more open/hilly areas that require support by cav and ranged to capture.  Spawn points rotate with territory captured.  Ultimately create a gamemode that promotes teamwork and objective gameplay so classes perform their roles instead of hunting for kills and preserving their life.

My thought process:

A whine thread about battle servers being crap got me thinking about whats good and bad about cRPG, all the game types, and all the effort the dev team put into Strategus development.  I'm starting to see a big gap in the potential of cRPG gameplay between what we are now so used to in Battle and Siege, compared to the innovation the dev team is capable of with things like Rageball and Strategus.  I wrote a few posts and I am basically just going to copy them here but I wanted to describe how I see a "conquest" type gamemode for cRPG that people are starting to wish for, accomplished by drawing from the best of all the modes available in cRPG for an experience that sounds, at least to me, like it would be the best thing to happen to cRPG.


A fully realized conquest/domination type game mode, that is fast, functional, rewards infantry play and encourages even pubbies to do teamwork, and has really good maps.. not 110 shit generic maps like battle, just 5-6 GOOD maps designed for the mode, even only 2-3 to start..

Would be the best thing for this game in the past year, would be tremendously more entertaining then any strat gimmicks, and could be a flagship gametype for a future MELEEGAMING.COM entry into the donkeycrew's game catalogue.

I wouldn't want to see a single respawn either.  Just ape Battlefield's conquest a lot.  Teams get tickets and losing ground or lives ticks them away.  What's so shitty about battle as an infantry player is you can man up and charge to take ground that is being contested then just die to pikes, a cav couch, headshot, or whatever.  If you want to get points stay alive and not die to ranged or cav instantly you need to honestly play like a pussy more often then not, even if being an over aggressive dude can have moments of hilarity/great success too.

The metagame I always honed in my mind when I was a strat commander, most of which never really work that well because even strat just is glorified team death match.. is the idea of map control.  Occuping territory with infantry.  Using ranged to facilitate movement of infantry players.  Cav threaten the routes infantry must take to get from points a-b-c or can be a mobile force like jeeps in battlefield to threaten rear spawns.  Strat NEVER plays like this though.  Its boring.  Its just TDM, regardless of map or setting.

Just making really interesting maps for this mode, with you know A B C points, and spawns turn to these points if you control them and maybe a few others around it that you set like Strat battles.  Maybe mini castles around the points and stuff like that.  You could also use the reworked town maps for the big Strat battles that I only got to play a couple times ever, and some of the towns that i saw the UIF take are too great of maps to be wasted in Strategus.

I imagine a few flags like in Siege across the map, on places like top of hills or in the middle of ruins or keeps.. just places that are fun to fight on.  Like the map Field by the River, probably the best native map.  People naturally gravitate towards the set of ruins on one side of the river.  Places of interest like this would have the Siege flags on them, and capping it will reduce a gradual drain of tickets on top of the drain you get from deaths.  So like a Strat battle, but with more fluidity and another layer of depth in a give and take of land, instead of solely being about grinding out a TDM count of lives.

Strat battles have the set spawn system built into them already, so you could just slap a couple of these around the siege flags, and if none selected just randomly select a siege flag that your team owns to be a spawn.

Basically I feel like this mode could be created by using assets that all already exist in cRPG.  You guys have created some awesome gameplay possiblities in Strategus, that the community often look forward to instead of mindless siege or battle server gameplay, and you know how often people bitch about maps and cav and it being unfair and everything for pick up and play sessions.

So I think it would be very forward minded for the dev team to consider porting some of the best features of Strat into a more accessible game mode, because Strat battles are rare, are full of bullshit drama and bugs, require effort and scheduling.. but have ultimately some of the most teamwork focused gameplay and inspired design compared to the port of native warband modes that just ape counter-strike and stuff.

You guys tried out that Stronghold or whatever mode a while ago that I think was basically too confusing and not focused enough on what I think all of us agree is the best part of Warband/cRPG:  Charging with a bunch of bros in a shield wall with pikes and whatnot, archers shooting away at each other, fighting over concise objectives.  Moments of gameplay where you feel like two armies fighting for something.  Not having to run and chase the last few alive archers across hilly generic map village map #3 for the last 2 minutes of a round, every other round.  Or being couched at spawn and sitting out for 6 minutes.

Siege gives you a basic objective and frees up the stress from a single life, kiting and cav, and keeps up a sustained level of intensity that is very fun to play for short gaming sessions.  This is why "bads" go on siege:  casual type players, who this mod honestly drive away in flocks, probably like this kind of gaming much better instead of the counter-strike ONE LIFE MAD CAV OPEN FIELDS GOOD LUCK BRO mode.  But Siege is full of shit maps, cav can't do anything, it just feels half assed.

Now if you can get that kind of objective based, fun, fast paced Siege gameplay on maps that represent the most balanced and fun experiences in Strat or Battle servers, you'd have something really great.  Some of those reworked town maps that we only got to see at the end of Strat 3.0 when UIF were taking them.. those were some amazing maps!  And would be perfect for a game type like this, instead of only getting to play them 3 times a year.

