ACKA servers, do they deserve to be in masterserver?

[ketar]

I am banned, with no reasons except personal weird preferences of a well known admin, from all the ACKA servers: nothing related to behavior in game tho. I never complained: the unwritten rule here is that if one owns a server he can do what he wants. Let's say this is ok.  
But my destiny is shared with oh so many players: lot of players I know told me they are banned there too, for the same (inconsistent) reasons (i.e. no reasons).

Given the state of the art of AC, it happens often that during the day (GMT time) there is only a single pub server working as meeting point for players (+some gema and/or servers with nooby maprot). When it happens to be one of the ACKA servers (kinda often) this means that all the people banned cannot join.

If the community was flourishing and growing this wouldn't be a problem: we could just use other servers. But as it is now, this means that often all the banned players (mainly good and experienced players) can't simply join the game. 


Do we want this? Can a single admin decide that? Couldn't the community decide that, if a servers admin decide to exclude half of the good players without reason, his servers shouldn't be on the master server list?

Do we have to succumb to someone's (evil) will?

[macm]

Devs have had too many reasons to ban PERROS's servers, but they don't, are they even still alive? o_O

[Alien]

I will put on my TODO list for the next month, contact Perros and ask him about ketar. But i think it is not big deal, more banned pro players, better environment for new players, nothing personal.

[+f0r3v3r+]

...more banned pro players, better environment for new players, nothing personal.

Sounds like a game-play affecting modification to me... >;D

[ketar]

I will put on my TODO list for the next month, contact Perros and ask him about ketar. But i think it is not big deal, more banned pro players, better environment for new players, nothing  personal.

He is just crazy it will not help: we were even friends on FB and chatting on skype and all here and there. He banned me from his life 'cause when I had admin on other servers he wanted to force me to ban people he did not like. And I was not listening him.

But 
1) I was not asking to be unbanned. If you let him control servers on a personal basis this will happen again ad again.

2) I am not a pro player

2) If there are good players the others not so good players have a goal: growing and being better, emulating them. They can get hints and advices (I just helped right now a guy to get better fps), they can see how someone more expert plays. I never saw in any place that having someone good beside you is an obstacle to your devolopment. Never ever. 

[Alien]

You guys are too good, even for me. Perros made many enemies in pro level but it has also positive effect in result for AC. It is ridiculous I know. :P Anyway i will contact him, i haven't seen him for ages.

[Waffles]

I am genuinely curious how evicting "pros" from public games help foster growth. The large majority of competitive players I know would gladly help new players. is a skill vacuum really the right way to foster growth in new players? I (and many others) would not play the game if there wasnt some challenge associated with it.

[HoeHunter]

Let's just get rid of the servers. Half of the ac community is banned there and PERROS hasn't been around in months to actually manage the damn thing.

[Alien]

You need to win in level 1 to be motivated for level 2. The players aren't motivated enough by "pro" challenges because why they would escape to play on camper maps. But this isn't Perro's concept, it is side effect of his "skill" to make friends around, I am just reasoning why people play there. The next reason is probably maps and maprots.

[1Cap]

im not pro player...
so actualy i can play there... hunm?

What banned players have in common?
With this response we know if this hurts or not the game ...

[Luc@s]

Like Waffles suggested they are no pros in this game, call it "good players".

[Vanquish]

The definition of "pro" would be being paid to play the game. Therefore there's only one "pro" in this game, and that's Undead.

[ExodusS]

The definition of "pro" would be being paid to play the game. Therefore there's only one "pro" in this game, and that's Undead.

What about mappers who won contests with money as reward?

[Vanquish]

What about mappers who won contests with money as reward?

Many people would have many opinions on this, but in my mind mapping is separate to "playing the game" so I wouldn't count it as being worthy of a "professional gaming" title (even undead's barely is), although I suppose something with the word "professional" in there would be sufficient.

Has that ever happened btw, or was it just speculation?

