Redeemer rules! (does it?)

[Valis]

Options for redeemer use are spelled out in the next post (and HuntrCkr's post)...

On the history of redeemer use at Catalyst CTF demo server:

At one point the Catalyst CTF demo server's biggest problem was a lack of admins, and a dearth of botters, hackers and flag glitchers. Almost every evening would end in an empty or unplayable server early on. Due to the lack of admins the players would have to gang up on a hacker who showed up to shut them down and/or prevent them from glitching the server. Over the winter & during spring several admins were added (myself included) and many of these problems have been solved. In fact the flag glitching bug has been (finally) fixed too, although a few exploits may still remain (no comment). Text flood scripts & nick change scripts are also a form of hacking and easily removed. People who insist on letting everyone on the server know what they're listening to or performing a soliloquy are easily removed as well .

Within a month or so of 'cleaning up' the server, OhYeahBB & I noticed another problem was surfacing. As the player load stabilized and the server was consistantly now loaded every day & evening, certain people (without naming names) were using the redeemer over & over in a manner that really has nothing to do with playing CTF and helping your team, and everything to do with inflaming tempers and 'having fun at another's expense' or in this case at the expense of the vast majority of people playing. Note that I rarely see experienced players complaining about a noob randomly using a redeemer, but people were definately getting annoyed when games are consistantly 6-0 with the redeemer abuser controlling gameplay every game.

Experience showed that EXCESSIVE deemer use, if allowed to continue use did 2 things: More than 50% of the people in the server would fight, complain & ultimately leave. Anyone that stays is in a position where most of the experienced players (catalyst averages 2-3 per team usually) are primarily involved in fighting over deemer control rather than playing CTF, both teams are complaining and arguing nonstop about its use, many people leave or go to spec halfway through the game, and again the game becomes annoying to outright obnoxious for anyone that's just looking to enjoy a bit of CTF.

Now I do understand that 'camping' and 'controlling a position' are legitimate, but 10+ redeemers per game from a player who would have one of the highest scores ANYWAY, and without any real show of team support or any other CTF play, is anything but purposefully disruptive (at least imo). So after some discussion, we initially had 'no excessive use of the redeemer' in the MOTD as you joined the server due to players who would DEFINATELY use it EXCESSIVELY. For a short period of time, the admin stating 'No excessive deemering' followed by a swift kick to the offending party seemed to actually work (march/april from my recollection but don't quote me on that plz). This is because at that time there were only a handful of experienced regular players who were being really obtuse about redeemers and after their fun was spoiled they tended to just stay away.

However since redeemer was now in question, we soon had to address "well how many deemers is considered excessive?" It's interesting to note that (at least to my observation) the first people to ask this question are those who might be guilty of using an 'excessive' amount but aren't sure. Ie, players who were also using redeemer when they were able to get it. and wanted to know the upper limit to avoid getting kicked. I can think of a few specific players who decided to champion the cause & would again use deemer after deemer, and say "well you're not telling me a number!" in their 'defense'. Usually an admin would either see the problem in webadmin or be in-game already and it would wind up resolved by a kick (hopefully).

Following their inquiry (and outbursts) I noticed the rest of the players took up the cause. After a week or so of discussion among the regular players it seemed to be unofficially 'decided' by most of the players (but not yet by the admins) that 3 deemers is excessive. While we (the admins) were in the midst of discussing changed to the MOTD in emails (since this isn't a full time job or anything) things rapidly changed on the server. Before a single change to the MOTD occured (within 2 days or so) it became quite common knowledge that using more than 2-3 deemers was 'wrong' and the players started trying to enforce it themselves, complaining anytime someone went 'over the limit'. so rather than clearing up the issue, it seemed to be a MAGNET for every kid who had problems with authority or just wanted to piss off & disrupt a server full of people.

