Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

GM interferes with player siege

24

Comments

  • Joker2240Joker2240 Member Posts: 664

    Originally posted by SomeDude101

    Originally posted by Joker2240

    uhh no... Try re-reading that statement again. They never directly said that "boomsticks" were the only thing you could not use on structures. They only said, "From this day forward you can not use the ones currently in the world on structures you will be banned if you do." That is SOOO vague it is a horrible rule and leaves SO much grey it is not even funny. 

    I agree though that it was horrible what happened as it was their fault that they did not clarify what the "new" rule was. 

     

    uuuuuhhhh...copy paste:

    Currently there was a issue in the code that allowed the two handle weapon [Boom Sticks ] to do more damage then intended. 



    This has been fixed for the newly created weapons, anyone affected by the old ones will not be reimbursed as they still acted as a sledge hammer would. For the ones currently in game we ask you delete them. 



    From this day forward you can not use the ones currently in the world on structures you will be banned if you do.

    READ PLEASE....

    I did and I still stand by what I said. He might have said [Boom Sticks] at the start of the paragraph yet he still does not directly says "From this day forward you can not use [Boom Sticks] on structures". See the difference? That is more direct and does not leave it vague and people will not question it.  

    Like I said before it is such a horribly put together post that people should have raised a red flag from the get go. I mean if you saw a new law written like this wouldn't you want to clarify it a bit better? 

  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Member UncommonPosts: 4,775

    Originally posted by rhinok

    Originally posted by SomeDude101


    Originally posted by thorppes

    It's so hard to keep up.. who's the GM's favorite?

    Is it TOP? Myrimdon? PROM alliance? WSX? 

    People were informed the hammers shouldn't by used to do damage to buildings.

    No they were NOT. The announcment was about beatsticks, NOT HAMMERS. This was already discussed earlier in the thread. Please read up.

    It may be a matter of semantics mixed with poor English.  From the announcement:

     

    "Currently there was a issue in the code that allowed the two handle weapon [Boom Sticks ] to do more damage then intended. 



    This has been fixed for the newly created weapons, anyone affected by the old ones will not be reimbursed as they still acted as a sledge hammer would. For the ones currently in game we ask you delete them. "

     

    He specifically refers to two handle weapon (Booms Sticks) and refers to them acting as sledge hammers.  It's definitely confusing, but it looks like the intention is to warn players from using overpowered weapons (as a whole) against structures. Were the players in the siege using overpowered weapons or were they just using regular weapons?

    Regardless, everything I read about this game shows what a mess it is.  Players should be able to use any weapon against anybody or anything, as far as I'm concerned, as long as the weapons aren't bugged.  That being said, if you whack away at a wall with your sword, your sword should take damage and possibly break... That just seems like common sense.

    ~Ripper

    It clearly says Boom sticks. Players are to delete the old boomsticks. Again specifically Boom sticks lol. 

     

    Notice he doesn't say two handed weapons. He says THE two handed weapon [Boom Stick]. 

    Then goes on to immediately say they have been fixed so that new ones won't have this problem. 

    The only mention of sledgehammer made is when they say that players will not be reinbursed for the older Boom sticks becoming disallowed. 

  • Joker2240Joker2240 Member Posts: 664

    Originally posted by cirsyndic

    http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/50419-house-destruction-keep-limit-weapons.html

    2 minutes of looking and here you go, community vote on siege methods.

    Plus, the official response about sledgehammers:

    http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/50419-house-destruction-keep-limit-weapons.html#post975461

    So it's a viable way of destroying structures, and the Lead GM has no clue about the game he's leading the customer-support team about. Go SV! In all seriousness, in any self-respecting company he'd be fired by tomorrow.

    Too bad that was in JULY and rules could have changed for the time been.  I highly doubt a GM would have that type of power to make up a rule like that with out consulting the rest of the team.

  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,706

    I wonder how long it's gonna be before the game is canned?

    Not long I would guess.

  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Member UncommonPosts: 4,775

    Originally posted by Joker2240

    Originally posted by cirsyndic

    http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/50419-house-destruction-keep-limit-weapons.html

    2 minutes of looking and here you go, community vote on siege methods.

    Plus, the official response about sledgehammers:

    http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/50419-house-destruction-keep-limit-weapons.html#post975461

    So it's a viable way of destroying structures, and the Lead GM has no clue about the game he's leading the customer-support team about. Go SV! In all seriousness, in any self-respecting company he'd be fired by tomorrow.

