Return of Reckoning

Tonixam wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 10:54 am
Gravord wrote: [...] and changing game into something that isnt WAR that players loved and wanted to continue to play.

The honest, non cheating/exploiting one, but simple players who want to continue play WAR they loved.

+1

notre wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 11:07 am

Tonixam wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 10:54 am
Gravord wrote: [...] and changing game into something that isnt WAR that players loved and wanted to continue to play.

The honest, non cheating/exploiting one, but simple players who want to continue play WAR they loved.

+1

Ive never known a game that had as much demand for balance changes by the community that was just ignored. Balance issues are always brought up when war is mentioned on any mmo forum.

Does this mean WL's will finally get toned down??

Needabeer wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 12:08 pm Does this mean WL's will finally get toned down??

If you can find evidence of them overperforming within a group and/or warband environment Anyway, I don't think it's a discussion to be had in this particular thread.

Azarael wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 11:01 am Later on today, I will be running through the ban history and lifting or adjusting any sanction that was applied in violation of the three main points I listed in my opening statement (i.e. it involved overreach, dissent or more force than was necessary to stop the behaviour and thus was vengeful.)

Anyone whose case is not dealt with in my initial pass (either because I do not have enough evidence of what happened or because it was never logged to begin with) will then be able to appeal to me directly.

Don’t be too soft, remember most ppl given an inch try to take a mile

Acidic wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 12:51 pm

Azarael wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 11:01 am Later on today, I will be running through the ban history and lifting or adjusting any sanction that was applied in violation of the three main points I listed in my opening statement (i.e. it involved overreach, dissent or more force than was necessary to stop the behaviour and thus was vengeful.)

Anyone whose case is not dealt with in my initial pass (either because I do not have enough evidence of what happened or because it was never logged to begin with) will then be able to appeal to me directly.

Don’t be too soft, remember most ppl given an inch try to take a mile

It'd be interesting to see just how many bans/infractions are properly logged (reason, name of staff that issued it, submitted evidence, yadayada).
I imagine a bunch of people noped out the very second they got banned regardless of the circumstances; issue is... if people think their attempts to appeal are futile (for various reasons), they most certainly won't waste their time fighting windmills and just hop onto another game regardless of how much they luv WAR.

In other words:
What percentage of bans are appealed to, how many of the bans that aren't appealed to are clear cut cases (cheats, exploits, definitive[!= broad] rules broken) - how many aren't?
A graph based on bans issued within an arbitary unit of time over the past years might be enlightening, too ~ so would be a graph that breaks down the reasoning of any ban issued.

It would certainly help Aza's judgement and reduce the amount of back-and-forth in regards to evidence, as it reveals certain trends ~ not to mention that, in terms of public relations, it's not as clear-cut of an undertaking, say someone appealed to their ban and claimed that they couldn't produce evidence for that all evidence was scrubbed by the relevant staff... Rabbit-hole much.
Mind you, I do not intend to suggest that RoR staff would go to these lengths, rather that regardless of whether or not something like this is happening, players have the ability to argue based on these mere possibilities - until procedures are transparent enough.
[Abbd.: Note, the public ban-archive-thing has not - or only very, very scarcely - been 'used' since your departure, Aza.]

Someone earlier on in this thread spoke of the splitting of power, as far as this is concerned... only actual moderators should have the ability to 'tamper' with posts, issue infractions and alike; Devs and moderators (if the moderators are involved in the 'case') should use the same venues of 'litigation' as players - you don't judge and punish a crime against yourself (or someone/thing [closely] related to yourself) by yourself ~ you take it to a court.
I threw a fit about these very practices in one of the balance discussions already...

Note: I just like data, graphs and common sense, no offense intended.

It shouldn't be to difficault to just re-ban people, should they act up (again).

E: Format, typos.

Welcome back Azarael.

There is indeed quite a bit of a bad blood about moderation in RoR (I do remember a specific tread that Penril made about changes to sorc DM mechanic, where he gave infractions to/banned every single poster which didn't agree that it is a great idea- infraction here, after which personally I stopped posting in any kind of mechanics tread), though it does seems to improve lately.

P.S. I do hope that the dok experimental mode is dead and buried for good- that one ruined the class, locking it from hybrid that it is quite possible to play into zealot/choppa wannabe.

so many banned ppl and their friends act like innocent.

well, i trust RoR devs decisions.
whoever get granted unban, I hope they've learned lessons and true meaning of constructive criticism.

anarchypark wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 4:51 pm so many banned ppl and their friends act like innocent.

well, i trust RoR devs decisions.
whoever get granted unban, I hope they've learned lessons and true meaning of constructive criticism.

Read the thread.

anarchypark wrote: Sun Jul 29, 2018 4:51 pm so many banned ppl and their friends act like innocent.

well, i trust RoR devs decisions.
whoever get granted unban, I hope they've learned lessons and true meaning of constructive criticism.

Yes, like Gravord who argued politely and with no offense to none in general? Or maybe like the guy who asked pig as mounts? Your post makes sense.