View Full Version : the first time you get kicked while playing
M.Penguin
25 Apr 2009, 21:47
hello. i made this thread, because i was on a game, and during the match, the host actually kicked me out of the game!! it was really annoying.
but how did you feel the first time this happened to you? they're not meant to do this, do you feel outraged they can do this? embarresed? shocked even?
btw, does anyone know which program they use to do this, just out of curiosity?
Koen-ftw
26 Apr 2009, 00:37
The whole kicking from ingame thing is stupid. Just play with people you know, that'll prevent you from being kicked.
Or if you're hosting and only want certain people to play, use a password.
Furthermore, if you're hosting and you feel you need to kick someone, have to decency to explain why. :P
b1llygo4t
26 Apr 2009, 11:07
if everyone only played with people they know then what would be the point of online play?
sometimes people hang for eternity yeesh
once this guy just started to insult and intentionally plop worms in a rr
i have never been booted in game. ever. ever
Clavius_SA
18 May 2009, 15:30
Haha you annoyed a host thinking you were safe, nice job.
e: oldish thread, my mistake
M.Penguin
18 May 2009, 16:10
Haha you annoyed a host thinking you were safe, nice job.
e: oldish thread, my mistake
lulz, i was watching (not playing), and there was loads of other people playing. i said 'theres too many people playing' and then he said 'well why dont we kick you?' and i said 'you cant, there isnt an option'...
and then i found out.
http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/1/1a/Rageoriginal.jpg
Malevol3nt
18 May 2009, 16:51
That's like entering someone elses house and complaining that the house owner kicked you out. What are you complaining about? If that host doesn't really like you then just don't join his games anymore. Case solved.
Almost any game where you can 'host' gives you the ability to control who can play or not. I mean that's the whole point of hosting, so you have some control over the games.
I mean that's the whole point of hosting, so you have some control over the games.
I disagree with this entirely, on all levels. Having some control is a nice extra. It, however, shouldn't make you king of your games and always right, despite being a cheater.
I've only reverse kicked people from their own games by scaring them with my incredible skill.
I disagree with this entirely, on all levels. Having some control is a nice extra. It, however, shouldn't make you king of your games and always right, despite being a cheater.
I think granting the host that sort of control is absolutely fine and sometimes even necessary. I just think that if you're going to kick someone you should tell them why and you should only kick people for legitimate reasons.
In M.Penguin's case, he pretty much asked to be kicked. No further justification was required.
MihaiS_v2
18 May 2009, 21:09
I disagree with this entirely, on all levels.
Uh, what? Sure you can disagree all you want, but the truth is that a host is enforced to do whatever a host can do. No one really cares and all this redundant niceness is really a pile of crap.
People aren't going to stop playing W:A just because they get kicked as hosts aren't going to drop privileges just because some of you think it would be nice to do so.
(in contrast to some forum moderators that delete your posts just because they don't agree with you, even if you didn't post a link to a kicking module that any retard can find sooner or later or talking about ways to kick people in-game while there are threads linking to downloads of such modules).
No one really cares and all this redundant niceness is really a pile of crap.
It's not redundant.
If people know why they are getting kicked then they might behave in such a way that gets them kicked less frequently. That in turn improves the overall experience, on average, in WormNET.
Education is not redundant; ignorance is not beneficial.
MihaiS_v2
18 May 2009, 23:24
Tutoring guests is of no host's concern. People can behave in any way they want... they can even submit threads regarding their misfortunate event of being kicked out of a game.
If you're not satisfied with someone's free service, do it yourself. There is really no excuse... WormNAT and other hosting solutions are available to everybody.
People aren't going to stop playing W:A just because they get kicked
From my personal experience:
I am a huge Worms fan, and have spent countless joyful hours playing WWP. It is by far my favorite game ever made (both W:A/WWP). However, all my worms buddies 1 by 1 quit the game as the WWP community slowly died.
So despite having played the game for years and learning a lot about it, whenever I attempt to play W:A online, I am considered a noob because nobody knows me. This is fine for me because I don't mind playing online games even if I don't know anyone.
The problem is that it has become the normal for the general W:A community to be jerks to new players.
Last week I attempted to play W:A online again. Out of the 15 games I tried joining, I was kicked out of 10 of them (before starting) without warning, 3 more because I refused to say the shopper rules (saying, "I know the rules" wasn't enough), 1 game the host quit half ways through, and finally the last game I was able to play. (w2w which I hate, 4 players, 2 cowed the whole game, the host couldn't w2w, and nobody but me spoke English)
At the end of the night, after wasting 2 hours of playing no fun Worms, I thought, screw it, this game just doesn't have the same type of people it used to. So your statement is false. I quit playing because of all the stupid kicking and other crap that is ruining an awesome game.
And if it's enough to make me quit, someone who truly loves the game, just think of how many more noobs have probably quit for the same reason. Only they have it worse because unlike me, they have little to no idea how to play, or how much fun the game can be, and they also have that extra bonus feature to deal with of being kicked during a game.
And that's the end of my little rant.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 01:31
Ya, well, when I host and play with new people, I keep 3 to 4 players that state the rules without having to ask them to, and I'm all for helping people to host and teaching them how to play, but I only do that when I'm in the mood. No one can constrain me or any other host to help new players or to support any kind of player.
When I join games hosted by people I don't know, I state the rules and if I'm among the first 3 players that joined I usually get to stay in the game. If I get kicked, it's either because I was one of the last to join, the host preferred to keep players from his country or the person does not like me for I-don't-care-what reason. No drama... I just join someone else's game or host one of my own.
That being said, I think this thread is about a frustrated guy called Penguin and how he got sad about being kicked during a game, not about supporting new-comers or noobs. My point is that you can complain as much as you want- no one cares! Host your own game!
The option of having a utility that lets anyone kick people out of their game widely available makes it easy to be a jerk to the players joining your game. Yes, it may save a minor percentage of games from being ruined but no, that doesn't outweigh ten times more games being ruined because of it. It's wrong in principle because it isn't available officially and thus to everyone, and it's wrong in practice because it veritably makes WormNet a worse place on the whole. Your personal rights, as someone who has bothered to set up his connection and is able to host, are irrelevant to this debate. So is the possibility that kicking modules may be found linked to on this forum.
Note: I treat this merely as a forum discussion and mean no actual offence to anyone who doesn't agree with my views. In reality, I'm a lot less bothered about this particular subject than I appear. Honest. But that doesn't mean I don't want to learn why so many WA players refuse to even consider more efficient and cleaner ways of filtering who gets to play in their games... like getting to know the people behind the nicknames.
(in contrast to some forum moderators that delete your posts just because they don't agree with you, even if you didn't post a link to a kicking module that any retard can find sooner or later or talking about ways to kick people in-game while there are threads linking to downloads of such modules).
So you disagree with forum moderators being able to remove you from a discussion because your arguments are better than their own, but you're all for letting bitter hosts kick Yakuza here out of their games because he's smarter, more handsome and more skilled than they will ever be? :p
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 03:13
Being a jerk is an option granted by nature. Being able to host is what makes the entire thread irrelevant. Supporting kicking in-game methods is more about supporting rights than condoning people using them.
Getting to know the people behind the nicknames takes time and requires a special mood. Some don't feel the need to know each and every player that joins their game. If you're so pro-wa-community, why don't you host daily tutoring games in #AG? Games where new-comers and noobs can play and learn the right path from mastah KRD.
have two connections to players, one that is there to determine if you are kicked (UDP) and the other to determine if you simply dropped out (and for transfer of game data) (TCP). official tools to kick people out of the game will end the UDP connection that is used to determine if the player was kicked resulting in the players client reporting they where kicked. If however the other connection (TCP) was lost then report as a game disconnection...
yea I know not much on how to implement such.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 06:42
A connections manager could cut any of the two connections to a player, so it would be useless to implement the feature you suggest.
