This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - yugitom
Pages: 1 ... 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 ... 120
801
« on: April 05, 2016, 09:31:13 AM »
Is there any point in spoiler boxing a quote which isn't spoiler boxed right above the post you made?
802
« on: April 05, 2016, 07:03:42 AM »
I suggest, for the assumptions part that, when using any arena, hazards will be on if the op has not stated otherwise. Some other assumptions that must be addressed:
Mulitbots are banned
Matches will be judged by the in-game points system
I also think that it should be addressed that rules are never to be included in the thread title. For example, if the thread title is 'R v R: IRL MATCH OF GREATNESS' but an IRL ruleset is not specified in the rules, the challenge will not be IRL.
Other than that, thank you for this thread. It'll make things easier for challenge hosts if they ever have any doubts.
803
« on: April 05, 2016, 05:24:13 AM »
Is having a bfe'd burst arc even allowed? Nothing is stated in the OP that says the use of bfe is okay.
Nothing is stated in the OP that says the use of BFE is banned as well, to be honest.
Well, that's the thing, there always has to be an assumption. I always believed that the assumption for bfe and any other glitches is for them to be banned.
With the thrackerzod wedges and this thing, I'm not assuming anything in challenge board anymore, unless someone puts "standard ruleset" or something like that like in my challenge with Madman.
As I read the rules, it's DSL 2.2 MW, best 2 out of 3, no popups or SnS, and anything goes other than those rules. So I assumed it was just that.
Of course, OP is new so he doesn't know very well the rules of contests and tournaments. So it's good it's being clarified.
I'm tempted to make a thread about assumptions, rules as written, and rules as intended in the challenge board, so it hopefully clarifies stuff.
I have actually already contacted Dragonfire about this a while back and he has some amendments to the rules ready to go, he just told me he'd implement them once he has the time.
804
« on: April 05, 2016, 04:37:30 AM »
Is having a bfe'd burst arc even allowed? Nothing is stated in the OP that says the use of bfe is okay.
Nothing is stated in the OP that says the use of BFE is banned as well, to be honest.
Well, that's the thing, there always has to be an assumption. I always believed that the assumption for bfe and any other glitches is for them to be banned.
805
« on: April 05, 2016, 04:28:19 AM »
Is having a bfe'd burst arc even allowed? Nothing is stated in the OP that says the use of bfe is okay.
806
« on: April 05, 2016, 04:24:39 AM »
I'm in London currently (and as a result, away from my PC,) but considering all I need to do is rebuild one of my bots, It shouldn't be too long before I send something over. I don't think I have time to AI however.
If you have time to build, you have time to AI. AI'ing takes ~2 minutes.
It's more that I don't know how (as shown because I didn't know how long it took)
That's fine, however. As long as your robot does not require any complicated AI line (which shouldn't be the case in a tournament like this), Mystic will give you a sufficient AI line.
807
« on: April 04, 2016, 06:40:18 PM »
I'm in London currently (and as a result, away from my PC,) but considering all I need to do is rebuild one of my bots, It shouldn't be too long before I send something over. I don't think I have time to AI however.
If you have time to build, you have time to AI. AI'ing takes ~2 minutes.
808
« on: April 04, 2016, 04:36:10 PM »
- i cannot ai these bots so you will need to either ai the bot yourself or have a friend do it for you. ( i dont know how to do it because it intimidates me.)
The Golden Rules of the Tournament Section are simple. Stick to them and you’ll do fine.
1) Don’t start a tournament if you can’t host it or won’t have time to complete it.
2) If you don’t have a general idea, don’t start a tournament. Instead, make use of the General Tournament Discussion Thread, mull your ideas over with other forum members, develop them, and once you have your firm idea, then make your thread.
3) If you cannot AI, do not start a thread until you have found someone who is willing to AI for you. The best place to ask is the General Tournament Discussion Thread.
I would highly advise you not find someone to AI for you because, then, I find it difficult to judge whether or not you are entirely responsible for the success of the tournament but I would highly recommend you learn how to AI. I would help you over Discord at some point if you would prefer to learn that way but it is not the responsibility of the entrants to AI their entries.
809
« on: April 04, 2016, 03:31:05 PM »
Those deemed reputable (via coloured names) are the ones who decided who else is reputable. That sounds good to me. I think that allowing more people to use the rep system allows more opportunity for some people to abuse the system. For example, when deciding whether someone should be an AU or Vet, the mods can decide then and there whether or not that member is suited to have rep powers. If it's a matter of, you can rep anyone as long as you have a certain amount of rep, that means mods have to actively keep an eye out for those that can rep and, if they abuse the system, the mods must act on it after the fact, when they could have debated it or prevented it from happening if it were simply AU's and above only being able to rep.