Rather than a handful of people who come in & dominate with deemer (using it in a DM fashion) we now had a server full of people who are instead trying to push the arbitrary deemer limit, or just the overall rule against. This is an important point: by removing the people that annoyed EVERYONE with constant redeemer use, they were replaced by people who seemed to be interested in challenging the server rules, especially when what *seems* to be just another player (rather than an admin) spoke up reminding the person of the rule. If there were no admins around at the time people would PURPOSEFULLY use deemer after deemer, with most of the other team crying out "You used more than 2! You used more than 3!" Keep in mind no admin had really 'confirmed' the arbitrary limit yet.

We also started seeing a lot of 'tattle tellers'. Rather than just an occasional email or IM message from someone complaining about a botter or flag glitcher, I started getting home and seeing 10-15 instant messages a day concerned ENTIRELY about some player who 'used more than X deemers'. This is perhaps my 'fault' for advertising my aim & msn addresses back when flag glitching & aimbotting were the worst of our problems, but it definately serves to show the increase in 'problems' even though the problems don't 'seem' to be as severe as aimbotting or flag-glitching.

Fast forward to present, and when an admin DOES show his face and attempt to reign in deemer abuse, it often instantly becomes an argument. Many times the argument is with someone that didn't even use the redeemer (or at least not excessively) and who isn't regular enough as a player to have seen this issue evolve but seems to feel the need to defend the 'innocent' player who is in question against the 'power tripping' admin. As this situation has continued over the last few weeks certain players are becoming more & more hostile and attempting to push the boundaries more & more. As a result the admins here are often quick to deal out a kick due to tiring of dealing with the situation (especially since most of the people being kicked are NOT unaware of the general situation). This is also only making the situation more severe. And I don't have any easy answer based on keeping the situation the way it is. No change is likely to result in the server becoming increasingly hostile until it hits a point where more casual players stay away from what will appear as arbitrary 'Big Brother' tactics, although it will perhaps remove players who seem to have issues with authority.

[Valis]

So, I've said my piece and attempted to give a bit of background on the situation, at least from my perspective. It's now time to talk solutions.
These are what I see as the possible solutions:

Removal of redeemer. (noone can even access let alone use redeemer) This is unfortunately NOT POSSIBLE so you will have to choose between option 2 or 3 (or something we didn't think of)
Deemer limit of 2. (using 3 redeemers is kickable & bannable on repeat offenses)
NO redeemers. (using ANY redeemers is kickable & bannable on 4 repeated offenses)

Perhaps you think that 3 rather than 2 deemers is an appropritate limit. Perhaps you have thought of something else entirely. Please speak up & give your opinion, but first I'll add mine:


1. Removal of redeemer.
Personally I'm 100% in favor of REMOVING the redeemer (edit): but it turns out that it is NOT POSSIBLE with a demo server.

2. Deemer limit of 2. (using 3 redeemers is kickable & bannable on repeat offenses)
Imo this is pretty much unofficially in place, and has been since about May. Most players seem to feel that this is somewhat reasonable when they are first confronted with the situation. However I think that within a few days of playing on Catalyst most of the more experienced players just want the redeemers to stop. General players (non-admins) as well as admins taking a lighter tone (but remaining firm in the limit) when addressing someone's redeemer use is more likely to get their understanding rather than just a defensive response and might mitigate this a bit, but we're already informally close to this rule and things are inflaming rather than calming at present (imo).

3. NO redeemers. (using ANY redeemers is kickable & bannable on 4 repeated offenses)
Someone had suggested a NO redeemer rule. I think that there is actually support in the staff for this, and as per my comments above that it's already been shown that a 'limit' of a certain number of redeemers is a simple solution. NO redeemers is definately going to inflame the players at any use, but at least with an admin around it's clear & decisive enough that if the player doesn't apologize & stop they're removed. Without admins around though it's still going to be problematic and cause arguments imo.