Also, a player dropping ends both type of connections. The server could be fed false information.
A connections manager could cut any of the two connections to a player
Yes, but a "official" kicking tool, IE: not 3rd party, would only discconect the UDP connection.
I know that if you drop out both connections will cease, but if you are kicked, the UDP connection would cease before the TCP one... you could have re-connection attempts for the TCP connection even.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 07:16
But can you stop people from using a connections manager?
Can you guarantee that the server doesn't not display a "player kicked" message when the player drops?
And even if this works, who cares? People won't stop kicking others just because a message is displayed, unless the entire game forcefully crashes because someone dropped or got kicked (which is practically the same).
I'm going to step into your little discussion to clarify one technical misunderstanding. You can not break a UDP connection, you can not even make a UDP connection. Unlike TCP, UDP sends data packets blindly to a specified IP and Port.
Supporting kicking in-game methods is more about supporting rights than condoning people using them.
There's no rights because there's is no judgamental hosts. There's only retards hosting shoppers who want things their way because they do not have the necessary maturity to influence good vibes and fairness.
If you're not satisfied with someone's free service
Ehrm, it's Team17's server that they using, not "their free service". :rolleyes:
I think that an official kicking option won't be doing any good without a secure, ranked online feature, where players need to register and everything is logged.
It would then make sense to implement comments for kicking and a rating system, so if someone continuously kicks players without reason, the host could be rated and penalised somehow.
Maybe labelling him as "bad host" with a certain percentage, like it is done on eBay.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 10:01
Ehrm, it's Team17's server that they using, not "their free service". :rolleyes:
I didn't bring the issue to an absolute level. The T17 server is available for everybody, so is the ability of hosting games. If only certain individuals were allowed to host, then complaining would be legit.
And kicking is about freedom, regardless if you do it once a month or 10 times a day (justified or not) while playing shoppa or whatever game Yakuza enjoys.
And kicking is about freedom, regardless if you do it once a month or 10 times a day (justified or not) while playing shoppa or whatever game Yakuza enjoys.
Oh, you mean like the freedom to not be kicked? Why do you think comparing a host to your own private possesion (eg. a house) is by any means a valid comparison legally or otherwise? It's just you trying to add a set of rulesets to an ambit that has none. You're not signing a contract when you host.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 10:27
As long as anyone can moderate games, a moderator has the freedom to do whatever he wants. There isn't a defined party with hosting privileges... anyone can do it, so don't complain if you don't like the way you are treated when joining someone's game: host your own! and do whatever you like (kick, swear, be nice or whatever). If you're a retarded dumb-ass, people will remember you and treat you the same, but that's a different story and it has nothing to do with the initial statement about freedom.
As long as anyone can moderate games, a moderator has the freedom to do whatever he wants. There isn't a defined party with hosting privileges... anyone can do it, so don't complain if you don't like the way you are treated when joining someone's game: host your own! and do whatever you like (kick, swear, be nice or whatever). If you're a retarded dumb-ass, people will remember you and treat you the same, but that's a different story and it has nothing to do with the initial statement about freedom.
Since you're hosting, and you're giving me the freedom to access your host through your IP, I then in turn have the freedom to get into your computer and watch your porn because thank god for freedom. HURRAY FOR CAPITALIST WORMNET. This argument is flawed like you.
There's no such a thing as an intrinsic definition of freedom. Freedom is a legal term. Team17 doesn't give you the freedom to kick players and thus there's no such a thing as the freedom to kick people.
If Team17 was based in Texas then perhaps you would have a case, but it isn't, so enjoy communism, worms lawyer.
But can you stop people from using a connections manager?
Iirc, the majority of people would switch to the official tool. there never will be a way to stop 3rd party tools from working? not without integrating the game deep into a operating system to prevent it...
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 10:59
Since you're hosting, and you're giving me the freedom to access your host through your IP, I then in turn have the freedom to get into your computer and watch your porn because thank god for freedom. HURRAY FOR CAPITALIST WORMNET. This argument is flawed like you.
You'd like to be able to do that, wouldn't you? Be my guest if you feel secure enough and if you think you have the basic knowledge to achieve it.
I don't need T17 to grant me any kind of rights. I can do whatever the medium allows me to.
not without integrating the game deep into a operating system to prevent it...
Never going to happen.
Never going to happen.
exactly.
I don't need T17 to grant me any kind of rights. I can do whatever the medium allows me to.
They can ban you for exceeding the rights provided by team17 and there services though.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 11:07
They can ban you for exceeding the rights provided by team17 and there services though.
Never going to happen because if you really want to kick people without being detected, you can do so. And there will always be a way, unless the game crashes when a player drops (for any reason at all).
I can do whatever the medium allows me to.
So you would approve hacking into nuclear silos and launching missiles just because you can? :eek:
Have you been hacking into US power plants recently? :p
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 11:11
So you would approve hacking into nuclear silos and launching missiles just because you can? :eek:
Have you been hacking into US power plants recently? :p
Nobody is going to imprison me or anyone else for kicking people out of W:A games, stay assured.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 11:19
And only frustrated, small-minded people like you can bring political conceptions and trends to a game's level.
And only frustrated, small-minded people like you can bring political conceptions and trends to a game's level.
You're the one who started talking about freedom, it doesn't get more political. I only presented facts.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 11:32
Yes, freedom within the game's boundaries. I didn't go socio-political about it, unlike you.
Yes, freedom within the game's boundaries. I didn't go socio-political about it, unlike you.
Oh, since Team17 is not actively stopping me from killing people I will.
Thanks Spadge for promoting murder.
You're so stupidly dense.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 11:48
You're funny. Do whatever you want, it's none of my concern. Hack into people's computers through a W:A server, kill people and support the outcome of your actions.
Fortunately, you can't change the way things work. Not for me, not for anyone else, no matter how much you babble.
Never going to happen because if you really want to kick people without being detected, you can do so. And there will always be a way, unless the game crashes when a player drops (for any reason at all).
Yes, and if a official detectable method/program was introduced then you would end up looking like a d*** head/***** for using undetectable ways.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 11:53
I already told you, that is not possible, unless the game is designed to crash whenever a player drops, feature that will never get implemented.
what wont be possible? the host using an official tool program to kick specific players and log the amount of players they kicked when ranking and stuff is implemented? If you kicked via undetectable methods it would be pretty obvious as that count won't go up each time you kick...
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 12:02
Who's going to tell for sure that the player you kicked using a connections manager was actually kicked and didn't drop for other reasons? And who would be stupid enough to use official kicking tools that keep track of your kicking ratio?
The only way you can prevent kicking players in-game is to have a centralized server (something superior to HostingBuddy), so people can connect to a game initialized by someone, but not owned by that person. No control over the server connections > no kicking. (or only then you could implement an official kicking tool)
But this will never happen as well.
Who's going to tell for sure that the player you kicked using a connections manager was actually kicked and didn't drop for other reasons? And who would be stupid enough to use official kicking tools that keep track of your kicking ratio?
The client does not track how many times it has been kicked. The host records how many times it has kicked players, you kick via a ingame command like "/kick 1". If you yourself want to greatly reduce the chances of getting kicked then be truthful about the number of people you have kicked by using the official method that tracks the number of times you kicked someone.
they could even log the total amount of time a person has spent playing and the number of times a player quits a game but to make that viable they would either need to block alt-f4 or intercept it and change its behavior.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 12:31
1. Only stupid people would use tools that keep track of their kicking activity.
2. Using a connections manager can't be forbidden, so you can kick people anytime without having to worry about penalties or stuff like that.
3. What's wrong with being kicked out of a game? Host your own or join some other.
I really don't know how to express this in a manner that is more clear.
I told you, the only way to implement an official kicking tool is to have a centralized W:A server. Then you would tell the server to kick people if you really want to kick someone, and that can be logged, otherwise, the only person you are able to kick is yourself, and the other players can continue playing the game you initialized.
