Why some don't want private server collecting points in BF2

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

I was reading on the net the growing opposition to Dices apparant decision
to NOT allow private servers to collect points and therefore build rank.

I want to weigh in and say I totally agree with this decision. My clan mates
don't agree with me and feel that as long as you have a server open to the
public then it should collect points toward their ranking system. The
problem is this.

In Americas Army the servers also collect points and build a sorta rank
system. My experience with that game has shown me that certain people will
essentially cheat the system by filling up all available slots and lets one
team win for hours on end so that they may collect points. I am here to tell
you and guarantee you that if Dice allows private servers to collect points,
you will see some people will the top rank within days of release of the
game. Not from playing other public players but by simply creating 2 or more
accounts and going to their private server multiple times and just letting
their 'real' account win over and over. IOW, cheating the system.

Please , think about it. I won't tell anyone how they should weight in on
this issue but hopefully my little rant gives you something to think about.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

In article <g1fZd.1373$qV1.640@fe57.usenetserver.com>, uioc@hotel6.com
says...
> I was reading on the net the growing opposition to Dices apparant decision
> to NOT allow private servers to collect points and therefore build rank.
>
> I want to weigh in and say I totally agree with this decision. My clan mates
> don't agree with me and feel that as long as you have a server open to the
> public then it should collect points toward their ranking system. The
> problem is this.
>
> In Americas Army the servers also collect points and build a sorta rank
> system. My experience with that game has shown me that certain people will
> essentially cheat the system by filling up all available slots and lets one
> team win for hours on end so that they may collect points. I am here to tell
> you and guarantee you that if Dice allows private servers to collect points,
> you will see some people will the top rank within days of release of the
> game. Not from playing other public players but by simply creating 2 or more
> accounts and going to their private server multiple times and just letting
> their 'real' account win over and over. IOW, cheating the system.
>
> Please , think about it. I won't tell anyone how they should weight in on
> this issue but hopefully my little rant gives you something to think about.
>
>
>
>


I too agree with this, HOWEVER. I don't think that they only way you
should be allowed access to additional weapons or being "commander"
should be based on points you accumulate through playing on EA-ONLY
servers.

If this is the case, and there's a way to "turn off" either commander-
mode or the extra weapons, our server will be turning both off.



/CF

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"CounterStrikeJunkie" <uioc@hotel6.com> wrote in message

> I won't tell anyone how they should weight in on this issue

Please do. I'm sure most of us are aware of the issue in what thet propose
for BF2. What we need is a practicle solution to wave in front of EA.

Sure we don't want our squad commanders to be some cheats, but also we don't
want to be playing on under-utilised clanservers because all the public (and
members!) are off playing on "official" status-gathering servers

I'm yet to be convinced that cheats are the real issue as there /must/ be
some workable solution, maybe there is a profit motive....

Lorian.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Lorian" <nospam@lorian.nod> wrote in message
news:1110806351.12077.0@nnrp-t71-01.news.uk.clara.net...
>
> "CounterStrikeJunkie" <uioc@hotel6.com> wrote in message
>
>> I won't tell anyone how they should weight in on this issue
>
> Please do. I'm sure most of us are aware of the issue in what thet propose
> for BF2. What we need is a practicle solution to wave in front of EA.
>
> Sure we don't want our squad commanders to be some cheats, but also we
> don't want to be playing on under-utilised clanservers because all the
> public (and members!) are off playing on "official" status-gathering
> servers
>
> I'm yet to be convinced that cheats are the real issue as there /must/ be
> some workable solution, maybe there is a profit motive....
>
> Lorian.
>
>

I wish I had a perfect solution. I happen to think that perhaps the official
server rules is best WITH the following. on private servers, the admin is
allowed to turn on and off cmd mode and 'special' weapons as they see fit
but that the points don't count.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"CounterStrikeJunkie" <uioc@hotel6.com> wrote in message
news:g1fZd.1373$qV1.640@fe57.usenetserver.com...
>I was reading on the net the growing opposition to Dices apparant decision
>to NOT allow private servers to collect points and therefore build rank.
>
> I want to weigh in and say I totally agree with this decision. My clan
> mates don't agree with me and feel that as long as you have a server open
> to the public then it should collect points toward their ranking system.
> The problem is this.
>
> In Americas Army the servers also collect points and build a sorta rank
> system. My experience with that game has shown me that certain people will
> essentially cheat the system by filling up all available slots and lets
> one team win for hours on end so that they may collect points. I am here
> to tell you and guarantee you that if Dice allows private servers to
> collect points, you will see some people will the top rank within days of
> release of the game. Not from playing other public players but by simply
> creating 2 or more accounts and going to their private server multiple
> times and just letting their 'real' account win over and over. IOW,
> cheating the system.
>
> Please , think about it. I won't tell anyone how they should weight in on
> this issue but hopefully my little rant gives you something to think
> about.

