yes cause IM SOOO insecure.. and butthurt over the fact that no one plays my mod..
BOOHOO..
point in case here is.. basically scratch is like well in order to succeed we need to make graphical improvements to springs interface and games, as well as simplify the installation process..
NO WAI! RLY...
Ive had enough of people making obvious suggestions, and im sure the devs are too.. for them its basically equivalent of people walking up to someone whos on fire, and going HEY your on fire, you should do something about that.. then standing around waiting to see what the guy will do. After the nth time this happens its just eh irritating.
WE all know what needs to be done, its just that 95% of this community lacks the capability of doing anything about it, and the 5% who can are too busy trying to address numerous other issues that are also just as critical.. and or dealing with RL..
TA Derivative Balancing Theory Discussion
Moderator: Moderators
Fang complaining about Sleksa saying "i was nanoshielding on brazillian when you were sucking your mother's mammaries." is incredibly pathetic if he really takes it seriously or even worse takes it seriously ironically.smoth wrote:Looks like I have not missed much. I sure hope you enjoy the shithole this place will become with that attitude.LordMatt wrote: sleksa's mission on the forums is to poke fun at insecure people.
Last edited by tombom on 12 Nov 2007, 19:43, edited 1 time in total.
BA loadscreens = the worst of BA.
Seriously, 2 juggernauts? Thats BA? That lttle square of DT's in the corner of DSD with the bombers flying over? Thats BA?
They are an excellent showcase of how not to play BA.
As for OTA vets vs spring players, of course they're going to be better. A spring player with a few months experience just isnt going to be as good as 10 year OTA vet.
Seriously, 2 juggernauts? Thats BA? That lttle square of DT's in the corner of DSD with the bombers flying over? Thats BA?
They are an excellent showcase of how not to play BA.
As for OTA vets vs spring players, of course they're going to be better. A spring player with a few months experience just isnt going to be as good as 10 year OTA vet.
Haven't read the whole thread 
, but on the original topic:
Most people prefer to copy a working model than reinvent the wheel. Look at the number of open-source projects that try to do a free clone of an existing commercial app. Hence the number of TA-based mods. Also TA is a legendary game, so anything based on it is attractive.
About balancing: personally I was never a great competitive TA player, even though I did play it quite a bit, I don't like playing always under pressure, and I don't like restricting myself to building the most effective units. What amazed me about TA initially was the large number of cool units, with their robotic feeling, as well as the music. I like building an army that looks more or less like a balanced modern army, with mixed forces. Doing otherwise breaks the immersion for me. When I finished the single player campaign I moved on mostly to playing with my friends in teams against the AI. This is just to show that someone can enjoy TA without playing competitive, and I know many people, both online and in the real world, who have similar preferences.
Smoth said that ultra-competitive players who look to maximise everything they can and find exploits kind of ruin the game, and I have to agree with him at least in part. Look at Supreme Commander: Chris Taylor came up with a wonderful stategic vision of giant experimental units smashing through bases, and instead of playing the game with the same vision, hardcore multiplayer gamers preferred to spam lvl 1 units and exploit transports for commbombing. If they like to play like that, fine. But they shouldn't look down on people who think differently. And they should stop complaining from time to time (if only) to catch their breath, as well.
, but on the original topic:Most people prefer to copy a working model than reinvent the wheel. Look at the number of open-source projects that try to do a free clone of an existing commercial app. Hence the number of TA-based mods. Also TA is a legendary game, so anything based on it is attractive.
About balancing: personally I was never a great competitive TA player, even though I did play it quite a bit, I don't like playing always under pressure, and I don't like restricting myself to building the most effective units. What amazed me about TA initially was the large number of cool units, with their robotic feeling, as well as the music. I like building an army that looks more or less like a balanced modern army, with mixed forces. Doing otherwise breaks the immersion for me. When I finished the single player campaign I moved on mostly to playing with my friends in teams against the AI. This is just to show that someone can enjoy TA without playing competitive, and I know many people, both online and in the real world, who have similar preferences.
Smoth said that ultra-competitive players who look to maximise everything they can and find exploits kind of ruin the game, and I have to agree with him at least in part. Look at Supreme Commander: Chris Taylor came up with a wonderful stategic vision of giant experimental units smashing through bases, and instead of playing the game with the same vision, hardcore multiplayer gamers preferred to spam lvl 1 units and exploit transports for commbombing. If they like to play like that, fine. But they shouldn't look down on people who think differently. And they should stop complaining from time to time (if only) to catch their breath, as well.
Insecure people can choose not to get riled up over stupid stuff. I really wish people would focus on what they can do to improve the situation, rather than what they think others are doing wrong.smoth wrote:Looks like I have not missed much. I sure hope you enjoy the shithole this place will become with that attitude.LordMatt wrote: sleksa's mission on the forums is to poke fun at insecure people.
