mrnutty12
- D
-
Content Count
647 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Posts posted by mrnutty12
-
-
1 hour ago, Kypari said:I don't understand how on earth you would get to that conclusion. The knockback that sniper provides happens so rarely and it's almost ineffective to a point where it's more of an inconvenience than a big deal. When have you ever approached a group of people as hale and thought "oh no these snipers are knocking me back so far i cant get to them"?
You can't compare the two AT ALL and there is literally no reason to add a cap where it is not needed. We should be discouraging caps, not adding them for the sake of it or because some class has a bit of knockback in their kit (being almost insignificant in comparison to other classes).
Sniper stops the boss. Heavy launches the boss.
Excuse me, but I always tend hesitate jumping a (group of) sniper(s)* because my momentum can very easily take a 180 because of the ridiculous knockback on them. Sniper can just reverse boss speed if he isn't planted on the ground, but heavies generally one can strafe around in the air to make consistent tracking a lot harder or just walk up to and give a good ol pat on the back. I don't know what you do to get launched by heavies, but I almost never experience that much trouble with the class alone.
Ideally though, yes we should not be capping anything I am simply saying that if the heavy is getting a limit for knockback that sniper should as well on the same grounds as he can be just as problematic with flinging bosses away.
*assuming it isn't a completely incompetent player.
12 minutes ago, Caleb956 said:Forums won't let me delete this tag or add any more..ree
Angery.
-
41 minutes ago, Kypari said:??
I don't know how you came to that conclusion at all, sniper not only has 1 bullet that will stop the hales mobility for that specific shot, but heavy crits minigun is consistently better at knocking back entirely. Not sure what you mean at all dude...
Because sniper has a ridiculous amount of knockback in the first place with his rifle, given he always does at least 150 (but often ~450) he is flinging you way far away if your feet are not firmly planted on the ground, but then heavy doesn't really send you flying back either on the ground so I'd say it is fairly comparable.
The easier bit is that sniper doesn't have to track-aim the hale like a heavy does doing all his damage and knockback in burst. The best part is that he isn't handicapped by large spread so he can fudge up a hale jump going after someone else far easier than a heavy ever could. -
1 hour ago, Elcark said:I'm not actually sure what you mean by putting a cap on the "mediguns", but if we can essentially cap medics for those two bosses specifically then that works all the same, but if not then capping them in general really does no harm to normal rounds anyways.
If I am reading the config correctly, it should just remove the mediguns from all excess medics past a certain ratio/number. It buffs up the crossbow it gives the rest of the medics to compensate for the loss of the medigun, but it should work in theory.
1 hour ago, Elcark said:So long as the boss never tries to jump ever, sure. The compounded knockback though is capable of keeping the hale pushed back even at range get taunting to get those crits back also takes merely seconds.
What i'd like really hasn't changed. No cap on sniper, cap of three on engi and heavy, cap of four on medic. Considering what has been said though, if we do see it as necessary to keep a cap on sniper (I agree with kypari that we really don't) and for the sake of not putting caps that are too unnecessary but still keeping things from becoming unfair to the hale by sheer spam, then perhaps a cap of four for all four classes.
The sniper can knock the hale back far easier than the heavy can, and doesn't require him to taunt to do that. I maintain that if we are capping the heavy for such reasons that you should cap the sniper for it as well. I rarely see more than a couple of traditional heavy players in a given round anyways, but it doesn't make much sense to me to cap them when other classes can accomplish similar things without requiring them to taunt for crits at all.
Further, when we have stuff like hyperheavy or your fatscout thing, there is little chance that every single heavy will be doing a crit minigun strat which makes the cap even more unfair to people who wish to use those alternate styles of play.Engie could do with a cap tho so eh.
-
1 hour ago, Elcark said:Heavy
Like Kypari said, heavy with crits is entirely equivalent to machine slapping. With crits being entirely free with taunting it does not take many to create an effect of keeping the boss perpetually at bay since the crit knockback is still going to take effect even at max range.
The notable difference between the two being that crits wear off in a few seconds unless the heavy is the last person or they are humping a very specific alternate engineer building. Moreover, you don't launch hales into the sky with the crits so pinning someone in the skybox is mostly reserved for engineers at this point.
1 hour ago, Elcark said:Medic
How many of these boss fights have you actually seen then? It's practically ever time that as much as 1/3 of a team will change to medic, and there have been many matches where the boss has been entirely shut down because of the medic respawns to the extent blitz was considered an underpowered boss for some time. The real issue doesn't come from the number of medics as I said before as few as two-three can keep a chain going fairly easily. It's when that chain is broken but the effort to do that can be undone because of a single extra medic, which makes hunting down six or more medics only for more to have gone by unnoticed an entirely unfun experience.