Or, they could do away with the ranking / points system. I've always felt
that it would be the first hack for BF2. Give credit where credit is due,
via medic, arty spotting, helo flying etc.. but the ranks are going to get
old VERY quick. I can just see it on eBay now.. "BF2 game and Key hash you
be in commannd."

I agree with Col Flagg.. People who pay hundreds of dollars to get a server,
set it up, maintain, admin and build a clan or players group around it,
should not get a penalty for doing so. EA/DICE should help those who have
made the whole BF community what it is.
To me the whole rank idea is dumb.. Ranks in a clan, fine, but having EA
decide is dumb.. I think in the long run it will be ignored. I mean HAVING
to play on a non admin'd EA server.. Why do they think there are so many
public / clan servers out there??

Some people can't play BF2 nonstop to get a high rank to get "special"
weapons.. If you pay $50.00 for a game, then it should be open to what you
want to do. If you want to have it build ranks, then put it online with a
subscription.. Plenty of people will do that.
I just think the ranking system will NOT help game / team play whatsoever.
Time will tell.

I'm just hoping that some group will be able to make a great mod with the
new engine..

 

[General]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"JR Hall" <jrhall@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:113c642kf9q3437@corp.supernews.com...
> Or, they could do away with the ranking / points system. I've always felt
> that it would be the first hack for BF2. Give credit where credit is due,
> via medic, arty spotting, helo flying etc.. but the ranks are going to get
> old VERY quick. I can just see it on eBay now.. "BF2 game and Key hash you
> be in commannd."
>
> I agree with Col Flagg.. People who pay hundreds of dollars to get a
> server, set it up, maintain, admin and build a clan or players group
> around it, should not get a penalty for doing so. EA/DICE should help
> those who have made the whole BF community what it is.
> To me the whole rank idea is dumb.. Ranks in a clan, fine, but having EA
> decide is dumb.. I think in the long run it will be ignored. I mean HAVING
> to play on a non admin'd EA server.. Why do they think there are so many
> public / clan servers out there??
>
> Some people can't play BF2 nonstop to get a high rank to get "special"
> weapons.. If you pay $50.00 for a game, then it should be open to what you
> want to do. If you want to have it build ranks, then put it online with a
> subscription.. Plenty of people will do that.
> I just think the ranking system will NOT help game / team play whatsoever.
> Time will tell.
>
> I'm just hoping that some group will be able to make a great mod with the
> new engine..
>
>
>

Can't argue with that. BUT if they are going to use a ranking system to
determine, at least make it fair for everyone.

Though I say too, get rid of the ranking system.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

assuming that dice release a linux version of the server of course....


"CounterStrikeJunkie" <uioc@hotel6.com> wrote in message
news:g1fZd.1373$qV1.640@fe57.usenetserver.com...
>I was reading on the net the growing opposition to Dices apparant decision
>to NOT allow private servers to collect points and therefore build rank.
>
> I want to weigh in and say I totally agree with this decision. My clan
> mates don't agree with me and feel that as long as you have a server open
> to the public then it should collect points toward their ranking system.
> The problem is this.
>
> In Americas Army the servers also collect points and build a sorta rank
> system. My experience with that game has shown me that certain people will
> essentially cheat the system by filling up all available slots and lets
> one team win for hours on end so that they may collect points. I am here
> to tell you and guarantee you that if Dice allows private servers to
> collect points, you will see some people will the top rank within days of
> release of the game. Not from playing other public players but by simply
> creating 2 or more accounts and going to their private server multiple
> times and just letting their 'real' account win over and over. IOW,
> cheating the system.
>
> Please , think about it. I won't tell anyone how they should weight in on
> this issue but hopefully my little rant gives you something to think
> about.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

In article <42363d5c$1@duster.adelaide.on.net>, nick17v@nowhere.hotmail
says...
>
> assuming that dice release a linux version of the server of course....
>
>
>



doesn't matter whether dice releases it or not, someone will port the
windows version for linux, it's not that hard to do.




