Shouldnt be. When I play chess with someone, we dont hate each other after even tho someone lost. Its just good sportsmanship. Again, thats a player problem, not a rule problem.
4 Likes
Oh, I didnât realize that you meant it like that. Yes of course I suppose we can be friendly as we blow our neighbours bases to pieces 
Man kind without control, rules, manors, obligations, is nothing else than chaos producers! Man kind needs leadership, needs rules and education to go forward! I wish the same things with you, have no doubt, but I know very well that my freedom stops exactly where the freedom of another starts. 8 billion +, lifes, souls, different in this earth, all of them unique, have no doubt again. Without rules, I give us a week maximum to our total extinction!
But letâs get back to our small, handful community here! Your obligation is to read the rules of this forum before you start posting! Still if you wonât read them, you can post again, but as an adult accept the consequences of your actions and stop blaming others for your mistake! Thatâs a start!
1 Like
Not sure what you are trying to say did you say that I had broken the rules of the forum? If so how? By having an opinion different to yours or someone elseâs? And I have never blamed others for my actions so I have no idea what you are talking about.
1 Like
@XninjaPIX
No my friend I was talking in general, not directly to you, thank you for pointing out my mistake 
. If you feel offended from this post I will gladly delete it, have no doubt . Happy to chat with you !
1 Like
Thank you for clarifying.
No, non need to delete anything everyone has the right to opinions and free speech I definitely donât want to censor anyone in a discussion. I just didnât realize that you were generalizing so I mistakenly jumped in to defend myself.
And thank you I am happy to chat with you and anyone else too
1 Like
And they call me condescending 
Actually wish I could ague with this, but some times you just have to break out the crayons.
I honestly donât understand why you insist in obscuring your message with unnecessary verbiage, and in other then normal grammar. If you are attempting to be read as AI you have succeeded.
Agree,
Donât feel like a singularity.
Man Iâm glad I used to be a voracious reader 
Actually that is a loaded question. Sarcastically Iâd say yes, go to any official PVP and you will get the âcomplete Conan experienceâ. But if you want a good Conan experience find a nonofficial server.
One is a punishment the other is just ignoring the issue. One solves the issue, the other just hides it. Pulling a couch over a pile of dog crap on the floor doesnât make it go away.
Actually it affects everyone. The TOS is across all official servers. But PVP has a way of dealing with some of it with out admin.
âIf youâre not part of the solution, YOU ARE part of the problemâ bet you have no idea what that means.
The part you miss is getting reported isnât what gets you banned. Actually violating the TOS is. Is that concept so hard to understand?
Iâve seen it in quite a few survival/builder games. Actually a regular thing on H1Z1. Car hoarders got the atomic ban fairly regular; destroying cars made them respawn on the map.
Iâm of the opinion if the rules were carved in stone you would still try to find wiggle room.
If only more people were like this. I remember playing Archeage a few years ago, and that was some of the most saltiest nastiest behavior I have ever seen in a PVP setting. Things like trying to infiltrate other guildsâ teamspeak servers for information, illegal activity such as identity theft to get access to game accounts, and all manners of vitriol in the forums. We had our guild leaders frequently get locked from their accounts because of the number of reports they would see on a daily basis and it would trigger things based on how much currency they had on their account, which for a guild leader of a guild that owned 75% of claimable PVP area (3 out of 4 castles in the north) wasnât unheard of.
However all this was from the normal player. Lots of lone wolves and smaller clans who just bit into self fulfilling agendas about how some of the top guilds operated. Our main rival guild, whoâs junior members also bit down on the nasty assumptions, had a senior leadership similar to our own.
I remember speaking to them in private in DMs orchestrating meetings between our guilds to have some good PVP. Going around in off raid time hours and trying to pick people off in onesies and twosies was just boring. I wanted mass fights with 50+ on each side with full naval fleets.
The large guilds were able to show respect from leadership to leadership. Never could get it from lower members. Even within our own guild it was hard to keep players in line to do things that werenât reprehensible (though booting people who crossed lines did of course happen).
I like to think that this happens in CE too, where between leadership there is an understanding, and even to some degree, collusion to ensure PVP happens in a fun way for its members. But of course this requires charisma and personality that just isnât always present in every 5-10 man group.
Clans in CE are usually small enough to stay as brigands and raiding parties, they donât get large enough to go âlegitâ as you might say. And so have no reason to grow beyond petty attacks and trolling.
But then thatâs what leads to these rules. Players canât really grow communities that police themselves with only a few dozen people online. When your typical server has only 20 people online, and like a quarter of that is some dude and his buddies who are bored and feeling a bit trolly, well it has major repercussions that normally wouldnât be felt in larger communities.
But because every server with this ruleset is a micro-community, it has to be dealt with in a dramatic matter to keep it in line. Believe me when I say this that I donât like to play on officials because I do NOT like their rulesets nor their enforcement measures. I donât. But I simply realize that the rules are a symptom of the problem. The servers donât support enough players, they donât support the small numbers they have in an adequate manner, and the whole experience is utter garbage for everyone involved.