[+f0r3v3r+]

[ketar]

can we jump the discussion about who/what is pro and stick to the problem? Whenever I write something that I think is important for all of us on this forum, it looks that nobody of the dev team gives a shit. Who is in charge of the MS? Who is in charge of this kind of decisions? Why something like that is accepted?

[Lozi*]

it looks that nobody of the dev team gives a shit.

surprised?

[Medusa]

can we jump the discussion about who/what is pro and stick to the problem? Whenever I write something that I think is important for all of us on this forum, it looks that nobody of the dev team gives a shit. Who is in charge of the MS? Who is in charge of this kind of decisions? Why something like that is accepted?

Because 'devs' do it too.

[Luc@s]

Because 'devs' do it too.

it was fixed long ago but then you deleted your account lmao
you will never get over it :| sad

[Marti]

Because 'devs' do it too.

it was fixed long ago but then you deleted your account lmao
you will never get over it :| sad

still doesnt justify your actions lmao

sad :|

[Luc@s]

still doesnt justify your actions lmao

sad :|

you have no idea what happened AND your opinion doesnt matter

[+f0r3v3r+]

Well... @Ketar - I get your point - And it is often thought of that servers on the MS are some kind of public property - but they really aren't.
The idea is that, a server owner has, at their own level, a right to disallow people from playing on their servers that they don't want to host. Whether or not that person should be banned, or if it is fair to ban, is not that big of a philosophical discussion.
It is a multiplayer gameserver. It is not a freely elected government of authority or nation of individuals collaborating for the sake of a larger group of people and necessities.
It is a server host providing spare CPU cycles to the game at their own discretion.
Sure, it may be wrong to ban people who have not actually done anything truly wrong.
But it is also at the freedom of the server owner to make that choice.

The community may choose to play, or not play, on these servers. You are upset that they are using these servers, and yet you are forbid from joining them.
I hate to argue on behalf of them, but it is quite foolish to me that these threads keep coming up when the real solution is pretty clear - don't use those servers.

Also, I do understand the issue completely, and I wouldn't be offended if they were removed from the MS.
But the reality is that this incessant soap-boxing about it is just a waste of time...
Said imho...

[ketar]

Well... @Ketar - I get your point - And it is often thought of that servers on the MS are some kind of public property - but they really aren't.
The idea is that, a server owner has, at their own level, a right to disallow people from playing on their servers that they don't want to host. Whether or not that person should be banned, or if it is fair to ban, is not that big of a philosophical discussion.
It is a multiplayer gameserver. It is not a freely elected government of authority or nation of individuals collaborating for the sake of a larger group of people and necessities.
It is a server host providing spare CPU cycles to the game at their own discretion.
Sure, it may be wrong to ban people who have not actually done anything truly wrong.
But it is also at the freedom of the server owner to make that choice.

The community may choose to play, or not play, on these servers. You are upset that they are using these servers, and yet you are forbid from joining them.
I hate to argue on behalf of them, but it is quite foolish to me that these threads keep coming up when the real solution is pretty clear - don't use those servers.

Also, I do understand the issue completely, and I wouldn't be offended if they were removed from the MS.
But the reality is that this incessant soap-boxing about it is just a waste of time...
Said imho...

No you are missing my point.

On a private server one can do what he wants: correct. But MS is a public service provided by AC community. Is this correct too? So servers that are on MS should satisfy some standards. I suggest that one of these should be giving public access. You want a private server? Keep it private: no advertising on MS.

I am not "upset" as u say. I am banned there from a year or so. I never really cared of that: you clearly do not know me. I never rage or worry about stupid things around me. But in these conditions - with not so many players around - keeping in MS servers that are not really public is stupid and counter-productive for the game itself.

Community may choose you say. But information is the first condition of a free choice. Do people know that playing there they will not be able to play with many other players? No, simply no. So they do not choose: they go there since EU players have a good ping. That's all.