/CF

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"CounterStrikeJunkie" <uioc@hotel6.com> wrote in message
news:g1fZd.1373$qV1.640@fe57.usenetserver.com...
>I was reading on the net the growing opposition to Dices apparant decision
>to NOT allow private servers to collect points and therefore build rank.
>
> I want to weigh in and say I totally agree with this decision. My clan
> mates don't agree with me and feel that as long as you have a server open
> to the public then it should collect points toward their ranking system.
> The problem is this.
>
> In Americas Army the servers also collect points and build a sorta rank
> system. My experience with that game has shown me that certain people will
> essentially cheat the system by filling up all available slots and lets
> one team win for hours on end so that they may collect points. I am here
> to tell you and guarantee you that if Dice allows private servers to
> collect points, you will see some people will the top rank within days of
> release of the game. Not from playing other public players but by simply
> creating 2 or more accounts and going to their private server multiple
> times and just letting their 'real' account win over and over. IOW,
> cheating the system.
>
> Please , think about it. I won't tell anyone how they should weight in on
> this issue but hopefully my little rant gives you something to think
> about.


My personal opinion for an alternative would be to allow server owners to
turn on the ranking system, but have the ranks built on that server apply
ONLY to THAT server and not the 'official' public servers. This would allow
everyone to be happy. The problem here is that most communities will lose a
LOT of players because they want to experience the full game, which they
won't be able to do on a private server. (Unless, of course, that server is
rented from EA)...

As for your point of people filling up slots and letting other teams win..
what, exactly, stops that from happening on an EA server? If you have
patience, you can pretty much load up an EA server with your own clan, and
then play however you like. As we all know, EA doesn't police their
servers, so who's going to stop that from happening anyway?

Open it up, make the rankings database local on private servers, and the
communities can survive.

-Basic-

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"Rexxx" <cbromley//@//cox.net> wrote in message
news:7lRZd.114130$FM3.58594@fed1read02...
> As for your point of people filling up slots and letting other teams win..
> what, exactly, stops that from happening on an EA server? If you have
> patience, you can pretty much load up an EA server with your own clan, and
> then play however you like. As we all know, EA doesn't police their
> servers, so who's going to stop that from happening anyway?
>
> Open it up, make the rankings database local on private servers, and the
> communities can survive.
>
> -Basic-
>
>
>

You make a good point. According to what I read in one of the Q&A sessions a
while back. the official servers are going to have admins on them. Not sure
if this will turn out to be the case of course, but if they aren't you are
right, there is no difference

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

Geez, doesn't anyone just play this game for fun?

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Visit the [FLOT] Spearhead Servers
14 slot modded stock maps: 66.55.134.103
18 slot Single Player map conversions: 64.237.43.196
www.flotserver.net

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

Colonel_Flagg <colonel_flagg@_NOSOUPFORJ00_internetwarzone.org> wrote in
news:MPG.1ca008eb1363e716989707@nntp.charter.net:

> doesn't matter whether dice releases it or not, someone will port the
> windows version for linux, it's not that hard to do.

With source code, sure. But I don't know of any game companies releasing
source code for their servers. I got the Tribes Vengeance server to work
with WINE, but only by tracing the system calls and faking out a weird one
that Irrational Games used at server startup. Work is underway to add
DirectX to WINE, but it's cleanroom development, so it's slow going. If
DICE decides to use a lot of DirectX in the server, then it will be awhile
before it will run under WINE.

(BTW, WINE is great for developing Windows software, as it makes it easy to
trace system calls, esp. ones that don't quite work as documented. WINE
emulates the MS weirdness, too.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.battlefield1942 (More info?)

"General" <general@hom.com> wrote in news:r62dna5VkdY9gqvfRVn-
uA@rogers.com:

> Can't argue with that. BUT if they are going to use a ranking system to
> determine, at least make it fair for everyone.

One way to do that is to decentralize the ranking system. Allow individuals
and servers to subscribe to user-operated "rank servers", which can develop
reputation with the community and can ban users who try to cheat the
system. When you want to have artificial rank (like when playing on your
clan server with your mates), you can run your own rank server the way you
want it.