1
General / Re: I miss you all
« on: May 02, 2024, 07:19:55 PM »
Stop making me feel old.
Show Posts
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.
2
I think I still have most lunixmonsterians in my steam friends group. I should hop on the NS2 server some time. I played an unhealthy amount of NS1 back in the day, but only played NS2 for maybe half an hour (it was not very playable when I tried it months and months ago).
EDIT: Wow, my account on here is almost a decade old.
EDIT: Wow, my account on here is almost a decade old.
4
Off Topic / TALK ABOUT POST A PIC!
« on: January 23, 2006, 01:18:23 AM »Quote
huh, thats a rareish thing to see...
a woman whos one of first four posts includes a pic.
welcome to the forums, it can be dicey, but its all good.[snapback]54807[/snapback]
Yeah, things can be tough for temm
5
Off Topic / Frohe Geburtstag
« on: January 23, 2006, 01:10:52 AM »
Achtung leiber! Ver ist eine pai? Los, los, das pai! Schnell!
7
General / If you play on our TFC server post here!
« on: January 05, 2006, 03:24:06 PM »
I was on yesterday. HD and Dubb were on, along with two or three other people who came and went. I think we had a 3v3 at peak, and usually a 2v2 or 3v2
8
General / If you play on our TFC server post here!
« on: January 04, 2006, 01:57:52 PM »
I tried to get on last night, but nobody wanted to join me.
9
Off Topic / A plugin that makes FireFox
« on: January 03, 2006, 09:43:01 PM »
Turning on FasterFox's prefetching made Firefox lock up. Not cool.
Turning it off helped.
Turning it off helped.
10
General / So who's left?
« on: January 03, 2006, 09:40:36 PM »
I still check the forums every so often, just to see if it is still dead. Because for many of the previous times that I'd checked it, there were no new posts, so my checks became less and less frequent. I've been on IRC mostly.
Glad to see things are starting to become a little bit undead. In a good way, like the graaaains type of way rather than the braaaaains type.
Glad to see things are starting to become a little bit undead. In a good way, like the graaaains type of way rather than the braaaaains type.
11
General / Why the SourceForts server quite honestly sucks
« on: August 28, 2005, 11:39:51 PM »
I was over on Free SunnyD today, and was horrified to see that it was so badly set up that it was virtually unplayable.
First of all, gravity was WAY too high, making it virtually impossible to navigate even slightly rough terrain. Some of the maps have bumpy terrain, and what were normally little bumps to jump over became insurpassable obstacles! This is, quite honestly, stupid. Set the gravity back to normal!
The second problem is in the server's network setup. The sv_maxrate seems to be way too low, as I was getting mad choke at anything over cl_updaterate 20. Even setting it down to 20 wasn't enough; while this eliminated most of the choke (Was still seeing 20% choke even at cl_updaterate 20), the server was still laggy as hell.
To be honest, trying to play on the server was so frustrating due to the incredible lag and rediculous gravity, that I will not be playing on Free SunnyD until it is resolved. Until then, regular Lunixmonster NS and non-broken SourceForts servers for me
First of all, gravity was WAY too high, making it virtually impossible to navigate even slightly rough terrain. Some of the maps have bumpy terrain, and what were normally little bumps to jump over became insurpassable obstacles! This is, quite honestly, stupid. Set the gravity back to normal!
The second problem is in the server's network setup. The sv_maxrate seems to be way too low, as I was getting mad choke at anything over cl_updaterate 20. Even setting it down to 20 wasn't enough; while this eliminated most of the choke (Was still seeing 20% choke even at cl_updaterate 20), the server was still laggy as hell.
To be honest, trying to play on the server was so frustrating due to the incredible lag and rediculous gravity, that I will not be playing on Free SunnyD until it is resolved. Until then, regular Lunixmonster NS and non-broken SourceForts servers for me
12
General / So What's up with everyone
« on: July 12, 2005, 09:40:28 PM »Quote
I think some (most?) of you know I'm pregnant.
Quote
Well, that and waiting for this child to be born...Could it be...
13
General / New server mods! yay!
« on: July 04, 2005, 10:58:06 PM »
Unfortunately it's the only way to do it. The moment you start relying on admins to decide if a eject vote was warranted you're going to get a slew of UNwarranted kicks and bans.
14
General / Voting The Comm Out
« on: July 04, 2005, 01:22:03 PM »
I must lodge my objection to this. I think it's a Bad Idea™.
A better solution is to LOG the player who starts an eject on the SERVER, but not print it out loud on the server.
This way the admins can take action if needed, because they have the info, but players in the server can't take retribution against what a player thought was a legitimate eject vote.
A better solution is to LOG the player who starts an eject on the SERVER, but not print it out loud on the server.
This way the admins can take action if needed, because they have the info, but players in the server can't take retribution against what a player thought was a legitimate eject vote.
15
General / New server mods! yay!
« on: July 04, 2005, 01:19:03 PM »
The admins better make it clear then that a commander is not permitted to "punish" a player for starting a vote. It goes both ways.