As I said, we should be able to limit how many mediguns actually exist on the red team with built in blitz code in theory, so porting that bit over have limiting medics to 3-4 should be fairly simple.
1 hour ago, Elcark said:Pyro
The old stun mechanic relied on usage of map height advantage and was practically never used due to the limited of being applicable because of that. That stun, the homing bonk stun, and not to mention the short circuit stun last much longer then the thermal thruster stun lasts (about three and a half seconds max), in two cases are as little effort as a right click, and have been accepted regardless. The actual range for the thermal thruster to stun is far exaggerated and is within melee range of the hale, adding on the air time to the jump makes it very easy for the hale to actually move out of the way if they bother to be attentive. Stun mechanics are regarded as detrimental in normal gameplay because when you are stunned, you're very likely going to die, which applies the same to being stunned by the boss's rage, but not to the boss themselves due to their health pools. With the current recharge rate, it takes over one minute to get a single charge, meaning with max stun effect it would take at least ten pyros actually landing properly to keep the boss stunned.
8 hours ago, mrnutty12 said:If the issue persists.
1 hour ago, Elcark said:Sniper
A cap of 5 is fairly redundant for a pick class since even without a cap at all the chances of reaching even that many being selected is practically zero.agree
-
On 7/1/2018 at 9:29 AM, Kypari said:All sounds good. Nothing I disagree with
1 hour ago, Kypari said:Cap neither. Heavy with crits (not limited to but including 1) + engineer sentry + medic uber makes heavy a lot harder to kill so that he doesnt need to have the mobility. Crits do the same as machine slapping too. We shouldn't add a cap on any of them, they dont need it.
... choose one please.
-
23 minutes ago, Kypari said:Sniper isn't even that great on ff2. He lacks in mobility and then you get something like heavy dealing SO MUCH damage with crit mingun that snipers damage is irrelevant. No sniper bias nutty pls
(jk) we shouldn't be setting a cap for where it isn't absolutely mandatory. I want people to play their favourite characters without having some cap stopping them.
And here I though we were not shouting bias whenever something we don't like is said. For shame!
Even if I were saying this because of my personal hate for snipers I'd say make it a cap of 0 snipers because fudge that class concept.Regardless of my feelings, snipers get perma crits on their rifle, and don't have to be anywhere close to the hale to do 450 unlike heavy who also has no mobility, but also crappy range. It is not much of a feat as a sniper to get upwards of 2-3k damage easy, the same cannot be as easily said for something like the heavy class who must be much closer to danger and gets raged on far more for it. This is without mentioning that snipers can kill superjump momentum with one no scope bodyshot (that still gets sniper crit damage) which makes it a notably harder to approach them on many maps as hale.
Honestly, if you want to cap the heavy, I see no reason to not keep the cap on sniper as well. -
On 7/1/2018 at 4:22 AM, Elcark said:Sniper
Currently set to 3 from what I've been told, I don't think we should have a restriction here at all
I am going to go ahead and disagree with that, aside from being extremely annoying to deal with snipers have always been able to output a massive amount of damage fairly easily given they don't even need headshots to get their full damage. Not much really changed for them with the loss of playpoints since even homing arrows had a fairly small radius so I don't see a need to change the class limit on them.
On 7/1/2018 at 4:22 AM, Elcark said:Pyro
I'm only mentioning this to say despite this being the central reason for the concept to be brought up lately I don't think we should actually restrict it, at least not now. The main reason for restricting Pyro was concern of the thermal thruster stun being spammed, but with the recharge rate nerfed to hell it hopefully isn't going to be an issue anymore.
You can still chain up to double the amount of pyros with the thruster equipped in consecutive stuns. Even with a murdered recharge rate that is a really long time alone for just 2 or 3 pyros which is a fairly common thing. While I'd like to leave it uncapped because other secondaries are fun to use, a cap of perhaps 4 on pyro would certainly be worth considering if the issue persists.
On 7/1/2018 at 4:22 AM, Elcark said:Heavy and Engineer
Having to fight four heavies all firing at you into a corner or even better seven plus engineers all building a cluster of sentries that keep you in the air while sometimes can be a bit funny, is just simply not fun to try and fight against. I think we should restrict both classes to a max of three.
Heavies I don't think have all too much knockback outside of crits (which they normally have to taunt for), yes they can tank a couple of hits and do a lot of damage but you hardly get pinned by heavies. Even so I rarely see more than one or two of them so capping it is fairly pointless imo.
