*DAMN R6 Forum

Alright here are some changes that gonna make it into season 6.

I just post them and you can comment on them and/or make other suggestions.

One of the main issues in season 5 was that at the beginning we had lots of glitching issues/discussions some justified but other were just started to get a cheap win as a consequence I would come add this rule:

If the doubt that someone glitched has been proofed (replay) the affected game will be turned into a win for you. If the endresult of the cb changes to a tie, your clan wins the cb. If it doesn't affect the endresult of the cb only the score will be modified(doesn't change anything at the combat points). If a clan is caught glitching? twice in a cb you get a forfeit win by 6 - 0 and the other clan gets a penalty

Something I need your help/input is about the penality: Penalty yes/no. If yes should we give a static penalty(e.g. you lose 50pts) or a dynamical one(e.g. you lose 20percent).
If you say no to penalties should we introduce warnings and if you have 3 warnings your clan get banned for the rest of the season!?

I think this rule would prevent or at least reduce the "I'm watching each replay to find a glitch" guys.

About other forfeits: I think we should eliminate those cheap wins e.g if a clan doesn't appear to an agreed time . Just give the clan a warning or a penalty and not a cheap win for the other clan. See above.

In the final cb ! vs N the default times have been discussed. Well I still think the default times are fine, especially now where the finals get complete played on a weekend. But I'm open for changes if you think you know better default times.

I can't remind other critic points except the "admin structure" which will discussed in another thread. So if you other suggestions just post them but I think all in all everything worked fine in season 5.

Bye,

Mauti

Good new rule!

My suggestion: penalty of 20% for 2 times glitching in a game, 2 penalty's > 1 warning, 3 penalty's > 2 warnings, 4th penalty 3rd warning > 5th penalty, ban from league.

Not showing up in time, no warnings, maybe penalty of 10% but how are we gonna do this? Is it only for the finals?

For the finals: If a clan doesn't play in the finals we may should ban him for the next season.

Currently you can challenge clans and agree on times during the main season. This rule would give the clan that doesn't appear a penalty instead of giving the clan, which is waiting, a cheap win.

(We didn't have such an issue yet.)

Mauti

Once again, Mauti rides to the rescue :)

Overall this seems like a more reasonable method of dealing with glitching. It doesn't address the 'inadvertant glitch' directly, but that would require a degree of subjective analyisis that might be worth avoiding.

The issue of post-match replay scanning for any glitches not actually witnessed in the match could be further addressed. Perhaps the following might help:

During the course of the match, after the game in question, a screen shot including the statement 'it appeared so-and-so was glitching at this location at roughly this point in the game.' A specific reference to a specific situation. Nothing else would then be open for investigation. This by itself might be enough to eliminate the replay scanning.

I think the idea of 'three strikes and you're out' might be a bit harsh, but what about a combination of penalty points and a sliding scale? First offense, 50 pts: second offense, 100 points: third offense, 200 point: fourth offense, 300 points, etc.

Also, under whatever system is adopted, would the infractions only be counted on the ladder where they occured or would a clan have a runing total encompassing all the ladders? Maybe a running total, points deducted on the ladder where the infraction occured.

Due to the rule about forfeiting for not showing up to scheduled cb's, our clan has almost NEVER had scheduled matches. I don't know if we would schedule more matches if the penalties were less severe for flaking, but I always thought that was kind of harsh, given the fact that most people don't seem to give the same respect to an appointment here online that they do to face-to-face appointments.

The overseas cb issue is one with no easy answer. On paper, the default times are a reasonable compromise, especially on weekends. In reality, the default times leave me on the west coast of the US trying to play matches during peak usage times of my cable network. I thought the maga-match Network and Core ended up playing was a unique solution that might be seen again. I personally would have pushed for 3 consecutive best-of-fives.

Looking forward to a chance to see what you have to say on the Admin structure, Mauti.

Another thing that was discussed during the season are the CQB map list. All larger maps will be removed as suggest.

Mauti, I know I heard someone else say that this may be a good idea for a rule but what do you think.

"A rule stating that there is to be no fireing of weapons untill 5 seconds have passed from the start of the game. The reason for this is so that no one can get cheap kills with shooting off the Gl from long distances into the possible insert areas."