In addition, the definition of a "llama" eject should not be if the admin thinks it is deserved, but if the player can explain. If the player says "I feel that the commander was wasting resources on such and such", even if the admin does not agree no action should be taken against the player. On the other hand if the player says "He was a ****tard" or "He's a noob" or some such thing, by all means.
Does this mean that players can make llama bans and then try to justify them with intelligent reasons? Yes. However we don't need players getting kicked/banned for starting an eject they really do think is needed.
In addition, the definition of a "llama" eject should not be if the admin thinks it is deserved, but if the player can explain. If the player says "I feel that the commander was wasting resources on such and such", even if the admin does not agree no action should be taken against the player. On the other hand if the player says "He was a ****tard" or "He's a noob" or some such thing, by all means.
Does this mean that players can make llama bans and then try to justify them with intelligent reasons? Yes. However we don't need players getting kicked/banned for starting an eject they really do think is needed.
16
General / New server mods! yay!
« on: July 03, 2005, 06:41:03 PM »
Who cares if people start joke ejects? Ignore them, if it's a joke eject nobody will vote for it and it will fail.
Perhaps we should also make public who voted for who in elections. Because then people would vote less for the stupid candidates.
Yeah, that makes great sense.
Perhaps we should also make public who voted for who in elections. Because then people would vote less for the stupid candidates.
Yeah, that makes great sense.
17
General / Whats going on?
« on: July 02, 2005, 03:11:34 PM »Quote
NS and HL in general are dying.[snapback]51312[/snapback]
BS. There are as many people playing NS now as what, a year ago?
18
General / New server mods! yay!
« on: July 02, 2005, 03:03:21 PM »
I like the new mod, for the most part. One thing, however strikes me as EXTREMELY bad:
- Notification of who's starting the eject vote
That is NOT a good change. There are reasons why voting is anonymous. It is meant so that people are not too scared about reprisals to vote for a comm eject.
If a comm eject succeeds, good, it doesn't matter who started it. It doesn't matter because for the eject to succeed most of the marine team obviously wants a new comm, so who voted is irrelevant.
If a comm eject fails, it STILL doesn't matter who started it, because it had no effect; nothing happened.
The reason we NEED comm votes to stay anonmyous is primarily in case the vote DOES fail. Imagine this scenario:
Player A is not pleased with the commander, who is generally wasting lots of res on useless things and ignoring the requests of his team. He starts a comm eject vote. Unfortunately, only 4 of 8 players vote to eject, failing to meet the "50% plus one" criteria. But the commander now knows that Player A tried to get him ejected. The commander now decides to try to be mean to Player A, denying him of all weapons, medpacks, items, etc. He also tries to undermine him by giving him useless orders.
This is the situation we want to avoid. People should not be afraid to start a comm eject vote!!
- Notification of who's starting the eject vote
That is NOT a good change. There are reasons why voting is anonymous. It is meant so that people are not too scared about reprisals to vote for a comm eject.
If a comm eject succeeds, good, it doesn't matter who started it. It doesn't matter because for the eject to succeed most of the marine team obviously wants a new comm, so who voted is irrelevant.
If a comm eject fails, it STILL doesn't matter who started it, because it had no effect; nothing happened.
The reason we NEED comm votes to stay anonmyous is primarily in case the vote DOES fail. Imagine this scenario:
Player A is not pleased with the commander, who is generally wasting lots of res on useless things and ignoring the requests of his team. He starts a comm eject vote. Unfortunately, only 4 of 8 players vote to eject, failing to meet the "50% plus one" criteria. But the commander now knows that Player A tried to get him ejected. The commander now decides to try to be mean to Player A, denying him of all weapons, medpacks, items, etc. He also tries to undermine him by giving him useless orders.
This is the situation we want to avoid. People should not be afraid to start a comm eject vote!!
19
General / What to do if you think someone is cheating
« on: June 13, 2005, 01:05:26 PM »
devnull's instructions are fine for the longterm, but simply don't make sense for immediate action.
If there is an aimbotter on the server, or some other major hack, he's ruining the game and we want him off the server NOW, not in a few days. Just like if there was a TKer running about killing every teammate in site, we would immediately do an admin highlight and get him dealt with. This is no different.
If there is an aimbotter on the server, or some other major hack, he's ruining the game and we want him off the server NOW, not in a few days. Just like if there was a TKer running about killing every teammate in site, we would immediately do an admin highlight and get him dealt with. This is no different.
20
Off Topic / Is it me or is gamesurge dead?
« on: June 01, 2005, 06:41:55 PM »
LM's host, ServerMatrix/ThePlanet, revised their IRC policy not too long ago. They changed it from banning all IRC servers to only banning IRC servers connected to a network. So it is possible to put an IRC server on the LM box.
Of course I don't know how demanding an IRC server is. One would imagine not very. Something to talk to LB about, I guess.
Of course I don't know how demanding an IRC server is. One would imagine not very. Something to talk to LB about, I guess.