Engineers however are far more of a problem when spammed because sentries do have a lot of knockback and damage, more than enough to keep plenty of bosses flying in the air indefinitely. While I might lament the loss of more dispencers, I think capping them at 3 is fine.
On 7/1/2018 at 4:22 AM, Elcark said:Medic
The main complaint for medic comes with the bkitzkreig and bloodrider. While it does take actual considerable effort from medics to stay alive to keep continual res's going and can be done with as few as two, the real annoyance comes from a boss having hunted down ~5 medics only for yet another to pop out of hiding and undo all the effort that was done. Now this restriction would have the least amount of drawback in normal rounds as you will practically never see more than two medics being used if even that, but we don't want to ruin this particular part of these special bosses either. Perhaps a limitation of four?
Actually I think I saw a thing in the Blitzkrieg config that has a max mediguns allowed thing. Don't know if that bit works correctly, but it exists...
Also not sure how easily that could be ported to bloodrider, though it should be possible.
-
1 hour ago, YeEternalTuna said:I mean what's the point of bringing up to the higher ups when one of them were on at the time. That was the last straw because a certain staff member had called him on just to say that I was wrong and that this invisible rule exists. Also funny enough, yesterday night I had been jokingly talking about toes in a weird voice and nutty had NO problem with it but then when another staff member cries to him about it, THEN it becomes a problem?
That's crazy my guy
I mean, unless there is someone being obviously extremely annoying on mic by constantly doing some dumb voice/impression that nobody asked for or likes, I usually just let people doing a funny little voice thing for a joke or something finish their bit and go on with life. Fewer people get muted, you don't make a scene over it, and you might just have a laugh along the way.
Though when people start complaining about someone doing a funny voice is about when I take action because at that point because it is disruptive enough for people to say something. Obviously different staff may feel different things qualify for an immature voice which is what led to that particular event, but I hardly find it that crazy that different people think different things would be past the line of a harmless joke.
For the record, nobody asked me to come to deal with anything in that particular case, I do join the servers of my own accord sometimes you know. You just happened to be there at the time.
-
ok, have fun.
-
Not a stinky anymore and has mic.
A: Enough
M: Mongolian Empire -
CONGRATULATIONS!
Your membership application has been accepted and you are now a member of Xeno Gamers!
You can now add the [xG] tag to your in-game name!
To begin your membership, familiarize yourself with our rules listed below. This is highly important and knowing these rules will keep you safe from bans!
Want to get more involved in the community and qualify for Staff?
Here's how!
1. Be active on our Discord server! You can download Discord here, and join us using this link !
2. Be active on the forums! This is one of the best ways to keep yourself informed on things happening within the community and for your voice to be heard!
3. Be active on our servers! This shows that you're committed to the clan!
For a server list, click here.
Come check out our staff list to see who is who on the servers, click here.
For a list of our server rules and guides, click on the appropriate division:
[TF2] [CS:GO] [GMOD] [Minecraft] [Nuclear Dawn]
WE HOPE YOU ENJOY YOUR STAY!
Note: n/a
Closed~
-
I think it makes sense if we leave the non-cosmetic donator powers turned off on the objective server because it is after all supposed to be gameplay stuff.
-
9 minutes ago, Caleb956 said:-----To sum it up-----
-Keep the rule how it is (add whatsoever if anyone thinks we should) since it covers what everyone needs to know already, it's just a matter of getting everyone on the same page.
-Adding a list of examples to the admin handbook and telling the staff about it.
-Talking with all of the staff members and making sure they know exactly what to look for so everybody is on the same page, no more one staff said this but you said this.
- agree
- Probably a good idea to give examples of stuff that is on the line of what is or isn't ok.
- in the immediate sense, sure, but really we should add something like that to the admin handbook for future staff.
-
I came here on my vacation just to +1 this. Give this man some more alcohol!
A: he exists
M: keeps asking me for an adultBecause numbers are boring!
-
15 minutes ago, Elcark said:We've already clarified this among ourselves unless you had a different opinion. I'll get the word out myself after @mrnutty12 gives another response to what was said earlier (bans/mutes/professionalism) so we can hopefully finally get that part finished up.
I mean, I don't have much else to add on that at this point.
By all means tell the staffy bois to cool it with the fun commands... -
19 minutes ago, Kypari said:Also, in regards to map votes, I would like to address when we actually close the vote. I personally believe that 1 week is fine and it has been this way for a while as far as I remember, but @Elcark pointed out that he had been doing 2 weeks rather than 1. I prefer 1 week because generally the discussion ends around then and the voting stops, though I wouldn't mind seeing it open for 2 weeks if the vote is close. Maybe just to not over-complicate things, we could make it 1 week or 2 weeks flat, but it doesn't matter all too much to me. Considering how we now have links on the server to the votes, maybe we could do with 2 weeks instead.
