<!--quoteo(post=1902307:date=Feb 12 2012, 07:24 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 12 2012, 07:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902307"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->An elitist-attitude no less, you're full of crap aren't you. The lack of dedicated-servers\proper admin-tools has been an ongoing grievance for many of the recent AAA-titles, and where NS2 has the ability to deviate, you instead want it to conform and dumb down gameplay in order to ensure that. Setup-and-forget has blandness written all over it. Like I said, if your game requires no administration of any kind, again I won't say it isn't fun (TF2 comes pretty close to such a concept), but it is not possible within the NS-universe without seriously screwing around with what made the game fun. Can't believe you would call the desire for a proper pub-community with regulars and admins an elitist attitude.
This particular problem doesn't even require that much effort from the side of the server-operator, just set-up a global ban-list servers can hook up to, and it'll only take a single admin-action to prevent A LOT of grief.
Thinking NS2 should compete against many AAA-titles is delusional, it won't be able to, instead it has to draw the audience left behind by those games (again, people who prefer proper communities around their servers). Let me ask you this, back in NS1, if you had the choice between Random Server #23, or a server filled with regulars and competent fair admins that keep ###### like racism\sexism and assorted other crap out of their server, which one would you honestly choose? You know you're probably in for a ###### game if nobody on the server gives a flying hoot about what you do or say.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Way to misrepresent my view.
I listed elitism as a possibility - and that possibility was entirely up to you - it was a possible interpretation, especially considering some of the elitist attitudes rampant in this community. I don't know you well, so I can't easily say whether you fit into that elitist subset of the community - that's why it was not an accusation, only a possibility. It was clearly something you took great personal offense to though, given the heat of your reply.
That defeatism though - I was right on the mark there: * "Thinking NS2 should compete against many AAA-titles is delusional, it won't be able to, instead it has to draw the audience left behind by those games (again, people who * prefer proper communities around their servers)." * "but it is not possible within the NS-universe without seriously screwing around with what made the game fun"
AAA titles are inherently devoid of creativity, because it is easier to sell what people are already familiar with. Only Valve appears willing to take risks, but they're just "big indies", and they've got their very name to sell them. Certainly, trying to carve out a niche is a valid approach, but at the same time, it is not a good plan for sustainable success. Generally, creators/publishers targeting niche audiences tend to release multiple products often, so that they are targeting multiple niches or the same niches frequently with different products (e.g. subscriptions). I doubt that is the direction that UWE is intending to take; at the very least, it isn't a possibility for them: they have worked on NS2 for years and they have to win big with NS2, so to speak. NS1 was a very popular game - in fact, modification; the fact that it was a third-party modification may even have held it back in popularity. If NS2 can bring in even half as many players (and I imagine that that is the goal), then we <b>will</b> have a huge playerbase: meaning plenty of public, unattended, servers.
You also seem to be under the impression that people who will play NS2 never play any AAA titles. That assumption is laughable. Because people who played NS1 never played Counter-Strike, right? A lot of people playing AAA titles simply don't have better options, more tailor-fitted to their playing desires - NS2 can reach these players, and NS2 <b>can</b> have mass appeal.
So should all these paying customers not get a game reasonably free of griefing, or at least with some anti-griefing measures in place? Do most people have time to waste on ruined games?
Any mechanic that gives one player power over other players has a possibility for griefing - and NS/2 is inherently filled with these as part of the game's design. But recall that I never once stated any specific suggestions as to how to deal with griefing - so your accusation that I (effectively) want the game to be dumbed down for the public, griefing masses is entirely unfounded. It is, however, possible to significantly reduce abuse of power without significantly reducing the actual power. And be realistic, it's not as if you'd never get used to a slightly (insignificantly) reduced level of power: it just becomes a new game mechanic.
And if we're asking each other questions, then let me ask you this: - Can all servers always be administered at all times of day, during all days of the year; and are all admins always objective and always right? If you think "yes", then I'm not the delusional one.