2. Using a connections manager can't be forbidden, so you can kick people anytime without having to worry about penalties or stuff like that.
log # of players a host has kicked, # of times people quitted the games and general loss of connections (total of previous 2 plus general disconnections).
If,
"Host A" hosts 1 game each day for 7 days and 5 people join each time with 1 quitting each game, 1 being kicked and 1 disconnecting.
7 quitting
7 being kicked
7 disconnecting
"Host B" hosts 1 game each day for 7 days and 5 people join each time with 1 quitting each game, 1 being kicked, 1 disconnecting and the host uses a undetectable method of kicking.
7 quitting
0 being kicked (undetectable kicking)
14 disconnecting
Which kind of host would the general gaming population prefer?
kicking is about freedom
I think Hitler said the same thing about Jews.
Mihais, I think the community's general consensus is pretty clear on this one and from what I can gather everyone disagrees with you. Unfortunately that is a pretty good indication that you're wrong on this, no matter how much you bang on about it.
3. What's wrong with being kicked out of a game? Host your own or join some other.
Let's imagine you get kicked out of a BnG in the lobby because you fail to acknowledge that the host wants to play ATL but hasn't made that clear to you. You are in #AG again and trying to join another game, let's say a w2w, but you don't know the rules at all so you get kicked. You are in #AG again and try to join some other game but you start behaving offensively (fascism, perhaps), so you get kicked. None of these people told you why so you spend an entire night joining and getting kicked.
If you found out why you were being kicked you would be able to join a game and not get kicked, and play said game. Then you'd be able to join another game and play it. And so it goes on.
Instead of spending all night getting kicked, you'd spend all night playing worms. Wouldn't that be better? Don't you think, since you paid for your game, that you have the right to play it? Don't you think, since most of these rules are invented by the community, that you have the right to the same community, the same information and the same amount of fun as everyone else who is in exactly the same situation as you (i.e. has a WA CD, a PC and an internet connection)?
Sure, the host has the right to kick people and the clients has the right to quit, but don't you think everyone would benefit from a little more communication?
I do... but then to my knowledge I've never kicked or been kicked, so maybe I'd be more bitter if the world seemed to hate me.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 12:56
log # of players a host has kicked, # of times people quitted the games and general loss of connections (total of previous 2 plus general disconnections).
If,
"Host A" hosts 1 game each day for 7 days and 5 people join each time with 1 quitting each game, 1 being kicked and 1 disconnecting.
7 quitting, 7 being kicked and 7 disconnecting over a period of 7 days (21 total).
"Host B" hosts 1 game each day for 7 days and 5 people join each time with 1 quitting each game, 1 being kicked, 1 disconnecting and the host uses a undetectable method of kicking. There user statistics would read as follows.
7 quitting, 0 being kicked and 14 disconnecting over a period of 7 days (21 total).
Which kind of host would the general gaming population prefer?
The one that displays no kicks. What's your point?
I think Hitler said the same thing about Jews.
Mihais, I think the community's general consensus is pretty clear on this one and from what I can gather everyone disagrees with you. Unfortunately that is a pretty good indication that you're wrong on this, no matter how much you bang on about it.
What community are you talking about? People I reply to don't even host games in #AG.
Let's imagine you get kicked out of a BnG in the lobby because you fail to acknowledge that the host wants to play ATL but hasn't made that clear to you. You are in #AG again and trying to join another game, let's say a w2w, but you don't know the rules at all so you get kicked. You are in #AG again and try to join some other game but you start behaving offensively (fascism, perhaps), so you get kicked. None of these people told you why so you spend an entire night joining and getting kicked.
If you found out why you were being kicked you would be able to join a game and not get kicked, and play said game. Then you'd be able to join another game and play it. And so it goes on.
Instead of spending all night getting kicked, you'd spend all night playing worms. Wouldn't that be better? Don't you think, since you paid for your game, that you have the right to play it? Don't you think, since most of these rules are invented by the community, that you have the right to the same community, the same information and the same amount of fun as everyone else who is in exactly the same situation as you (i.e. has a WA CD, a PC and an internet connection)?
Sure, the host has the right to kick people and the clients has the right to quit, but don't you think everyone would benefit from a little more communication?
I do... but then to my knowledge I've never kicked or been kicked, so maybe I'd be more bitter if the world seemed to hate me.
Imagine me hosting my own game.
The one that displays no kicks. What's your point?
Over the course of more then a week it will become obvious that "Host A" is using 3rd party methods to tamper with the game (possibly beyond simply kicking players) and as such less people would trust them and would pretty much claim any luck the host was bestowed with as cheating.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 13:05
The system you suggest is based on assumptions- doesn't mean **** for anyone.
I could use an official tool to kick 3 to 4 players per week and kick a dozen with a connections manager.
glad you come to agree with me at last, you simpleton.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 13:11
glad you come to agree with me at last, you simpleton.
Uh, what? I didn't sustain the implementation of the system you suggested. Odd...
you could also log the number of people that have joined you and a high number of general disconnections would be pretty suspect compared to the average number most would have.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 13:21
Seriously, do you really think someone eager to play a game would waste time studying charts and player statistics? Stats that can be interpreted in different ways? Bother no more, nothing can be done to stop people from using a connections manager to kick players in-game.
I don't say that it is a good thing or not. I just support it because it can be done and because anybody can do it.
nothing can be done to stop people from using a connections manager to kick players in-game.
I know, but you can implement methods to make it easier to determine if that is what that person does.
I just support it because it can be done and because anybody can do it.
Then play games in which that feature is implemented, not one where someone has had to write an external module to go against the game's design.
If someone wrote a module which forced a win to their team, would you support it simply because it can be done?
Anybody can jump face first out of a very tall tree...
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 13:29
I know, but you can implement methods to make it easier to determine if that is what that person does.
Doesn't worth the effort if it's not a 100% reliable system.
Then play games in which that feature is implemented, not one where someone has had to write an external module to go against the game's design.
Why cripple my on-line activity because someone thinks kicking players is inappropriate? (while anyone can do it, even those that think it's inappropriate)
If someone wrote a module which forced a win to their team, would you support it simply because it can be done?
If, if, if, if, if, if if... yeah, you do it and I will support you. That is, IF you are able to do it. (regardless if the purpose of such a module is stupid- I'm not the one coding it)
Doesn't worth the effort if it's not a 100% reliable system.
it doesn't need to be 100% reliable. It just needs to be reliable enough to determine how that player kicks people from there games. Statistics will become pretty important to people interested in ranked games once that is implemented too.
If, if, if, if, if, if if... yeah, you do it and I will support you. That is, IF you are able to do it. (regardless if the purpose of such a module is stupid- I'm not the one coding it)
If someone can code it, must they?
Why cripple my on-line activity because someone thinks kicking players is inappropriate? (while anyone can do it, even those that think it's inappropriate)
Why cripple a client's online activity by kicking them mid-game? It's downright rude, if you ask me.
If, if, if, if, if, if if... yeah, you do it and I will support you. That is, IF you are able to do it. (regardless if the purpose of such a module is stupid- I'm not the one coding it)
Well I was merely applying your argument. If you have other, more specific reasons for thinking it's a good thing, please voice them.
Personally I think the purpose of an in-game kicking module is stupid. The host should just accept the responsibility of starting the game. In other words, once the host commits to that player list by clicking Start Game, they should accept that it was their doing and live with it. If they don't want the responsibility then they shouldn't be hosting in the first place.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 13:49
it doesn't need to be 100% reliable. It just needs to be reliable enough to determine how that player kicks people from there games. Statistics will become pretty important to people interested in ranked games once that is implemented too.
Good. If that day comes, I hope people will join your games and intentionally drop so they can discredit you, statistically making you a player that kicks people using 3rd party software.
If someone can code it, must they?
Who cares? Vader's example of a cheating module is poor anyway.