I have seen more and more players use this method. I think this would be a good idea, maybe for all ladders.

vood's

LMAO@!

Mauti can we also just BAN Gernades, Im sick of getting throwing them at me during clan battles....  LOL! (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/yabbse/YaBBImages/icon_lol.gif)  

Discussion... ok I can do that.  Ideas I throw at the mercy of the league:

How about adding the s1-s3 maps to the required list of maps (a topic well discussed in the N forums, especially why it should be required instead of optional)?

and/or

fixing the *DARN (pardon my pun) 4 broken kits which issue a second set of binoculars?  Shouldn't I be allowed to use the claymores with my m60 or sensors with my FAL?  Who is red storm to tell me I cant by not fixing this bug in one of their updates?  (I have the files fixed already if you would like them)

 ;D Whos up for banning sensors, like every other respectable Ghost Recon league? ;D

and finally, my favorite and most joking of suggestions (i mean it DO NOT flame me plz!), make a rule that whenever SAR starts voicechatting in a game, everyone mutes their sound and starts chat spamming "sar's a frootcake"

*COUGH* *COUGH* Red Square *COUGH* me and sar *COUGH*
 ;D

I totally disagree, if nades are banned or the launching of them at the start is banned too, then this league is no different than communism.

Eh, I don't know how crazy you are, but I personally would hate to see sensors go, It was overruled once, and it'll be overruled again, sensors will stay.

I agree, this game needs some spice added to it, and no other better way than adding new maps, how about new guns too? ;)

I say banning sensors should just be it's own ladder, along with any weapon mods.

It would take too much away from what is already there.  These add different aspects to the game that may be better or worse for some people.  I like the idea of original and X-tra Tasty Crispy, oh wait, I mean modified.

If both clans agree any modifications can be used.

So... about weakening forfeits, it got lost in some other thread amidst flaming.

Should we give less points for a forfeit win? And lose more points for a forfeited loss?

Interesting comparison, do you mean Marxists-Leninism or the classical Marxists theory of communism? Limiting nade spawn spamming, in my opinion is a good idea, because maps have been overlooked and forgotten because of the chance of getting killed in the first second of the game. It takes away from the game. If only this league was more communist, to quote the Communist Manifesto "The communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality" this would take care of the U.S. vs Euro dispute. I think a more proper comparison would be this league is an Oligarchy. For if it was truly communist in the Marxists sense the "proletarians"(common GhR folks) would have more say and the "bourgeoisie"(admins, community pillars) would heed to their call.

I will address a few posts within one.  Look at that!  I'm being efficient already!


I don't think this happens as much as you might think.  I can only really think of a few maps where this might be a problem: Small River, Small Docks, Creekbed.

?   Small River - Nading the waterfall is almost like a pasttime now.  I think the majority of times an enemy actually spawns there is not enough to enact a rule.  Also, what about rockets or support guns?  Would it be a bad thing if I laid down on the trigger of my M60 into the waterfall, or would I have to wait 5 seconds no matter what I selected?  

?   Small Docks - Nading spawn points on Docks is more like a scare tactic than anything.  I have personally seen it work only a handful of times.  Besides, if you nade the wrong spawn point, you just gave away your position.  Also, if you plan on spawn nading on Small Docks, good luck.  Since there isn't really a clear line of view, such as the Small River waterfall, I really don't see the advantage.

?   Creekbed - I've seen the spawn nading done on Creekbed, and it doesn't work.  One of the most important tactics in Creekbed is to take as much ground as possible and as fast as possible.  

If anything, spawn nading takes guys away from moving, as well as gives your position away.  It bascially becomes a sever disadvantage to the clan who uses it.  Besides, the clan that do use it probably do not win that many CB's because of it anyway.  If the clan's tactic is to give your position away at the beginning, good luck.
Also, 5 seconds on my machine might be different than yours.  No real way of proving it, but you know the game timers sucks immensely.  I can see it now... "MAUTI... HE SHOT ME 4.5 SECONDS AFTER THE START, NOT 5!!!


