fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited November 2012
I can't agree with wiry, or the other posters lambasting this initiative. I think it's great that UWE are both sponsoring AND hosting tournaments, and I hope they continue to do so. It is also fantastic that you guys are working on creating a proper ruleset that will hopefully prevent the problems we've seen in past tournaments from reoccuring. Rules that prevent players from discussing things like balance or gameplay during matches are perfectly fair, as long as such minor infractions don't automatically result in disqualification or equally harsh punishments -- which I believe you have already addressed with the "multiple offences" clause.
So keep up the good work and I look forward to seeing how this evolves in the future. I have one issue though, that I hope you will consider carefully:
<!--quoteo(post=2017314:date=Nov 9 2012, 07:49 PM:name=WasabiOne)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (WasabiOne @ Nov 9 2012, 07:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2017314"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1.8a - ha yeah, but all the same Bob spent a lot time formatting this... wouldnt want anyone to copy it and say its theirs :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> While I understand that it might seem painful to see others "exploiting" your hard work, I think you're looking at it the wrong way. If you "opensource" these rules, everyone will benefit from it! If you are able to create a solid standard rules framework that the entire community can then use, with appropriate modifications for each tournament, that will be to the betterment of the entire community, not just your tournaments. Isn't that what we all want -- to see as many successful tournaments as possible?
I'm a little iffy on the allowance of Crosshair mods. (3.2b) The way I see it, the inclusion and exclusion of crosshairs for certain abilities/firearms is part of the game's balancing, and should not be altered. Really, the only mods that should be allowed are viewmodel skins, provided you cannot see through them.
My other issue is 2.8b. What if someone loses internet? Or if power goes down? That team is down a player for the entirety of the set? Allow the rules on ringers to come in via the ENSL's /mercs option. Or if a player is lost in the first game, allow the rules of a ringer to come in between games.
I also have some issues with 1.7a, and 3.1. But those have already been pointed out. If players act like immature children, yes, reprimand them. But this is very vague, and quite broad.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1.8a - ha yeah, but all the same Bob spent a lot time formatting this... wouldnt want anyone to copy it and say its theirs :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm hoping this is sarcasm. XD I'm with Fanatic on this side of things.
<!--quoteo(post=2020719:date=Nov 12 2012, 09:20 AM:name=wiry)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (wiry @ Nov 12 2012, 09:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2020719"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Crosshair should be allowed, this isn't a console game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry? I don't follow. The inclusion and exclusion of crosshairs makes little to no difference for a console shooter, or a PC shooter. You don't have a difficult time finding the center of your screen as an alien, do you? You don't want marines using range scales on their Grenade Launchers, do you?
Custom crosshair should be allowed, I dislike the default crosshair. I like it simple. GL should have range scales, but it's pointless, it's not like bf3 where you have to aim really far.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm a little iffy on the allowance of Crosshair mods.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> If UWE blocks custom crosshairs their tournies should be boycotted for idiocy.
<!--quoteo(post=2021292:date=Nov 12 2012, 02:15 PM:name=MinstrelJCF)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MinstrelJCF @ Nov 12 2012, 02:15 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2021292"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If UWE blocks custom crosshairs their tournies should be boycotted for idiocy.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I assumed the default crosshairs were an NS running gag. In the original it was a horrendous, kitschy mess and seeing as they kept it through every release it must have been some kind of joke.
Also, given the track record for previous tournaments, I can't help but feel defensive about some of these rules. A lot of them are great and clarify the organization of tournaments, but some of them are vague and nondescript. I would like to see more about the breadth of the admin's power and the process for discipline.
Line 2 of page 2, you'r missing a 'to' befor adhere.
Use 'This document' instead of 'it' ... much easier to decide who 'this document' referrs to. [Than 'it']
Again, 'the organizer' rather then 'they' ... see where I'm going with this ... (1.2b)
Instructions 'given by' , not 'instructions of' ... 1.2c .. 'tournament admins' not 'admins' .. surely you're not referring to the server admins? There are ~8 levels of admin on any windows network. Be specific. If you define 'tournament admins' make sure you *use* the term 'tournament admins.'
His/Her. Close to the start of the doc, befor the listing, define 'her' to mean 'male or female, a generic user of NS2 via Steam (Valve)' ... now you can just use 'her' for the rest of the document.
I'm up to ONE point ~ d, maybe f, honestly, I'll give it a good read tomorrow afternoon and do a word doc of suggestions, why be a cn8ut with English if you can just be a cn8ut basely?
