User panel stuff on forum
  48 posts on 2 pages  First page12Last page
European Quake League
2009-01-29, 23:40
Administrator
2059 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
Zalon wrote:
The difference between rockets, grenade, armor and weapon skins are that you know where these items are, a backpack could be hidden in a shadow somewhere, in the water, or next to a health pack. If you were allowed to have yellow backpack skins, it would be quite too easy to see them.

Why should it be hard to see backpacks but not enemy players?
www.facebook.com/QuakeWorld
2009-01-29, 23:41
Member
462 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
Zalon wrote:
The difference between rockets, grenade, armor and weapon skins are that you know where these items are, a backpack could be hidden in a shadow somewhere, in the water, or next to a health pack. If you were allowed to have yellow backpack skins, it would be quite too easy to see them.

Regarding player skins that somehow became standard.
Everything can become standard, if enough people agree it should, it has always been the players who decided on the rules in the end.

I mean rockets and grenades that are shot, in the air. You might not see a pine on the floor without fullbrights eg.

Quote:
The rollalpha thing is cool, i use it myself, but i guess it's banned as the majority see it as cheating.

I bet majority does not even know it exists. I don't believe in your theory that players decide the rules. The rules are basically decided by a handful of league admins / client coders and most players just accept what they are told because they can't be arsed to care enough.

I however am slightly bothered about illogical and inconsistent policies in these matters.

And yes I only quoted the parts I don't agree with. Eye model's only point is to make the player hard to see so it can be viewed as an exception to the rule.

The ruleset obviously does ban some things that could be used for cheating, but because I feel that cheating is almost nonexistent in qw and the fact that the ruleset also bans nice features for no real reason, I'd rather ditch it. Of course a better solution would be a new ruleset.
2009-01-30, 02:09
Administrator
1864 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
Ake Vader wrote:
Zalon wrote:
The difference between rockets, grenade, armor and weapon skins are that you know where these items are, a backpack could be hidden in a shadow somewhere, in the water, or next to a health pack. If you were allowed to have yellow backpack skins, it would be quite too easy to see them.

Why should it be hard to see backpacks but not enemy players?

Well you tell me, when i started playing online in 99, fb skins was the standard.

blAze wrote:
I don't believe in your theory that players decide the rules. The rules are basically decided by a handful of league admins / client coders and most players just accept what they are told because they can't be arsed to care enough.

Well I guess that league admins/client coders can't be arsed to care about people who do not speak up.

Atleast for me, as I can only speak for myself in this matter, but I try to follow the directions of the players I get input from.

However, regarding the nice new features being banned, like rollalpha, teamoverlay and what not. Oh well blAze, you've been around for a long time, and you remember all the big discussions we've had, regarding fakeshaft, kfjump, if scripts, timers and now the movement scripts.

I believe that the ruleset has been used by client coders as a way to add new features, like rollangle and teamoverlay. If they restrict the usage from the start they won't get into trouble. As nobody cares to whine about a feature that is only available in prac games.

I'm certain that the client coders do not want to restrict the features that they add, I'm pretty sure that when they use a lot of time and energy in creating something, they want it used. But with the qw community that just ain't something you do by just adding it to the lastest stable.

As always, there will be whine.
2009-01-30, 08:35
Member
398 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
I'm not satisfied about fuhquake not being allowed as it is the only client that works for me, so guess there will be no hagge playing 4on4 until nqr gets back (( *saknizzen*
2009-01-30, 09:13
Administrator
1864 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
Well, as I've said before, if people for some reason cannot run latest stables of either FTE or ezQuake, then exceptions can be made, and if this shows to be a large amount of people, we will of course change the client list.

But hagge, do you also have a stoneage pc? I mean, even my work laptop can run ezQuake using the nQuake package with 308fps stable.
2009-01-30, 10:22
Member
77 posts

Registered:
Feb 2008
nix wrote:
Jimo wrote:
nix wrote:
To play this map in a higher div both teams have to agree on it. In the lowest div you can pick it just like a normal map.

I know that the admins is very clever and don't gonna add some random kenya to the map pool.
But IF, WHY should higher divs have the big honor to choose if we lowdivs won't?

I explained it already in my post why low divs and not high divs. Additionally, why should people who start playing qw and are pretty unexperienced with the maps have to play 12 year old maps who are designed for a total different gameplay (e1m2 not even for deathmatch), when there are maps that fit modern gameplay better. I know the chance of introducing a new map is pretty slim. You want new players in QW to let the community grow. You cant expect them to come to QW and then shut up. New people will bring in new demands and new ideas. Oldschoolers are used to play TB3 and shouldnt be forced to change their habbits, but new players should have the possibility to test something new.

Not every lowdiv player is new to the game, almost everyone is oldschools that have startet over to play again after like 5 years inactivity.