And I do mean EVERYONE involved. Thatâs the players who endure those servers for whatever reason. The ones who admin those servers, they donât like banning or suspending people. They donât like demoing a base that looks cool but is too close to a boss spawn. The developers who make the game, as they try their damnedest every day trying to find the one bit of optimization that will somehow make it work, praying its even possible. The ones who make new content who see hundreds of players not being able to enjoy it because the server they play on grinds to a halt.
The rules are a bandaid fix to a problem with server performance which has the cascade effect of changing how the rules are applied with every update. Officials are pretty much a crappy advertising gimmick for a subpar server host.
Iâve said it before, a bad decision was made five years ago. It was made and will not be unmade. It is there for good or for worse. The latter more so than not as time goes on. If that decision is unacceptable, then I donât blame you. You all do deserve better, and FC wonât be able to provide you the experience you deserve.
I decided early on that I wasnât going to tolerate the performance of those servers. The first time I tried one was a crappy experience with rubber banding and NPCs that wouldnât move. That was years ago. From my understanding that hasnât improved, at all.
The rules you have make it so the servers will load up. And thatâs about it.
So I understand if people want to leave them and those who must absolutely play on a officially operated server want to just leave the game entirely, youâre right to do so. Leave the negative review and let it be a testament to future projects by FC or other companies to do a bit more research and testing before signing contracts.
Should FC make the rules more clear? Probably. But I donât think they have the spare time to do it. Theyâd have to restructure them and change the restrictions after every patch. If they said they were going to redo the rules as it was suggested by a post from Mayra. Then I believe there will be some disappointment in the form of new restrictions on what a player can and cannot do.
After 3.0, it was apparent that the servers are incapable of handling a full load of active players. As optimizations are too slow to come, the rules have to carry that slack. Have storage handy and lines of communications open with friends who only login to refresh. I foresee downsizing in everyoneâs future on those servers.
1 Like
Yup. And I guess its just the way I was raised, to deal with things on my own if I can. This situation is a prime example. Someone is being toxic in chat, I have the ability to deal with it and its over. Done. Some poeple cant or wont do that for whatever reason. To each their own I suppose.
Sure do, and its led to alot of very toxic discussions, especially in politics (which I will not bring up). The problem is, over the last say 5-6 years people have evolved to that line of thinking when its plain wrong, but allows the person to justify their anger. Just because I see someone (lets use the example of toxic chat behaviour) using foul language, and I choose to ignore it, doesnt mean I agree with it, agree with that person, or am against what you think. I just know how to handle those situations myself. I dont care what others think beyond that. If it bothers me, Ill deal with it.
Which is why theres been numerous threads on the rules, becuase everyone knows precisely what each building violation is. Anyone with two cells in their head can make or come up with a reason to submit a report on building infractions. We both know that alot of those are bogus, but since even Funcom itself cant come up with solid rules (like building size etc), it leaves room for speculation. That shouldnt be bannable offences if it leaves room for doubt. In my mind anyways.
Perhaps. Depending on the rule. Heres a real life example. I live in a very, very rural area. Traffic on the municipal road (like a county in the US) might be 2-3 cars per day. For the last 100 years that the road has been there, there has never been a stop sign at the T intersection on the south end. Two years ago, the municipality (county) put one there.
I know stop means stop. Its rural, there is no one for miles in any directionâŠdo you stop for the full 3 seconds thats legally required? I never stop.
Now, if that stop sign was in a city of 100,000 people, where there is wall to wall traffic would I stop? Absolutely.
Rules are rules, but for the love of god, what happened to common sense? Its been long forgotten
Because this one cannot rely upon anyone else to amuse them, so they choose to amuse themselves.
Because ânormalâ grammar in a living language is often a polite suggestion based upon regional affectations and false appeals to authority, especially in a chimerical language such as English.
When someone shifts their goal posts, or offers contradictions labelled as clarification there is no right answer. One is left to match words to deeds and see which ones hold up.
Yes yes yes do not ascribe to malice what can be attributed to frequently being dropped as a child.
Yet we have seen demonstration of competence. The game itself, at core is good. Many additions are good. This one sees the problems as the (too common) oops moment. The aberration as opposed to the true nature.
It is this oneâs way of showing respect. Evil is a choice and can be corrected. Stupid is a state of being and cannot be cured.
But this one leaves the matter as progress is unlikely and if existent is not worth the investment of time and attention.
1 Like
Agree with the first and not with the last. As one that was considered mediocre in intellect until something clicked in grade 8 and was provided a chance by a very clever teacher, I cannot agree that intellect is something that is limited at birthâŠlike # of eggs in the ovaries sort of thing. Itâs something i cannot support in an sociological concern and the science also is there that says neurons do grow. Bio-electrical signals do adapt and change and therefore intellect can be increased over time. Sure there are those that are more predisposed to a faster advancement but that doesnât mean that others cannot advance, they just do so at a slower pace overall (although certain subjects can be wickedly insightful)
2 Likes
Thatâs why I tried to find a good word. âStupidityâ is definitely the wrong word. Even âincompetenceâ is not to my taste, because it has certain connotations that we associate with incompetent people, and Iâm trying to apply it to an organization.