It's not like BTs changed the spawn points.  They only pointed them out.  I knew where the spawn points were before those maps came out, and so did most everyone else.  Like I said, I think it hurts the clan who is doing it, not the clan they are doing it against.

NEXT!



The problem with only allowing modifications when both clans agree is that both clans never agree!  Imagine if Warzone would only be played if both teams agreed upon it??  I can tell you that Warzone would most likely have been avoided like the plague for the majority.  BUT, since it was required, clans had to learn it, and then become proficient at it.  If something as simple as new maps were allowed, we would be opening GhR, not confining it.  We added Warzone, so why not offer more maps in which to play it on?  The map packs are relatively small downloads.  I do not condone IT of FB maps because you have to download the entire expansion altogether.  IT and FB are way to buggy and way to big to implement as a requirement.

That's all for now... more to come...

.::|N| Noto

Thats the dumbest fucking rule I heard all year... if you find yourself involved with nades coming over your head then duck and move. We dont need a stupid rule like that tarnishing this great league.




This was brought up in a previous season discussion... I dont believe sensors should be banned its part of the game if you dont like the game then dont play it.

You can't ban sensors, and you can't ban nades - you might as well ban the guns if you do this, it would simply get rediculouse pulling the game to pieces....

5 second hold a the beginning of the game maybe would be nice to stop those GL bombers... but how on earth would you inforce it... and well its a skill and a part of the game isn't it?!

Yea, drop the 5sec rule. It would lead to ludacris situations where you find yourself face to face with the enemy but you cant shoot them until 3...2...blam - Hey you shot too early!  ;D

The maps... For a different ladder yes, not for the main ladder. I'm not really for implementing 3rd party mods for the main ladder.

I suggest we make de_dust a required map for the cqb ladder and maybe a few more small maps.

Guys please read and don't stiffen on small points that are only undecided suggestions as Voodoo's 5sec rule was which will come for AA for certain reasons.

However back to penalty points for glitching. I slept about it and I would rather give out warning points that are entered on a list here in the forum. This makes  the whole envirment friendlier than giving out penalty points.

Some ideas: not all players are registered on the BL site: 0.5 warning points.
You don't appear to a sheduled cb in the mainseason: 0.5 warning points
You don't appear to a sheduled cb in the finals: 1.0 wp
You get caught glichting once: the rule in my first post will apply + 0.5wp(no matter if accidently or not but all in all 0.5 isn't much).
You get caught glitching twice: 1.2 wp

If a clan reaches 3.0wp he will get suspended for the rest of the season. I think that sounds fair and doesn't invites clans to search for glitches in the end of the main season so a clan gets 10% off in the last week so misses the finals.

Bye,

Mauti

Mauti- I'm not sure this adderesses the 'replay scanning for glitches not affecting the game' issue adequately, if your intention is to eliminate that practice. Maybe something about a glitch needing to directly affect the outcome of a game? That puts the responsibility on the Admins to  determine if a glitch affects the game. I still think a glitch should be noted in the debrief period and a screenshot taken of the accusation to remove all doubt about where the glitch was and when it happened. That would eliminate that practice quite thoroughly.

Yep good idea Gambit. The warning points would only be for the "my glitch doubt has been proved what happens" action.

In regards to glitching...

Unintentional vs. =Intentional?

How about this:

? If you glitch and kill someone = Forfeit the entire match (Same as before).

? If you glitch and do not kill = Forfeit that game. No replay.

We need to let glitchers know that either "form" of glitching is not acceptable. If you glitch and kill, then you are dumb, and the CB is forfeited. If you glitch, and no one is killed, you're still a dumbass, but only that game is forfeited.

I personally hate replaying a game because it's never the same situation. Different spawns, different kills, just different different different. I think replaying a round, which was being fairly played by one clan, is unfair to the clan who followed the rules.  Therefore, the game that was in question for a glitch, if found unintentional, should be counted as a loss for that game only, not replayed.  

I still feel that it is the clan leader's responsibility to make sure their clan knows about glitches, what and where they are, and how to avoid them.

As for giving warnings, should we not consider this thread as the one and only warning these clans need?  Giving warnings are much like a slaps on the wrist in school.  If the rules are stated clearly at the beginning, those who are breaking the rules were well aware of the consequences.  Warnings should only be used in cases where the rule is not clear enough.  The issue of a rule being clear or not clear could also be decided upon by the Admins in a 2/3 or 66% vote.