If it's not possible to remove the redeemer with this demo install I really hope that someone has a suggestion I haven't thought of, because option 2 & 3 create a lot of overhead for the admins to manage this server. Personally I'd rather play than exercise my admin rights, regardless of what some players out there might think. :D

[TheBlackDahlia]

First off i would like to thank Valis for taking the initiative to address this issue in a more formal manner, because this definitely is something that won't be solved by a simple MOTD or kicking of the random offender. Starting an online dialog in the hopes of getting the input of Catalyst regulars, to me, seems like the best way to solve this problem in a way that everyone will feel is just and fair.

Anyways, with that, I would like to give my two cents: Firstly, while many people feel that the outright removal of the redeemer from the map is the best way to deal with the situation, I think that is a bit too drastic as there *are* players who use the redeemer, but not to the point of being excessive. For example, using it once or twice in a game to clear out the opposing team's flag room defense, (ie. if they've been all camping D after taking the lead) would be considered fair use IMO.

To address Valis's second suggestion: - Deemer limit of 2 - (which has been pretty much the unwritten rule as of late) to me, seems like not the best solution as it would be hard to enforce unless there are admins constantly on guard. And it would be near impossible to keep a running record of everyone's deemer count during a game. Suggestion 3 seems to also fall under the category of being impossible to enforce.

So if possible, what I think would be fair to everyone, is too *not* remove the deemer and also, to not make any rules regarding its use, but rather, instead of outright removal, make it so the deemer's specific spawn area produces a random weapon, one of which could be the redeemer. That way there will be fewer redeemers to go around in game. And fewer deemers means fewer complaints while at the same time keeping the deemer's non-abusers from complaining about the removal of such a helpful weapon from their arsenal.

Anyways, thanks again Valis for bringing this problem to the forum, and I look forward to reading the opinions of all the Catalyst regulars and anyone else who has something to say about it.

booya/the_black_dahlia/GhostOfPerdition

[Valis]

Demo servers can't run mods =\

However removing deemer (or all powerups) is available in webadmin I *think*. The only question is whether it's available on a demo server (I don't have access to those settings).

[HortonsWho]

Wait.... Valis is playing here? Where are my discs.... :beer:

[Valis]

lol insightful as always!
:moon:

[HuntrCker]

Demo servers can't run mods =\

However removing deemer (or all powerups) is available in webadmin I *think*. The only question is whether it's available on a demo server (I don't have access to those settings).Nope. Mutators webadmin panel is blank due to demo servers having those options disabled. NoSuperweapons (mutator) is not present. Removal of powerups option is not present on the CTF demo server either.

Btw, very nice writeup Valis. You hit all the major points on the redeemer issue.

Removal of redeemer. (noone can even access let alone use redeemer)Not possible.

Deemer limit of 2. (using 3 redeemers is kickable & bannable on repeat offenses)Currently in effect. Extensive administration required. Strongly subjective, with player criticisms to be expected. However, using Epic's UT2004 Stats website, objective enforcement is possible.

Case in point, PromiserOfDeath used 4 Redeemers at the CATALYST CTF Server on Tue, Aug 22 2006 at 1:06:13 AM (EST)
http://ut2004stats.epicgames.com/matchplayer.php?match=24035184&player=9

In this case, if the Admin was present and witnessed the events, he could kick/ban and substantiate (on the Admin forum [private]) the ban. If the Admin was NOT present, and players complained by email/im/forum, the player in question would be placed on a watch list for possible future abuse of the redeemer and kicked/banned by an Admin when present.

NO redeemers. (using ANY redeemers is kickable & bannable on 4 repeated offenses)Extensive administration required. Certain player backlash to be expected. But enforcable and a viable option.

So we're down to two viable options: limited redeemers or no redeemers. I believe no redeemers would be easier to enforce. Both options change the gameplay of CTF for good and bad.

In the end, whatever the choice, we must keep our patrons' opinions in mind, regardless of how hard or easy the administration of the policy.