Why cripple a client's online activity by kicking them mid-game? It's downright rude, if you ask me.
Why not? He can do it as well. He can chose not to join my game, he can host his own damn games.
Well I was merely applying your argument. If you have other, more specific reasons for thinking it's a good thing, please voice them.
Personally I think the purpose of an in-game kicking module is stupid. The host should just accept the responsibility of starting the game. In other words, once the host commits to that player list by clicking Start Game, they should accept that it was their doing and live with it. If they don't want the responsibility then they shouldn't be hosting in the first place.
Who are you to assign responsibilities to a host? A host can do whatever a host can do, as long as anybody can be a host.
I think that for most of you it's a difficult task to grasp the following concept: Host your own game if you're not satisfied! and if you are lazy or stupid enough to not know how hosting works, maybe you don't deserve playing the game, as most of you say people don't deserve to use a kicking module if they can't find the link to it.
Maybe Team17 should implement a licence that you must agree to each and every time you host?
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 14:01
Yeah, and what is going to be the penalty of not respecting it? Or how will they be able to detect license infringements?
they could simply make it so that you agree to get banned from the server at any time for any reason. so they can ban you when they "suspect" you of using 3rd party tools to modify the expected gaming experience.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 14:12
Do you realize what you just said?
Who's going to monitor your activity 24/7? And don't say they can do that based on your earlier suggestion regarding statistics.
Getting banned from the server at any time for any reason is something anyone wouldn't agree on, but IF it does apply to anyone connecting to WormNet, I have nothing against it. Though, it would not be fair, because some have dynamic IPs, so reconnecting is just a matter of restarting your Internet connection.
AND statistics and stuff like that imply a connection to an external location, so ranking or statistics could be influenced if the server does not grant access to that external location.
Why not? He can do it as well. He can chose not to join my game, he can host his own damn games.
He sure can, but he chose to join your game. It's not about law and order, here, it's about being polite to fellow wormers. It's just common courtesy.
Who are you to assign responsibilities to a host? A host can do whatever a host can do, as long as anybody can be a host.
I thought it was implicit that the host, being the one who actually manages the game in terms of schemes, maps, teams, worms per team and rules, was responsible for making sure everything was good to go before clicking the Start Game button.
I think that for most of you it's a difficult task to grasp the following concept: Host your own game if you're not satisfied! and if you are lazy or stupid enough to not know how hosting works, maybe you don't deserve playing the game, as most of you say people don't deserve to use a kicking module if they can't find the link to it.
I always host my own games, so the concept of hosting my own games if I'm not satisfied is lost on me. As a host I like to make sure people are happy with their gaming experience, so long as it fits within my idea of what the game should be about. I make sure things are correct before the game begins and if I make a mistake then I live with it until that game finishes.
Perhaps you're too lazy or impatient to make sure you're playing with people you'll get on with and you need an in-game kicker. I'm not sure. I'm not really sure why you're so worked up about this. You think one thing, most people think something else.
In a democratic world this module would be abolished entirely. The majority are in disagreement with you, and in a democracy that makes you wrong, unfortunately.
If you're saying that each game is like a little dictatorship in which the host is the dictator and what they say goes no matter the cost, then fine. It just makes my comparison of you to Hitler all the more valid. ;)
RANKED SERVER, they block your USER which would be linked to a EMAIL ACCOUNT... no need for IP banning etc. and yes, they could implement an automated system that checks the ratio of all the different disconnections/connections to determin what your doing. (they could ban registration with free email services thus restricting people to registering with there ISP provided email account.)
Your agreeing that they have control over how they manage there server,don't connect to there server if you don't like it.
In my opinion a software solution to this isn't the correct solution. All the necessary software is already in place.
The solution is to be more communicative with your fellow players. Not just you but everyone. I mean, there's a chat window for a reason, right? Why not raise awareness? If you can be bothered to install an in-game kicking module then I'm sure you can bothered to say to someone "sorry buddy but check out worms2d.info and come back when you're clued up on the rules - I'm going to have to kick you for not abiding by them. Cya!" or something along those lines.
Vader, installing a module is a one off thing, you would likely need to repeat that message to many, MANY people.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 14:32
He sure can, but he chose to join your game. It's not about law and order, here, it's about being polite to fellow wormers. It's just common courtesy.
I thought it was implicit that the host, being the one who actually manages the game in terms of schemes, maps, teams, worms per team and rules, was responsible for making sure everything was good to go before clicking the Start Game button.
I always host my own games, so the concept of hosting my own games if I'm not satisfied is lost on me. As a host I like to make sure people are happy with their gaming experience, so long as it fits within my idea of what the game should be about. I make sure things are correct before the game begins and if I make a mistake then I live with it until that game finishes.
Perhaps you're too lazy or impatient to make sure you're playing with people you'll get on with and you need an in-game kicker. I'm not sure. I'm not really sure why you're so worked up about this. You think one thing, most people think something else.
In a democratic world this module would be abolished entirely. The majority are in disagreement with you, and in a democracy that makes you wrong, unfortunately.
If you're saying that each game is like a little dictatorship in which the host is the dictator and what they say goes no matter the cost, then fine. It just makes my comparison of you to Hitler all the more valid. ;)
Vader, if you want to make everybody happy, fine. I think it would be great if everyone would have the patience and mood to act polite. But you still have the freedom to be a cold ass-mother-****er, and nobody should deny that, not even reproach as long as you can host your own game.
At this point it would be useless to tell you I rarely kick people in-game (approx. once every 50-70 games played with strangers), as I have a lot of friends on WormNet. I'm not defending myself, I only support something anybody is capable of using and most of you deny it should be used.
Also, comparing me to Hitler in any regard is childish. W:A isn't important enough to bring dictators on the stage.
RANKED SERVER, they block your USER which would be linked to a EMAIL ACCOUNT... no need for IP banning etc. and yes, they could implement an automated system that checks the ratio of all the different disconnections/connections to determin what your doing. (they could ban registration with free email services thus restricting people to registering with there ISP provided email account.)
Your agreeing that they have control over how they manage there server,don't connect to there server if you don't like it.
My question is, will the ranked server support all the game data traffic and connections initialized by registered users?
In my opinion a software solution to this isn't the correct solution. All the necessary software is already in place.
The solution is to be more communicative with your fellow players. Not just you but everyone. I mean, there's a chat window for a reason, right? Why not raise awareness? If you can be bothered to install an in-game kicking module then I'm sure you can bothered to say to someone "sorry buddy but check out worms2d.info and come back when you're clued up on the rules - I'm going to have to kick you for not abiding by them. Cya!" or something along those lines.
Not everybody is a hippie.
Also, comparing me to Hitler in any regard is childish. W:A isn't important enough to bring dictators on the stage.
Nor is it important enough to need a in-game kicking facility. Also, calling someone Hitler is a pretty "cold ass-mother-****er" thing to do, right? So I'm just playing by your rules here.
Not everybody is a hippie.
I'm not sure manners and being a hippie are totally synonymous. I'm certainly not a typical hippie; I have short hair, I bathe, I don't wear tie-dye clothing, I eat meat, I'm violent and I'm not here to say we need world peace. I mean, I do recycle... so maybe you're right.
Damn... this whole time I've been trying to promote a better community in a computer game when in reality I'm just a smelly, paranoid idiot. Thanks for enlightening me. :rolleyes:
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 15:23
Most of you opposing a host's right to kick people in-game don't even host games in #AG, but you're all trying to promote a better community.
I'm not talking about the importance of having a in-game kicking facility, I'm talking about the right to use it. Why should anyone listen to people like you saying it's wrong to kick players? Can you prove you never kicked someone (or that you are not able by any means to kick a player), because taking your word for granted is not enough.
And calling someone Hitler is not a pretty cold ass-mother-****er thing to do, it's plain childish attitude, hoping your post gains resonance by the use of a historically important character's name.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 15:46
You used used to call me a commie, now you call me a Nazi. Will you ever make up your twisted little mind?