<!--quoteo(post=2020440:date=Nov 12 2012, 03:15 PM:name=BeerTent)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BeerTent @ Nov 12 2012, 03:15 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2020440"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm a little iffy on the allowance of Crosshair mods. (3.2b) The way I see it, the inclusion and exclusion of crosshairs for certain abilities/firearms is part of the game's balancing, and should not be altered. Really, the only mods that should be allowed are viewmodel skins, provided you cannot see through them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
LoL? what?
+1 for making ruleset open to everyone. Creating a ruleset is a monumental task, once its done once it should be available for everyone to pick up and modify slightly for their own leagues/ladders/tournies.
Good work Wasabi.
I personally don't agree with the rule stating that 'slandering the game is against the rules' but whatever. That rule is already taken care of with having only captains allowed to talk.
<!--quoteo(post=2017330:date=Nov 9 2012, 11:00 AM:name=WasabiOne)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (WasabiOne @ Nov 9 2012, 11:00 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2017330"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Section 3.1 is by far the most important. I dont believe is broad or hard to understand at all.... pretty much team captains should be the only ones chatting during the game to call NL or to request review, etc... However; during ready room or even during a round players should not under any circumstances state any opinons regarding the game it self, ie... HITREG lol, Map Sucks, Balance wtf... if you dont like the state of the game at the time of play, then dont play, but these matches are not a podium for any individuals opinions to be heard regarding any changes they want in the game. Those conversations can be had elsewhere. When even joking the stream become and chatting then amplies the post and takes a whole new direction which is not what these events are about.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why are UWE tournament organizers so afraid of criticism? It's not like UWE doesn't get criticized all the time, in all quarters, including its own forums, and 100x harsher than "rofl hitreg."
Instead of being afraid of criticism, UWE should be accepting it. Competitive players have a lot of knowledge of the game and actually have useful input to make about game balance. Flayra certainly said so himself on the weekend. People criticize UWE and elements of NS2, it's a fact of life, who cares whether they do it in a game or in the forums. Accept it, sometimes learn from it, and don't run away from it. UWE tourney organizers need to lose their glass jaw.
What Wasabi's post is saying is that not only were UWE tourney organizers right to ban for hitreg comments, <i>they would do it again.</i> And I think 99% of players playing and watching the stream thought that was a disproportionate and uncalled for response to the most innocent of comments (which was pretty much on the same level as "damn ping" or "bad reffing" ...in other words the common kind of griping you find in any competitive sport or e-sport.) It is right for people like wiry to be skeptical of participating in UWE sponsored events if they do not admit that was a mistake but instead continue blindly down the same road.
3.1c banning team chat is silly. I would note that in the recent ESL finals, the biggest NS2 tournament ever, watched by 40000 unique streamers, and Charlie in the audience, both Exertus and Archaea used team chat. The earth did not stop spinning. No animals were harmed. The point of rules is to prevent problems. Team chat is mostly used for light banter between teams. Rules that are inappropriate and unnecessary actually only create problems rather than preventing them....as we saw in the last ESL event.
3.1c - Sometimes it is more efficient to type in team chat. Can't you guys just mod the cameraman's NS2 to not show messages?
5.1c - More definition of which disciplinary actions will result from which rule breaks. I would prefer seeing a 2 tier classification - one for minor infractions and one for major (and what exactly comes under each category) - combined with a 3 strike rule. Major infractions should result in an automatic red card. Also, nobody should be forever banned due to a first time offence. Ban them from the next tournament, then if they break the rules again ban them forever.
thank you everyone for your thoughts and input, Scardy and I will be going through all the notes and making changes in the next day and will update the online version accordingly. Also as a note, I have no problem honestly with people saying that disagree or have issues with something related to the tournament, but doing it live on the stream isnt the place to air out your frustrations, we have a private chat channel, you have the forums, skype, teamspeak, email... after the event you can air it all out to the world but during the event we need to keep it clean and professional, doesnt mean we cant have fun, just means there is a proper time and place to say certain things.
BTW EvilSheep, Thats not exactly what I said... My opinion is that all of it could have been handled differently and that if those players had been warned they probably would not have continued saying the things that got them banned by an admin... But I do feel that if you are warned and continue to display behavior that you agreed not to do then yes some action should be taken... I think the action will also weigh on what or how severe the rule breaking was... IMO a BAN would have to be something pretty bad, like racism, extreme exploit abuse.... and again everyone is entitled to a warning, no instant bans, period.