I like just one week, it is enough time to get thoughts in but doesn't leave people hanging for super long waiting for results.
Also, if votes are that close, are they really going to break 70% for a yes then? I find it unlikely personally, but meh. -
-
1 hour ago, Elcark said:- Admin+; There's no reason any staff member shouldn't be trusted to handle something like this as far as i'm concerned. If we keep this line at all, then this should be changed to simply stating a staff member.
The Admin+ bit exists because mods don't get the raffle command for being mods.
1 hour ago, Kypari said:- Firstly, I was referring to raffles with an entry fee. Someone did a raffle with an entry fee for an unusual and rigged it to give it to his alt account who was on the server as well. This would be to avoid situations just like that.
-
Sure, I was just using admin+ because that's what was said in the rule originally
- It doesn't have to refer to raffles if you don't want it to, but I believe strongly it should stay for things such as spycrabs to prevent scamming (on the rare occasion people actually do gamble on the server)
So just specify staff can be middlemen for that sort of thing?
-
On 5/28/2018 at 8:14 PM, Elcark said:This line can be found on both the tgh and pokemon motds
- If you want an Admin+ to middleman for a Raffle, the items being raffled must be a minimum of 3+ keys in value.
Personally I find it pretty laughable, but in short we should probably remove the part about the keys at the very least if not the whole thing. If we do keep this line, we should also probably change it from Admin+ to just staff (mods have /raffle, right?).
I don't think mods get raffle, but imma tag @virr to double check that one.
But yeah, remove the odd keys thing...On 5/28/2018 at 8:14 PM, Elcark said:I also noticed that this line here is included on the trade server motd's, but none of the rest. It really only applies to the other ones anyways so we should probably remove it from the two it is included in and add it to the rest.
- Keep all trades to typed chat only, unless you are on a designated trade server.
Lastly for the trade server motd's, we should add a line about trading taking priority over mic. I believe it is mentioned somewhere i'm just not sure where, but more importantly it is heavily enforced despite there not actually being a clear rule for it here.
-
12 hours ago, Elcark said:In short straight up removing the command entirely is way too excessive for an issue that is caused only by part of it's usage. That also goes back on how removing donor commands with no compensation is pretty scummy. My suggestion before was to just disable the ability to add models to grenade pills and sticky bombs, that's all.
Yeah, that should in theory be easy to remove the specific ability to change stickies, pills, and syringes. Personally I don't think it is too hard to tell what team they are, but if we want to remove that ability for specific projectiles, we can.
On 5/28/2018 at 8:27 PM, Kypari said:I agree, I feel 60 minutes is much more suitable than 30 minutes for bans personally. I've also seen some staff do 60 minute comms related punishments instead of doing the default 30, though I feel because the default is 30 it should be 30 personally.
I don't think there's a major issue with being playful on servers but I do feel there has been a lot more of it going on. If we're to maintain a professional attitude then I'm fine with this, but overall I do feel it's a lesser of the issues until it actually becomes problematic in terms of abuse
You do realize that the default ban time is 30 min as well if you don't specify a time?
I think it makes far more sense to have standard comms punishment time of 60 min like the bans are supposed to be than have it at 30 min because that is what it defaults to.On 5/28/2018 at 8:21 PM, Elcark said:Secondly and less direct, I've felt like many staff have become too lax and carefree lately. It's a lot of behaviors that aren't terrible and rather minor individually (name changing, fakesay, binds, and other things that would just be considered jokes) but the key word here is "lot". It's becoming very common and just looks way unprofessional. I don't want to seem like a hard butt about people just having fun, but really think a reminder to tone it down is in order.
Staff having fun with harmless commands like fakeitem or something is all fine by me as long as they don't get out of hand. Obviously some powers offer themselves more to being "fun commands" than others, but I do have a problem with binds to abuse certain people regardless of being friends. At that point it just feels like it becomes less of a jokey haha and more of a "I want to abuse you because I can" sorta thing.
Really I don't think it is all that necessary to say much on it aside from a case by case basis (unless it is a rampant abuse problem from a lot of staff peeps). -
-
-
4 hours ago, Elcark said:If what Caleb said about their being a cap to the number of bosses is true then that's one reason there to remove some, but also consider the ridiculous number of assets that need to be downloaded to play on the server. If removing some bosses that are hardly used anyways would help to clean that up, I'd be all in favor of doing so.
I know there is a fix to the cap, but I have to do some shenanigans with the plugin code I think.