Actually, in comparing you to Hitler I was trying to highlight the fact that you feel the host has to right to act like a dictator. The name I used was just to simplify that comparison, not to gain resonance. I felt the comparison was actually fairly sophisticated given the circumstances but I guess we disagree on that. You can get over that one as soon as you like, rather than degenerating the discussion even further.
Also, my cheat module was a good example in that from what you've said, if someone has it, then they are within their rights to use it. It doesn't work like that. I am capable of name-calling but it doesn't give me the right to name-call.
Actually, the closest I've come to kicking someone (And this is going back maybe 6 years now) was when we used to get people asking if they could join our game. I would say "oh noes i can't host you better host dude and we'll join lol". I'd wait for them to host and then I'd host a passworded game for me and the rest of CoW. Pretty funny at the time but it wasn't exactly the right thing to do. Mind you, since I could do that I guess I had every right to, and that means whether it was right or wrong is irrelevant by your agrument.
I admit I only really play in #PT because I only play private games with CoW. That doesn't mean I don't care about the community, it just means I know how to host games which suit me and my friends and that I don't need to kick people. I do know that if you want to improve any community, ****ing off the people involved isn't a good idea. Being nice to them and helping them progress is usually of benefit to everyone involved.
Maybe it would be best if the in-game kicking module only worked if the person being kicked had that module. That way they are implying consent to be kicked mid-game. Currently any user is implying consent to be kicked from a lobby as that is part of the game they bought but once in the game they should be able to safely assume that they are in until they quit, get disconnected from the host or their worms all die.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 16:04
Touching story.
And, yeah, the host has the right to act like a dictator. Anyway, it's fine... I understand you have an issue... Bold letters don't imprint on your cortex. Let's try bold and underlined letters: If you are not satisfied with a host, host your own game! If this doesn't work, I can highlight it too.
Ah, wait.. you already told me you always host your own games, so the concept of hosting your own games if you're not satisfied is lost on you. Well, maybe you should understand there is no point to reply to my post since you lack the concept.
So, you are saying that because we can kick people, that it should be ok to do so? you don't mean that people should actually do that, right?
Bold letters don't imprint on your cortex.
That's true. Data imprint on my cortex, not the format in which the data were written.
Furthermore, I am capable of understanding a concept which I have not experienced.
I understand there's no reasoning with you. You've already agreed with me that it would be great if everyone was polite yet you insist on continuing this discussion. I believe that could be because you don't feel you've got your point across sufficiently: you think the host has the right to do whatever is in their power whether the game came with that function or not.
I believe you have got that point across and when countered with equally stupid module proposals you've not met them with the same attitude. In fact, even when I suggested a sensible variant on this in-game kicking module you've talked around it.
This thread kept me entertained for the day but I feel all that can be said about this point has been, so I'm going to back off. I think you've done quite well at proving to everyone just how ignorant and dense you are.
I am brilliantly awesome and I'm right. Let's just leave it there, OK? :D
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 16:30
So, you are saying that because we can kick people, that it should be ok to do so?
Yes.
you don't mean that people should actually do that, right?
Yeah, they should, whenever they feel like doing it. If it's justified or not, I care the less.
Furthermore, I am capable of understanding a concept which I have not experienced.
I always host my own games, so the concept of hosting my own games if I'm not satisfied is lost on me.
I understand there's no reasoning with you. You've already agreed with me that it would be great if everyone was polite yet you insist on continuing this discussion. I believe that could be because you don't feel you've got your point across sufficiently: you think the host has the right to do whatever is in their power whether the game came with that function or not.
Vader, you are simple. Politeness has nothing to do with the ability and right to use in-game kicking methods. It's true, the game does not have a function for it, but would that prohibit the usage of such methods? So, if it can be done, everybody should have the right to do so, without having to hear you or Yakuza or KRD whining about it.
robowurmz
19 May 2009, 17:11
Tell me, since when has impoliteness been truly acceptable in this community? Kicking players had never been a feature due to the reasons Team17 probably have specified somewhere.
MihaiS, as host you have a responsibility to ensure the people on your server are having a good time: this is what the duty of a host is. If you cannot handle the responsibility properly (since you did not kick a disruptive guest, but an innocent one) then do not host in future.
TL: DR; You should only use the kicking ability you have given yourself to improve your guests' game experience.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 17:18
Talk about a host's responsibility to someone who actually cares. Still, it would not make any difference.
1) I think in-game kicking methods should require the client's consent, implicit or explicit, as it does in the lobby.
2) I think it would be nice if people explained why they are kicking people so as to help prevent it from happening again.
3) You agree it would be nice if everyone was polite. Kicking people in-game is impolite, yet you condone kicking in-game, from the sounds of it, just because it can be done through hacks. The same logic can be extended to cheating.
4) I concede that I contradicted myself (as you quoted) but it doesn't detract from my point in any way. I also concede that I am contradicting myself by continuing this discussion but I feel that since you have practically called me stupid I must defend myself.
I'm far from simple but my logic is fairly straightforward.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
Here is a possible system for ranking how likely the player is to be a "cheater" (cheater is defined as either kicking other players using unlicensed tools, or disconnecting on purpose).
I expect something like this to come in not long after if/when ranking is re-implemented.
A player has a rating, measured in % or some other easy scale, of how likely that player is to be a cheater.
There should be a central server keeping track of every game (very little bandwidth, just connections open to every player with keep-alives every 5-10 seconds). I wouldn't be surprised if it was light enough that the current wormNET server will be able to act as this. When a connection to the host of the game is lost, the game of the host (or player 2 if the host disconnected) automatically notifies the central server. First of all the central server checks to see if that player is still connected to it, by sending two or three pings. If the player is still connected to the server, the game adds cheater points to the host (remember, if the player is still connected but not connected to the game, it will either mean the host kicked him, or the host disconnected, both of which warrant cheater points). If the player is not still connected to the server, the game adds cheater points to the player (since it would have then been the player disconnecting).
If a player reaches 100% (or whatever) points, the server bans him/her for a week. If repeat incidences occur (more than for example three times), the server flags one of a team of moderators who can then manually keep an eye on that player (preferably through an interface which will record the exact circumstances of every disconnect from when the player is flagged onwards), and if need be, a manual, permanent ban will ensue.
Simple, but effective. I can't see of a way that this could be worked around (if someone can, feel free to point it out in a polite manner and I'll try to think of a way to correct it).
With the fun side effect of making it rather unfair to everyone with connection or computer crashing problems! Ah, its not like we care about those people anyway.
If a person's computer crashes that regularly (we are talking 10-20 times a month, I forgot to mention it will be reset every month or something) or their network drops that regularly, they need to get a new computer/router/provider, as people aren't likely to want to play with them anyway.
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 22:42
1) I think in-game kicking methods should require the client's consent, implicit or explicit, as it does in the lobby.
I don't think someone re-joining a game shortly after being kicked from the lobby agreed to the possibility of not participating to that game, nor do those that don't return. Anyway, the whole client's consent theory is bull.
2) I think it would be nice if people explained why they are kicking people so as to help prevent it from happening again.
Yes, you and I and others think it would be nice, but all this thinking can't affect your right, my right or any other player's right to be a jerk.
3) You agree it would be nice if everyone was polite. Kicking people in-game is impolite, yet you condone kicking in-game, from the sounds of it, just because it can be done through hacks. The same logic can be extended to cheating.
Kicking people in-game may be impolite, but do you think someone gives a **** about you and I agreeing to this? No, and it's their right not to.
If being able to use a connections manager is hacking, then you have a distorted perception. A connections manager doesn't alter game data, it only stops feeding it to the server/client.
And, yes, the same logic can be extended to cheating. IF you are able to cheat, why wouldn't I be granted to do so if I find a way to. But if isn't reality, it's just an assumption and no-one cares, unless there's no if anymore.
