|
Post by Death to ALL on Apr 29, 2007 18:22:10 GMT -5
Current Issues with posted rosters Note: Some of the 'not on ladder' maybe that they are now playing under a different name. The listings with a different name are not a big deal but are listed to make it easier on the staff. May 3rd is the cut off date for being in good standing to be able to take part in this CCC. The 'In Good Standing' rule has been lifted for this CCC and will be reviewed before the next CCC. MUD/SD2R 1 too many members RaY Rokkitlauncher - Boxed until May 18(Playing while suspended and multiple accounts)
FUN [FUN]spide001 - Not on ladder
OS Luc201 - Not on ladder
STYX LupusInFabula - Not on ladder
..A.. kazache - ..A..kazache CanKaban - ..A..CanKaban Matlowe - ..A..Matlowe MigUgra - Boxed until May 24(Violating Rule #16) MoJo PBB - [MoJo]PBB Ape - [MOJO]Ape Nepenthe - [MoJo]Nepenthe hendrix - [mojo]hendrix stetson - [MoJo]stetson LiQuiD - [MoJo]LiQuiD qwazar - [MoJo]qwazar Fierce - Not on ladder PAF Abukhir --> ..A..Dache - Abukhir Baron Pirus --> [FUN]Eral - Baron-pirus Casaubon --> [GOD]Zilla - casaubon Cemi59 --> [KC]DC - Cemi59 DonkeySam --> [MDR]UCrazy - DonkeySam Enzho --> [MUD]InTaiwan - Enzho Juni --> [OS]Wife - Juni Lil --> [PAF]Etic - lil Mr Phelps --> [RaY]DotChiliPeppers - mr_phelps Shook --> [RUS]Tic - Shook Sinople --> [STYX]Matize - Sinople SirHill --> [TORC]Ture - SirHill moudubide --> [VVV]Rroooom - moudubide
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 29, 2007 19:12:35 GMT -5
Funny that this rule, to my knowledge, has never been enforced before. Players and clans have been allowed to register and be added to rosters pretty much whenever.
It would have been nice to know that this rule was actually going to be followed more than just a couple days before the cut off date. Seems pretty unfair to me when in the past many rulings have been made after the CCC in order to facilitate a good time and fun competition between the clans.
Most recently -- the ..A.. reporting scam that resulted in them having nearly all of the top 10 locked up? Figured out after the CCC.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 29, 2007 20:30:42 GMT -5
Funny that this rule, to my knowledge, has never been enforced before. Players and clans have been allowed to register and be added to rosters pretty much whenever. It would have been nice to know that this rule was actually going to be followed more than just a couple days before the cut off date. Seems pretty unfair to me when in the past many rulings have been made after the CCC in order to facilitate a good time and fun competition between the clans. Most recently -- the ..A.. reporting scam that resulted in them having nearly all of the top 10 locked up? Figured out after the CCC. The fact is that it's never had to have been enforced before, but with the number of NR penalties increasing because of our new rules, we are making sure that it is going to be fairly enforced when it does apply. The CCC will not be an excuse to alter the ladders policies. As to MGT's multiple reports issue, it was not technically breaking the rules and that was the ruling, the ruling was delayed until after the CCC simply because planning the CCC was more important than making a ruling on only a semi important issue. No one was punished anyway so it wouldn't have effected the CCC rosters at any rate. The best thing to do within your clans is to ensure that your members don't end up "not in good standing" by always reporting there ladder losses promptly. CS
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 29, 2007 21:24:56 GMT -5
Let's face reality:
* The CCC is the biggest, best, and most fun event in the Civ4 MP Universe.
* Unfortunately, due to a number of factors, including the poor performance of GameSpy and lack of MP features compared to the majority of MP games, the Civ4 MP Universe seems to be constantly shrinking. The activity in the lobby is much lower than it was at this point last year.
* Disallowing players to participate in the CCC is only going to frustrate Civ4 MP players even more, and I'd hate to see more people leave this game as a result of our actions as a community. Is it so important to enforce rules so strictly as to lose players? I understand placing players in the penalty box for violating ladder rules, but not permitting them to play in the CCC is taking things way too far, in my opinion.