[RE*S.T.A.R.S.*2]

Valis Gunner*****
How you guys doing.
Well i registered to vote for complete ban of deemer , but i find out it cant be possible.
Tell you deemer pissed me off a lot, for watever reason they throw at you and this awfull man, we are playing to have fun and this guys came to pisse people off, just becouse in the moment of fight they losse you win.
I believe that its very unfortunate no being able to disable this weapon , there are also good playes that plays fair and without deemer i hate hate hate, damn sorry i`m just piessed off..
well see you guys later on the server or here.... :hammer:
And i vote for Ban for anyone using the deemer , use deemer Ban :rockon:

[«Dôôm's/Dây»]

Hi all.

Just wanna vote to take deemers out, if you can take them out the map, just do it!!. Is a great idea.. make it works.

[RE*S.T.A.R.S.*2]

Hi all.

Just wanna vote to take deemers out, if you can take them out the map, just do it!!. Is a great idea.. make it works.


Hey man whats up.
Demo servers doesnt have the setting to disable deemers and power up, thats why they cant disable it.
But your vote its good for a total Ban rigth , couse there are 3 options two choose! Later man

[-Fragula-]

I'm in favor of the most restrictive rules on the use of deemers. Anyone that uses a weapon that you just point at the ground to kill everyone around them should be embarassed. It's a ridiculous weapon, so if you can't get rid of them altogether, then kicking for any deemers and banning at 4 repeated offenses sounds good to me...

-Fragula-

[Xumos]

I vote for the most restrictive alternative possible.

No redeemer use at all.

I have been playing alot on the server lately and have been witness to people using the deemer as a tool for strife rather then strategically for the benefit of the game.

I think epic made a mistake in allowing the deemer to be used in CTF, even worse not being able to remove it from the server completely.

The other powerups I do not have an issue with.

[ddunk]

no deemers, its one of the lamest things about playing on demo servers, which is what it comes down to for me at this point in time.

Is it possible to run full version server and just call it a demo server?

You must be talking about people like this: http://ut2004stats.epicgames.com/matchplayer.php?match=24112012&player=5

just super-ghey and totally bannable. No mercy on that crap, inexcusable. Even more fun when your team gets out-fragged 3 to 1 and they have someone like that. Suffice to say it puts a damper on the experience.

I've been known to use less-appropriate language in those types of circumstances but a holes like that deserve it.

thanks for the server!

[yen_master]

Down with the deemers!

[Freakish]

I'm 86.3% accurate with the deemer and it's my #5 weapon of choice, says Epic.

:moon: :D

[Valis]

Freakish did I mention that cows are killed on sight? :tsk:

[.Magus]

Thats one helluva way to tip a cow. LOL

-M

[Sta7ic]

Valis (edit: not Varis), you need to change that MOTD!

Anyway... I've always seen the nuke as a "play weapon" -- you should use it to clear flag rooms and drop the flag carrier. Alternately, you can attempt the spectacularly unsuccessful "nuke jump", which has only seen positive results twice (OhYeahBB got propelled from the flag stand to the doors. Then got LG'd). It's way too easy for newbies and tired players to excessively use a nuke on players they can't otherwise take out, especially when they're not finding the shields, keg, etc.
Flat-out banning the nuke... is understandable, but will really make the tough fights tougher, and slightly more predictable. Eh, oh well, it's a game.

Finally... the stupidest thing that could possibly be done is to have admins go through the logs every 24 hours and ban people for using nukes repeatedly. When an admin is only, sure, it's game. If you have a bot on the field, then you're going to end up with a lot of frustrated players who will gang up on and repeatedly nuke the bot. If an admin's on, not an issue.
So please, no log scanning. There are more constructive ways to remedy such situations.

[Valis]

I don't think any of the admins are considering scanning the logs to ban people who use the redeemer. To clarify:

The reason for the policy is the 'experienced' players who choose to abuse the redeemer to the deficit of other players. The reason for the application of the policy across the board (to all players) is because it's the only fair way to moderate the use of the redeemer. The policy is not there to allow admins to abuse players, but we do expect the experienced players to be able to catch on to the rules rather quickly (bans will be used when people who should know better are repeat offenders--which isn't really a change from how things are already).

