Elcark

Map has been removed

-Closed

Map will not be removed from rotation

-Closed

On 7/13/2018 at 6:57 AM, Kypari said:

There's a lot of stuff that's piled up on trello, so we should get onto that.

This is something I've been working on practically everyday. It's not all so simple to complete as you may think (especially for me at least). That being said, I did finally update it a bit over the last few days.

On 7/13/2018 at 6:57 AM, Kypari said:

Let's make rules more consistent and clarified! 

What nutty said for the most part. A lot of the issues with people getting "confused" lately has been more revolving around people trying to poke holes at the rules as grounds for petty arguments. The consistency aspect is of course being worked on and since there's been no feedback about it, is likely complete sans jailbreak. A few others things though, such as the staff have final say rule and immature voices could be addressed to staff through discord if you think that needs more clarification for some people right now. I actually don't (for the most part, it's not necessarily harmful to do anyways afterall) and think again these examples became far over-exaggerated from unnecessary aggression. 

On 7/13/2018 at 6:57 AM, Kypari said:

We have a bunch of bugs that are happening on the server, examples being:

Again, being worked on, but hardly an easy task when there really is no clear indication what is causing the issue for some. I will talk about /disguise though as again nutty did explain the entirety of what is known for the issue, but I so far have not either heard of it happening since last mentioned nor been able to actually replicate it as it was described either. Even if I had been, i'd still advice against complete removal due to it being a donor power people have paid for and a fairly significant one at that. If a replacement were to be found for it though then i'd be much more favorable towards removing it to stay on  the safe side. 

Two other things to talk about though. 

About rougeport, there's never been a point where the map itself has caused crashing and even though there was a crash on the map last night, that does not mean at all it was the map that caused it. There is no other version and peoples performance issues with it stem from the map simply being made very poorly. Now the fact that it is such a popular map should be testament that the number of people not having issues with the map far outweighs those that are, but I don't think we should just dismiss those people since this map is notorious for causing such issues for a reason. I do think it is too common place this map makes the game worse off for people or in cases even unplayable and we shouldn't keep it if it means people are going to be excluded from playing on the server. As much as I don't want to be, i'm in favor of removing the map for this reason.

Then about people needing three higher ups to vouche for them to receive member after having lost it, i'm very much in favor of keeping these as is but because of the concept hinted at by virr will through out the idea of replacing this rule with a combination of higher up and member vouches. As some arbitrary starting point, perhaps letting up to two of those higher up vouches be replaced by four member vouches a piece. Again i'd much rather keep it as is, but if someone has a better concept for us to go with definitely want to hear it (and certainly not exactly what I just stated as an example, unless that is a system you'd want to see in some form).  

Despite being late there are a few things I'd like to chime in both to elaborate on and explain a bit.

First of all people have been throwing around "staff discretion" a lot as if it's some accursed form of staff using personal bias to enforce their own ideals separate from that of the community, which is not what the purpose is at all. To put it into better perspective, i'll borrow from what @Tatost said.

Quote

I think the key words here are "in my view," which indicates you are going to state your opinion. Instead of people saying "in my view," regarding rules, I'd like it to turn into "in the community's view..." I hope you know where I'm coming from.

"In the community's view" is exactly what this is, or at least what it strives to be. A staff members goal is always focused on making the servers as enjoyable for everyone on it as possible which isn't always cut and dry. Not all rules can plausibly be direct in every situation (spawnkilling is very much direct, while something like trolling or even this case of immature voices covers too wide a variety of possibilities to be summed up to cover every situation) and require a judgement call to best find a solution to the issue. These judgement calls are in essence where staff discretion comes into play and one of the most important, and difficult, parts of being a staff member. They need to decide based on the situation and context where and how to draw the line for these situations to their discretion as to how it will best benefit the server. Now since this is a solution coming from the mind of a single human they will not be able to not always have a perfect answer that fits in line with what a mass of people desire (especially when often times what that is ends up being several conflicting opinions) and there is always margin for error (people learn over time), but it's being able to come to a solution as close to what satisfies everyone as possible or at least try to that ends up being a notable amount of the trust put in staff to have this authority. 