That's a lot of damned words I know but I combined my posts so people could have a place to talk about a game type like this instead of being buried in shit threads of people simply saying cav is OP.  I dunno, seems like it would be pretty fun to me!

[Wraist]

So this is a pretty odd, but relevant question. If I'm on defense and a teammate is trying to open the gate for no good reason, and there is no mod around, how should I respond? I saw somebody do this at the beginning of the round where the flag is right next to the gate, and it looked like it was going to happen again, so I kicked and then nudged him [he didn't report]. Poll Kick and Ban were unavailable, and I could easily see myself being kicked from the server if he reported those kicks/nudges [and tking would probably get me banned].

[Zaren]

So this is a pretty odd, but relevant question. If I'm on defense and a teammate is trying to open the gate for no good reason, and there is no mod around, how should I respond? I saw somebody do this at the beginning of the round where the flag is right next to the gate, and it looked like it was going to happen again, so I kicked and then nudged him [he didn't report]. Poll Kick and Ban were unavailable, and I could easily see myself being kicked from the server if he reported those kicks/nudges [and tking would probably get me banned].

screenshot/post ban thread

[Jarold]

I didn't know this thread would turn into such a big discussion! Yes NA Siege needs to have different treatment compared to EU Siege because of the player amount difference. But that doesn't mean we need extra special treatment or anything. But we all know devs are biased to EU over NA problems.

I personally love all siege maps and will play it with 20 people and have a lot of fun doing it.

[Jona]

I think the problem isn't just that admins don't play siege, it's that hardly anyone is playing siege, let alone any admins. We have at least two admins who would primarily play in siege already, they've just been inactive or playing elsewhere some of the time because the server has been so empty. It hasn't been completely abandoned by the team; many of us are easily reachable with problems, if you care to contact us about specific people causing trouble at a given moment, and would oblige switching over to spectate the issue.

I was playing siege earlier, and much to my surprise after populating the server with a few friends the server eventually grew to nearly 30 v 30 at one point. The only admin I was aware of that came into the server during my much too long play time was phantasmal... who showed up for maybe 1 map, so like 20 mins tops. That was it. Other than plenty of leechers, and some minor greifing, there were no problems major problems, per se. But the fact that we easily had 60 players for some time, and no admins were in server was quite unsettling. I was tempted to report one guy who was opening the gate (as a defender) and standing on top of ballistas so that friendlies couldnt use them, but that would require me going into irc and poking every admin idling in there until I found one who was around, and then they would have to hop on the server, and by then the whole thing would have been over and whoop-dee-doo at best the troll gets a warning. I understand that with such a small community we can't expect an admin to be on every server at any time, but this is getting just a little annoying. Not to mention that the final nail in siege's coffin today was a huuuge map when the population got down to lower (15 v 15, or 10 v 10) numbers. If an admin were able to switch to a smaller scaled map, siege could have been alive longer. And the longer its alive, the more people will flock to it.

We're not giving siege-only players admin power on the single basis that they would play on the server.

While I completely understand that if someone has a resume stating "I am in siege 24/7 and I never sleep or go afk" that would by no means qualify them for adminship, yet it should still be factor in your decisions for new candidates. If you have two guys who are pretty active, well-respected players, but only 1 admin slot to fill, it should go to whoever plays more siege at this point.  Not to mention that at this point, the most likely outcome for misbehaving in siege is someone posting a ban thread on the forums, where an admin (who wasn't there) would have to download and review the logs and then make a verdict based off of limited information. Sure, that method works, but having an admin on-site would save you from having to review so many ban requests. In all honesty, I would report quite a few things if it weren't such a hassle for everyone involved: I would have to take screenshots and then upload them to some picture sharing site, and then write up a complete description of the incident, remember who was around for witnesses, etc. Then the accused may choose to come in and rage / troll some more. Then an admin would have to read all of it, check the logs, and come up with a suitable punishment.  Just so much work its not even worth it at the end of the day. Then the troll goes unpunished and will only continue to cause trouble.

I didn't know this thread would turn into such a big discussion! Yes NA Siege needs to have different treatment compared to EU Siege because of the player amount difference. But that doesn't mean we need extra special treatment or anything. But we all know devs are biased to EU over NA problems.

I personally love all siege maps and will play it with 20 people and have a lot of fun doing it.

Since we can't expect much of any assistance from the devs in terms of 'special treatment' I think the whole admin thing could really help out. It is something that us NA folks can decide upon too help ourselves.

And its a shame that you missed out today during prime time! It was a blast. Defense won nearly as often as attackers... truly a change from the norm, and one that is more than welcomed!

[Canuck]

Jona dude, did you read this?

Admins on NA1 don't have any problem switching over to NA2 to deal with a map or player issue. Several of us also provide our Steam information so that we can be contacted even when not playing and also are willing to login to help out when we are able. Try either option, or of course, hit up irc.

I know that there are problems on siege when there are no admins about but seeing as they've provided a solution why not try giving it a shot, and then if it doesn't work you can make a case about NA2 needing more dedicated administration.

Edit: missed the part where you said you didn't go try and get an admin, so I guess you did read it. I get that it would take too long to catch that particular instance but letting an admin know that siege could use somebody to look after it would help with the leechers