Your obsessing about it doesn't make it true.Risiko94 wrote:Can someone enlighten me on why the head devs ignore all HOG wrongdoing?
We don't get money from HOG and HOG doesn't get money from us.Is it simply a matter of money?
Your obsessing about it doesn't make it true.Risiko94 wrote:Can someone enlighten me on why the head devs ignore all HOG wrongdoing?
We don't get money from HOG and HOG doesn't get money from us.Is it simply a matter of money?
Nate is lying PR developer team just bought two new Villas in Dubai with all the money, The corner Villa Nate bought for himself, and the second Villa they bought for Mineral, Mats and Max which faces 400ft road.Nate. wrote:Your obsessing about it doesn't make it true.
We don't get money from HOG and HOG doesn't get money from us.
Seems legit.RaNa-Rocxs wrote:Nate is lying PR developer team just bought two new Villas in Dubai with all the money, The corner Villa Nate bought for himself, and the second Villa they bought for Mineral, Mats and Max which faces 400ft road.![]()
What actions have the devs or mods taken against servers that do not follow the licensing agreement in the last 12 months?Nate. wrote:Your obsessing about it doesn't make it true.
You dont see that problematic? Considering how sensitivez incompetent and trigger happy some admins are overshoots and mishaps are waiting to happenShrapGnoll wrote:you dont
They actually do. Extending DoD and moving airbases off map to prevent baserape is one example. Though server rules weren't adjusted for that.Wicca wrote:Developers should make game less required for adminning. Just play
That's great, because the less adminning the less people feel attacked. If the game features fix players behaviour or what an admin deems as wrong, the less people feel frustrated with the game.VTRaptor wrote:They actually do. Extending DoD and moving airbases off map to prevent baserape is one example. Though server rules weren't adjusted for that.
Or a vehicle claiming script which actually works, so stealing assets is impossible.
They could also add an option to mute all chat if it bothers anyone, to put an end to kicking for all chat spam.
Oh my its almost like the dev team and HOG work together occasionallyVTRaptor wrote:They actually do. Extending DoD and moving airbases off map to prevent baserape is one example. Though server rules weren't adjusted for that.
Or a vehicle claiming script which actually works, so stealing assets is impossible.
They could also add an option to mute all chat if it bothers anyone, to put an end to kicking for all chat spam.
No, rules were not adjusted for that at all, you're still banning for something as dumb as shooting incoming helicopters on maps like Adak, Pavlovsk Bay, Beirut, Masirah, Soul Rebel, Ras el Masri. Not to mention all the maps with their airbases moved outside of the map.ShrapGnoll wrote:Oh my its almost like the dev team and HOG work together occasionallyserver rules were adjusted in line with the dev discussions on DOD.
They were, and no amount of typing on your part will change that sorry.VTRaptor wrote:No, rules were not adjusted for that at all
I'm talking about engaging aircraft in DOD if you still haven't noticed at this point.ShrapGnoll wrote:They were, and no amount of typing on your part will change that sorry.
I guess you missed all the DOD changes, forgivable. You should read the updated sections of the rules.
There is a difference between the rules not being changed and you being unhappy with the changes. The feedback over the new ruleset has been positive, including the new jet rules. Jets used to not being able to fly into others DOD period. The remaining problems are for the most part player behaviour and mapping issues.VTRaptor wrote:I'm talking about engaging aircraft in DOD if you still haven't noticed at this point.
You are PROHIBITED from attacking any AIR vehicle with a surface-to-air, or land-based weapon/vehicle in enemy DOD. If the air vehicle instantly dies in DOD from these specific weapon categories, the attacker will be subject to admin action. Air to Air combat can take place anywhere on the map so long as the unit is in the air and not touching ground.
You have a whole "muttrah specific" section (outdated as hell btw.), so you might as well add a line of map exceptions which would solve that problem. I don't know why haven't you done it already. Just list all maps that are either an amphibious assault or have their airbases outside of the map.