810
« on: April 04, 2016, 02:11:23 PM »
Both sides have no strong argument because it's so insignificant. As goose said, it was implemented to reward helpful and nice members and help new members know who they can trust. All I can say is that it is doing it's job fairly well because, as I've said before, it's pretty much just a pat on the back for nice members. It doesn't matter what people have been doing with the rep system that matters, because those people that have previously abused the system can be dealt with. It also doesn't matter that there is room for more people to abuse the system because it's restricted to AU's and up. As long as newly appointed AU's and up are reviewed by moderators as to whether or not they may abuse the system, it'll be fine.
811
« on: April 04, 2016, 01:40:12 PM »
The whole point of this thread has seemed to point out outstanding problems with how the rep system is being executed, something which can be easily monitored and something which is being dealt with right now, as seen with Trov's clean up of the karma history. Every problem with the rep system that has been put forward I have either tried to refute or I believe it's a minor detail not worth worrying about. I know people have put forward problems with the system but they haven't convinced me enough to want the system to be abolished, too.
812
« on: April 04, 2016, 01:01:32 PM »
There's no reason to change or abolish the current rep system. There are no outstanding problems that I can see. However, perhaps more moderation of rep 'reasons' is needed but that isn't a tough or tasking job. I'd prove it by doing it myself, if I have to. I'll report all reps that do not have a sufficient reason and they'll be dealt with, simple as. Other than that, I cannot see anything wrong with rep.
813
« on: April 04, 2016, 12:23:01 PM »
Isn't that what 'Reason' is for?
814
« on: April 04, 2016, 10:19:34 AM »
Right, this is why rep was a thing, in the first place: Its just a system to reward good/helpful/nice members, and help new members know who the people they can trust are. I think the first point is enough to keep the system. Also, why isn't this a thing? (Obviously, the boundaries would have to be lowered because no one has anything near 150 rep.) right now only Admins can give out and remove reputation. However if you reach a "rep" level of 150, you will be able to give people positive rep. When you reach 300 you will be able to give both positive and negative.
815
« on: April 03, 2016, 11:48:23 PM »
You have a very valid point. The only reason Serge doesn't have as much rep as me or anyone else you'd think perhaps deserves it less is because those that hand out rep don't do it as an obligation and do it on a whim. I understand that the system is useless when you look at it like that but I don't see why people can't just see the system as something that just 'is' and is a part of the forum. I was not part of GTM prior to the introduction of reputation, so the rep system has always been there for me and I haven't really questioned it or looked too much into it until lately, it's just always been there. I never saw Serge and toAst as equals (even though Serge would have had more rep than toAst at the time, this is just an example) because of their equal rep. When I ever take notice of rep, I never usually compare it to someone else's and then make judgments and compare, I would make simple judgments on that one person and the rep they have. It also comes with context. I know how toAst is reputable as, whenever I would see him, it'd be him making a 'funny' post. I know how Serge is reputable as he's a Technical Adviser and I usually see him (when lurking past threads) posting about RA2 mods and the like.
Basically, the furthest someone would go into delving into someone's rep is, "is it positive or negative?" Not, "is it higher than that other builder/modder/member?" I know that doesn't excuse misrepresentation but I do think those that argue to remove the system only focus that it doesn't add anything. So, why complain? Why can't it be something GTM has? Something in GTM that just 'is'. We don't necessarily care or know why it's there in the first place but we don't mind living alongside it.
That being said, why was rep introduced? If we can ascertain why it was made in the first place, perhaps we can make things right in order to achieve the goal it set out for.
816
« on: April 03, 2016, 07:45:31 PM »
I think yugi had similar issues with a bot that uses axles which then lost a few parts and crashed the game later (which was ironically my bot, lol)
It was almost as consistent, haha. Like you, I didn't know what to blame it on, sometimes. I did end up getting 3 matches without having to invoke any havok DQ's, however, unlike this :P
817
« on: April 03, 2016, 05:30:10 PM »
I have had an incredibly bad past couple of days but that's no excuse for this being so late and I'm sorry for that :P I'm really tired right now, so much so that I forgot about the ballast rule for a bit and thought one robot was overweight. Anyway, here's the thing: Boby wins 2-1. Nice and quick games, gg, guys. Oh yeah, I took the BBEANS arena thing very literally, so I used the first one, not the V2 arena. Not that it would have mattered, tbf :P
818
« on: April 01, 2016, 03:55:30 PM »
Never heard of them and I don't want Garry's Wars having anything to do with them. You know our motto.
819
« on: April 01, 2016, 03:48:58 PM »
820
« on: April 01, 2016, 10:12:34 AM »
Rep in a nutshell:
It does matter, but only as far as a general indicator of good behavior/who should be trusted in the forums, also as a general way to communicate and say "thank you for what you did" or "no, you shouldn't do that" to someone else.
Fighting and causing drama over a few points of rep isn't worth it, however someone like Andrew having 15 rep is problematic. See my former point about it.
Rep is only as important as it's pragmatic uses are. Otherwise, it isn't. But yet, it should be kept because of those points I brought.
Simply, rep abuse should be fought, as in MNB's sucking Andrew's dick or massive rep circlejerks which are no longer common since not everyone can rep.
I agree with everything being said here.
Pages: 1 ... 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 ... 120
|
Show Posts