* In good standing for a week prior to the CCC ... what is the point of that exactly? As long as a member is not in the penalty box during the actual time of the CCC, he or she should be allowed to play. Once someone has served their time, they shouldn't be subject to additional punishment. A week in the box, or whatever someone is serving, is more than enough. Not being allowed to play in the CCC is cruel and unusual.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 29, 2007 22:56:19 GMT -5
Well I think we are splitting hairs here. I agree that keeping the MP community vitalized is very important and has been an ongoing concern of the admin team about how to best keep interest in Warlords and avoid boredom. Ergo, our efforts to introduce mods as an option.
However, you have to balance that with the need to fairly enforce all the rules on everyone. The rules have always been the cornerstone of the ladder. I can't very well have two sets of rules, one for the average ladder player and ones for members of clans. And I find it amusing that your complaining about a rule that has always been in effect the moment we apply it for the first time it's required, shouldn't you have complained the first time it was written into the rules if it was so unfair? The point of the rule was to make the point that the CCC is a privilege not a right, if you can't abide by simple rules for atleast the week before the CCC then you forfeit that privilege.
No one is being made an example here, infact it looks like several players may fine themselves watching the CCC on the sidelines. Perhaps this will strike home the need to report your matches right away, and don't try and quit and rejoin to change your name without people knowing, rolling the dice has a cost. I'm hearing all the time how the ladder is falling apart because we don't enforce the rules and now that we are ensuring that all the rules are enforced all the time, that is a problem?
If the vet players on the ladder are concerned about the health of the ladder perhaps more of them could become TD's and run random tournaments, that would likely help keep the ladder moving forward.
I'm not discounting your opinion but there is a lot of factors to take into consideration when running an organization like this, you often don't make everyone happy, but making the most people happy is our goal, and If one person gets mad and leaves over enforcing the rules, I can live with that, because on the flip side is the other players that will leave if I treat one person as a special case.
CS
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 29, 2007 23:24:42 GMT -5
Players who won't be in the penalty box during the CCC should be allowed to play, plain and simple. Extending 3 days, 7 days, 14 days, or whatever of penalty box time to include the CCC weekend is splitting hairs. You commit the crime, you pay the time ... and then an extra 3 days if the time you are paying for happens to occur one week before the actual CCC? I don't find a lot of sense in that rule.
The CCC is a huge multi-ladder event combining players from C4P, CivFr, and The Battlefield. To disqualify any player from participating is a huge punishment way above and beyond penalty box time. Furthermore, we do much to accomodate the players from the other Ladders and new players and clans to encourage their participation. We constantly bend these rules to make sure they can play in the CCC. I agree that we should do everything in our power to encourage maximum participation in the CCC, and I am happy to compete against all of my international friends. However, to only enforce the 1 week of good standing rule for some players and not all is not very fair.
I strongly urge you to reconsider taking actions like this against players who won't even be in the penalty box during the CCC. Putting people in the penalty box for making mistakes or violating rules is appropriate, but not allowing them to play in the CCC ... ouch. This community can only be as strong as its members, and policies such as this will only cause dissent, resentment, and rampant unhappiness among the players of this ladder. Do we really want to chase away active players just because their penalty box time occurs not during the CCC, but before it? I for one, hope not.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 29, 2007 23:46:10 GMT -5
And I find it amusing that your complaining about a rule that has always been in effect the moment we apply it for the first time it's required, shouldn't you have complained the first time it was written into the rules if it was so unfair? Why would I complain about a rule that previously has never been enforced in this way? I guess I interpreted this rule incorrectly, because I always thought it meant that to be on a CCC roster a player had to be a member of the ladder by a certain date. Without any examples ever being given in the rules, and without any enforcement, how was anyone supposed to know exactly how the rule worked? I've been posting my clan's roster for the CCC for over a year now and I've never once been told that there was a problem with it. Now all of the sudden there are, and I'm being told there is no way to fix it. I do not agree with this rule at all; I firmly believe that as long as the penalty box time does not overlap the CCC then players should be allowed to participate. However, if this really is the way you want to run things, then I guess we all have to live with it. However, I really think you should reconsider the rule for just this CCC. This is a major change to what we've played with before -- now that everyone is aware of how the rule works and that it will be enforced, I'd hope that there would be no future controversy, while at the same time keeping everyone happy right now. Also, I'm not asking for an exception for just one player, but for everyone who is currently banned from the CCC due to penalty box time in the week before the CCC, but not during the CCC itself.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 29, 2007 23:48:47 GMT -5
We may bend that rule to allow "new" players from other leagues to participate, that is totally different from allowing players(from any background) to play while not in good standing because they were penalized the week prior to the CCC.
