| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
simsverd wrote:Hello.
We dont discuss bans publically, not in the game chat or here.
But you can send me a PM with the info if you think that there have been a ban that was not in line with the terms of service.
I was unable to send in-game PMs while banned. Do forum PMs work? I sent one to Hakumen here in forums since I couldn't in game, but I'm not sure how many check forum inbox.
|
|
|
|
Currently banned from chat for 12 hours, unable to use any chat, including team chat and PMs. Hoping my teammates read this so they know why I'm not responding.
|
|
|
|
I'm also apparently unable to send PMs to anyone, to even ask for clarification.
|
|
|
|
The main reason I ask is this is restricting my ability to chat in team games, which seems a little over the top. Especially since I'm in the Grand War...
|
|
|
The moderator "Hakumen" just banned me from chat for 12 hours for statements made in BASEMENT chat in response to others. His claim is that I was insulting others, which is ironic because my statements were in RESPONSE to insults. So if I'm banned for 12 hours, then the others who were doing the EXACT same thing should be banned for 12 hours as well.
Seriously, I was under the impression that anything goes in basement. The "insults" made were laughably tame in comparison to those against me.
|
|
|
|
Zendesk would be able to handle support requests from any medium, as you could set it up so any email sent to support@uniwar.com creates a support ticket. This ticket would be assigned automatically to a set group of support agents, who can answer, or refer to knowledgebase/FAQ, or if needed, escalate to Xavi or a moderator. Would probably decrease what Xavi has to deal with by a good 90%, and would give a searchable database for Xavi to track bugs in. Cheap too, $5 per user per month, wouldn't take more than a handful of users to run. Zendesk also has an app for Android/iPhone, so no computer infrastructure needed, entire support team can operate on mobile devices. I'm happy to help implement, setup, or run this if needed, I have a ton of experience running this already, and could provide training easily.
|
|
|
|
I run the technical support and IT department at the engineering firm I work at, and I recently converted our system from an antiquated spreadsheet system to Zendesk. Zendesk uses a ticket system, has the ability to program macros and automatic responses, has the ability to set up a FAQ, etc. Very easy system to operate, and can integrate multiple users into a support team very easily. Using something like this would allow most basic questions to be answered by community members/moderators, while also allowing technical questions that only Xavi can answer to be escalated. This would vastly reduce the support overhead Xavi currently has. I'm happy to do training and help in whatever way possible if this is something you guys would be interested in.
|
|
|
|
simsverd wrote:A system of volunteers seems like a nice idea.. but it would be very impractical (not scalable)... there are tens of thousands of maps.. and new being created each day.
System has to be automatic to be scalable.
I agree that it could be tweaked, but there are way easier solutions...
- give mods *100 power to be able to remove or promote maps that have been unfairly recieved
- make positive votes from losing player and negative vote from winning player count double
- only high level players 2000 can vote on maps they have not played
I like the idea of double vote count for opposite votes vs win/lose status, but I think anyone who plays a map should be required to vote, and no one who hasn't played a map should be allowed to vote, even if highly ranked. I've had plenty of highly ranked individuals tell me my maps are unbalanced until they played them, only to find that the map actually was balanced just fine.
I understand that new maps are being made every day, but not all of them are submitted to ranked. Maybe remove the cost for uploading maps, and instead male that cost be for submitting to ranked pool. This would allow players to create unranked maps freely, while restricting ranked maps to players who are willing to put skin in the game, as it were.
As far as scalability goes, if players were mildly reimbursed, I think you could find plenty of volunteers. Once volunteers were selected by mod staff, the process could be made automatic and very simple.
In any case, the current system is very broken. Votes also need to be reset overall to clear out old maps that can't be voted down because they have extra votes from before the voting system changed from per game played to per player.
|
|
|
You all realize that the arguments that started on this thread on March 6th were predicated on statements made about the Fuze before it had its defense and attack nerfed, right?
Fuze is no longer the powerhouse it was back in beta and early release.
|
|
|
|
The oldest game is usually at the top of the list of completed games, unless you just had a game end and have not reviewed the results yet. So you should always know what the oldest game is.
|
|
|
Hey all!
So, been trying to figure out a good way to change the map voting/ranked map system to prevent massive downvoting as revenge for perceived slights in chat, doing it just to troll, etc.
As it stands right now, the voting system is a free-for-all - anyone can vote on any map if their ranked score is above 1500, adding one vote per 100 ranking score (1600 gets 2 votes, 1700 gets 3, etc.)
I'm proposing the system outlined below.
First, separate public votes not derived from ranked game play from votes from anyone at anytime. Votes made outside of the end of a ranked game go towards a "popularity" vote count that has no effect on if a map is in ranked play or not.
Allow for submission of maps to ranked pool, but with the stipulation that they must undergo testing prior to being added to the pool. Volunteers can play for a nominal reward (5 unicoins per game played), and the game must be played to at least 7 rounds (or possibly to completion to ensure proper testing?). Volunteers must apply to be in the volunteer program, and must be approved by moderators/admin (to prevent abuse) before being able to join the volunteer program. I'm thinking 5 test games per map, and at least 50% (3 positive votes) in order to be added to ranked.
This brings it to the second half - mandating map votes after a ranked game is completed. After every ranked game that lasted at least 7 rounds, players must vote the map up or down after completion. This ensures that a map remaining in ranked depends on votes only from players who actually played the map, rather than a popularity contest. It also removes multi-account down-voting.
If a maps ranked game voting ratio goes to 25% more downvotes than upvotes, then the map is removed from ranked play. This replaces the current ratio due to the mandated voting after ranked matches complete - if the winner upvotes and the loser downvotes, votes remain even (assuming same score), but if both upvote or both downvote, it should weed out maps that are bad, and keep maps that are good from being removed by inexperienced players or revenge votes.
|
|
|
|
I'll be a mercenary as well...
|
|
|
Map name: Solomon
Map maker: GOUT
Number of players: 2
Link: [link://1,37929,Solomon,0,2]
Reason for report: Player 2 is placed one space closer to center bases, giving a base advantage right away.
Suggestion to fix: Place both players equal distance from center instead of intentionally giving one player position advantage.
Map has been downvoted, author is dismissive of the disparity.
|
|
|
I only think that 1, 4, 7 and 12 follow the theme of island invasion, maybe that's just me though. Even though 11 looks amazing visually, the terrain variety isn't enough in the middle for varying strategies.
I don't like the base cities in 4, or the cluster in the middle of 7.
1 looks interesting, but it appears to be a 3 player 2v1 map, which isn't very appealing to me.
So I'm going to vote for 12.
|
![[Search]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_search.gif){kind=icon}
![[Recent Topics]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_recentTopics.gif){kind=icon}
![[Login]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_login.gif){kind=icon}
Login