    Too bad that was in JULY and rules could have changed for the time been.  I highly doubt a GM would have that type of power to make up a rule like that with out consulting the rest of the team.

    The problem with that is Discord tried to say that Sledge hammers were never supposed to damage structures lol so he's   clueless and that link provided by cirsyndic proves as much. 

  • Joker2240Joker2240 Member Posts: 664

    Originally posted by SomeDude101

    Originally posted by Joker2240

    Too bad that was in JULY and rules could have changed for the time been.  I highly doubt a GM would have that type of power to make up a rule like that with out consulting the rest of the team.

    And that's where your wrong. He did make it up on the spot, and he is the lead gm. He chose to act before talking to Henrik. We'll see how that works out for him. Please stop grasping straws, I'm starting to think you're on SV payroll ;)

    Show proof or it is not true. Not that I am on SV payroll but that he acted by himself and not with consent of other people.  However we will find out soon enough what comes of this. Then the real proof will be presented because I too doubt that if he did act without consent of Henrik or whatever he will be in big trouble.

    p.s. I am not against you guys at all, I do think what he did was unacceptable and should have never happened. I just wish for you guys to calm the rage and use logical thinking.

  • cirsyndiccirsyndic Member UncommonPosts: 261

    Like GreyGhost posted before me, I posted log of the Lead GM saying that "sledge hammers were never intended to do damage to structures". Then I posted a thread from a community vote with the CEO saying that's how it'll be (with sledge-hammers being anti-structure weapons).

    Seems to me like the Lead GM doesn't have a clue what game he's working in. Bear in mind I wasn't there, my game account was recently banned - their way of closing charge-back accounts? LOL! - and I couldn't play even if I wanted to give them money.

    y logical thinking, a GM stepping into a PvP siege like that and breaking it because of some flimsy exploit charge and doing what he did; he needs to be fired. Case CLOSED.

    No bans were handed out, he just "made it more fair". I'm sorry but no amount of logical thinking can make either the facts or the results that should follow, any bit different.

  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Member UncommonPosts: 4,775

    Originally posted by cirsyndic

    Like GreyGhost posted before me, I posted log of the Lead GM saying that "sledge hammers were never intended to do damage to structures". Then I posted a thread from a community vote with the CEO saying that's how it'll be (with sledge-hammers being anti-structure weapons).

    Seems to me like the Lead GM doesn't have a clue what game he's working in. Bear in mind I wasn't there, my game account was recently banned - their way of closing charge-back accounts? LOL! - and I couldn't play even if I wanted to give them money.

    y logical thinking, a GM stepping into a PvP siege like that and breaking it because of some flimsy exploit charge and doing what he did; he needs to be fired. Case CLOSED.

    No bans were handed out, he just "made it more fair". I'm sorry but no amount of logical thinking can make either the facts or the results that should follow, any bit different.

    Unless your a member of TOP lol I think this is something we can all agree on. 

  • Joker2240Joker2240 Member Posts: 664

    Okay guys lets go through the thinking process..

     

    Okay the link of henrik was posted in July, right? 

    Knowing the way of games rules change and new ones get put in place. Even if they might be temporary. 

    So, with consent from Henrik or whoever the GM posted this new rule (as horribly vague it is) on the 10th of this month because that is his job. To post new rules. Am I wrong to think that? 

    Then this happens. 

    Now can you guys see where I am having problems agreeing? I am fine with you guys raging about his action however raging about the rules is something I can't see. His actions were wrong and it should not have happened like that at all! 

  • HanoverZHanoverZ Member Posts: 1,239

    Originally posted by GrayGhost79

    Originally posted by cirsyndic

    Like GreyGhost posted before me, I posted log of the Lead GM saying that "sledge hammers were never intended to do damage to structures". Then I posted a thread from a community vote with the CEO saying that's how it'll be (with sledge-hammers being anti-structure weapons).

    Seems to me like the Lead GM doesn't have a clue what game he's working in. Bear in mind I wasn't there, my game account was recently banned - their way of closing charge-back accounts? LOL! - and I couldn't play even if I wanted to give them money.

    y logical thinking, a GM stepping into a PvP siege like that and breaking it because of some flimsy exploit charge and doing what he did; he needs to be fired. Case CLOSED.

    No bans were handed out, he just "made it more fair". I'm sorry but no amount of logical thinking can make either the facts or the results that should follow, any bit different.