A common conclusion of people is that they can help others by pointing out potential flaws and mistakes in other peoples projects with the intention that in the long run the corrections lead to improvements for all.Insecure people can choose not to get riled up over stupid stuff. I really wish people would focus on what they can do to improve the situation, rather than what they think others are doing wrong.
Rather, it is the assumption by the people running these projects, that these are attacks and unfair criticisms that causes trouble. The mistake of reading the wrong intentions in another persons actions can portray insecurity.
Most people in this world are extremely insecure about something. Usually themselves and their work. Simply stating it as irrelevant and asking people to 'grow up', 'thicken their skins', or 'stop taking things so seriously', usually makes things much, much worse.
If you woke up to find your next door neighbour squatting over your face midway through a cr*p, would you choose to be or not be riled up? Or would your emotions take control? Perhaps there's a conscious trail of thought debating wether to express disgust?
Nothing even close to that extreme is possible on an internet forum. The fact is that some people here seem to get along with everyone, and some people cause seem to get in all the fights. Of these there are two kinds, the kind that is insecure, and the kind that exploits that insecurity. All the insecure people whine and complain about the trolls, rather than making an effort not to feed them.AF wrote:If you woke up to find your next door neighbour squatting over your face midway through a cr*p, would you choose to be or not be riled up? Or would your emotions take control? Perhaps there's a conscious trail of thought debating wether to express disgust?
Yes lordmatt, I am an insecure person because after months of it I finally say something. Cute logic you have there. Yeah, it is easy to ignore initial trolling but half of the people you are protecting know that I will eventually snap at them and it is inevitable.
there is an expression that goes like...
that to rub the face of buddha three times and it will lose all it's luster..
that is not right but basically all things have their limit. I have been around a long time. Yeah, I am easier to troll because I have stuck around. I will get trolled in spurts when they feel up to it for a time. I will be harassed for their lulz or whatever. Of course I am the problem because I do not posses infinite patience and because I am not always everyone's friend. Yet the trolls who you hear so little from are not subject to caring about the community, the people they bother or what their effect is because they will troll until they have had their fill then go into remission like a bad cold.
you as a moderator blame the victim. It is like saying a girl was asking to be raped because she wore provocative clothes. It is backwards logic and probably stems from the fact that when a troll misbehaves it is myself or someone else that bother you in an attempt to quell it. So I am your pest because I request that you do your job? I had enough of this place once before and I left in very loud rage. I was then told that I should have instead of taking it on myself contact the moderator.
Now you say that I should just take it and that I am at fault for inevitably being forced to ask for moderator assistance. Well you can go sit and spin, I was told that is the correct method of handling these things! I am doing what I was asked to do. If fighting the trolls is too much, step down, let someone else more able step up.
there is an expression that goes like...
that to rub the face of buddha three times and it will lose all it's luster..
that is not right but basically all things have their limit. I have been around a long time. Yeah, I am easier to troll because I have stuck around. I will get trolled in spurts when they feel up to it for a time. I will be harassed for their lulz or whatever. Of course I am the problem because I do not posses infinite patience and because I am not always everyone's friend. Yet the trolls who you hear so little from are not subject to caring about the community, the people they bother or what their effect is because they will troll until they have had their fill then go into remission like a bad cold.
you as a moderator blame the victim. It is like saying a girl was asking to be raped because she wore provocative clothes. It is backwards logic and probably stems from the fact that when a troll misbehaves it is myself or someone else that bother you in an attempt to quell it. So I am your pest because I request that you do your job? I had enough of this place once before and I left in very loud rage. I was then told that I should have instead of taking it on myself contact the moderator.
Now you say that I should just take it and that I am at fault for inevitably being forced to ask for moderator assistance. Well you can go sit and spin, I was told that is the correct method of handling these things! I am doing what I was asked to do. If fighting the trolls is too much, step down, let someone else more able step up.
Last edited by smoth on 13 Nov 2007, 04:47, edited 1 time in total.
Aside from the obviousness of its extremity, in order to serve as an example and not a literal case of common occurence. That's a rather general sweeping statement, and it applies both ways.
There is the secure person who doesn't care that they're feeding the trolls and complains about moderation, not because they're victimized or flamed, but because they do it out of principle. The knight in shining armour, or the activist who stands up for others? Or perhaps someone who has a general objection based on something other than how it affects them personally.
There is also the troll who attacks because they're insecure about their reputation on the forums and fear what could happen with no retaliation or offence.
Then there are the insecure victim who does not complain for fear of appearing weak.
What about the insecure poster who condescendingly attempts to exert control over the discussion by dismissing arguments and attacking the psychological points in order to exert their own maturity securing their superior motives?