On 7/1/2018 at 3:29 PM, Tatost said:

No, things did change. You said that the 'no immature voices' rule used to be targeted at young children. Nowhere did it say "you can't make impersonations on mic." You guys recently changed the rule to fit more modern needs. There isn't anything wrong with that, it's just that we're not very good about getting the word around that this or that rule changed, or you got a new rule at the pet store.

I know we have a general updates thread, so can I suggest that we add that to the list of stuff being broadcasted at all times on the server? Ex: "Any changes to the MOTD will be posted in this thread [link], please check this thread to keep informed!"

Recently is far from the case. The children aspect hasn't been enforced since before I even knew these servers existed myself and was changed around then if not before. The issue with this is between the atrocious inconsistency between motd's and server rules as they have been made and the absolute paltry "communication" of any note worthy changes of these for quite some time. Like @virr mentioned working on fixing these issues has been on going for awhile and still is (server motd's were recently all reorganized to varying extent) and you pointing out the general update thread is one place for overall communication to be done better, but this also has been addressed between a lot of more direct communication to staff through the xG discord and is the entire purpose of this thread. Not every discrepancy is going to be known right away though such as in this case here where it is revolving around a very old change to a rule that does not come into relevance very often. When these issues are brought to light though, they are often very easily addressed thanks to these new"er" ways of doing so. 

Now like how the immature voices rule does still exist for a reason as pointed out by @LAN_Megalodon, the rule about not arguing staff decisions does as well. Frankly, the server is not the place to have such arguments especially when they delve into clear conflictions between people which often can happen when someone attempts to argue solely because they are upset about being punished for breaking a rule, but regardless of any legitimacy to either sides claims in these situations, the bottom line is they are not best handled over the server. There is no need for unnecessary drama to have to ruin everyone else's time. Instead, these is far better handled through pm's or by coming to higher ups especially if it's believed that a staff member is incorrect in their decision or as said using it as a way to shut down people when the staff member is themselves wrong as that's an issue that exists on a basis direct to that individual at that point and can only be solved in such a manor. Now @YeEternalTuna pointed out feeling as if that can't be done due to believing one such higher up was allowing the situation in the first place, but you need to remember "higher ups" aren't some single entity. There are others that can be reached out to always and what one seems to be acting on is not by any means what the rest will. 

Staff as a whole are there to help everyone which shouldn't be dismissed so easily when seemingly having conflict with a few, and the more direct people are about these under lying issues that exists the better they can be handled before they bloat and heads end up colliding over the ordeal. 

Aquatucruin was my favorite for a short while, but now it is so overplayed it becomes mind numbingly dull within only a few minutes.

The two maps that I've probably has the most consistent enjoyment with have been facing worlds and cyberpunk 2_a

15 hours ago, Kypari said:

PM is specifically for those who have abused, which is why we give them less commands. It would likely just be straight up mod.

To elaborate on this it isn't specific to abuse, but anything that would create concern revolving around a staff members usage of powers. Regardless, it isn't something that should be relevant to tuna.

Also here are my own thoughts for trying to play on more servers. Of course it should not be viewed as a requirement by any measure, but the benefits of it shouldn't be dismissed either.

It's very similar to how teamspeak used to be treated for staff and there's two main aspects to it. First of all it simply looks favorably for you and speaks directly for your dedication and willingness to help out. Perhaps more directly than that is the publicity it gives you. It makes you more likely to be noticed as you're going around trying to show everyone what makes you qualified for staff and stand out as such. @Tatost and I talked earlier about higher ups watching people for this reason (which has always been done even for people who don't know they're being considered for staff) but it's even more important for you to go out and try to be noticed in the first place when applying. The more effort you personally put in the stronger you build your chances.

In simpler terms, playing on other servers is not a requirement for getting staff, but it should be obvious that it is highly encouraged.

12 minutes ago, MisterAngus said:

I know.  I may not be sure how you get your bosses, but I'm just showing this as a possible idea.

