Jail Break Revamp Feedback and Suggestions

[Goku]

After running a beta test on this new rule, it's pretty easy to manipulate. I'd recommend removing it altogether, but if not, restricting by either timer (2:00 and below) or by players. Players would be harder to accurately implement because if you said '5 players or less for a forced deathgame', the same issues that arose from this rule would still happen during the timeframe the server is less populated.

 

While I appreciate you beta testing for me, I was already aware of these when you messaged them to me earlier where I told you I would work on fixing them likely tomorrow. Again, appreciate the beta testing, but didn't really need half my server being pissed off by your testing and crying foul to me over something I was already working on fixing.

[Caution]

While I appreciate you beta testing for me, I was already aware of these when you messaged them to me earlier where I told you I would work on fixing them likely tomorrow. Again, appreciate the beta testing, but didn't really need half my server being pissed off by your testing and crying foul to me over something I was already working on fixing.

 

You probably should have ran a better beta test on it then before pushing the live rule change. I gave you one possible devil's advocacy, and was seeing all the potential ways it can be abused as it is a major rule change that was provided little to no clarification.

[Goku]

You probably should have ran a better beta test on it then before pushing the live rule change. I gave you one possible devil's advocacy, and was seeing all the potential ways it can be abused as it is a major rule change that was provided little to no clarification.

 

Seeing as how the only way to test out these changes is to put them on the server, that's exactly what I'm doing. Sadly we don't have a beta test server, so consider these first few days until the rules are more finalized, the beta test. I was fully aware of what you said to me, and am working on how I want to go about limiting it based on what I've seen on the server. Don't think pissing off the server along the way over something I was 100% aware of, was the best way, but sure why the hell not.

[delirium]

Seeing as how the only way to test out these changes is to put them on the server, that's exactly what I'm doing. Sadly we don't have a beta test server, so consider these first few days until the rules are more finalized, the beta test. I was fully aware of what you said to me, and am working on how I want to go about limiting it based on what I've seen on the server. Don't think pissing off the server along the way over something I was 100% aware of, was the best way, but sure why the hell not.

 

who was pissed? I had a blast! new rules are best rules!

[Caution]

Seeing as how the only way to test out these changes is to put them on the server, that's exactly what I'm doing. Sadly we don't have a beta test server, so consider these first few days until the rules are more finalized, the beta test. I was fully aware of what you said to me, and am working on how I want to go about limiting it based on what I've seen on the server. Don't think pissing off the server along the way over something I was 100% aware of, was the best way, but sure why the hell not.

 

Or you could have created an event for prison break for a few hours that you would be able to play, go on, test it out, observe what stipulations need to be obviously in place, make the rule live, then make small counter-corrections from there. You put up an entire rule change in a public forum that is obviously going to have possible ways to abuse it. I saw you make one or two edits throughout the day, but your 'Death Game' rule change was extremely unprepared and it showed. Keeping us in the loop as to what you know, what you're working on, and what needs to be tested would have been great, instead of choosing to go on the forums and refer to people utilizing your fuck up as "cunts".

[Goku]

Or you could have created an event for prison break for a few hours that you would be able to play, go on, test it out, observe what stipulations need to be obviously in place, make the rule live, then make small counter-corrections from there. You put up an entire rule change in a public forum that is obviously going to have possible ways to abuse it. I saw you make one or two edits throughout the day, but your 'Death Game' rule change was extremely unprepared and it showed. Keeping us in the loop as to what you know, what you're working on, and what needs to be tested would have been great, instead of choosing to go on the forums and refer to people utilizing your fuck up as "cunts".

 

The plan here, which I believe I made clear from the start, was make these changes, see how they are taken in stride, and make the changes needed. Which is why I made this go live when I knew I would be on the most to be here for them.

 

I called you a cunt, and still stick by it because you literally abused the shit out of something literally just because. The potential for abuse was brought to my attention by you, I acknowledged it and said I would fix it. You opt to then go on the server and abuse the shit out of just to make a point. When I was on the server and you weren't there causing issues, things actually worked just fine. The potential for someone to abuse it was there, which I was aware of and working on, but no one did. There were some hiccups that I immediately worked out, and that was it. But going onto the server and purposely abusing a rule just because its possible, is deserving of me referring to that person as a cunt. It was causing trouble just for the sake of it.

 

I was on the server when the change went live. I've been on my computer all day answering any questions that popped up. The only issue with the first day of the rule, was someone purposely abusing the rule, or in this case lack thereof, literally just because he can. I purposely didn't add many restrictions right out of the gate because I wanted to gauge first hand exactly how the server would react, and then make the changes from there. Which is what I've been doing. I don't want to add a 20 point check list for the CTs with this, which is why I didn't make the change right after you told me. It was a potential issue when you mentioned it to me, but wasn't actually happening till you made it happen. So I wasn't too worried with rushing out a rule change since I wanted to figure out what exactly I wanted to add with the change.

[Caution]

The plan here, which I believe I made clear from the start, was make these changes, see how they are taken in stride, and make the changes needed. Which is why I made this go live when I knew I would be on the most to be here for them.

 

That's a great plan, I'll just go reference the AO thread. Oh...

 

Well hey, I'll just reference the CA thread you made about what your plans are - oh, that's right, you didn't implement the death games based upon the review from your peers, CA's, and the VP.

 

I called you a cunt, and still stick by it because you literally abused the shit out of something literally just because.