Nothing is ever so simple, and to plainly dismiss people in this way, tends to fuel problems rather than resolve them.
There is the secure person who doesn't care that they're feeding the trolls and complains about moderation, not because they're victimized or flamed, but because they do it out of principle. The knight in shining armour, or the activist who stands up for others? Or perhaps someone who has a general objection based on something other than how it affects them personally.
There is also the troll who attacks because they're insecure about their reputation on the forums and fear what could happen with no retaliation or offence.
Then there are the insecure victim who does not complain for fear of appearing weak.
What about the insecure poster who condescendingly attempts to exert control over the discussion by dismissing arguments and attacking the psychological points in order to exert their own maturity securing their superior motives?
Nothing is ever so simple, and to plainly dismiss people in this way, tends to fuel problems rather than resolve them.
offtopic but
lordmatt just cos u find it funny wen these people (who shall not be named) flame or troll.. Its off putting wen one of these people flames a new person or starts trolling on new people or threads it makes the community look like asshats (but in truth there are alot of asshats)
and then they barely get moderated for there asshattery cos there friends with the mods.. and all in all it puts people off the forum. Forum Community and Spring Community are two different entity's it seems (altho some trolls visit both) and if the forum wasnt so hostile discussions would be easier. Being part of many forums in the past Spring's atm is the most hostile of all.
On topic
good players need to work with devs together to work on balance
lordmatt just cos u find it funny wen these people (who shall not be named) flame or troll.. Its off putting wen one of these people flames a new person or starts trolling on new people or threads it makes the community look like asshats (but in truth there are alot of asshats)
and then they barely get moderated for there asshattery cos there friends with the mods.. and all in all it puts people off the forum. Forum Community and Spring Community are two different entity's it seems (altho some trolls visit both) and if the forum wasnt so hostile discussions would be easier. Being part of many forums in the past Spring's atm is the most hostile of all.
On topic
good players need to work with devs together to work on balance
It is good to point out problems if it's done politely. I don't understand why you seem to be implying it's not.A common conclusion of people is that they can help others by pointing out potential flaws and mistakes in other peoples projects with the intention that in the long run the corrections lead to improvements for all.
I was not implying that. Read the text immediatly after it, which talks about people who make the assumption you just made.
There's nothing wrong with constructive criticism. Its the misinterpretation of that criticism as an unfair criticism or a direct or indirect attack by the recipient thats wrong.
There's nothing wrong with constructive criticism. Its the misinterpretation of that criticism as an unfair criticism or a direct or indirect attack by the recipient thats wrong.
-
Pressure Line
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09
to be fair, a lot of the time on here it is thinly veiled flaming, but veiled enough that people can go "i wasnt trying to be rude, its all a big misunderstanding" and thus the trollee looks like a moron, or an emotional crybaby.AF wrote:Its the misinterpretation of that criticism as an unfair criticism or a direct or indirect attack by the recipient thats wrong.
assuming that trollers/flamers are stupid is a bad idea.
There are people who have been around for a long time and are not trolled. What about them is different?smoth wrote: that is not right but basically all things have their limit. I have been around a long time. Yeah, I am easier to troll because I have stuck around.
Except that this analogy fails on an internet forum, where you entirely control how you come across, and therefore whether you are a victim of trolling or not. I'm not interested in protecting people's "right" to bait trolls but then not be trolled.smoth wrote: you as a moderator blame the victim. It is like saying a girl was asking to be raped because she wore provocative clothes.
I am much more interested in helping people who are blameless in the trolling. When I see someone doing something that will lead to trolling, because of the way they are coming across (e.g. earlier business in this thread), I point that out. If a person is going to insist on feeding the trolls, they must really want to be trolled, no matter what they say publically, and so who am I to get in the way?smoth wrote: If fighting the trolls is too much, step down, let someone else more able step up.
That's a good one that I left out.AF wrote: There is also the troll who attacks because they're insecure about their reputation on the forums
Who's that?AF wrote: What about the insecure poster who condescendingly attempts to exert control over the discussion by dismissing arguments and attacking the psychological points in order to exert their own maturity securing their superior motives?
It's not just insecurity, but a lack of insight into how others actually perceive their actions that makes these trollees so unable to change. They narcissistically assume that they are the center of the universe and that the way the act on the forums is the right way to act, even though most of those around them do not act that way and do not get trolled. They think: "THOSE WHO WOULD SUGGEST OTHERWISE ARE JUST MOAR TROLLS I MUST BE RIGHT BECAUSE I AM ALWAYS RIGHT." They were probably the kid everyone picked on in school too, and somehow, some way, they find themselves in the exact same position on an internet forum, but this time they can't blame any external factors (e.g. appearance, race, etc.).