ArgathorJoin Date: 2011-07-18Member: 110942Members, Squad Five Blue
I think it would be a lot easier for Huze to add in a caster mode/function to spectator mode, that simply disables the chat. Huze is mega talented, I am sure that would take him like 5mins! ;-)
The last few events have had all sorts of garbage in the chat from players, referees, admin, casters, etc. None of it should ever be visible, it was very distracting at times. Which fixes it completely and removes any need for the rules.
ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
<!--quoteo(post=2021663:date=Nov 12 2012, 08:29 PM:name=Evil_Sheep)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Evil_Sheep @ Nov 12 2012, 08:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2021663"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why are UWE tournament organizers so afraid of criticism? It's not like UWE doesn't get criticized all the time, in all quarters, including its own forums, and 100x harsher than "rofl hitreg."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Criticism is fine, but it needs to be made in the appropriate venues. Various forums (UWE, Steam, etc), emails to UWE, GetSatisfaction, and the Dev Q&A's are all great and well-used conduits for criticism, praise, suggestions, etc. Doing so during a livestreamed tournament, especially by people participating in the tournament, is more akin to trolling. Many sports have rules regarding player/coach conduct both during and after games, as participants are rightly held to a higher standard than the general public.
Also, I'd support either Insight or ns2stats being able to disable all chat (I think team chat is fine and useful) during live matches. However, until such a change is made, the 'no chatting' rules needs to stay.
Something I've always been curious about with regard to competitive play - Is bile bombing the power node from the vents in nano-grid allowed? Or is that considered a no-no?
<!--quoteo(post=2022996:date=Nov 14 2012, 05:01 AM:name=d0ped0g)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (d0ped0g @ Nov 14 2012, 05:01 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2022996"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Something I've always been curious about with regard to competitive play - Is bile bombing the power node from the vents in nano-grid allowed? Or is that considered a no-no?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why wouldn't it be allowed?
You can't hit the gorges doing this (provided they bile from a clog platform slightly below the top bit of the vent).
You have to boost somebody into the vents and attack from inside to clear the gorge out. Either that, or research grenade launchers early. It basically forces that tech out early if you want a shot at keeping double res. Wouldn't be a problem if there were hand grenades (hint hint).
I'm not saying it should or it shouldn't be allowed. I'm just curious.
I imagine at the very least, some clans might not be very impressed if this is done to them.
<!--quoteo(post=2023532:date=Nov 14 2012, 02:07 PM:name=d0ped0g)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (d0ped0g @ Nov 14 2012, 02:07 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2023532"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You can't hit the gorges doing this (provided they bile from a clog platform slightly below the top bit of the vent).
You have to boost somebody into the vents and attack from inside to clear the gorge out. Either that, or research grenade launchers early. It basically forces that tech out early if you want a shot at keeping double res (. Wouldn't be a problem if there were hand grenades (hint hint).
I'm not saying it should or it shouldn't be allowed. I'm just curious.
I imagine at the very least, some clans might not be very impressed if this is done to them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm pretty sure that you can just jump on the Extractor and shoot them from there.
<!--quoteo(post=2023535:date=Nov 14 2012, 03:08 PM:name=Techercizer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Techercizer @ Nov 14 2012, 03:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2023535"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm pretty sure that you can just jump on the Extractor and shoot them from there.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I just tested it by myself with a hydra on top of the clog as a placeholder for the gorge (I figure they're roughly the same height)
You have to jump on top of the extractor to get any hits in, and even then you have to shoot around abit first to find the sweet spot. Usually you'll get 0 or 10 damage in each jump (and you cant jump over rapidly or you lose height). If you find the right spot you can get 20 damage in. Once I got 30 damage in, but I couldn't reproduce it, even when I thought I was aiming at exactly the same place).
I figure if you have 2 marines on top of the extractor (one boosting the other for height), then maybe it would give the height to shoot it properly. Of course the gorge could just fall down into the vent or a slightly lower clog if this happens, but I guess it would prevent it from bile bombing.
<!--quoteo(post=2023634:date=Nov 14 2012, 04:31 PM:name=Techercizer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Techercizer @ Nov 14 2012, 04:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2023634"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They are not the same height.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
-_-
I was agreeing with you (sort of).