    Unless your a member of TOP lol I think this is something we can all agree on. 

    image

  • seabeastseabeast Member Posts: 748

    I am really trying to stick with this game, there are many neat concepts and abilities that are present. However, the issues are fastly catching up with the experience and if review of this incident report is true than I must unsub.

    1. To muster a unit to attack a large clan is a feat in itself, let alone preping and organizing. If incident report is true, the experience of game play is lost. Who is fair game and who is not, worse, who is prey and who is not.

    2. Even in non-pvp game I have yet to find any concept of "all things being equal" if TOP is not on to defend, than that is theirs alone to deal with, not any Mg.

    3. The "item is not ment to be used" theory is BS, if it is not ment to be used, than it should not be available. Anything less and players would be left guess what to use which takes away from the experince. This is a game issue, not a player issue.

    In conclussion, I am now shifting to the MO forums for futher research and if this incident is true then my sub comes down. Even with all the little issues of server crashes, items stat problems and pet command errors I have really enjoyed my time. However, I refuse to fear the political stance of a game when developers and employies are in clans. While it is important for such people to play their game, the overtness of "conflict of intrest" becomes apparent. In laymens terms, if you charge for a AAA game, you better deliver AAA game experience.

  • AethaerynAethaeryn Member RarePosts: 3,118

    A little off topic. . but:

     

    They claim. . and other defending the game that there are soooo many players playing that do not read the forums . . yet they only announce this on the forum that it is bannable anyway.

     

    They clearly pointed out that "boomsticks" were acting like sledgehammers..  .meaning sledgehammers are supposed to act that way from my understanding.  

     

    They need an in game way of announcing these things.

    Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!

  • seabeastseabeast Member Posts: 748

    Originally posted by Aethaeryn

    A little off topic. . but:

     

    They claim. . and other defending the game that there are soooo many players playing that do not read the forums . . yet they only announce this on the forum that it is bannable anyway.

     

    They clearly pointed out that "boomsticks" were acting like sledgehammers..  .meaning sledgehammers are supposed to act that way from my understanding.  

     

    They need an in game way of announcing these things.

     I respectufly disagree, IMO they need to not have items for use that serve more than one purpose. What is next? A sword that is suppose to only be used on animals? And if you use it on another player you get banned? If they messed up and put a weapon in game then it is thier problem to fix, not the player to guess what weapon is used on what. I spend what gaming time I have playing the game and not searching the forums to see what I can and can not use to play the game. If this is how they operate they need to advertise it. Something to the regards, "before you purchuse and play this game...you need to report to the forums and read all the post to figure out what items to use and when to use them...everytime before you log into the game."

  • RohnRohn Member UncommonPosts: 3,730

    It appears that the principal parties have gotten together and discussed the issue, and now both sides of the story are known, to whatever extent they can be.

    http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/55834-regarding-tonights-siege.html#post1058635

    At least they are acting quickly.

    Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  • AethaerynAethaeryn Member RarePosts: 3,118

    Originally posted by seabeast

    Originally posted by Aethaeryn

    A little off topic. . but:

     

    They claim. . and other defending the game that there are soooo many players playing that do not read the forums . . yet they only announce this on the forum that it is bannable anyway.

     

    They clearly pointed out that "boomsticks" were acting like sledgehammers..  .meaning sledgehammers are supposed to act that way from my understanding.  

     

    They need an in game way of announcing these things.

     I respectufly disagree, IMO they need to not have items for use that serve more than one purpose. What is next? A sword that is suppose to only be used on animals? And if you use it on another player you get banned? If they messed up and put a weapon in game then it is thier problem to fix, not the player to guess what weapon is used on what. I spend what gaming time I have playing the game and not searching the forums to see what I can and can not use to play the game. If this is how they operate they need to advertise it. Something to the regards, "before you purchuse and play this game...you need to report to the forums and read all the post to figure out what items to use and when to use them...everytime before you log into the game."

    No, I agree with you.  I meant that they need to have a way to do this that is clear and be sure that everyone gets the message.  To me it was clear that sledgehammers were meant to be used in this way.  Anyway. . I can't wait to see what they decide on.

    Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!

  • brostynbrostyn Member Posts: 3,092

    I'm really surprised. Surprised that 50 people pay to play this game.

  • Luthor_XLuthor_X Member Posts: 431

    I gotta tell ya, this kind of stuff is a complete turn-off to those of us who have yet to purchase, but are still potential customers. I can understand if the GM made a mistake (read honest mistake) and comes clean about it and apologizes for said mistake. We all make mistakes, no matter how hard we try not to.

