PCS and no-go lines - Page 6

**CingularDuality** · 01-24-2005, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

If players were aware of their objectives and the needs of their team (and the limits PCS imposes upon them in relation to these things), there would be no need for this thread. As a counterargument to that, I'll will refer you to the five pages penned thus far.

Again, we're not running this server to make everyone happy. The players that understand what PCS is about will get to stay. The players that want to understand what PCS is about will get to stay. Any others will not get to stay. This thread is merely an exercise in philosophy.

I've said it before, there are too many variables to establish strict rules. We have admins to make judgement calls. Is that subjective? Yes. I'm sure that if an admin is not enforcing PCS standards in an appropriate manner, Apophis will drop him like a hot potato.

We've created a server that welcomes a certain style of play. It's not for everyone. In fact, it's not for most people, as you can see by the multitude of Dust 24/7 Fragfest!!!! servers out there... If we were to try to cater to what everyone wanted, we would soon lose the uniqueness that has drawn us to this server in the first place.

**Pokerface** · 01-24-2005, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CingularDuality

Again, we're not running this server to make everyone happy. The players that understand what PCS is about will get to stay. The players that want to understand what PCS is about will get to stay. Any others will not get to stay. This thread is merely an exercise in philosophy.

I've said it before, there are too many variables to establish strict rules. We have admins to make judgement calls. Is that subjective? Yes. I'm sure that if an admin is not enforcing PCS standards in an appropriate manner, Apophis will drop him like a hot potato.

We've created a server that welcomes a certain style of play. It's not for everyone. In fact, it's not for most people, as you can see by the multitude of Dust 24/7 Fragfest!!!! servers out there... If we were to try to cater to what everyone wanted, we would soon lose the uniqueness that has drawn us to this server in the first place.

This isn't about catering to everyone, Cing. It's about implementing your standards within the realm of a game that needs to be administrated, as you can't admin a server based on subjectivity. Well, maybe ONE admin could, but as these servers have nine (by my count), the implementation of the standard could very well vary across the administration.

And if the implementation of the standards ISN'T going to waver between the admins (due to Apo being the ultimate arbiter or whatever), for pete's sake WRITE IT DOWN.

There AREN'T too many variables. There's what: playercount, bomb location, possibly location of teammates... what else? And even if there ARE more, recognize them in the rules and move on. Seriously, if you can't be bothered to spell out actual definable rules that the PCS standards create, it looks more like laziness than Zen.

**CingularDuality** · 01-24-2005, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

This isn't about catering to everyone, Cing. It's about implementing your standards within the realm of a game that needs to be administrated, as you can't admin a server based on subjectivity. Well, maybe ONE admin could, but as these servers have nine (by my count), the implementation of the standard could very well vary across the administration.

Good point, but we did OK in years past...

Quote:

And if the implementation of the standards ISN'T going to waver between the admins (due to Apo being the ultimate arbiter or whatever), for pete's sake WRITE IT DOWN.

There AREN'T too many variables. There's what: playercount, bomb location, possibly location of teammates... what else? And even if there ARE more, recognize them in the rules and move on. Seriously, if you can't be bothered to spell out actual definable rules that the PCS standards create, it looks more like laziness than Zen.

Well, perhaps it is laziness.... I'm not going to write an 80 page document just so a few people can push the limits of the rules. The regulars on our server don't seem to have a problem with the way the server is being run. This thread was started by someone that stated that they intend to cross the lines and play aggressively on the server. That's not the way you get to stay on our server. Is it lazy to get rid of people that don't understand the concept of PCS instead of writing out detailed instructions of exactly what you can and can not do so that people go to the extreme within those limits? Perhaps... I'm OK with that, though...

**Pokerface** · 01-24-2005, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CingularDuality

Good point, but we did OK in years past...

Is it lazy to get rid of people that don't understand the concept of PCS instead of writing out detailed instructions of exactly what you can and can not do so that people go to the extreme within those limits? Perhaps... I'm OK with that, though...

I'll call you on it. Yes, it IS lazy.

There's no such thing as "extreme within limits". Things are either over the line or they're not when it comes to limits. The only time extremism comes into play is when the limits are nebulous and therefore CAN be pushed. You can't push a rule that says "Don't go through that door." You CAN push a rule that says "Work with your team to accomplish your objective". Not only can that second rule be pushed, but depending on the admin, his mood, the moon's alignment, whatever, the admin might not push back! I DON'T want to be on the receiving end of a kick for something that was acceptable one day that becomes unacceptable another day because of "innumerable variables". That's silly.