If a system is too insecure for you and if that bothers you, fix it, change it or quit it.
4) I concede that I contradicted myself (as you quoted) but it doesn't detract from my point in any way. I also concede that I am contradicting myself by continuing this discussion but I feel that since you have practically called me stupid I must defend myself.
You contradict yourself a lot, maybe I was right.
Here is a possible system for ranking how likely the player is to be a "cheater" (cheater is defined as either kicking other players using unlicensed tools, or disconnecting on purpose).
Why did you bother writing such a long post if you're wrong from the very beginning? Disconnecting on purpose? Get serious... no-one and nothing will ever know the true reason you dropped, so your view in regard to a possible system for ranking how likely the player is to be a "cheater" is very narrow.
A player has a rating, measured in % or some other easy scale, of how likely that player is to be a cheater.
I'd like to see you being considered a cheater because of a series of misfortunate events.
team of moderators who can then manually keep an eye on that player (preferably through an interface which will record the exact circumstances of every disconnect from when the player is flagged onwards), and if need be, a manual, permanent ban will ensue.
Who's going to pay the team of moderators (moderators that may misjudge events)? And all that effort for what? So people that have dynamic IP can join back anytime?
Why did you bother writing such a long post if you're wrong from the very beginning? Disconnecting on purpose? Get serious... no-one and nothing will ever know the true reason you dropped, so your view in regard to a possible system for ranking how likely the player is to be a "cheater" is very narrow.
did you read his whole post?
Who's going to pay the team of moderators (moderators that may misjudge events)? And all that effort for what? So people that have dynamic IP can join back anytime?
ACCOUNTS! seriously, you register an account to an email (likely not a free one like hotmail or gmail) and you use that account to play online... they ban your account and email address! there is no need for IP addresses at all.
Muzer has thought up what I was trying to early on but I kinda ****ed up with the whole 2 connections to the host instead of one to a server and one to the host. (http://forum.team17.co.uk/showpost.php?p=693796&postcount=18)
Muzer wrote a good idea :)
MihaiS_v2
19 May 2009, 23:37
did you read his whole post?
Yeah, I did. Did you read mine?
ACCOUNTS! seriously, you register an account to an email (likely not a free one like hotmail or gmail) and you use that account to play online... they ban your account and email address! there is no need for IP addresses at all.
If having an account involves paying money to some organization, you're better off not implementing the system. And what does paying for some e-mail service have to do with paying a group of moderators?
Muzer wrote a good idea :)
Not entirely a good idea. It doesn't solve the kicking issue and the ranking system is hazardous, and by that I mean depending on chance. A ranking system shouldn't depend on chance, but on skill alone. If it can't be done the right way, it shouldn't be done at all.
If having an account involves paying money to some organization, you're better off not implementing the system. And what does paying for some e-mail service have to do with paying a group of moderators?
why would it cost money? who would pay, customers or the admin?
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 00:07
ACCOUNTS! seriously, you register an account to an email (likely not a free one like hotmail or gmail) and you use that account to play online... they ban your account and email address! there is no need for IP addresses at all.
why would it cost money? who would pay, customers or the admin?
If registering an account would require an e-mail address which you could not get for free, then you'd have to pay for the service. Do you really think people are going to pay for playing on a ranked server?
CyberShadow
20 May 2009, 00:43
This thread is :rolleyes:
A certain idea was discussed somewhere else some time ago, and I'm surprised it hasn't been brought up here: instead of introducing in-game kicking, allow the host or a voting process to force a player to surrender. We already have an ignore function in chat, and these two put together should pretty much remove all ways for griefers to ruin games.
The only way you can prevent kicking players in-game is to have a centralized server (something superior to HostingBuddy), so people can connect to a game initialized by someone, but not owned by that person. No control over the server connections > no kicking. (or only then you could implement an official kicking tool)
But this will never happen as well.
I wouldn't be so sure.
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 01:01
I wouldn't be so sure.
I'm sure until someone offers to support the extra costs.
If registering an account would require an e-mail address which you could not get for free, then you'd have to pay for the service. Do you really think people are going to pay for playing on a ranked server?
Most ISP's offer email accounts as a part of there service. So if you are signed up with such then you can use the email account that is payed for as part of your monthly internet fee.
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 10:25
Well, mine doesn't. Oh, wait... I can generate as many as I need as part of the service provided by my web domain company. Maybe I could give some for free too.
CyberShadow
20 May 2009, 10:32
I'm sure until someone offers to support the extra costs.
Not counting PNG maps (the traffic generated by which will be greatly reduced once a map cache will be implemented in W:A updates), W:A consumes about 100-150 bytes per second per running game. (This is not counting TCP frames, but counting the size of the frame per each packet would also be wrong because packets are joined using Nagle.) Even if you count the extreme case - 1kB/s per game, and 1000 games running simultaneously - it's just 1MB/s, something someone's home connection can easily handle.
You contradict yourself a lot, maybe I was right.
Nah. I have the right to remain in a game I have successfully joined. Nobody has the right to take that away from me! I paid for my game, not some host who can't take getting beaten!
I think we'll all just have to call this stalemate. I think one thing, you think another. Neither of us will change each other's minds, so we'll have to agree to disagree.
robowurmz
20 May 2009, 12:25
I suppose we could all consider this thread closed until further notice then?
b1llygo4t
20 May 2009, 12:56
If you look at it the game is not noob friendly, so why should i? most other games have some sort of sorting involved with types of play, but not this game. AnythingGoes, RopersHeaven, PartyTime, and Help are all there is. then its just a pile of multilingual giberish and random games. its not my job to hold every noobs hand and walk him through the world of worms. (tho i do help people struggling to host, and if someone asks how to play ill let them stay, even if the room fills up and i start booting people)
there should be more rooms. each with a click through window that says the gist of whats going on in whatever language the game is set to.
example;
#ShopForWeapons
Games hosted here involve collecting weapons to kill your enemies! some common rules that may be enforced by the host include;
CBA - You must collect a Crate Before you can Attack
AFR - you must Attack From the Rope if able
FBA - you must Fly Before you Attack
SBA - you must Surf Before you Attack
#WBA or w#w - you must touch the indicated number of Walls Before you Attack
KTL - only Kill The Leader
ABL - you can attack Anyone But Last place
FFA - Free For All attack anyone
#Racing
Games hosted here involve racing. There will be a starting location indicated on the map and the type of race will be indicated by the host. The host will indicate if it is ok to attack another player as well as knocking other worms.
#Normal
Classic style games are hosted here. have fun!
#WeaponExpert
Games hosted here have a limited arsenal and involve your skill with the supplied weapons. Other rules may enforced by the host, such as;
You May Not block another worm with a girder, an arrow, or a worm
You must place your worms in specific places on the map
Restricting the fuse timer on certain weapons
Restricting a way in which you use a weapon
KTL - only Kill The Leader
ABL - you can attack Anyone But Last place
FFA - Free For All attack anyone
#CustomPlay
Games here involve intricate rules or unconventional play
At least then noobs know what their getting into.
Cheating would be the only other issue, which i think repeated offenders should be kicked, and singled out. but i dont really see a lot of cheating, just mistakes and people that dont know whats going on.
if i put pro only in the game name generally noobs don't join
Shadowmoon
20 May 2009, 13:11
For games like "pro's no noobz" surely their could be an own section for pro's, which you can only enter if you've won 25 matches?
We put you, Shadowmoon, in charge of counting how many games every player on WormNet has won and grant them access to the channel when you see fit. Rise, sir knight.
:rolleyes:
More rooms are pointless, If I go onto WN I wanna see who's there, ask who wants a game, not 1/5th of em. Plus there are 4 rooms now, everybody joins AG anyway.