<!--quoteo(post=1902559:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:24 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 13 2012, 08:24 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902559"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Way to misrepresent my view.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Always a pleasure.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->AAA titles are inherently devoid of creativity, because it is easier to sell what people are already familiar with. Only Valve appears willing to take risks, but they're just "big indies", and they've got their very name to sell them. Certainly, trying to carve out a niche is a valid approach, but at the same time, it is not a good plan for sustainable success. Generally, creators/publishers targeting niche audiences tend to release multiple products often, so that they are targeting multiple niches or the same niches frequently with different products (e.g. subscriptions). I doubt that is the direction that UWE is intending to take; at the very least, it isn't a possibility for them: they have worked on NS2 for years and they have to win big with NS2, so to speak. NS1 was a very popular game - in fact, modification; the fact that it was a third-party modification may even have held it back in popularity. If NS2 can bring in even half as many players (and I imagine that that is the goal), then we <b>will</b> have a huge playerbase: meaning plenty of public, unattended, servers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> NS2 has user-run dedicated-servers, people whom are willing to put these up and pay for their cost of operation aren't going to just sit back and never look at them again. There's a high degree of involvement here, which directly implies an effort to ensure smooth games (via admins obviously and whatnot). There will always be 'dead' servers out there, but it would be nice not to screw with the game in a pedantic effort to have the game run on every crappy little server.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You also seem to be under the impression that people who will play NS2 never play any AAA titles. That assumption is laughable. Because people who played NS1 never played Counter-Strike, right? A lot of people playing AAA titles simply don't have better options, more tailor-fitted to their playing desires - NS2 can reach these players, and NS2 <b>can</b> have mass appeal.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I never said it wouldn't, but not the mass appeal of certain war-shooters out there currently. Arguably NS2 would in fact tap into the CS-playerbase too, where more modern war-shooters have been unable to.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So should all these paying customers not get a game reasonably free of griefing, or at least with some anti-griefing measures in place? Do most people have time to waste on ruined games?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> So suddenly most people will have ruined games? Don't act as if every other commander is a griefer. And I've already suggested a ban-list that would solve most cases outright with zero effort for the server-operator.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Any mechanic that gives one player power over other players has a possibility for griefing - and NS/2 is inherently filled with these as part of the game's design. But recall that I never once stated any specific suggestions as to how to deal with griefing - so your accusation that I (effectively) want the game to be dumbed down for the public, griefing masses is entirely unfounded. It is, however, possible to significantly reduce abuse of power without significantly reducing the actual power.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Any denial that this is a job for admins, and suggestion that a mechanic could solve this is incorrect as has already been elaborated about in this very thread. So yea opting for anything but admins constitutes dumbing down (without actually fixing the damn problem too).
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And be realistic, it's not as if you'd never get used to a slightly (insignificantly) reduced level of power: it just becomes a new game mechanic.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Like MACs, multiple-commanders, the alien-commander and assorted other 'new' mechanics that have done nothing but worsen the game so far? If something is a ###### solution and in fact doesn't solve anything but rather makes the game less enjoyable, don't humor it by calling it a 'mechanic', it's just a dumb ###### idea.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And if we're asking each other questions, then let me ask you this: - Can all servers always be administered at all times of day, during all days of the year; and are all admins always objective and always right? If you think "yes", then I'm not the delusional one.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Right, some servers may for a short while run without admin-presence, let's therefor alter the game in a ###### way on EVERY server.