I am positive about the changes too, but why does it have to take so long? And why are you only fixing it partially? Issues at hand were solved YEARS ago by rulesets of other servers. It looks like these changes were actually forced down your throat by DEVs, rather than a result of "working together".ShrapGnoll wrote:There is a difference between the rules not being changed and you being unhappy with the changes. The feedback over the new ruleset has been positive, including the new jet rules. Jets used to not being able to fly into others DOD period. The remaining problems are for the most part player behaviour and mapping issues.
Good job on the script then, but other than that what's your point? We're talking about punishment for engaging aircraft in DoD, even though DoD is a no-go zone by design, and not no-combat zone. Clearly you haven't read anything above, so we're operating in different frequencies here.lespyd wrote:Lol someone pinged me to this thread. I’ll have you know, that I, the non-dev, created the dod scripts and the original idea of the vehicle stealing script. So no, no dev forced anything down my throat.
Believe it or not, some people actually want people the play the game without some edge lord testing the rules and trying to gain an edge because his pp small. It’s people who argue semantics that are the problem. Both these rules significantly lowered the amount of admin actions and inconsistency in actions; if the application of rules is confusing to you, the rule is written in about 3-4 lines of code. If you think that is complex, I’m sorry. I feel for the people who try to explain. If you do understand it but don’t like it, I’m sure everyone sees you, hears you and is your ally.
Back to my slumber. Hope everyone is well.
but other than that what's your point?
I'm directly refuting your assertion, as the primary source. That is my point.It looks like these changes were actually forced down your throat by DEVs, rather than a result of "working together".
Did not have an intention to call you an edge lord. I'm referring to the people who test the rules to get a leg up. I don't know if you fall under this or not.you call me an edge lord with small pp
If you want to talk semantics, I believe DoD is considered a "transit zone" after my conversation with a developer (I'd point out, this is the exact opposite of what you say, where people did "work together" to understand the intentions). After looking at complaints, both from people doing the wronging and people wronged as it relates to DoD fights, it was determined that most issues happen when ground units "camp" air assets, whether intentional or not. This led to the creation to the present ruleset for the HOG server. At the same time this ruleset allows for dog fights to continue to happen and to completion.DoD is a no-go zone by design, and not no-combat zone.
The punishments are up to the people running the server, you have every right to argue that but the head admins already said it won't be changing it seems. I have no skin in the game here. I will however, provide context and refute what you think to be true, and say they are not, in the first person. No one else can do that as I was the one having those conversations.We're talking about punishment for engaging aircraft in DoD
What I was saying was relating to DoD rules, not the claiming script (again, chapeau bas) nor messages given to admins when kill in DoD happens. Rules artificialy limiting gameplay were lifted, which is good (it was really long time comming and i really doubt it could happen without DEV intervention) - but there's still room for improvement.lespyd wrote:I'm directly refuting your assertion, as the primary source. That is my point.
And here lies the issue. Some admins will always hand out bans for ground to air kill in DoD within 5-10 seconds without second thought. I presented a case of Pavlovsk bay, where USMC CAS wouldn't touched as long as it engaged from DoD. Nobody got banned, because nobody wanted their evening ruined.lespyd wrote: If you want to talk semantics, I believe DoD is considered a "transit zone" after my conversation with a developer (I'd point out, this is the exact opposite of what you say, where people did "work together" to understand the intentions). After looking at complaints, both from people doing the wronging and people wronged as it relates to DoD fights, it was determined that most issues happen when ground units "camp" air assets, whether intentional or not. This led to the creation to the present ruleset for the HOG server. At the same time this ruleset allows for dog fights to continue to happen and to completion.
To sum up:
The punishments are up to the people running the server, you have every right to argue that but the head admins already said it won't be changing it seems. I have no skin in the game here. I will however, provide context and refute what you think to be true, and say they are not, in the first person. No one else can do that as I was the one having those conversations.