Hate Speech

[Pinky]

I could not find this in the rules but now we must be "nice" in the game? May we call a player "noob"? Morong?

Curious.

TYIA

pinky

 

[IceSkater]

I think you mean this?

No rules broken. I think Lone is just riding on a cushion of smugness because I praised him. However, excessive use of noob etc does...hit home just as in the old times still.

I would...say even though it's in a gaming spirit...scum isn't a classy word to use.

 

[Pinky]

I have been playing with Nagi for 20 years. A gaming friend. It's nothing more than having fun with him/her in the game. That's it. I;ve said it before and now it's .... "hate speech" and "not nice"? lol ok. Enjoy.

 

[LoNe WoLf[Ger]]

Sorry that I got upset about it
But in these times

 

[IceSkater]

I'm telling you, he's a changed man! I like and appreciate this new Lone Wolf!

 

[Blueheeler]

Now a message from Mr perfect.Yeah nah just kidding I have no problem with those who I have a good in game relationship with calling me names as I know it's all in jest. Like when I killed Al gore and then he comes back with a BTR and kills me.and I said" that's cheating lol".Admin were on me faster than a fly on a fresh turd.Al knew why I said it and that it was said in Jest and admin accepted that. I don't get into anything with others if they don't start on me like calling me an "ABO" which is the same as Ni**er. We all mention at times about the use of RPGs in infantry mainly maps. YES you Nagi I have an Idea for myself and myself alone ... Ice. As this is really a single player game as no real team work is done and now days I prefer sniping so I'm of no use to a team,How about having admins communicate ONLY using the RM.That way I can "ignore all" ,and not get caught up with other peoples crap going on or won't know when I'm called names or insulted or asked time after time by an admin if I am playing or not when I have already replied, time after time that I am playing.That could only be done as a way of kicking me for not replying. EACH time and harassing me by said admin. So ICE let me know when I can play with any admin comments to me made Via yellow txt RM.If that's possible as a way to reduce saying banned words or comments or such now days.Oh and Grass Hopper if you read this I warned you if you shoot me to wound me in Team on Team I will just shoot you in return,Not my problem if you wound me and I kill you.I have warned you not to disrupt the game,but you go out of your way to be a ASShopper. See the pun there guys maybe that will need to be censored?

 

[IceSkater]

I'm not turning this into a long thread.

You can report. You know the deal. You find that prejudiced. Fine.

If you don't want to report people breaking our rules and it is NOT seen, nothing will be done. Your own cause of inaction. No one else to blame.

As for your request, fine. I'll make a special little adjustment just for you.

 

[Blueheeler]

I'm not turning this into a long thread.

You can report. You know the deal. You find that prejudiced. Fine.

If you don't want to report people breaking our rules and it is NOT seen, nothing will be done. Your own cause of inaction. No one else to blame.

As for your request, fine. I'll make a special little adjustment just for you.

I'm not turning this into a long thread.

You can report. You know the deal. You find that prejudiced. Fine.

If you don't want to report people breaking our rules and it is NOT seen, nothing will be done. Your own cause of inaction. No one else to blame.

As for your request, fine. I'll make a special little adjustment just for you.

I wasn't asking you to turn this into a long thread? I do like your passive aggression though Please tell me how I find reporting a player prejudiced?Thank you for making that little adjustment just for me! It used to be the rules that admin had to warn people via the RM so it came up as yellow txt that is hard to miss and not in game chat,but hey the rules change so fast a person like me can't keep up.So now im blaming others for my own inaction of reporting players that know the rules, while a certain admin is on and harassing me with "are you playing" time after time as witnessed by other players that told him I was, while I was telling him I was. As I said, I love your passive aggression.I must have upset you?

 

[Blueheeler]

I could not find this in the rules but now we must be "nice" in the game? May we call a player "noob"? Morong?

Curious.

TYIA

pinky

Pinky,you noob don't you know soon we will all be sitting around the BFV camp fire singing "Kumbaya my Lord"holding hands,and toasting marshmallows. rofl.

 

[Blueheeler]

I have been playing with Nagi for 20 years. A gaming friend. It's nothing more than having fun with him/her in the game. That's it. I;ve said it before and now it's .... "hate speech" and "not nice"? lol ok. Enjoy.

You can still play in my sand pit Pinky

 

[IceSkater]

Just to answer your little statement because you can read the forum still:
The rules didn't change so much as you're alluding to: you couldn't be bothered to read the three(3) amendments after it was explained many a time now by Heilig, myself and other admins. Even players.

1) No warnings are required. Been in place for a while now.
2)"Player" names are not a kickable offense (changed when you were an admin) we only "suggest" they change their default Player name.
3)And we amended the main rape rule to include ramming as well as provided CLEAR areas that are considered under the rule.

Golly gee, that's so many changes.

We will no longer tolerate your behaviour. Especially after you promised to be a good boy.

Behave in game, and you will be treated as everyone else. Deliberately go at it, and see what happens. Remember! You won't be warned! It's in our rules and guidelines!

Heilig may have done the honours already otherwise I'll apply it now. But you are banned from our forum for a week.