If you think all games on every server should be 'fun' all the time, you will need to obliterate almost all of NS' gameplay to do it. I think we already have something that does that: Combat.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS2 has user-run dedicated-servers, people whom are willing to put these up and pay for their cost of operation aren't going to just sit back and never look at them again. There's a high degree of involvement here, which directly implies an effort to ensure smooth games (via admins obviously and whatnot). There will always be 'dead' servers out there, but it would be nice not to screw with the game in a pedantic effort to have the game run on every crappy little server.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not every dedicated-server will be <strike>user-</strike> community-run. Many won't be. Especially in a popular game, which I hope NS2 will be.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I never said it wouldn't, but not the mass appeal of certain war-shooters out there currently. Arguably NS2 would in fact tap into the CS-playerbase too, where more modern war-shooters have been unable to.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, what you said was: "Thinking NS2 should compete against many AAA-titles is delusional, <b>it won't be able to</b>, <b>instead</b> it has to draw <b>the audience left behind by those games</b>". There's a sentiment of exclusion (or exclusivity, depends how you want to see it) there.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So suddenly most people will have ruined games? Don't act as if every other commander is a griefer. And I've already suggested a ban-list that would solve most cases outright with zero effort for the server-operator.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, most people will have a higher likelihood of ruined games. Don't act as if that's what I said. The ban-list is a good idea. Admin-tools out of the box is a good idea. If I could see all the good ideas beneath the nerd rage, I'm sure we would have less of a problem with one another.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Any denial that this is a job for admins, and suggestion that a mechanic could solve this is incorrect as has already been elaborated about in this very thread. So yea opting for anything but admins constitutes dumbing down (without actually fixing the damn problem too).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No one is denying that this is a job for admins. But it is not <b>only</b> a job for admins. Do we understand each other now?
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Like MACs, multiple-commanders, the alien-commander and assorted other 'new' mechanics that have done nothing but worsen the game so far? If something is a ###### solution and in fact doesn't solve anything but rather makes the game less enjoyable, don't humor it by calling it a 'mechanic', it's just a dumb ###### idea.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Multiple-commanders is actually an example of giving more players more power and therefore increasing the griefing potential. Removing multiple commanders would be one case of removing griefing potential (or rather, "chaos", really).
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Right, some servers may for a short while run without admin-presence, let's therefor alter the game in a ###### way on EVERY server.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It seems like you have only ever played in games with small, tight-knit communities where everyone greets you by name and you have never once experienced the feeling of anonymity on the internet.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you think all games on every server should be 'fun' all the time, you will need to obliterate almost all of NS' gameplay to do it. I think we already have something that does that: Combat.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> So games shouldn't strive to be fun all the time? That is defeatism.
Could you two please stop with this "It's my toy you cant have it!" and be actually productive? Like debating if the mentioned "reputation counter" could work to solve this problem? (3rd site, last post in case you missed it.) Thx.
swalkSay hello to my little friend.Join Date: 2011-01-20Member: 78384Members, Squad Five Blue
edited February 2012
This thread needs a video. Don't remove recycling, then no-one will ever experience this again: <center><object width="450" height="356"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/x3yXitENic0"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/x3yXitENic0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="356"></embed></object></center>
Here is the thing. Recycling is fine, when the team agrees, as a team, that the game is lost. Thing is, right now the ability to concede rests with the commander alone.
Just put in the ability for a team to concede together, a simple vote, if 2/3 of the team agrees, to call it quits the game ends.
There is obviously a lot of people who want to be able to conceded, recycling the ips is just a work around to add this feature back into the game.
Comments
This particular problem doesn't even require that much effort from the side of the server-operator, just set-up a global ban-list servers can hook up to, and it'll only take a single admin-action to prevent A LOT of grief.
Thinking NS2 should compete against many AAA-titles is delusional, it won't be able to, instead it has to draw the audience left behind by those games (again, people who prefer proper communities around their servers). Let me ask you this, back in NS1, if you had the choice between Random Server #23, or a server filled with regulars and competent fair admins that keep ###### like racism\sexism and assorted other crap out of their server, which one would you honestly choose? You know you're probably in for a ###### game if nobody on the server gives a flying hoot about what you do or say.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Way to misrepresent my view.
I listed elitism as a possibility - and that possibility was entirely up to you - it was a possible interpretation, especially considering some of the elitist attitudes rampant in this community. I don't know you well, so I can't easily say whether you fit into that elitist subset of the community - that's why it was not an accusation, only a possibility. It was clearly something you took great personal offense to though, given the heat of your reply.
That defeatism though - I was right on the mark there:
* "Thinking NS2 should compete against many AAA-titles is delusional, it won't be able to, instead it has to draw the audience left behind by those games (again, people who * prefer proper communities around their servers)."