We don't make bosses, other people do and put them up openly to the public which are what people search to find ones for our server. Here's an example https://forums.alliedmods.net/showthread.php?t=264387

If you ever happen to try and learn to make a boss though you could see about creating this yourself.

The best person in xG, you've undoubtably made this place all the better whenever you're around.

24 minutes ago, Tatost said:

when towny comes back up we're making the cave again

hours upon hours of assigned mine grinding just for it all to be reset LOL

Does this mean we get to hit the mascot again?

26 minutes ago, Vexx said:

Because your idea of "majority of people" are just the people most vocal about it. I'm sure a lot more people on the server like the map, just don't have member to vote/don't want to speak up about it.

People will always be more vocal about what they dislike making any kind of vocal minority usually seem as if they are just disgruntled, regardless of if there's merit to the complaints or not. The server messages are a pretty direct way to get these votes in peoples faces and have garnished more traffic for votes, but it's pretty unlikely forum polls will ever reflect a significant portion of the total people who actually play on the servers. 

I would like to see map polls have some higher standards to them since really the only real guideline to it is that it needs a 70% majority and despite it being claimed it's not easy to get maps removed that's proven to not quite be the case when people actually push for it.

Cyberpunk 2_a will be removed from Trade Gaming History's map rotation

Bsor and Masscc will not

-closed 

The ban has expired and no further action will be taken.

-closed

So taking a look at this step by step, he was previous gagged and muted for this behavior, and repeated it now here. So the next step would be to kick him and then go into a ban. Now considering how it occurred between him leaving and how excessive his behavior was the ban seems like a fair punishment to address it, but why would it be for any longer than this for his first ban?

These chat logs are what occurred before his ban and in all consideration what lead to him receiving it, but with exactly that in mind he received his punishment for how he was last night via that ban. There's no reason to add on to that when he has already been punished for it.

-1 on an extension 

11 minutes ago, Jacklyn said:

• I think my ban is pretty unfair because I only said a few things and I thought we were all just having some fun bantering with eachother. Really it seemed to me like Moo -Moo was unphased by what I had said judging by his responses. 

The banter had gone on over the course of an hour with you chiming in through out it and there are points (looking at the second to last image) where it is clear moomoo is not taking it favorably but you're continuing to goad at him regardless. It doesn't matter how big of a part you played in harassing someone like this, the bottom line is that you in fact did and that will result in punishment. 

14 minutes ago, Jacklyn said:

• Moo -Moo and Mau -Mau really hate my friend kamaal and try to start poop with him constantly,

If this can be backed up it's something that can be looked into exactly like this ordeal was, but going off of word of mouth without any real evidence doesn't make it something that can be regarded.

15 minutes ago, Jacklyn said:

• I know that it's a month because of my previous bans from Kypari, but I think even those bans are debatable. Everyone knows he hates my guts and just jumps at the chance to punish me for any minute reason he can find at the time. (He's even wrongly banned me for a month in the past and it got instantly repealed because it was unfair)

Kypari is not the only person who has punished you for this behavior so pinning it on him when it's been a repetitive issue all around revolving around you regardless of who has had to deal with it doesn't change the history you've had.  I'm unaware of any bans you were unbanned from in your ban history. The other month ban you received was done so at the end of it's run to reduce ten extra hours that it didn't need, but the ban itself still lasted a month.

17 minutes ago, Jacklyn said:

• I don't think I deserve this long of a punishment for just chiming in at the start and poking some harmless fun at Moo. 

As I already said it was anything but harmless fun and expands off of the fact that this is a running behavior from you. This is exactly the way bans work where they increase in length from repetition of the issue. 

20 minutes ago, Jacklyn said:

• And also the admins decided that my ban didn't even need a formal request on the forums, Moo moo just brought it straight to them and they decided to ban me without considering the thoughts of the players??? what the fudge is up with that???

It being handled privately makes it no different from being handled here when it's plainly clear the issue being caused/rule breaking. There is nothing that prevents someone from going straight to us about an issue they need to report, especially if they want to stay anonymous about it.