 

[HeiligWahrheit]

Just a little statement here:

We are not banning without any reason. Other opinions are appreciated. But then also our opinions must be respected. But this was not the reason for banning Blueheeler.

Since Blue was removed as an admin, he continued to troll the admins and espacially the leadership. He loves to push the limits - and he now reached the limits.

We of course don't expect, that people are thankful for what we are doing (providing and managing a server for BFV and other games). We just expect the same amount of respect everyone should get. But if someone decides to troll us for months, we'll show him the limits. Again: Blueheeler reached them now, we'll continue banning him here and in game if he decides to continue trolling us or if he is not able to express his opinion without trolling us.

And a final statement: There are always people, who think: "We are such a small community. When someone gets banned, we're even smaller". That's right. But I would rather provide a friendly atmosphere ingame and on our platforms with less players, instead of having many players with some trolling characters here.

 

[DiscoMagpie]

I don't know if this is the place for it, but can't we all just get along? I mean, I admit I lost my s**t over a game of Rising Storm 2: Vietnam where my team was trolling hard (and even ended up winning somehow which made me mad), but I've always played Battlefield Vietnam for fun, and I've always enjoyed the games we have together because I don't play to win or achieve something, I just do whatever I feel like doing in the game (within the rules of course).

I don't know how everyone sees the game, but to me it's special yet something casual, and unless there's people outright insulting others and being mean I can't really be bothered by anyone's behavior (I personally don't care much if there's main raping or taking main right at the start or other similar rule breaking related to the gameplay itself).

There's only 1 rule that bothers me (I abide by it but I completely understand why others wouldn't like it) and that is the kicking for inactivity one. Unless it's meant to keep the server less stressed (actual hardware), I see no other reason for that rule to exist. This isn't a game like RS2 where the server stays full for like 16 out of 24 hours and during those 16 hours there's almost constantly a line of people waiting to go in, so if someone's afk for like 2 minutes it's already a problem for everyone (a team is fighting with 1 less potential soldier, plus he's keeping others from joining in) and people do actively kick AFKers there.

If someone's AFK then let them be, I feel kicking someone just cause he had to get up to take a leak or something is kind of unnecessary. If it's for the reason I mentioned earlier, then I understand why that rule has to stay. But maybe we should be a bit more lenient with it?

 

[HeiligWahrheit]

I can understand the frustration about th AFK rule. But ,ou already said it: We don't have that many players playing. When someone is AFK on a server with 64 players, it has no consequences for the game. But when it's a 5vs5 game, and one player is AFK to make it a 5vs4 (or maybe two are AFK to make it 5vs3), it makes a huge difference to the game. That's the mean reason why the AFK rule is active.

 

[htn]

The problem with AFKs is the balance.

If you have a player AFK it blocks the place and a not AFK player joins the other team who normally would take the place of the AFK person.

That's why AFKs are asked to go to spectator mode when they leave.
If a round change happens during this time of course they automatically get's assigned to a team again.

If the player is still AFK it will be kicked by some time.

But it is just a kick, never a ban, also in repeated AFK cases. So no problem to join directly again, when the player is back.

Beside of just loading the map again I see no problems to make sure, the balances of the team are correct.

 

[IceSkater]

There's only 1 rule that bothers me (I abide by it but I completely understand why others wouldn't like it) and that is the kicking for inactivity one. Unless it's meant to keep the server less stressed (actual hardware), I see no other reason for that rule to exist. This isn't a game like RS2 where the server stays full for like 16 out of 24 hours and during those 16 hours there's almost constantly a line of people waiting to go in, so if someone's afk for like 2 minutes it's already a problem for everyone (a team is fighting with 1 less potential soldier, plus he's keeping others from joining in) and people do actively kick AFKers there.

If someone's AFK then let them be, I feel kicking someone just cause he had to get up to take a leak or something is kind of unnecessary. If it's for the reason I mentioned earlier, then I understand why that rule has to stay. But maybe we should be a bit more lenient with it?

I do hear you and this is also one argument that has been had quite a few times.

Please understand that we have a clear definition for being AFK as in the rules:

AFK​

If you need to step away from your PC for a few moments, we recommend that you got to spectator mode (bear in mind you will loose your score) until you return. If you are AFK and not in spectator mode, the following will happen;

1. The player will be asked if they are playing. This will be through yellow admin chat or in-game, both count as sufficient warning. Should they respond, nothing further will happen.
   
   
2. Should the player not respond after being given a sufficient amount of time, or should they still fall under any of the below conditions, the player will be kicked.

Conditions for being AFK:​

At least one of the following conditions need to be met for us to decide a player is AFK.

1. a) The player must have a score of 0 0 0, signifying they've made no game-play actions.

1. b) The player must have no kit beside their name, signifying they haven't spawned.

1. c) The player must have a greyed out name for at least a few minutes, signifying they've not joined.

Just showing you that we don't just kick . If a condition is met and the player doesn't respond then they go. If they have a score but have had a greyed out name (not spawned in) name for a reasonable amount of time, they'd be asked if they were playing as per the above.

It is also among the primary reasons why we have spectator mode enabled. Albeit certain people just like talking too much with that yellow text at times.