     

    I have to say though, on the surface it reeks of favoritism, and that in my eyes is the ultimate red-flag in an ffa / pvp game.

  • Joker2240Joker2240 Member Posts: 664

    Originally posted by Luthor_X

    I gotta tell ya, this kind of stuff is a complete turn-off to those of us who have yet to purchase, but are still potential customers. I can understand if the GM made a mistake (read honest mistake) and comes clean about it and apologizes for said mistake. We all make mistakes, no matter how hard we try not to.

     

    I have to say though, on the surface it reeks of favoritism, and that in my eyes is the ultimate red-flag in an ffa / pvp game.

    http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/55834-regarding-tonights-siege.html

  • RohnRohn Member UncommonPosts: 3,730

    Originally posted by Luthor_X

    I gotta tell ya, this kind of stuff is a complete turn-off to those of us who have yet to purchase, but are still potential customers. I can understand if the GM made a mistake (read honest mistake) and comes clean about it and apologizes for said mistake. We all make mistakes, no matter how hard we try not to.

     

    I have to say though, on the surface it reeks of favoritism, and that in my eyes is the ultimate red-flag in an ffa / pvp game.

     

    I also hope that no favoritism was involved.

    But, as stated above, it sounds like the incident has been discussed by those involved and Henrik, and they now have both sides of the story and are attending to the issue quickly.

    We've only heard one side of the story here.  Then there will be Discord's side.  The truth will probably be in the middle of the two, which can be hard to extract in the heat of the moment.

    Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  • uohaloranuohaloran Member Posts: 811


    Originally posted by Luthor_X
    I gotta tell ya, this kind of stuff is a complete turn-off to those of us who have yet to purchase, but are still potential customers. I can understand if the GM made a mistake (read honest mistake) and comes clean about it and apologizes for said mistake. We all make mistakes, no matter how hard we try not to.
     
    I have to say though, on the surface it reeks of favoritism, and that in my eyes is the ultimate red-flag in an ffa / pvp game.

    I agree.

    His only hope of bandaiding this would be to publicly apologize and step down from GM position.

  • HanoverZHanoverZ Member Posts: 1,239

    Originally posted by Luthor_X

    I gotta tell ya, this kind of stuff is a complete turn-off to those of us who have yet to purchase, but are still potential customers. I can understand if the GM made a mistake (read honest mistake) and comes clean about it and apologizes for said mistake. We all make mistakes, no matter how hard we try not to.

     

    I have to say though, on the surface it reeks of favoritism, and that in my eyes is the ultimate red-flag in an ffa / pvp game.

     

    The one server surely doesn't help, GMs/Devs all playing on the same server they police. 

    MO has always been Henriks own little "play thing".

  • I have to say, if this is true, I will revoke my statement of giving MO another chance in a year. Favorism kills a game for me completely. But let's wait for the whole story, the Gm might have had a reason and it was a big misunderstanding.

  • maharetmaharet Member Posts: 115

    This is a game that has been released for almost 6 months.  DO any of the people who play it understand that???  How could anything like this happen.  If a sledgehammer or anything else is not supposed to do damamge to a wall then why does it??  Why does anyone need a referee to pvp in the game?  At the myrnvasion we had 3 gms there almost the whole time telling us what we can and cannot do.  I have never played a game that had such shitty mechanics NEVER!!!!  GM at  the myrm house destruction " DO not shoot spells or arrows through the slits in the walls"  INVADERS= "But we can see through them and target the people" GM= "It is not supposed to be like that".  Well this is 2 months later and you can still see and target through the walls.  Fucking rediculous.

  • Cik_AsalinCik_Asalin Member Posts: 3,033

    Originally posted by maharet

     If a sledgehammer or anything else is not supposed to do damamge to a wall then why does it?? 

    I walked outside and hit my wall with a sledgehammer....it broke it.  Interesting.

  • cirsyndiccirsyndic Member UncommonPosts: 261

    Ok I've talked with [CIR]Konrad, [AQ]Alfie and [TKO]Malum after seeing the post on the MOFO (http://www.mortalonline.com/forums/55834-regarding-tonights-siege.html#post1058635); noone from the main organizers of the attacking force ( [AQ]KoLi, [CIR]Konrad) or guild-leaders/guild-officers present ([TKO]Malum, [CN]Suttner, [Ely]Fatal) at the time were in any way consulted or represented.

    So, only the defending player side (TOP alliance) was represented in this talk. The leaders and organizers I talked to have no idea who "represented" them but this is pouring more oil on the fire for them.

This discussion has been closed.