 

Or because I play devil's advocate with every thing that comes our way to see the outcome of it and review the possible corrections. You being a little bitch and calling me a cunt on the forums PUBLICLY instead of being a man and saying 'Hey dude, I've already ran all the betas on it and actually know what needs to be changed' is some beta ass shit and a quick way to find yourself out of an AO position. I was being nice and ignoring that, providing input on your garbage ability to implement something, but you had to be typical edgy-Goku and post a back-handed compliment. I'm not a drunk, slutty girl at a bar that you can get away with that.

 

The potential for abuse was brought to my attention by you, I acknowledged it and said I would fix it.

 

Caution: So I read your rule change as far as deathgames go. Playing Devil's advocate here, but what's to stop a CT from just starting a death game instantly as soon as the cells are open and playing until everyone is dead, then rinse and repeat next round?

 

Goku: still seeing how they're adapting to the change and mulling over some changes i'll likely make in the next 24 hours.

 

Oh, that's funny, I provided one possible scenario for abuse, and you gave me some bullshit answer that provides NOTHING. You didn't tell me you agreed with it, you understood it, or anything of that sort. You said that you're still seeing how they're adapting.

 

You opt to then go on the server and abuse the shit out of just to make a point. When I was on the server and you weren't there causing issues, things actually worked just fine. The potential for someone to abuse it was there, which I was aware of and working on, but no one did. There were some hiccups that I immediately worked out, and that was it. But going onto the server and purposely abusing a rule just because its possible, is deserving of me referring to that person as a cunt. It was causing trouble just for the sake of it.

Once again, to see how it can be abused because you keep no one in the loop as to what you are doing.

 

We were all seeing the possible ways that it can be abused, as well as wondering what the fuck the administrator of the server is doing. You didn't respond to my message and keep me informed, you gave me some half-assed response.

 

 

You used the word 'literally' wrong.

[CollieFlower]

You used the word 'literally' wrong.

 

Your my fucking hero

 

On a serious side note: why dont we just remove this rule all together? Our server having no forced deathgames was part of what made it great. Why change whats been working great? If anything we should try to get the ct's to get off their ass' s, stop sending the t's to soccer every round and offer more death games for the people willing to join the games. The lr idea is nice to keep people from prolonging the round, however, the forced deathgame rule will end up abused and as noticed, piss people off.

 

As much as I enjoy watching you 2 fight like 15 year old girls over an issue of GQ, it not solving the issue at hand...

[Goku]

I listened to the feedback from the public and CA+, and specifically made it clear I wanted to see how things worked initially before adding any changes. The suggestions made are noted and are being considered in the changes I'm still mulling over and am actually in the process of tossing in the CA section before going to bed for the night. Made it very clear I wanted to see how things played out first before adding these restrictions.

 

You messaged me about the deathgames pretty early into the rule going live. And I, as you said, told you I was still watching how everyone adapted before making any changes. Since this change went up, I've been hearing the same few suggestions over and over, and have been bouncing them around my head before going anywhere with them.

 

I also had no idea you planned on abusing the the rule until players come to me complaining about you doing it. Hearing from my player base that the president is abusing a rule and causing mayhem isn't something you enjoy hearing. I told you I was mulling over changes that would likely be made in the next 24 hours, because I was still taking my personal thoughts, alongside the feedback I got, and deciding which direction to start taking it.

 

There's not too much to keep you in the loop of what I'm doing, since nothing had been decided yet. Nothing new had been presented to me that wasn't said in the CA or public threads. It was just a matter of thinking over which of them to take, and how to word them. I did, and do have every intention of tossing out the rule changes into the CA section before making them go live. I said from the start that we'd likely see a big influx in deathgames being played. And we did the first 30 mins or so. But after that, it was relatively calm. Issues didn't start until you started testing that exploit out.

 

Look, I'll be honest. I should have confronted you when I heard complaints from the players. I completely apologize for that. I also should have been more open about which of the ideas I was mulling over in the CA+ section at the very least. I didn't find it that necessary since everything I was thinking on was already presented in the feedback threads and I hadn't fully decided which direction to start. By no means is this rule implication perfect. I know that. Since taking over JB, this is the first big rule change that's hit besides adding restrictions to LRs. And its a big ass change at that. Could some things have been done better? Yeah. I'll admit that. I completely apologize for not handling this better on my end, and will take my mistakes here as future reference, though I don't see another change of this magnitude happening again.

 

I still have high hopes for this change to have a good impact in the long run. I'd like us to find that perfect balance that still sees the rounds we are used to with going to pool, or soccer. While still giving the CTs a little more freedom with their orders and not having 3-4 minutes being spent in big cage while CTs get picked off due to not paying attention.

 

As noted, the LR rule seems to be the most well received one. I don't want to jump ship from the deathgames less than 24 hours after it being added, and would like to see how things go with the new restrictions that I'll implement after bouncing them off the CAs tonight. If those additions to it don't seem to work very well, and people would much rather jump that ship completely, then we'll go back to no forced deathgames, but keep forced LRs. I'd like to get at least a day or so of testing in with the new added rules and see how they go.

 

Again, I completely apologize for not handling it better and will be more open with the team about where I'm currently thinking about taking things. I acknowledge that this change has been way less than stellar, and hope that the ship can be righted soon.

 

I'm off to bed. Have to be at work in 4 hours. Gonna toss up my thoughts in the CA section real quick, then lay down.

[frosty]

Keep the death games.. people just don't like change. If it gets too much the rules can always be amended.