"Getting it" shouldn't be a requirement to play on a server.

**CingularDuality** · 01-24-2005, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

There's no such thing as "extreme within limits". Things are either over the line or they're not when it comes to limits.

This is where you're so very, very wrong. I'm at a loss of words to try to get you to comprehend it, though...

Quote:

"Getting it" shouldn't be a requirement to play on a server.

Why not?

**Tempus** · 01-24-2005, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CingularDuality

This is where you're so very, very wrong. I'm at a loss of words to try to get you to comprehend it, though...

You would have to explain it to me too.

**CingularDuality** · 01-24-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempus

You would have to explain it to me too.

That's much easier. Look at the R|B clan... They almost always followed the letter of the law on our server, but they were constantly looking for loopholes and glitches to get around them... When we drew lines on the map, they would instantly run to the exact edge of that boundary every single time so that they could rack up the kills. Zebra was the exception, and after a while so was devilman, but there's a reason why much of their clan was restricted from playing here... I don't think JohnnyD ever actually broke any of our rules, but he just wasn't able to wrap his head around the idea that defensive teams are supposed to defend. Lines on the map didn't get anyone to think about defense, it just meant they had to play deathmatch in a smaller area...

**Twisted_Firestarter** · 01-24-2005, 05:13 PM

I'm all for making hard boundries on maps. It may limit the creativity of the PCS style of play somewhat, but that is better than players being confused about what they can and can't do. On some maps it's very easy...de_aztec, "The CTs must guard the bomb sites and may not rush through the double doors or across the bridge." Others, such as de_chateau, have a more organic flow and are much more difficult to nail down in a sentence or two.

**Twisted_Firestarter** · 01-24-2005, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

"Getting it" shouldn't be a requirement to play on a server.

LOL...we can make that our trademark:

Tactical Gamer. Get It! Or Leave.

DeRanger · 01-24-2005, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CingularDuality

Lines on the map didn't get anyone to think about defense, it just meant they had to play deathmatch in a smaller area...

Exactly!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

If players were aware of their objectives and the needs of their team (and the limits PCS imposes upon them in relation to these things), there would be no need for this thread. As a counterargument to that, I'll will refer you to the five pages penned thus far.

And somehow you think that telling a new player that he can't go through the door just because you say so is BETTER?
If it's something over which a player risks being tossed from the server, it MUST have objective backup. If you want to allow for flexibility, you can write in stuff showing a dropped bomb on the ground and a caption that reads "You know what this means? No size restrictions and SCREW the limit."

Does it matter? The admins can write up a set of rules that say the CTs have to stand exactly where they spawn for the first four minutes of the map; so long as it's written and promulgated, we're a zillion times better off than before. Then, when someone is kicked for moving around in spawn, you can point them to a hard and fast rule that leaves no room for interpretation on EITHER side: admin and player (any two people, really) can both agree that what was done went against the stated rules of the server.

I think the maps are a fine start, truthfully, and I'd love to see the others done so well. If there are to be "boundaries" on maps, it's best to know what and where they are, yes?

I didn't quote subjective for any particular, glaring reason and understand where the need for hard and fast rules, maps, hard boundaries etc. might come from, believe me, I know. I'm just trying to make suggestions and that is why I posted a couple of the old CS 1.6 boundaries maps from Dead Men Walking. Quite frankly you guys can do whatever you want and think is the best, I care less and less all the time especially considering, because of my route to the server and debilitating packet loss most of the time, the server works half the time for me in general if I'm lucky... I've had enough with trying to develop PCS here. Not because I don't want to but because of personal matters I just don't have, nor can I afford to expend and exercise, the energy or tolerance.

Considering that there are so many new players (and some admins perhaps) with varying views as to what PCS is exactly despite studying the FAQ, maybe boundary maps and a smattering of rules are just what's needed like Pokerface says.

Berzerker2 · 01-24-2005, 05:22 PM

One more in the "me too" thread as the understanding goes - maybe. I think what you might be trying to say is that it's okay to have these somewhat nebulous rules, and that players who "get it" are the ones who won't have any problem with them, and won't be kicked, and the ones who do might whine, but you won't care. I think that's an okay thing to say, as long as you say it outright.