4 hours ago, Elcark said:I haven't seen any of these new bosses much myself but have only heard people complain about the new "weeb" bosses being overpowered. Changing the rage to the flame burst that knight and others have doesn't seem like a great solution to me since that particular rage tends to cause the most aggravation in people. Probably best just to remove this particular boss by the sounds of it.
Only really one was OP af when I got it. The other two were not functioning how we thought they would so I fixed the one (whatever the one with the cloak is called), but the other has the aforementioned flamethrower bug. I could remove it if we really want, but that isn't the only option here.
4 hours ago, Elcark said:Out of this list, i'd say remove radaghan, pancakes, HHH Jr, Garfield, and sonic.exe. They all are practically never played outside of very rare occurrences, Garfield is constantly memed as being the single worst boss, and sonic.exe gets a lot of complaints for being very weak (lacking health I think?) and having an annoying rage so neither being fun to play as or against. Dark Vader I've seen played very often but does suffer from breaking a lot due to the pyro model. I think that has to do with the barrel power up from playpoints so removing that will likely fix it assuming that's the case. Chuck Norris I see maybe not as often but far from as rare as those listed above. Outside of dark vader's model issues, they both are fairly well balanced and functional bosses. The Triceratops is very....wonky. If people would want to remove him for how awkward he seems to operate and his hit boxes supposedly being widely inaccurate I wouldn't be too opposed.
First off, I thought Sewer Medic was memed to be way worse than garfield (pre buff anyways). Sonic.exe's health is now a bit high if anything, I gave him the second life that he was supposed to have.
Personally though, if I am going to increase the cap on bosses (eventually) removing them would seem pointless. Also, replacing as needed when introducing new bosses is very possible.
And yes, the triceratops is so thicc that it can only be shot in the butt. -
10 hours ago, Elcark said:Nevermind then, guess that's actually 3 for tf2items to 1 for war3 so that makes it much more clear unless you want to push it more @Vexx. Otherwise, it just leaves how you and @mrnutty12 decide to proceed. Be it jumping right in or getting with bone to see what help he can provide with getting some stuff set up. It would be good to lay out any plans though to better ensure it is actually gotten to.
Immediately we could try to replicate a couple of the more loved playpoints powers like hyperheavy by editing the stats of weapons that never see any use (eg. warrior's spirit) while we decide how to modify other things to compensate for the loss of the more annoying powers.
6 hours ago, virr said:Server rules are kind of (see: very) inconsistent between servers and i think at the very least the general ones could be the same. I would like to ideally revamp all of them and maybe give them a little update, but in the meantime, if you spot any minor things that could be changed, feel free to do so. For bigger things please bring up with the group first.
i have clarified the disrespect rule to include harassment and trolling after speaking to seg about people trying to loophole that specific rule (hurr durr its not in the rules!!!). It now states:
Disrespect, harassment or trolling is not tolerated and may result in a punishment.If we are specifying trolling there the pre-existing rule on trolling should also probably be looked at. (for reference)
" Trolling is unallowed. (The definition of trolling is to the discretion of the moderator, and can include intentionally being annoying, antagonizing players, impersonation of staff members, spoiling the ending of games or movies, etc.) "Also dealing with correcting the general rules, one that immediately comes to mind is found ONLY in the jb rules list. (link for the lazy)
" Staff members (DMs and DLs only) reserve the right to adjust the rules on the fly in case of new maps, new plugins, or new situations. Be aware. "
There isn't much reason as to why that wouldn't apply to all server rules (or be omitted altogether if we want).
TF2 Discussion Thread
in Server Discussion
Posted
No I do not believe heavy should have a cap, but if he must I believe the sniper should as well.
I'd be plenty happy if we removed caps from everything (save maybe engie).
Though really if you have 5 heavies all tracking you perfectly and somehow supplied with infinite crits, perhaps using your rage at that moment is a prudent action.
Har Har funny one. I do actually play hale on occasion, perhaps not at every chance but I do play it.
Insinuating that I don't ever do it and dismissing my argument on that basis is not only a logical fallacy but also a blatant lie.
Addressing the rest of your statement, sniper and heavy deal knockback in different manners this is true, heavy through volume of bullets while sniper does it with the knockback given on damage in general (which scales with the volume of damage given in each particular instance). Both can very severely mess up a hale's movement and both can stack easily which is in theory what the cap is for regardless of your opinion of such caps.
However, I do agree that we should not be having caps in general (with maybe an exception for engie for hopefully obvious reasons), but I stand by my position that if we are going to cap heavy because a relatively short duration crit buff you get on taunting makes it harder to move as a hale then sniper should as well since he can also easily mess with hale movement even without the benefit of a crit modifier (though such doesn't hurt his ability to do so).