* "but it is not possible within the NS-universe without seriously screwing around with what made the game fun"
AAA titles are inherently devoid of creativity, because it is easier to sell what people are already familiar with. Only Valve appears willing to take risks, but they're just "big indies", and they've got their very name to sell them. Certainly, trying to carve out a niche is a valid approach, but at the same time, it is not a good plan for sustainable success. Generally, creators/publishers targeting niche audiences tend to release multiple products often, so that they are targeting multiple niches or the same niches frequently with different products (e.g. subscriptions). I doubt that is the direction that UWE is intending to take; at the very least, it isn't a possibility for them: they have worked on NS2 for years and they have to win big with NS2, so to speak. NS1 was a very popular game - in fact, modification; the fact that it was a third-party modification may even have held it back in popularity. If NS2 can bring in even half as many players (and I imagine that that is the goal), then we <b>will</b> have a huge playerbase: meaning plenty of public, unattended, servers.
You also seem to be under the impression that people who will play NS2 never play any AAA titles. That assumption is laughable. Because people who played NS1 never played Counter-Strike, right? A lot of people playing AAA titles simply don't have better options, more tailor-fitted to their playing desires - NS2 can reach these players, and NS2 <b>can</b> have mass appeal.
So should all these paying customers not get a game reasonably free of griefing, or at least with some anti-griefing measures in place? Do most people have time to waste on ruined games?
Any mechanic that gives one player power over other players has a possibility for griefing - and NS/2 is inherently filled with these as part of the game's design. But recall that I never once stated any specific suggestions as to how to deal with griefing - so your accusation that I (effectively) want the game to be dumbed down for the public, griefing masses is entirely unfounded. It is, however, possible to significantly reduce abuse of power without significantly reducing the actual power. And be realistic, it's not as if you'd never get used to a slightly (insignificantly) reduced level of power: it just becomes a new game mechanic.
And if we're asking each other questions, then let me ask you this:
- Can all servers always be administered at all times of day, during all days of the year; and are all admins always objective and always right?
If you think "yes", then I'm not the delusional one.
Always a pleasure.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->AAA titles are inherently devoid of creativity, because it is easier to sell what people are already familiar with. Only Valve appears willing to take risks, but they're just "big indies", and they've got their very name to sell them. Certainly, trying to carve out a niche is a valid approach, but at the same time, it is not a good plan for sustainable success. Generally, creators/publishers targeting niche audiences tend to release multiple products often, so that they are targeting multiple niches or the same niches frequently with different products (e.g. subscriptions). I doubt that is the direction that UWE is intending to take; at the very least, it isn't a possibility for them: they have worked on NS2 for years and they have to win big with NS2, so to speak. NS1 was a very popular game - in fact, modification; the fact that it was a third-party modification may even have held it back in popularity. If NS2 can bring in even half as many players (and I imagine that that is the goal), then we <b>will</b> have a huge playerbase: meaning plenty of public, unattended, servers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS2 has user-run dedicated-servers, people whom are willing to put these up and pay for their cost of operation aren't going to just sit back and never look at them again. There's a high degree of involvement here, which directly implies an effort to ensure smooth games (via admins obviously and whatnot). There will always be 'dead' servers out there, but it would be nice not to screw with the game in a pedantic effort to have the game run on every crappy little server.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You also seem to be under the impression that people who will play NS2 never play any AAA titles. That assumption is laughable. Because people who played NS1 never played Counter-Strike, right? A lot of people playing AAA titles simply don't have better options, more tailor-fitted to their playing desires - NS2 can reach these players, and NS2 <b>can</b> have mass appeal.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I never said it wouldn't, but not the mass appeal of certain war-shooters out there currently. Arguably NS2 would in fact tap into the CS-playerbase too, where more modern war-shooters have been unable to.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So should all these paying customers not get a game reasonably free of griefing, or at least with some anti-griefing measures in place? Do most people have time to waste on ruined games?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So suddenly most people will have ruined games? Don't act as if every other commander is a griefer. And I've already suggested a ban-list that would solve most cases outright with zero effort for the server-operator.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Any mechanic that gives one player power over other players has a possibility for griefing - and NS/2 is inherently filled with these as part of the game's design. But recall that I never once stated any specific suggestions as to how to deal with griefing - so your accusation that I (effectively) want the game to be dumbed down for the public, griefing masses is entirely unfounded. It is, however, possible to significantly reduce abuse of power without significantly reducing the actual power.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Any denial that this is a job for admins, and suggestion that a mechanic could solve this is incorrect as has already been elaborated about in this very thread. So yea opting for anything but admins constitutes dumbing down (without actually fixing the damn problem too).