.::|N| Noto

You can't judge if a glitch was made intentional or not. That just leaves ground for unclear admin decisions.

Further I think we should go away from forfeited matches. See my first post Noto. Only if a clan glitched twice the complete game will be auto forfeited otherwise it depends on how this single game would have affected the whole cb. There won't be any "replay" the game decisions anymore.

With such rules I try to concentrate more on gaming again.

Bye,

Mauti

crypt, fah, billy, and bfg:

May I introduce you to the BIG DOPEY GRIN BROTHERS:  ;D ;D

They denote a joke, an element of humor, or a reference-to-a-controversial-topic-on-purpose-for-getting-a-reaction state of the nearby or in this case enclosed statement.  Thank you for totally swallowing my bait like the big-mouthed bass that you all are.  I end this post on a " ;D " note and suggest that the topic moves on, letting the joke sit where it was meant to.  Sad that it has to be a joke instead of reality though. ;)

P.S. Sorry for disrupting your thread Mauti.

I like the warning point system a lot and think it will be effective.

Hazard

P.S. And for the love of God what about forfeit weakening! I thought people didn't want cheap wins/losses!

Hazard please explain what exactly do you mean with forfeit weakening.

One step to make forfeits less happen is to have forfeits due glitches only if you get caught glitching twice in a cb but other than that where do you think we should change the rules so less forfeits happen?

Bye,

Mauti

Give less points for forfeit wins then regular wins. Make a "disputed win" reward half the points(amount is up for discussion) and a "disputed loss" make you lose double the amount(once again amount is up for discussion.)

I think no one will strive to get a win by forfeit if they have nothing to gain from it. People will be more likely agree to redo the game in question if there is a penalty for both sides.

I see where you are coming from but the only problem is that we would have to rewrite major parts of the script to realize that.

Gotcha. Just a thought I had.

I think in general also most clans really look to avoid having forfiet wins... theres no joy in it and well we play to play...
I think the warning system regarding glitching would be most effictive and gets my vote

I also like the warning syst.

Personally, I'd love to see these map packs added, simply for the variety. But, not in the middle of a season. 1) Too much work creating map mods; 2) Overwhelming for new clans. We would simply have to refuse playing them until we know them, which won't happen in the middle of a season.


Agreed, banning sensors and/or grenades is too much of a change to the nature of team play. A large portion of what we train for involves that.

If it's that much of an issue for certain clans/people, let there be a mod written with single weapon kits, and have a seperate ladder for it to be used on. That would give everyone equal opportunity.


Agreement on this point, too, although there is a slight educational issue. In the official rules, there is a link to the Ghost Recon site about glitching... both of the links to explain glitching further are either broken or out of date. I would like this information, but it doesn't appear to be available. How can I furnish it to my clan if I can't find it?

Did I miss a rule or something on replays regarding dedicated servers somewhere? It appears that replays are not possible there. There must be another way to prove glitching by replays somehow?


I know that I'm sticking my foot in my mouth by even posting in this thread, as an inexperienced clan... but if you are wanting the ladder to grow, perhaps these things should be taken under consideration... such as:

If established clans resent replaying games so much, please do not require that for glitching. First, they won't want to cb us, and second, we are NEW and bound to have a couple of slip-ups somewhere along the line.

Point penalties would be preferential (at least, my first choice). If that is not possible, warning points are better than forefits, that way new clans can eliminate their repeat offenders from cb participation--and give the individual player a url to show him/her why.

Although, it would be almost too easy for a new clan to eliminate itself from future participation on the ladder if more than one player has a "slip-up." It seems too harsh to let mistakes made in a first season played by a clan totally eliminate it from current season and possibly a future one, too  ... that will either send them elsewhere, or cause them to disband and completely give up. With the current point system, a single cb could knock a clan out of play not only for that season, but for the next one, too (?!?). (I know you don't want to play with newbies, but we have to start somewhere.)

Thanks for consideration. That was my 2 cents worth. I'll put a sock in it now,  ;)