But since you want to nitpick the details... <img src="http://i46.tinypic.com/29ditqf.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Note, I never said 'exactly the same height'. I said 'roughly the same height'. And they are. I'm not sure what the hitboxes are like, but presumably they are roughly (maybe not exactly) the same height as the model.
Go derail a different thread. I just wanted to ask a simple question about something and get a simple answer. If I wanted to discuss the ins and outs of this so much and whether gorges are as tall as hydras I would have created a thread rather than ask a passing question in the rules thread.
Comments
So keep up the good work and I look forward to seeing how this evolves in the future. I have one issue though, that I hope you will consider carefully:
<!--quoteo(post=2017314:date=Nov 9 2012, 07:49 PM:name=WasabiOne)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (WasabiOne @ Nov 9 2012, 07:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2017314"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1.8a - ha yeah, but all the same Bob spent a lot time formatting this... wouldnt want anyone to copy it and say its theirs :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While I understand that it might seem painful to see others "exploiting" your hard work, I think you're looking at it the wrong way. If you "opensource" these rules, everyone will benefit from it! If you are able to create a solid standard rules framework that the entire community can then use, with appropriate modifications for each tournament, that will be to the betterment of the entire community, not just your tournaments. Isn't that what we all want -- to see as many successful tournaments as possible?
My other issue is 2.8b. What if someone loses internet? Or if power goes down? That team is down a player for the entirety of the set? Allow the rules on ringers to come in via the ENSL's /mercs option. Or if a player is lost in the first game, allow the rules of a ringer to come in between games.
I also have some issues with 1.7a, and 3.1. But those have already been pointed out. If players act like immature children, yes, reprimand them. But this is very vague, and quite broad.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1.8a - ha yeah, but all the same Bob spent a lot time formatting this... wouldnt want anyone to copy it and say its theirs :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm hoping this is sarcasm. XD I'm with Fanatic on this side of things.
Sorry? I don't follow. The inclusion and exclusion of crosshairs makes little to no difference for a console shooter, or a PC shooter. You don't have a difficult time finding the center of your screen as an alien, do you? You don't want marines using range scales on their Grenade Launchers, do you?
If UWE blocks custom crosshairs their tournies should be boycotted for idiocy.
I assumed the default crosshairs were an NS running gag. In the original it was a horrendous, kitschy mess and seeing as they kept it through every release it must have been some kind of joke.
Also, given the track record for previous tournaments, I can't help but feel defensive about some of these rules. A lot of them are great and clarify the organization of tournaments, but some of them are vague and nondescript. I would like to see more about the breadth of the admin's power and the process for discipline.
Use 'This document' instead of 'it' ... much easier to decide who 'this document' referrs to. [Than 'it']
Again, 'the organizer' rather then 'they' ... see where I'm going with this ... (1.2b)
Instructions 'given by' , not 'instructions of' ... 1.2c .. 'tournament admins' not 'admins' .. surely you're not referring to the server admins? There are ~8 levels of admin on any windows network. Be specific. If you define 'tournament admins' make sure you *use* the term 'tournament admins.'
His/Her. Close to the start of the doc, befor the listing, define 'her' to mean 'male or female, a generic user of NS2 via Steam (Valve)' ... now you can just use 'her' for the rest of the document.
I'm up to ONE point ~ d, maybe f, honestly, I'll give it a good read tomorrow afternoon and do a word doc of suggestions, why be a cn8ut with English if you can just be a cn8ut basely?
LoL? what?
+1 for making ruleset open to everyone. Creating a ruleset is a monumental task, once its done once it should be available for everyone to pick up and modify slightly for their own leagues/ladders/tournies.
Good work Wasabi.
I personally don't agree with the rule stating that 'slandering the game is against the rules' but whatever. That rule is already taken care of with having only captains allowed to talk.
Why are UWE tournament organizers so afraid of criticism? It's not like UWE doesn't get criticized all the time, in all quarters, including its own forums, and 100x harsher than "rofl hitreg."
Instead of being afraid of criticism, UWE should be accepting it. Competitive players have a lot of knowledge of the game and actually have useful input to make about game balance. Flayra certainly said so himself on the weekend. People criticize UWE and elements of NS2, it's a fact of life, who cares whether they do it in a game or in the forums. Accept it, sometimes learn from it, and don't run away from it. UWE tourney organizers need to lose their glass jaw.