But to get a feeling of the general ladders opinion(not just our two opinions) I'll put a non binding poll up after CCC 47 is over in order to address this rule for future CCC if that is what the poll indicates.
CS
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 30, 2007 0:45:54 GMT -5
And in the mean time Rokkit and Namejs can't play in the CCC even though their penalty box time will be over before it even begins? I don't think you are grasping the complexity of this issue -- the Ladder is simply not going to lose 1 or 2 players over something like this. Maybe they both say "screw this" and leave, but I am willing to bet that countless others will be thinking, "if they are going to treat their members like this, what the heck am I doing here?" and leave as well. I cannot accept that forgetting to report from 1 game (which constitutes more than simply 1 report), even though all penalty box time has been paid and is over with, should so radically change the dynamics of the CCC. This hurts the player first and foremost, but also hurts his or her teammates, weakens the competition, and makes for an overall less fun weekend. I love Civ4 and have had many great experiences in past CCCs, win or lose. However, if banning players who aren't in the penalty box during the CCC is the way things are going to be run from now on, even though it will more than likely run them off the Ladder, I'm not so sure what kind of a future is in store for this community ... and I'm not so sure how many people will stick around to find out.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 30, 2007 1:47:47 GMT -5
Believe me Mookie I am very well aware of how complex an issue this is. This goes to the core of the principle of due course of law. I am discussing this issue right now with the admin team. So I'm not going to write a novel right now in this post.
But in short, I could also argue that if I change this policy just for Rokkit and namjis that an equal number of players will say, heck rules mean nothing here, CS is playing favourites to vet clan members and why should I play ladder games, when open games have no rules and no need for all the post game administration......
Indeed a very complex issue.
CS
|
|
moineau
Warrior
Administrator
Posts: 330
|
Post by moineau on Apr 30, 2007 3:11:29 GMT -5
Ok sry for all these error DTA, we'll change it.
|
|
|
Post by TheClash on Apr 30, 2007 3:12:34 GMT -5
Believe me Mookie I am very well aware of how complex an issue this is. This goes to the core of the principle of due course of law. I am discussing this issue right now with the admin team. So I'm not going to write a novel right now in this post. But in short, I could also argue that if I change this policy just for Rokkit and namjis that an equal number of players will say, heck rules mean nothing here, CS is playing favourites to vet clan members and why should I play ladder games, when open games have no rules and no need for all the post game administration...... Indeed a very complex issue. CS Don´t forget theWiz. Ray will also miss theWiz. "theWiz gets 30 days in the penalty box Duplicate Account Inquery, DTA."
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 30, 2007 3:30:01 GMT -5
Well if TheWiz reply's explaining what looks like a duplicate account, I'm sure we can sort that out, suspending accounts while under investigation is a standard procedure. And it usually gets there attention quickly, since apparently not everyone reads there emails every day CS
|
|
|
Post by cryptococcus on Apr 30, 2007 3:42:21 GMT -5
Just sign up Sillk, IceCreamman, generalpooface and you'll be sorted. In all seriosness though, just let Noobitlauncher and wiz play so when RaY loses ccc, we don't have to hear excuses. I wouldn't want to play RaY without all their people anyway. Noobitslauncher's reports will be forced anyways during tournaments PS. Can you box Maglan? He owes me 1 report a day for hanging out with him and he's behind a few days.