Ideally the scheme file would allow a description of the gametype wich could be displayed whenever some1 joins. At least when a total newbie joins, he knows what he's in for and doesnt start playing a normal :P
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 15:43
Not counting PNG maps (the traffic generated by which will be greatly reduced once a map cache will be implemented in W:A updates), W:A consumes about 100-150 bytes per second per running game. (This is not counting TCP frames, but counting the size of the frame per each packet would also be wrong because packets are joined using Nagle.) Even if you count the extreme case - 1kB/s per game, and 1000 games running simultaneously - it's just 1MB/s, something someone's home connection can easily handle.
I know the bandwidth is not an issue (HostingWhore is still running and I have a pretty clear idea on how things work in this regard), I was referring to hardware, maintenance and personnel. If a couple of thousands of dollars and a dozen of volunteers is not a problem, then cool.
Nah. I have the right to remain in a game I have successfully joined. Nobody has the right to take that away from me! I paid for my game, not some host who can't take getting beaten!
I think we'll all just have to call this stalemate. I think one thing, you think another. Neither of us will change each other's minds, so we'll have to agree to disagree.
...you have practically called me stupid
Right in that regard. Anyway, you still don't get it. Who cares you have successfully joined a game and that you have paid for it? That doesn't make you special. Go host your own game! and nobody will mess with your right to play.
I suppose we could all consider this thread closed until further notice then?
No.
For games like "pro's no noobz" surely their could be an own section for pro's, which you can only enter if you've won 25 matches?
25 matches against yourself? Difficult task.
robowurmz
20 May 2009, 17:04
This thread isn't really going anywhere anymore.
It's just hurtling down into an eventual flamewar, so since nobody here can actually agree on anything, I vote for the thread to be closed.
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 17:16
Why do you wish so much for the thread to be closed? Will it make you sleep better at night?
People don't need to agree in order to learn new stuff.
And if you have nothing to add, you can just read or ignore.
CyberShadow
20 May 2009, 17:32
I know the bandwidth is not an issue (HostingWhore is still running and I have a pretty clear idea on how things work in this regard), I was referring to hardware, maintenance and personnel. If a couple of thousands of dollars and a dozen of volunteers is not a problem, then cool.
You're over-exagerating. This task does not require a dedicated server. Well-written code requires minimum maintenance, and it takes only one programmer to write it and one Team17 server administrator to install it.
Right in that regard. Anyway, you still don't get it. Who cares you have successfully joined a game and that you have paid for it? That doesn't make you special. Go host your own game! and nobody will mess with your right to play.
Hosts have the right to kick people. That doesn't make it the right thing to do. That's all I'm saying. Move on.
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 17:45
You're over-exagerating. This task does not require a dedicated server. Well-written code requires minimum maintenance, and it takes only one programmer to write it and one Team17 server administrator to install it.
Sorry, I understand now. I thought there would be special requirements this time, having in mind that the last ranking system failed.
Hosts have the right to kick people. That doesn't make it the right thing to do. That's all I'm saying. Move on.
Yes, they have the right- this is what matters. Who cares if it's the right thing to do or not since you can't do anything to stop a host from kicking people.
CyberShadow
20 May 2009, 18:00
I thought there would be special requirements this time, having in mind that the last ranking system failed.The only special requirements are lack of a deadline :) Team17 was really rushed by the end of development, and the network code was one of the things that went in last, AFAIK.
Well, mine doesn't. Oh, wait... I can generate as many as I need as part of the service provided by my web domain company. Maybe I could give some for free too.
If registering an account would require an e-mail address which you could not get for free, then you'd have to pay for the service.
http://gmail.com
:rolleyes:
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 18:18
http://gmail.com
:rolleyes:
Read, Muzer: ACCOUNTS! seriously, you register an account to an email (likely not a free one like hotmail or gmail) and you use that account to play online... they ban your account and email address! there is no need for IP addresses at all.
robowurmz
20 May 2009, 18:18
Why do you wish so much for the thread to be closed?
I feel that the discussion here is pointless; you will not be swayed, but neither will anyone else: if there is no hope of a solution, then surely the thread is done?
Nobody has anything to really add - at least, the person who originally wrote this thread has since long gone. Perhaps it is time to start a new, fresh thread, where the discussion thus far can be summed up and improved upon, yes?
If you like disorganised, argumentative rambling, then by all means, forge ahead. I won't stop you.
I just thought it'd be easier for everyone to stay on topic that way.
you can't do anything to stop a host from kicking people.
That's why I think in-game kicking modules should require the client to also have the module in order to work. That way, if you are of the belief that being kicked in-game is OK you can install the module. If you aren't, then you can't be kicked once the game has started.
It's a compromise which ensures the people most likely to be considered the victims aren't put out for what they might construe as unfair reasons.
It seems fair to me.
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 18:50
If you like disorganised, argumentative rambling, then by all means, forge ahead. I won't stop you.
I just thought it'd be easier for everyone to stay on topic that way.
Read the initial post by mPenguin. We're are on topic. You're not.
That's why I think in-game kicking modules should require the client to also have the module in order to work. That way, if you are of the belief that being kicked in-game is OK you can install the module. If you aren't, then you can't be kicked once the game has started.
It's a compromise which ensures the people most likely to be considered the victims aren't put out for what they might construe as unfair reasons.
It seems fair to me.
You skipped some posts, that's for sure. The discussion was carried way beyond modules. We're talking about connections managers. My point is that those who do not agree with in-game kicking should find a solution, not talk about fairness, because, in essence, the same characters that talk about fairness can kick people in-game without anybody ever knowing they did so.
Fortunately or not (I don't care), there is no solution and there won't be any as long as the owner of the game has control over the connections.
You skipped some posts, that's for sure. The discussion was carried way beyond modules. We're talking about connections managers.
Oh, I realise that, I just figured it would be more simple to modify an existing module than to create a new connection manager which integrates into the game. Besides which, the reasoning behind my suggestion can be applied to whatever methods are used.
Also, I'm within my rights to skip posts as I am the one running my browser. ;)
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 20:59
Oh, I realise that, I just figured it would be more simple to modify an existing module than to create a new connection manager which integrates into the game. Besides which, the reasoning behind my suggestion can be applied to whatever methods are used.
Who said anything about integration? You use the connections manager outside worms.
Also, I'm within my rights to skip posts as I am the one running my browser. ;)
If you like to reply with nonsense, good. You're also the owner of your own stupidity.
M.Penguin
20 May 2009, 22:15
The only special requirements are lack of a deadline :) Team17 was really rushed by the end of development, and the network code was one of the things that went in last, AFAIK.
rly? could you by any chance complete the needed fixes to it?
Who said anything about integration? You use the connections manager outside worms.
Oh, fair enough. It would still be quicker to modify and existing module, I would have thought.
MihaiS_v2
20 May 2009, 23:18
Oh, fair enough. It would still be quicker to modify and existing module, I would have thought.
Modifying a module for what? There already are working modules created for people that do not know how to handle a connections manager software. Nevertheless, modules can implement constraints, but that would only turn them deprecated.
...
It just makes my comparison of you to Hitler all the more valid. ;)
*Alarm goes off*
Godwin's law. You have lost this argument.
Until a middle man (server between host & players) is put in place, no one can detect anything in regards to connections. I'd be fairly sure that the majority of "disconnections" you see in games are really that person quitting the game legitimately (not via alt f4). Also, the majority of the time that the Wkick module is used, the person that is kicked rarely if ever sees the automatically generated message by the kicking module because the connection is terminated before that sends.
*Alarm goes off*
Godwin's law. You have lost this argument.
I lose but Glod wins?
robowurmz
21 May 2009, 09:36
Touché.
Let's look at this from another angle, shall we? You're playing a game, Mahais. You idly make a little joke at the host because he just leapt into the water and missed you. You get kicked.
How do you feel? Frustrated? That's why kicking should only be used in moderation.