What Wasabi's post is saying is that not only were UWE tourney organizers right to ban for hitreg comments, <i>they would do it again.</i> And I think 99% of players playing and watching the stream thought that was a disproportionate and uncalled for response to the most innocent of comments (which was pretty much on the same level as "damn ping" or "bad reffing" ...in other words the common kind of griping you find in any competitive sport or e-sport.) It is right for people like wiry to be skeptical of participating in UWE sponsored events if they do not admit that was a mistake but instead continue blindly down the same road.
3.1c banning team chat is silly. I would note that in the recent ESL finals, the biggest NS2 tournament ever, watched by 40000 unique streamers, and Charlie in the audience, both Exertus and Archaea used team chat. The earth did not stop spinning. No animals were harmed. The point of rules is to prevent problems. Team chat is mostly used for light banter between teams. Rules that are inappropriate and unnecessary actually only create problems rather than preventing them....as we saw in the last ESL event.
5.1c - More definition of which disciplinary actions will result from which rule breaks. I would prefer seeing a 2 tier classification - one for minor infractions and one for major (and what exactly comes under each category) - combined with a 3 strike rule. Major infractions should result in an automatic red card. Also, nobody should be forever banned due to a first time offence. Ban them from the next tournament, then if they break the rules again ban them forever.
BTW EvilSheep, Thats not exactly what I said... My opinion is that all of it could have been handled differently and that if those players had been warned they probably would not have continued saying the things that got them banned by an admin... But I do feel that if you are warned and continue to display behavior that you agreed not to do then yes some action should be taken... I think the action will also weigh on what or how severe the rule breaking was... IMO a BAN would have to be something pretty bad, like racism, extreme exploit abuse.... and again everyone is entitled to a warning, no instant bans, period.
The last few events have had all sorts of garbage in the chat from players, referees, admin, casters, etc. None of it should ever be visible, it was very distracting at times. Which fixes it completely and removes any need for the rules.
Criticism is fine, but it needs to be made in the appropriate venues. Various forums (UWE, Steam, etc), emails to UWE, GetSatisfaction, and the Dev Q&A's are all great and well-used conduits for criticism, praise, suggestions, etc. Doing so during a livestreamed tournament, especially by people participating in the tournament, is more akin to trolling. Many sports have rules regarding player/coach conduct both during and after games, as participants are rightly held to a higher standard than the general public.
Also, I'd support either Insight or ns2stats being able to disable all chat (I think team chat is fine and useful) during live matches. However, until such a change is made, the 'no chatting' rules needs to stay.
Why wouldn't it be allowed?
You have to boost somebody into the vents and attack from inside to clear the gorge out. Either that, or research grenade launchers early. It basically forces that tech out early if you want a shot at keeping double res. Wouldn't be a problem if there were hand grenades (hint hint).
I'm not saying it should or it shouldn't be allowed. I'm just curious.
I imagine at the very least, some clans might not be very impressed if this is done to them.
You have to boost somebody into the vents and attack from inside to clear the gorge out. Either that, or research grenade launchers early. It basically forces that tech out early if you want a shot at keeping double res (. Wouldn't be a problem if there were hand grenades (hint hint).
I'm not saying it should or it shouldn't be allowed. I'm just curious.
I imagine at the very least, some clans might not be very impressed if this is done to them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm pretty sure that you can just jump on the Extractor and shoot them from there.
I just tested it by myself with a hydra on top of the clog as a placeholder for the gorge (I figure they're roughly the same height)
You have to jump on top of the extractor to get any hits in, and even then you have to shoot around abit first to find the sweet spot. Usually you'll get 0 or 10 damage in each jump (and you cant jump over rapidly or you lose height). If you find the right spot you can get 20 damage in. Once I got 30 damage in, but I couldn't reproduce it, even when I thought I was aiming at exactly the same place).
I figure if you have 2 marines on top of the extractor (one boosting the other for height), then maybe it would give the height to shoot it properly. Of course the gorge could just fall down into the vent or a slightly lower clog if this happens, but I guess it would prevent it from bile bombing.
-_-
I was agreeing with you (sort of).
But since you want to nitpick the details...
<img src="http://i46.tinypic.com/29ditqf.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Note, I never said 'exactly the same height'. I said 'roughly the same height'. And they are. I'm not sure what the hitboxes are like, but presumably they are roughly (maybe not exactly) the same height as the model.
Go derail a different thread. I just wanted to ask a simple question about something and get a simple answer. If I wanted to discuss the ins and outs of this so much and whether gorges are as tall as hydras I would have created a thread rather than ask a passing question in the rules thread.