Huntr will change the motd at first opportunity I'm sure. Thanks for the feedback.
;)

[Sta7ic]

Hmm. In that case, I'll have to spam fireworks into the ceiling of the CTF-Bridge pillar room for fun...

Never underestimate what sort of random s*** comes up at 2am.

-Sta7ic

[RE*S.T.A.R.S.*2]

Quick question did you guys came to an answer to this deemer rules?
Cuz you guys and we the player need t do something, game its getting better just with let them other to know we are voting about this.
AND they are actually undertanding this and using fewer deemers.

[spanish-fly]

I registered here simply to make this one post / point. I have no intention of belaboring this point, or arguing with anyone, however I feel compelled to point out what I see as a falsehood in the comments regarding the redeemer issue.

Valis very eloquently and articulately made a compelling argument for a ban on redeemers. However, playing the game three or four times a week I’m someone who is aware of the whole redeemer issue but I don’t play enough to be that worried about anything in an online game. Personally I find it ridiculous to worry so much about redeemers (isn’t there better ways to spend your time and energy?) it’s part of the game and there is “abuse” (if that’s what you want to call different game play styles) of ever weapon and way of fragging your opponent. But I’m not here to disparage anyone.

The bone I want to pick is regarding the notion that players hate redeemer’s use by “experienced” players who want to disrupt the game. I was privy and even participated in many an argument regarding redeemer use and not one “experienced regular” such as Valis or OhYea BB or Re Stars (forgive me if I’m not typing their names perfectly) responded with any sort of argument that game play was being “purposely disrupted” by experienced players who would score high anyway. Lets call a spade a spade here folks, experienced players like to kill one another through what they believe to be “skill” which in their perspective is fighting their opponents with fast and complicated keyboard moves, and these people see the redeemer as a weapon that requires no skill. It has very little, if anything, to do with overall game play. Every single time a redeemer was used someone called that person a “total noob,” or something similar, even the administrators. This is not about disrupting game play, or even about excessive use, whatever arbitrary number equates to excessive, it’s about UT 04 being around long enough to have a lot of very experienced and skilled players who like to win by their narrow perspective of what skill is, which I believe, as stated above, to be a particular way of playing. I’ve heard ever-single regular say something to this effect. “Deemers are total noob weapons” “you shouldn’t use deemers, you should rely on your skill” that second statement was made to me by OhYeaBB. Never mind the other, less obvious, skill in playing UT, like strategy, knowing when and how to best use EVERY weapon, how to adapt to “different” playing styles, etc.

I’d like to add here that even though most people now days have broadband there are still some who do not, and as someone who lives very close to this sever, a few miles from downtown Los Angeles, my area does not have DSL or cable. Yes, as unbelievable as that sounds it’s true. So no matter how experienced I may be, I always appear as a “noob” to everyone simply because of the fact that I’m moving very slow and cant react fast enough because my ping is always above 180, even frequently spiking to over 500. From the perspective of just about everyone, I’m slow. From my perspective, most of the time I’m killed before I see a player draw their weapon. Redeemers give players like me a fighting chance, but I’m in the minority so it doesn’t matter.

After hearing all the complaining about redeemer use, from players who are clearly very skilled and benefit from sub 50 ping, I actually welcome the ban. But I saw no evidence of abuse, or purposely-disruptive game play through redeemer use. What I saw was a bunch of spoiled players complaining like children because they couldn’t adapt to different styles of play, and couldn’t handle not having the advantage that their ping provides ALL the time and wanted to make sure that they did. I mean God forbid a couple newbies who play a few times a month might actually have chance against players who play UT 24-7. It all boils down to the regulars who don’t like the ‘leveling of the playing field' that the redeemer provides to inexperienced or slow players and instead of seeing it as a challenge, they want to squelch it in order to remain on top.

just my humble opinion

[VeNoM]

I think that Redeemers should be use on extreme situations.

eg

One time use in a match only in Onslaught.
No usage in CTF, DM, AS, etc

And if the situation is beak. Then use it. Not like every minute.
Thats just not on!