As you mentioned me, and I think to a certain extent misinterpreted my words, I'd like to respond on a personal note as well. I did say I seem to play more aggresively than the average on the server. I did say that if we have lines that are crossable as long as you have good reason, I'd be crossing them. I don't think I'm your average frag-monkey though. I do think I understand PCS - maybe not as well as some of the rest of you, but then again, I've only been playing it for a month. My problem, and I think the problem being discussed at large here, is if it makes sense to have these hard lines drawn on maps, or hard rules written down in the forums. My personal take on it is that it's not necessary - possibly in the short run, but definitely not in the long run. We have admins, and if we trust their judgement, we can let them enforce the general spirit of the rules as they see fit. If that means that sometimes decisions aren't clear cut, as they would be with hard rules, so be it.

To go back to the football analogy: sure, 10 yards is 10 yards, but holding is a judgement call to be made by the referee. The league chooses refs based on their understanding of the rules of the game, and their ability to enforce these rules fairly. A good ref might see a hold that was clearly unintentional and not play-breaking, and not call it. The same hold, being made consistently and intentionally would get called. That's what makes a good ref - just as it's what makes a good admin.

Finally, I'd like to point out that Ghost almost totally quoted my very first post in this thread, except with slightly closer limits. I totally agree with him and Vulcan that to best work as a team, you need to react to the way the round is unfolding (ie. pull in closer to the objectives as your team's numbers are thinned on defense), and take full advantage of the special skills present on an individual basis on that team. A good team is not a group that all play the same way - it's a group of players that play differently, but in ways that complement each other. At least that's my $0.02 - well, probably to $1.50 by now.

**Wyzcrak** · 01-24-2005, 05:23 PM

Hrm. You're referring to players who have no intention of playing the objective and being part of a team regardless of map boundaries, whereas this thread is about players intent on playing the objective and being part of a team regardless of map boundaries. There's a relevant difference there, I think. The former should be discarded, as we require teamwork. But what do we discard the latter for? Being in the wrong place at the wrong time when the wrong admin is playing?

Imagine me sending this PM to Berz:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

You're not allowed to play on the server anymore, Berz.

It's really irrelevant that you're making a sincere effort to play the objective and help your team. We've arbitrarily decided we don't like the way you try.

This may not make much sense to you, but you're being banned in response to your best effort to meet your obligations. It's too different from what we prefer.

Unfortunately, as the banning admin, I'm not able to reference a documented rule you've broken, as it's not practical to document them, really. There's so many things that have to be just right for you to do what you did, and you missed one. I essentially think you went through the wrong door at the wrong time. The right door and time aren't really written down anywhere. You just have to "get it."

I know other admins encouraged you to go through that same door in similar situations three times last night, but I'm not the other admins, and I'm banning you now.

You're banned now. It's not open for debate.

I tried to avoid anything unfair there. Did I fail?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twisted_Firestarter

players being confused about what they can and can't do

This thread is starting to feel like a Rubik's Cube.

**GhostintheShell** · 01-24-2005, 05:25 PM

The only thing sensible IMO, is when you are playing to honestly ask yourself if what you are doing is helping or hurting your team to meet its objective.

Aside from all this chatter (a lot of it from people who I've never even seen playing CS:Source I might add), we've had considerably good games so far I think.

Several nights people have had to be booted for behavior, but for the most part I've found new people get into it rather quickly when prompted by more seasoned PCS players. Those that I've seen booted definitely have deserved it, good riddance to them. Those that "get it", settled down and play properly with us.

**Wyzcrak** · 01-24-2005, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berzerker2

holding is a judgement call to be made by the referee.

Good example, but I don't think of the referee as interpreting as much as observing. Somewhere, it's documented what you have to do to get called for "holding"?

Observing isn't the problem on the server, but rather arbitrary interpretation of that observation?

Hrm...

**CingularDuality** · 01-24-2005, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

Imagine me sending this PM to Berz:

I tried to avoid anything unfair there. Did I fail?

Like I said, either a player "gets it" or he doesn't. If a player is repeatedly warned for abandoning his objective and repeatedly kicked, then yes, he'll eventually be banned simply for not playing in the manner that we expect people to play.

I'm sick and tired (literally), and don't wish to discuss this anymore right now. Let me know when you've got the rules typed up.