You can have a group of people where every individual is extremely competent, and arrange them into a perfectly incompetent organization.
That being said, when an organization is incompetent, itâs almost always because one or more people in it are consciously choosing not to prioritize improvement, so I guess youâre also right, in a way.
I guess the difference is in how far that decision is removed from what we were discussing originally. Your claim, if I understood it correctly, is that they decided âletâs deliberately make official server experience as crappy as we can get away withâ. My claim is that they decided âletâs make official servers represent how we think this game should be played in multiplayerâ and then, when it became obvious that this wasnât working out, they pushed to fix the problems, but someone along the corporate food chain said âdo your best to get stuff working, but we wonât change certain things, and thatâs thatâ.
1 Like
Apologies, this one is less than impressed with attempts to tie eugenics to mental acumen and never wishes to imply it.
Also, this one draws a distinction between taking extra time to grasp an idea, requiring alternative pathing/situations to grasp an idea, and those who have already grasped the idea and decide to act as tho they do not.
But that said, whether stupid, slow, or just using alternative means of learning and processing, if someone doesnât get it, no amount of raging/shaming will help. The person will either come to a conclusion on their own pace, or through different means, or not at all.
Shaming doesnât work, because we do not choose how our minds work. When we are able to impact our processing it is through protracted effort and processes, not a snap decision.
Shaming does work against evil, at times.
Some people are ignorant of their evil and will correct when informed of it.
Others may think themselves clever and that their malfeasance is well hidden. When they realize the gig is up, they may find incentive to either correct to something more acceptable or hide their perfidity better.
4 Likes
Oh organizations? here are a few words
Myopic- Only reactionary and all resources are pushed towards a quick resolution without concern over the longer or larger effects this solution could have later. They tend to promote managing tasks over a more global viewpoint and firmly believe everything can just be simply broken down into easily performed subunits and therefore work can always be easy.
Dense- Stalwart and stubborn defenders of the past. This organizationâs motto is âwe always did it that wayâ. EDIT to add more: They believe that there is very limited amount if variation in problems and therefore solutions already determined are the only ways to move forward. The Simpsonâs Bart doing Rock Paper Scissors with Lisa is the mascot here. âGood old rock. Nothing beats rockâ
Disingenuous- Organizations that love the buzz words but fails to understand them or put resources into them. Tends to manage things via the other two methods but tries to market it internally as whatever the current popular management style is. Can always tell these guys from other by the amount of perfect condition management books behind their desks collecting dusts. Very appearance based.
2 Likes
It works most of the timeâŠuntil it becomes norm and then those that speak out against it are viewed as âwhite knightsâ
3 Likes
2 Likes
My claim point, for the record, is that they decided:
âLetâs make officials a basic/stripped down experience until players find a private server for their particular needs/desiresâ
Edit: This was probably not the original idea, but it has been the governing concept for some time.
The motivation behind that being:
- Hiring and maintaining sufficient staff for thorough Administration of servers is more expensive than they wish to invest.
- The number of official servers will remain fluid so they donât encourage anyone to get too comfortable.
- By leaving rules deliberately vague any slipshot or whimsical ruling (see item 1) is covered.
- Developing tools for players to better self regulate is not an investment they see as worthwhile.
So, while this one agrees with the final of your quotes on certain levels, this one finds the deliberate sloppiness inherent to be just a couple steps to the malicious side of pragmatic.
For many years calls for various QoL, after acknowledging it as a desirable feature to have in game, were dismissed with âThereâs a mod for thatâ. This one finds that somewhat indicative of a greater problem of deliberately not maintaining their own product as they know it should be while foisting much weight on to unpaid shoulders of the modding community.
While irksome, it wasnât nearly as odious as it became once the new (interpretation/enforcement of the) rules were in place.
Itâs the choice of when to play fast and loose vs when to be a stickler where malice really comes in.
2 Likes
I love it. I would add something that when you come on and play you agree that you are part of a larger playing event and accept moderation decisions. In turn, the moderators will provide mature conversations and feedback with the intent of understanding the player motivations and provide the player with rationale for their decisions. Furthermore any action done in efforts of moderation should be accepted by all players (even if that includes providing an enforced on player some gear and or goods as means to keep the player if the player is found to be a contributing member of the server)
2 Likes
Yes, this one puts on pants when going in public. Likewise this one gives the local police a chance to resolve problems before getting the chainsaw and hockey mask out.
So strong agree in general principle.
Hereâs the other side of that.
The owners do get a final say.
There are many cases where rule creation is not going to be a collaborative process. We arenât talking about government, but rather, a game.
A product and a service. A virtual amusement park.
Very much a virtual amusement park.
So those running the park do merit the final say on itâs management. Even if all the guest think the limit of people in the wave pool is too low, the owner of the water park is the one on the hook for any drowning.
On a pragmatic level, are there enough administrative staff to go through the best practices? Finding where idealism and pragmatism meet is always tricky.
1 Like
Why do you not get that does not solve the issue? And I am doing my best to not be all condescending.
Right, Know no idea what it means. Thought as much.
Yes actually it does. Sorry you donât understand that.
Just how young are you?
Thought they called that mast⊠never mind.