Spring RTS Engine

[14:51:00] Login failed: You are banned from this server! (Reason: persistent ally dgunning (unban after day or so)). Please contact server administrator.


I dgunned only one guy because he took my start position. Then technikker kept following me throughout every game i tried to play saying i was teamkiller. Then i kept getting kicked. Then he told the mods to banned me and they obeyed him. He doesn't even have proof that i dgunned more than one person and i can't beleive mods will just ban people when somebody asks them to.

plz unban me or ill be reduced to playing hitman for 2 days (boring!)

lols i remember doing that to DroneFragger once and how he kept getting kicked from games for shouting "OMG HES A TEAMKILER" to hosts & being made fun of in #main
Spring community has really falln donwwards since then:/

word to the wise, enough people are fed up with the clowning around idiocy on the game... don't go being a raving, teamkilling, lunatic.

if he has a replay of it, and it was out of "just to do it" or, "I want to piss him off over something trivial, or whatever..." you deserved it.

thats all I can say.

if he chased you around calling you a teamkiller, that was childish of him.

I suppose I'd have to see the severity of the issue.

My heart truly bleeds for you, mass famine in Africa is truly a mere inconvenience compared to this outrageous travesty.



...but I thought mods didn't ban from the lobby based on in-game stuff?

Banning because of that is just stupid. I guess some mods must be really bored or something.

if you dgun an ally you ruin the game for everyone involved and therefore deserve to die alone soz

1v0ry_k1ng wrote:if you dgun an ally you ruin the game for everyone involved and therefore deserve to die alone soz

Idunno, I could see doing it in the first 5 seconds of a game, when spawn points are borked. However, once players have invested the time into the game, it's pure griefing.

more to the point which moderator banned him?

As I udnerstand it moderators have to post in a mdoerator only forum where their proposal is then weighed up and action is taken if nobody objects.

Ontop of that he should have had warning or notification, and a chance to give his side of the story.

Hul, which moderator banned you?

BTW use this to upload the replay easily:
http://replays.unknown-files.net/upload.php
Then we can shout on mods for being such nubtards ^_^

ok thx for unabnning me now

I'm pretty sure its been moderator policy not to police anything that happens in-game.

I wonder which mod it was :O

Andrej wrote:lols i remember doing that to DroneFragger once and how he kept getting kicked from games for shouting "OMG HES A TEAMKILER" to hosts & being made fun of in #main
Spring community has really falln donwwards since then:/

things can only be better without dronefragger

To a very limited degree we do police in game actions. Intentional ruining of games is considered harassment and depending on the severity and frequency can result in a ban. If lobby had the ability for users to set up and control their own intelligent ban lists we'd drop in game policing entirely and leave it up to game hosts. It's acctually a huge hassle to take reports when they require us to open and view a demo.

[edit] TO THE MODERATOR THAT ISSUED THIS BAN: You didn't leave a ban report in moderation forum. DO NOT ban users without reporting. It massively increases the chance of screwup and massive lose.

The bot servers all have player ban features already. If you're actually present and hosting and don't want another player in your game, then force spec him or wait until the game is full and kick him.

So you're dropping your game policing entirely now? =)

Also, I'd like to note that an inordinate number of hosts rage quit on me after I blow up their bases. I feel that this is a game-ruining act, and should be at least as policeable as D-gunning as a mere player.

Seriously, ingame modding is just dumb. ~~

I have admin on 90% of the bot servers due to springie regarding any spring operator as a privileged user. So ya, I still police those, to a very limited degree, due to that fact that I'm kind of expected to.

Ingame modding isn't "dumb" it's dumb that ingame modding has to be done by global moderators, when a game room should be the responsibility of the host that created it. Ingame modding always has been and always will be necessary in gaming, we can try whatever we want but we won't be able to change that Tired.

I doubt that spring moderators will ever drop in game modding completely, most of us host our own games, and are fairly affluent so we get added to bot admin lists anyways. However, once host specific modding features are in place by default I won't be taking replay submissions of "bad players" that I the host wants banned from the server any more. It will be considered a host's responsibility to moderate their games however they please.

I fully expect many hosts will develop internal global banlists between multiple friendly hosters and what not to deal with the problem players themselfs when we no longer are assuming responsibility for dealing with those issues.

If ban abilities for hosts are coming, might as well try to make a ban mean something other than "hey i maek new username bb in 2min".

IP based banning is better but still easily worked around.

Maybe TASClient could create a unique computer ID that is attached to all usernames created on that computer? Easiest way to do that would be to use the MAC address (unique hex value identifying a computer) or some derivative thereof. I'm not up to date on network security, though - does broadcasting your MAC address introduce major security vulnerabilities? If the CPU serial number is available to TASClient maybe it would be better to use that.

One of the reasons i enjoy spring is that the community is relatively mature and small enough that you can get to know a lot of the people in it.

Given that the host can .cheat at any time, that com-bombing and d-gunning can totally ruin the game for the other players, and all the other dozens of cheap, dirty little exploits (mods-in-maps to change the game is one) in an open source game like this, there is very little griefing.

Most team-killiers like Hul simply dont realise that the appropriate way to deal with such a situation is to request a re, not to just d-gun a teammate over a start position dispute. They arent out to ruin the game.

As many problems and dramas we may have with the community, its hundreds of times better than any retail game ive played online. I dont think we need to get into IP bans and heavy handed moderation. We do already have !smurfs though, so its obviously possible.

Yeah, about the ban thing - its an FOSS game. Anything that is enfroced client side, is changeable with a minimal amount of effort.

Besides, ban-dodging is useful. B)

Saktoth wrote:As many problems and dramas we may have with the community, its hundreds of times better than any retail game ive played online.

Quoted for truth and relevance to the greater good.

Felix the Cat wrote:If ban abilities for hosts are coming, might as well try to make a ban mean something other than "hey i maek new username bb in 2min".

IP based banning is better but still easily worked around.

Maybe TASClient could create a unique computer ID that is attached to all usernames created on that computer? Easiest way to do that would be to use the MAC address (unique hex value identifying a computer) or some derivative thereof. I'm not up to date on network security, though - does broadcasting your MAC address introduce major security vulnerabilities? If the CPU serial number is available to TASClient maybe it would be better to use that.

Felix, I agree in total, and have been harking on this issue for ever already. Everyone who is currently designing a spring lobby server replacement has gotten a lecture from me on this subject at least once. The current spring lobby will likely not change in this respect, because while betalord knows of the issues, I'm fairly sure he doesn't have time for a massive rewrite. Small features in functionality have been put off for more than a good year now since they were first discussed.