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And be realistic, it's not as if you'd never get used to a slightly (insignificantly) reduced level of power: it just becomes a new game mechanic.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like MACs, multiple-commanders, the alien-commander and assorted other 'new' mechanics that have done nothing but worsen the game so far? If something is a ###### solution and in fact doesn't solve anything but rather makes the game less enjoyable, don't humor it by calling it a 'mechanic', it's just a dumb ###### idea.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And if we're asking each other questions, then let me ask you this:
- Can all servers always be administered at all times of day, during all days of the year; and are all admins always objective and always right?
If you think "yes", then I'm not the delusional one.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right, some servers may for a short while run without admin-presence, let's therefor alter the game in a ###### way on EVERY server.
If you think all games on every server should be 'fun' all the time, you will need to obliterate almost all of NS' gameplay to do it. I think we already have something that does that: Combat.
Not every dedicated-server will be <strike>user-</strike> community-run. Many won't be. Especially in a popular game, which I hope NS2 will be.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I never said it wouldn't, but not the mass appeal of certain war-shooters out there currently. Arguably NS2 would in fact tap into the CS-playerbase too, where more modern war-shooters have been unable to.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, what you said was: "Thinking NS2 should compete against many AAA-titles is delusional, <b>it won't be able to</b>, <b>instead</b> it has to draw <b>the audience left behind by those games</b>". There's a sentiment of exclusion (or exclusivity, depends how you want to see it) there.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So suddenly most people will have ruined games? Don't act as if every other commander is a griefer. And I've already suggested a ban-list that would solve most cases outright with zero effort for the server-operator.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, most people will have a higher likelihood of ruined games. Don't act as if that's what I said. The ban-list is a good idea. Admin-tools out of the box is a good idea. If I could see all the good ideas beneath the nerd rage, I'm sure we would have less of a problem with one another.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Any denial that this is a job for admins, and suggestion that a mechanic could solve this is incorrect as has already been elaborated about in this very thread. So yea opting for anything but admins constitutes dumbing down (without actually fixing the damn problem too).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No one is denying that this is a job for admins. But it is not <b>only</b> a job for admins. Do we understand each other now?
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Like MACs, multiple-commanders, the alien-commander and assorted other 'new' mechanics that have done nothing but worsen the game so far? If something is a ###### solution and in fact doesn't solve anything but rather makes the game less enjoyable, don't humor it by calling it a 'mechanic', it's just a dumb ###### idea.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Multiple-commanders is actually an example of giving more players more power and therefore increasing the griefing potential. Removing multiple commanders would be one case of removing griefing potential (or rather, "chaos", really).
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Right, some servers may for a short while run without admin-presence, let's therefor alter the game in a ###### way on EVERY server.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It seems like you have only ever played in games with small, tight-knit communities where everyone greets you by name and you have never once experienced the feeling of anonymity on the internet.
<!--quoteo(post=1902610:date=Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Feb 13 2012, 08:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1902610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you think all games on every server should be 'fun' all the time, you will need to obliterate almost all of NS' gameplay to do it. I think we already have something that does that: Combat.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So games shouldn't strive to be fun all the time? That is defeatism.
NS2 needs less insularity, not more.
Like debating if the mentioned "reputation counter" could work to solve this problem? (3rd site, last post in case you missed it.)
Thx.
Don't remove recycling, then no-one will ever experience this again:
<center><object width="450" height="356"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/x3yXitENic0"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/x3yXitENic0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="356"></embed></object></center>
Just put in the ability for a team to concede together, a simple vote, if 2/3 of the team agrees, to call it quits the game ends.
There is obviously a lot of people who want to be able to conceded, recycling the ips is just a work around to add this feature back into the game.