[+f0r3v3r+]

And all I am saying is that the statement has been made - if there are no gameplay affecting modifications, the maprot is varied, and there is no blinking in the server title, then it stands that a server is legitimate.
Unless there is significant community out-pour or a server promotes hate directly in some fashion.
Which is where an argument could be made - that enough people in the community can say that there is some direct abuse going on that warrants the server shouldn't be around.
But no - I fail to see the validity in claiming servers listed on the masterserver to be community property.

I do agree there should be a clearer set of standards in the matter, but I doubt that would even come to the satisfaction of all.
So my beef with your banter is simply that this is a truly fabricated concept that servers somehow 'belong' to the community.

As for the ping issue there are plenty of other servers available in the E.U.

[ketar]

But no - I fail to see the validity in claiming servers listed on the masterserver to be community property.

So my beef with your banter is simply that this is a truly fabricated concept that servers somehow 'belong' to the community.

I respect your opinion, but I still wait and hope to have others qualified participation to the "banter" (a new word! I had to look in the dictionary: does it sound vaguley derogatory?)

Only one thing: do not put in my mouth things I did not say. I never said that servers "belong to to community". This interpretation is stretching the point too far.  I said MS should not promote servers who are a damage for the community and the game: pretty different eh?. I do not doubt your honesty, but a better comprehension of my statements would help our reasoning. 

[1Cap]

"On a private server one can do what he wants: correct. But MS is a public service provided by AC community. Is this correct too? So servers that are on MS should satisfy some standards. I suggest that one of these should be giving public access. You want a private server? Keep it private: no advertising on MS."
10/10
Wow! I waited this support for years !!! lol
Surely you are right and this is the better way to do in online games LIKE AC.
While we dont know why these BANS happened we cant analyze better this situation.
"Do not play on these servers" --- I hear this for years ... this is wrong. (a very good reason is necessary)
AND .. that is not about "... GET OVER" ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzcWwmwChVE

[stef]

There are rules for servers on the MS - "unmodified gameplay" is one of them. But not alll rules are enforced all the time - mostly because usually there are grey areas.

For example, servers owners should make sure, that their servers are able to handle the load, because most players don't give a shit about the red and yellow bars in the serverbrowser. For example: the owner of this one (http://i.imgur.com/QMS2wqG.jpg) should clearly limit his server to 12 or 13 slots, because his connection can't handle more.

However... server admins are given quite a bit of leeway when it comes to their blacklists. For the simple reason that it is a hard job and an ugly job to keep a server free of cheaters and others who want to cause mayhem. If you do this right, it involves hours of reading logfiles - and then making unpopular decisions on blacklisteing ranges of evading assholes. Most of those, who cone to the forum, second guessing, would never put in that amount of work themselves.

Of course, blacklisting someone "because he's too good" is nonsense. Is that really the reason? And is ketar actually the intended target of the ban, or did he just never ask for a deban pass?

But, since you'll always have to deal with some weird servers (of whatever kind): the serverbrowser has nice bookmark feature... just pick a few servers with reliably good connection (press F9 then F2) and a nice stack of maps in a good maprot (press F9 then M) and bookmark them. If no good game is running that allows you to join (what do you do with full servers, btw) - just start a new one with a nice map and mode. It'll take a few minutes longer to get a game running, but if you pick a good map, the server will fill up quick enough...

PS: 1Cap, how many hours have you spent reading server logs so far? (don't answer that...)

[ExodusS]

Has that ever happened btw, or was it just speculation?

It happened to me, and I gave half the reward to DaylixX, and I guess previous winners of the same contest earned money as well.

[Undead]

can we ban people that harm the common good of our autonomous collective?

[Mousikos]

There are rules for servers on the MS - "unmodified gameplay" is one of them. But not alll rules are enforced all the time - mostly because usually there are grey areas.

So I could host a server that blacklists 0.0.0.0-256.256.256.256 and as long as the title isn't blinking, there's a varying maprot, and there are no gameplay affecting modifications (it's vanilla!), then it's valid?

Also, what's the point in having rules if even the rulemakers don't follow them?