Mihais argument is not about the moralities of kicking. He is arguing that since there is no way to detect a connection loss instigated by the host, nothing will stop it.
MihaiS_v2
21 May 2009, 10:03
Touché.
Let's look at this from another angle, shall we? You're playing a game, Mahais. You idly make a little joke at the host because he just leapt into the water and missed you. You get kicked.
How do you feel? Frustrated? That's why kicking should only be used in moderation.
What Franpa said.
Nice argument.
My argument is that since we can't travel in time to stop Hitler we shouldn't think it would be a good idea to do so.
MihaiS_v2
21 May 2009, 11:32
Who cares if it's a good idea or not since you can't materialize it. You can dream all you want, nothing can change the past, noob.
It's quite disheartening to see this argument, which appears to have stemmed from the fact that neither side originally seemed to realise what the other side was arguing for, devolve into a fair bit of petty name calling - mainly from mihais, who seems to think everyone else on this forum is an idiot... Why can't we all just get along?!
Well that would be no fun now, would it? These chaps have just spent the last 2 days arguing! I can only imagine they'd be sitting there picking their noses if they hadn't :P
CyberShadow
21 May 2009, 12:12
The reason this thread is still open is because, despite all the trollish behavior, it discusses a real problem. The (other) problem with this thread is that instead of trying to find a solution, half of the posts in this thread argue about a subjective point (morality of kicking) which doesn't really get us anywhere.
MihaiS_v2
21 May 2009, 12:46
It's quite disheartening to see this argument, which appears to have stemmed from the fact that neither side originally seemed to realise what the other side was arguing for
Not my fault. I recurrently stated: IF YOU'RE NOT SATISFIED, HOST YOUR OWN GAME!, but they kept babbling about their rights as guests.
..., devolve into a fair bit of petty name calling - mainly from mihais, who seems to think everyone else on this forum is an idiot... Why can't we all just get along?!
Mister, I say you should recheck your numbering and see how many times I've been called retarded and Hitler, then check how many times have I called Yakuza a life noob.
I can only imagine they'd be sitting there picking their noses if they hadn't :P
Yeah, well it's my fault I work from at home; what can I say... I envy you.
The (other) problem with this thread is that instead of trying to find a solution, half of the posts in this thread argue about a subjective point (morality of kicking) which doesn't really get us anywhere.
That is what I said. Nobody cares about morality as no-one can do anything in regard to kicking.
Well that would be no fun now, would it? These chaps have just spent the last 2 days arguing! I can only imagine they'd be sitting there picking their noses if they hadn't :P
That's very true.
To be honest, I'm not bothered about any of this but it was nice to have some fast-paced activity on the forum.
MihaiS_v2
21 May 2009, 13:05
That's very true.
To be honest, I'm not bothered about any of this but it was nice to have some fast-paced activity on the forum.
Maybe you didn't realize GreeN was referring to you too, Vader.
Do you still pick your nose?
Maybe you didn't realize GreeN was referring to you too, Vader.
Do you still pick your nose?
I do realise that. Do you realise he wasn't being literal? He could equally have said "twiddling their thumbs" and meant the same thing.
My point is this thread killed a fair bit of time for me which would probably not have been spent doing anything particularly productive.
My point is this thread killed a fair bit of time for me which would probably not have been spent doing anything particularly productive.
Yep, shame this thread has pretty much ended becuase I just got a cold yesterday night and have been sick all day today :/
MihaiS_v2
21 May 2009, 13:24
I do realise that. Do you realise he wasn't being literal? He could equally have said "twiddling their thumbs" and meant the same thing.
Do you realize that by quoting him I was not being literal too?
My point is this thread killed a fair bit of time for me which would probably not have been spent doing anything particularly productive.
Yeah, it did kill some time, because you as well as many other characters enrichening the thread didn't understand basic principles regarding reality. And I'm not surprised if you still don't.
Took me awhile but I eventually understood what you were saying :)Yeah, it did kill some time, because you as well as many other characters enrichening the thread didn't understand basic principles regarding reality. And I'm not surprised if you still don't.
I like this thread.
Something like this will never happen on T17's Facebook thingie.
This will keep us feel special.
:D
Yup! There really isn't anywhere like the Team17 Forum to find someone blaming other people for their own inability to speak on a topic!
Edit: comedy gold!
Mister, I say you should recheck your numbering and see how many times I've been called retarded and Hitler, then check how many times have I called Yakuza a life noob.
Note how two posts later he just said that a bunch of people arguing against him don't understand the basics of reality.
Edit again:
My point is this thread killed a fair bit of time for me which would probably not have been spent doing anything particularly productive.
Its a sure sign that you're getting old when you've forgotten the importance of booger-picking!
MihaiS_v2
21 May 2009, 14:42
Yup! There really isn't anywhere like the Team17 Forum to find someone blaming other people for their own inability to speak on a topic!
If you disregard the last posts, particularly, I believe it is not the case of this thread.
robowurmz
21 May 2009, 16:57
Ladies and Gentlemen, that was "W:A Drama", by our hosts Mihais and Vader.
Now for some relaxing music and the weather.
You're listening to 77-81 FM, Radio T17.
Do you realize that by quoting him I was not being literal too?
Not sure where you're going with this, but I didn't. I didn't realise you were asking me whether I spend time doing things which aren't practical. If that is what you were asking, then the answer is "yes, I do pick my nose".
Yeah, it did kill some time, because you as well as many other characters enrichening the thread didn't understand basic principles regarding reality. And I'm not surprised if you still don't.
To be fair I was missing the point with a lot of it. I totally understand what you were saying now and you're right: there's nothing you can do to stop someone from force-kicking you from in-game.
That doesn't really make what I said invalid, though. You should probably calm down a bit, you know? Chillax. It's just a game and we're all trying to do the right thing for it and its community, even if we don't all see eye to eye all the time.
But then, that probably makes me a stupid hippie, right? ;)
robowurmz
21 May 2009, 17:34
And now a classical piece from Chopin...
MihaiS_v2
21 May 2009, 18:11
It's just a game and we're all trying to do the right thing for it and its community, even if we don't all see eye to eye all the time.
We make a great team, man. Together we can increase the audience of any forum. We should do this more often. And if Yakuza joins, the three of us are going to be unbeatable. Until the next session, accept my apologies for being rude.
robowurmz
21 May 2009, 18:38
And that just about wraps it up. Well done everyone! I'd say that performance was stage-worthy.
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/16/bravo.gif
10characters
Malevol3nt
22 May 2009, 15:15
lol this turned into a firestorm.
Anyway, I won't discuss the wkick module, it's a neat little module for some much needed protection from random douches - as in those who attack verbally for no apparent reason or the likes. That rarely happens tho. But I do want to share my opinion about people who complain about the rule asking, such as this:
- "You shouldn't ask for the rules before you start the game, it's really lame. I don't wanna say cba, afr, abl all the time, I don't wanna tell the rules, don't kick me."
So what exactly is so hard with typing "abl, afr, cbr" when you join an uknown host? Or even better all you have to say is "i know the rules" and you're good to go. The reason this trend of asking the rules has grown so much is because there are many idiots around who just like to randomly join any game, without reading or understanding
what the scheme is about, and eventually if you let these people play they often start ruining the game by not giving a damn about the rules of the scheme.
I wouldn't have a problem with random people joining if they're willing to learn, but if I host a game called "Rubberworm - FlySurf" and random people with version 3.3.00 join in and click the light, then I'm forced to ask these people if they really know what game is being hosted. It's as simple as that. And believe me, this happens ALOT.
If you're a non-friend, expect to be asked for the rules. Just check out that new statictics website for wormnet, there's like ~1600 people who join in every day (well actually those are just unique IPs, so the real number is fewer but it's still high). You can't really say you know them all. :D
If I had to kick every player who when compared to be is considered a newbie then I'd have to play all by myself, because Jesus Christ is not so active nowadays.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.