As a general statement to everyone do not turn this into a poopstorm and have needless back and forth banter at each other about disliking one another. 

3 hours ago, Aegean said:

I think people are overreacting to the issue imo by calling it an exploit. 

Having aia to have fun with rapid fire weapons for a brief period at the start of the map is not a detrimental matter in anyway, but neither is not having it. Really it could go either way and make little difference. There is no reason to disable it entirely though due to a problem caused by only one aspect of it being used by some people some of the time.

Earrape isn't something fun to deal with, but in terms of it being allowed or not, this is something incredibly easy to categorize as trolling due to intentionally causing irritation to the rest of the server. Again though considering how minor having this available really is there's not much reason not to just cut it off from the source to prevent this issue in the first place so long as that doesn't involve ruining the unharmful aspects that aia offers.

Advanced infinite ammo at the start of the round will not be disabled. 

Infinite Demoman shield recharge has been disabled. 

-Closed

-1

Doesn't care for DA RULEZ much and is pretty immature.

A:9

M:4

All Divisions

* Before you apply for a Moderation position, you must have been a member of the clan for a minimum of thirty days.

Team Fortress 2

* You must have a minimum of 50 forum posts before you may apply.

-closed

User will not be unbanned.

-closed

3 hours ago, Brunche said:

You could have a version of the wrap assassin that bonks the boss

 

I'd rather not see anything that involves giving a buff to scouts movement or scout hindering the bosses. That class already has enough of an advantage in regards to that 

+1 cause I forgot you needed them higher up vouches. 

So to catch everything up in one place, to replace the playpoints system that used to give bonuses to players on the freak fortress server, we are construction a number of special weapons. These function as typical unique tf2 weapons with new attributes that are already in place when equipping one of them. A number have been completed already (listed below) but to make them feel a bit more finished we are asking for any ideas for a few more you would like to see added.

Now in principle, these weapons shouldn't just be taking any old tf2 weapon and increasing it's stats to make it stronger. Ideally they should be somewhat gimmicky and the more unique the better. They should definitely be powerful to warrant using them, but not so universally better that it is a must to take them over any other weapon. They are more idealistic to offer an alternate play style or make a less viable play style more worthwhile. It is also a goal to prevent the ability to use more than one of any of these weapons at a time. 

Lastly, it's important to note at this time rocket launchers are not working with custom attributes. Don't be afraid to suggest any, but don't expect any to be added just yet (We already have a few ideas for some once/if we can). 

Current weapons

More crap on sniper and heavy, honestly mostly already said

+1 cap heavy

17 hours ago, mrnutty12 said:

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.

There's never a guarantee that all of the heavies would be doing the same thing but the issue is "if". It's definitely not often that you'll see a group of 7+ engineers with a huddle of sentries or built on top of a building, but when it does happen, it's no fun. Same thing when you have five heavy miniguns preventing you from walking, and i'd rather prevent that.

9 hours ago, mrnutty12 said:

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.

I do get your point on the sniper's knockback and stopping capability, I just don't really think it's as likely to suffer the same stacking issue as these other classes. What it boils down to though is with what you're saying, do you agree that heavy should have a cap, and if not, should we still keep the cap on sniper at that point?

5 hours ago, Kypari said:

No caps unless 100% necessary and on sniper it's far from it. I'm ok with medic caps

That makes way more sense then what you said before.

10 hours ago, mrnutty12 said:

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.

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.

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.

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. 

1 hour ago, Caleb956 said:

I still agree with *most* of what Elcark said, but with a few changes. 

You changed literally everything.

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.

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.  

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.

Engineer
Even three engineers can come close to shutting down a boss when a map gives a height advantage, but four shouldn't be too significant of a difference. 

Medic

1 hour ago, Caleb956 said:

a good number of people don't go medic for those bosses anyways, so I see no reason to cap the class.

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. 

Something that has come up a few times now is class restrictions on freak fortress 2. Taking it on a class by class basis, there's a few I'd like to consider changing.

Sniper

Currently set to 3 from what I've been told, I don't think we should have a restriction here at all

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.

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.

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?