|
|
|
Post by magelan on Apr 30, 2007 4:13:24 GMT -5
PS. Can you box Maglan? He owes me 1 report a day for hanging out with him and he's behind a few days. maglan was NOT found on the ladder.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 30, 2007 4:18:56 GMT -5
PS. Can you box Maglan? He owes me 1 report a day for hanging out with him and he's behind a few days. maglan was NOT found on the ladder. No but MaGeLan is CS
|
|
|
Post by DustyDragoon on Apr 30, 2007 7:19:54 GMT -5
And in the mean time Rokkit and Namejs can't play in the CCC even though their penalty box time will be over before it even begins? I don't think you are grasping the complexity of this issue -- the Ladder is simply not going to lose 1 or 2 players over something like this. Maybe they both say "screw this" and leave, but I am willing to bet that countless others will be thinking, "if they are going to treat their members like this, what the heck am I doing here?" and leave as well. I cannot accept that forgetting to report from 1 game (which constitutes more than simply 1 report), even though all penalty box time has been paid and is over with, should so radically change the dynamics of the CCC. This hurts the player first and foremost, but also hurts his or her teammates, weakens the competition, and makes for an overall less fun weekend. I love Civ4 and have had many great experiences in past CCCs, win or lose. However, if banning players who aren't in the penalty box during the CCC is the way things are going to be run from now on, even though it will more than likely run them off the Ladder, I'm not so sure what kind of a future is in store for this community ... and I'm not so sure how many people will stick around to find out. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Before Mookienj said, Re: Non-report Penalities « Reply #15 on Mar 14, 2007, 11:02pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't understand why it's so hard for people to report, because it's really not. I'm currently waiting on about 10 non-reports and that's pretty ridiculous. I'd like to think that swifter processing of non-reports combined with harsher penalties would somewhat alleviate the problem. The fact that sometimes you need to wait 2 weeks or more before you receive a reply on a non-report that you filed, combined with giving the non-reporter a few days to report, means that they're "getting away" without reporting for quite a long time. What incentive do they have to report when seemingly nothing happens to them when they don't? Personally, I would like to see the penalties as: 1 non-report -- warning and rules explanation 2 non-reports -- 3 days in the box 3-5 non-reports -- 7 more days in the box 6-10 non-reports -- 14 more days in the box 11+ non-reports -- 30 more days in the box Give them some time to think about how hard it is to report. It may be harsh, but anyone who quits over box time for not reporting probably isn't worth having on the ladder in the first place. As for the processing of non-reports, it would be great if they could be handled 72 hours after being filed. That gives the non-reporter plenty of time to check his or her email, report, or contest the non-report. Hopefully harsher punishments along with swifter processing of non-reports will make this less of an issue . ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm a little confused here Mookie??? You ask for stiffer penalties and CS and the rest of admin are trying to apply them. But the minute those penalties effect you, you are up in arms against them. Kinda like having your day in court for running a red light, and then explaining to the judge, "But your honour, I've been running that red light all my life and this is the first time I've been fined for it and I don't understand why??" I wonder what that judge would do hmmm.
|
|
|
Post by eiffel on Apr 30, 2007 7:38:45 GMT -5
I think that Mookie says that once a boxed player has paid for his fault, he's considered as a regular ladder member... So he should be able to play in ladder tourneys. I think i agree with him on this point. Non-report is a big issue and congrats to admins for trying to fix it. On another hand, if players who regularly don't report, leave the ladder because the admins apply rules, i'm not sure it's a bad thing. And about lobby dying, try to play less Ray entertainments or Ray versus if you want to bring some life to the lobby ;D Ooops, i'll be flamed for that
|
|
|
Post by toratoratora on Apr 30, 2007 8:52:23 GMT -5
I agree with Admins here If a players boxed and then penalized by not being allowed to play in the CCC thats gotta be a good incentive to not get boxed again!
Just Report ya losses dont Get Boxed and dont play another ladder game before Reporting the previous one simply really!
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 30, 2007 9:36:40 GMT -5
I think that Mookie says that once a boxed player has paid for his fault, he's considered as a regular ladder member... So he should be able to play in ladder tourneys. I think i agree with him on this point. That's exactly what I'm saying. Once the penalty box time is over, it shouldn't be extended to include the CCC just because it happend to occur a few days before the CCC started. As long as penalty box time does not include the CCC, players should be allowed to participate.
|
|