 

[x4|Al Gore]

If someone's AFK then let them be, I feel kicking someone just cause he had to get up to take a leak or something is kind of unnecessary. If it's for the reason I mentioned earlier, then I understand why that rule has to stay. But maybe we should be a bit more lenient with it?

Good point Disco, and just as several of my suggestions fell on deaf-ears, this was something similar to yours that I shared last year. Unfortunately, good ideas are implemented based on whom they come from https://forum.helloclan.eu/threads/10017/post-69373

 

[TKO_Flight447]

The AFK situation and how it is handled in game daily is very nuanced from perspective of the admins. To kick for AFK is typically not a lackadaisical decision. I can speak for myself and all the other admins that I've also seen deal with AFK's in a similar manner. Our goal is never to kick for the sake of kicking but rather because someone has either a) not played the entire round up to that point or b) has gone AFK for an extended period of time. Even when that happens, which almost always happen at least once in each round, the goal is not to kick. Even though I am playing the game and focused, along with other in game admins, I will still take note if someone appears to be AFK. If they are in fact AFK, but its not affecting the overall game, teams are otherwise balanced and they are not taking up a spot from another player to balance, I tend to leave it be. And its for the exact reason you have mentioned multiple times @x4|Al Gore ; it keeps the overall server population up and entices others to join.

The problem with AFK's is that when their absence DOES begin to cause an issue to the balance of the game, it happens almost immediately and many players begin complaining about balance of teams. The admins try to find the silver lining between not kicking vs kicking before their absence causes an issue. If the teams are 5 vs 5 but one player is AFK, and then a new players joins the other side, now its 6 vs 4 and depending on how the teams are stacked with certain players, it will kill the map quickly and end the game. Thats not fun for anybody. People often show their displeasure by further unbalancing teams by going into spec mode before there is a chance to even address the AFK(s). So, from the admin side, its a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation because some folks take it personally when they are kicked but chose not to go into spec mode. Unfortunately, we do not have the luxury of having 20+ players in game very often, where the effect of an AFK would be felt much less. Smaller player base in game with players going AFK/unbalancing is felt exponentially more than if we had a lot more players on.

 

[HeiligWahrheit]

Good point Disco, and just as several of my suggestions fell on deaf-ears, this was something similar to yours that I shared last year. Unfortunately, good ideas are implemented based on whom they come from https://forum.helloclan.eu/threads/10017/post-69373

You know that this is not true. Remember who had the idea for the auto-kick for inappropiate language? Because he wanted, that younger people are not confronted with this language? It was you. And we're still having the auto-admin active, since you suggested it (2 years ago?).

Just because not all of your ideas were implemented, doesn't mean we igonore your ideas.

 

[x4|Al Gore]

You know that this is not true. Remember who had the idea for the auto-kick for inappropiate language? Because he wanted, that younger people are not confronted with this language? It was you. And we're still having the auto-admin active, since you suggested it (2 years ago?).

Just because not all of your ideas were implemented, doesn't mean we igonore your ideas.

Good point Heilig. There were other suggestions from me that also made it through (by other means) such as players getting to play all maps. Before that, the static map order prevented players to get to a few maps at the bottom of the static map order for months. The removal of mapvote which was being misused. Running mod events on the regular server which was first ignored but then recognized and accepted.

My suggestion for a phone app that would send alerts about online players we thankfully developed by you and HTN.

Silvia's suggestion of adding jeeps in La Drang was also a great move. It helped balance the teams. Before that, the Red team suffered heavily, and some Red team's players left mid map.

I am glad that these suggestions from players made it through.

I do remain a bit disappointed that my suggestion for a rule for admins not to kick AFK players when an AFK player does not effect team balance, or the game, didn't go through. My suggestion was because I had noticed (at that time and occasionaly even now) that some trial admins become trigger happy kick AFK players unnecessarily just because they have the power to do so.

We would be naive to think that ALL admins have landed from heaven and would never misuse the power they have been entrusted with. I am sure you and other senior admins remember that not all new and old admins are made of responsible, ethical, and good moral character. We have seen trial and full-time admins removed due to misconduct, behavioral issues, cheating/hacking, etc. Heck, even a clan leader admin had to be removed. I have even seen an admin using game hacks. Of course we cannot prove it and he knows this.

Simply "discussing" with admins about how and when to kick AFK players was a temporary band-aid solution because that "discussion" didn't happen with future/current admins.

An updated guideline is needed for admins conduct especially for kicking AFK players, taking votes to manually change maps, not being a spoiled-sport by constantly complaining about certain maps that the individual admin doesn't like, not spamming game chat by constantly asking all players to vote to change map even after most players have already decided not to change the current map, not isolating or questioning or singling out one particular player constantly, absolutely prohibit admins to use game-hacks, and be advised to watch a few YouTube videos about how to be responsible, how to be neutral, and how to be ethical. Such published guidelines give players a channel to complain to senior admins, and reprimand admins who misuse or not use their responsibility. If such a code of conduct was published and implemented for admins, we may not have seen the fiasco of some admins removed in recent years.

Thanks for your time.