[HuntrCker]

...However, playing the game three or four times a week I’m someone who is aware of the whole redeemer issue but I don’t play enough to be that worried about anything in an online game. Personally I find it ridiculous to worry so much about redeemers (isn’t there better ways to spend your time and energy?) it’s part of the game and there is “abuse” (if that’s what you want to call different game play styles) of ever weapon and way of fragging your opponent. But I’m not here to disparage anyone.

...It all boils down to the regulars who don’t like the ‘leveling of the playing field' that the redeemer provides to inexperienced or slow players and instead of seeing it as a challenge, they want to squelch it in order to remain on top.

just my humble opinionSpanish-Fly has brought up several just points from the perspective of a dialup player . From my experience, there are dialup players who continue to play the game even when the current playing field's average ping is 50-60. They tend to play on servers local to them to maintain playable pings.

I call these heroic players HPBs [High Ping Bastards] and salute them every chance I get - no disrespect intended - the HPB acronym has slowly dwindled in usage with the advent of broadband. Likewise, LPBs were the envious class of low ping bastards who now dominate the playing field. All history aside, CATALYST servers (with the exception of the 1v1 retail server with 70 tick) have been configured to balance between LPB and HPB players.

Back to the Redeemer issue... As the mini and lightning guns provide significant advantages to LPB players, the redeemer (so appropriately named) has historically provided a counterbalance for HPBs as Spanish-Fly stated. However, I do not agree with the notion that removing the redeemer removes a "key" weapon for "inexperienced players". The placement of the Redeemer as well as the respawn time of the Redeemer actually makes the weapon's acquisition difficult and infrequent for "inexperienced players". For "slow" players or HPBs, I would concur with S-Fly's opinions.

The decision to ban the use of the Redeemer outright on the CTF server does impose an unjust, debilitating factor for HPBs. I understood this when the Redeemer issue was presented in the public forums and deliberated amongst the CTF Admins. The final decision was made with the understanding that the decision would cater to the majority of CATALYST regulars (mostly LPBs), and disenfrachise some of the HPBs. Other factors taken into consideration in arriving at this decision included the viability of policy enforcement, the extent of reprecussions from the controversial decision, and the lack of alternate methods to achieve the same goal (ie, demo servers being unable to utilize mutators to replace the Redeemer with alternate HPB favored weapons like the Flak or Rocket Launcher).

This is why I take the time to respond accordingly (hopefully with some clarification as to how the policy was contrived) and to apologize to those most affected. The "No Redeeemer Use" decision was made realizing its affect on HPBs, and is a responsibility that I do take seriously, with an open mind to possibly revising the policy as necessary.

--HuntrCker

[spanish-fly]

HuntrCker I thank you for being so studious in providing a place for us all to meet, and caring for all those players who frequent your server. I understand the time and energy and overall efficacy of trying to enforce minimal deemer use. I (hopefully) fall into the category of HPB because I believe that I fair well (generally speaking) at any given time I play, usually not in last place but almost always having the highest ping. So yes, the Deemer is very useful to me. There are probably dozens of •legitimate• reasons to use the deemer but unfortunately no one would probably agree on them. I’ve been ready to score on many occasion and was brought down by a camper with a deemer, yea it totally sucks, but again from my perspective it's a challenge to me to try to circumvent this particular player. Just as a camper with a lighting gun perched on top of the castle entrance (in the central cavern) can be almost impossible to get past when you suffer from a high ping. Most people don't like the deemer so I’ll respect the majority decision, but again as stated in my last post, I take offense to what I perceive as a •spin• on the reason behind the ban. Fast players don't like the leveling of the playing field the deemer provides, plain and simple. I’d feel better if that was just admitted to. Anyway, I’ve always thought it odd when severs try to dissuade particular game play styles or weapons use. Some servers used to ban camping, even somehow having the game recognize when a players was lingering too long in one place, assuming you were camping, giving you a few seconds to move or be disconnected. Just doesn’t resonate with me, I like playing a game as it was designed to be played, period. But there are people also complaining about camping, and mini gun use, it never ends. Anyway I'm doing what I said I wouldn't, belaboring the point, I apologize.