New players can have the possibility to test the maps if both lowdiv clans chooses to play it.
But if one clan really don't wanna play a kenya, they shouldnt be forced to it.
2009-01-30, 10:43
Member
1435 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
I really don't recommend using default ruleset in competitive environment, lots of the stuff is rather experimental and some can be really mis-used to gain an advantage. Such discussion should have been here sooner, now it's too late. Yes, some of the stuff is disabled just because there wasn't time or will to discuss / test it properly.

There's only one way to properly decide on other stuff (enemy skin forcing, strafe script, ...) - make a poll where each team that signed up for EQL can vote.

Problem with maps is that cmt3 and cmt4 are not THAT great and they are de-facto another "the best 5". The scene is so braindead that playing 5 maps over and over again is considered incredibly different from playing 3 maps over and over again. Sigh.
2009-01-30, 10:48
Member
253 posts

Registered:
Nov 2007
blAze wrote:
fog wrote:
howcome?

.
And since my mouse buttons only work with 2.0 branch of ezQuake and in_raw_allbuttons 1, I'd of course want to see it allowed too, because otherwise I can't play.

i have the same problem. so i entirely support the idea. I hope that 1.9.3 will containes in_raw_allbuttons.
cheat 2 win!
2009-01-30, 10:50
Administrator
1864 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
JohnNy_cz wrote:
I really don't recommend using default ruleset in competitive environment

What do you recommend then?

JohnNy_cz wrote:
Such discussion should have been here sooner, now it's too late.

Well such a discussion wasn't possible to do before EQL9, as this EQL season wasn't supposed to happen, we expected NQR do start up again.

Actually, we decided to do EQL 5mins after soma msg'ed me that NQR wouldn't happen.
[20:53:40] *** Zalon changes topic to 'EQL scheduled to start this february'
at 23:18 i posted this http://www.quakeworld.nu/news/425/
2009-01-30, 11:43
Member
1435 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
I recommend smackdown ruleset and discuss each disabled feature separately in more appropriate time in more appropriate place.

ezQuake 1.9.3 will have in_raw_allbuttons.
2009-01-30, 20:28
Member
398 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
hehe zalon, my computer is very antique yes.. it's about nine years old and I don't really know why fuhq works better for me, but I haven't managed to fix ezq to work in the same way and therefor there is no point for me to change
2009-01-30, 21:20
Administrator
1864 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
Hagge wrote:
hehe zalon, my computer is very antique yes.. it's about nine years old and I don't really know why fuhq works better for me, but I haven't managed to fix ezq to work in the same way and therefor there is no point for me to change

Well for those who can't change to latest stable of either the ezQuake or fte client, we will of course allow the usage of another client. What we want with the limitation is to make it easier for the players to authenticate their clients, also with updated clients, it's possible for us to better communicate with the developers and discuss future features. And for those that can upgrade, I see no reason why they shouldn't
2009-01-31, 01:55
Moderator
1329 posts

Registered:
Apr 2006
You can run the latest ezQuake very good with 700MHz Athlon and Geforce1, at least stable 77fps. If you have 1GHz p3 with GF4ti you can run ezQ at 250fps max so unless you have a VERY SHITTY pc with 400MHz p2 and riva tnt, then the fps might be problematic.
Servers: Troopers
2009-01-31, 16:55
Member
251 posts

Registered:
Jul 2007
Zalon wrote:
And for those that can upgrade, I see no reason why they shouldn't

How exactly do you plan to distinguish between those who can and cannot? I know that your intentions are good but at the same time you make yourself a target of "untruthful statements". Like one player just cannot be bothered to upgrade and whines to you about how the official clients don't work on his PC - how high are the changes anyway? That, in turn, questions the rule overall. Either you (can) enforce it and ensure equal rights for all or you might treat some players unfair. What about the guys you reject the use of a legacy client? Lots of drama potential here.

I suggest you either enforce the rule without any concessions or you allow the use of Fuhquake for everyone. I prefer the first.
2009-01-31, 19:04
Member
386 posts

Registered:
Apr 2006
While I understand the need for consistency in rules, we can't afford to alienate any players with legitimate reasons for not upgrading in these delicate times.

ESPECIALLY NOT THE MIGHTY DIV0 HAGGE!
2009-02-01, 23:55
Member
108 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
Perhaps there could be a fundraiser among the players. Just a few bucks each to buy a PIII 500 mhz for hagge. The heart and soul of QW~~!
Spell "mogul," Bateman. How do you spell mogul? M-o-g-u-l. Mo-gul. Mog-ul. Ice, ghosts, aliens-
2009-02-02, 08:09
Administrator
1864 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
pattah wrote:
I know that your intentions are good but at the same time you make yourself a target of "untruthful statements".

I understand that some might do that, but I believe that QW players are more mature than that

The reason why it's removed from the list is to get those who can upgrade to do so.
2009-02-02, 16:55
Member
251 posts

Registered:
Jul 2007
Zalon wrote:
[...], but I believe that QW players are more mature than that

Let's hope so.
  48 posts on 2 pages  First page12Last page