I would like to bring something else to the attention of the admins however, deemers are still being used, and the bickering and arguing about them is still going on. Something else to think about, If an admin isn't around to kick a deemer user, but most people adhere to the rules then when someone does use the deemer it provides an unfair advantage. So it comes down to the regulars who don't want to lose their privilege to play end up getting bested by the random players who don't care if he / she gets kicked or banned and use the deemer. There is always two sides to every coin. You’re still going to get tattle tales, you’ll still need to comb through records to see who used the deemer and who didn’t. My opinion, for what it’s worth, is that a simple statement about three uses per player with a warning about being kicked or banned AND a warning about excessive complaining (like what I’m doing here) would be sufficient. Thanks for listening (reading).

[RE*S.T.A.R.S.*2]

The fact its if you are found using deemer and the admin is there in game watching and the rule its aproved for 3 deemer use or total ban if you use it once You will get banned, dont need to search who did in past few minutes while he wasn`t in the server watching.
If you are in dialup you wont gain anything using randonly the deemer, you will mess the gameplay of others that has no problems following rules.
Even my brother DIABLO understand this and stoped using danm deemer.
I tell you my brother don`t like to follow rules at all.
The thing is many player like my brother plays on this server since it came up online, i for me started playing it in 2005 as Nforce2 and i remember when i was playing without knowing how to move the mouse or something or even dodge.
But learned and in that moment where there was no admin at all. i`dint go to the deemer spot to catch the weapon. cuz i know even that i was a noob in that time, that the deemer its a coward weapon and if i wanted to make progress i should not even think in using it.
I for me tell you that i sometimes use it to destroy it on the ceiling or when the oppositive team wins.
Just to have fun , i know with this wont mess the gameplay of others fellows Players.
Well see what happen and i meet you in the server :hammer:

[ohyeahbb]

I believe that we were all noobs at one time. I also believe that we all felt that the redeemer was our only chance to survive against certain skilled, low pinged players. I am one of them that would use the deemer if I felt threatened by player that had more skill than I did. As the complaints got worse, I realized that it was time for me to step my game play up a notch or two. Or else, I would always be fearful of that other experienced player. Now, I don't think twice about even getting the deemer. It isn't an option that I think of at all. The only time I would get it was before the rule and use it as a payback to a player who used it on me. Hopefully for that player to realize how ridiculous it is to use the weapon.
I am fall into Huntr's category of a LBP I believe because my ping is an average of 40. I agree it is hella nice to have that ping. However, I goto other servers and get owned with peeps with 60-100 ping and mine is lower. I try to figure it out but can't. Again, I will have to step up my game if I want to continue to play with such players. The bottom line that I am trying to get to is that someone will not increase their skill level as fast if you don't play people with lower ping/higher skills. Like Huntr, I applaud people that try and play with a 80+ ping. I try it and get frustrated to easily. I have to come back home to catalyst and my 40 ping. However, that isn't helping my situation on killing those experienced players.
I think after all is said and done, the deemer not being able to be used will set a standard in the server. We will get the occasional player that will come in and not abide by the rule and we can try to curve their oppinions unless they just wont stop.

BB

[Hypnotized]

BTW...BB-you remember when our old icebox NwS demo server somehow had superweps(the redeemer being one fo them) disabled? Maybe you can call your buddy Spoon and ask him about it :P

But seriously, is it Huntracker's server? I could get Spoon's email from Skimo...and find out how our demo server was set up to not have it. BUT...our demo server got very laggy when only one mutator got added. As I recall...if adding a mutator would be the only way to remove it-maybe it would not be worth it.