[M. Bison]

Popular maps 1 - all weapons
Popular maps 2 - no awps/autos

I don't want to separate these two servers just yet. Popular Maps #3 is a blank slate. If an admin wants to play around with it, I'll happily give them access via server control panel.

This is actually a very good idea. Have one pop maps server with unrestricted weapons and let the consequent popularity of the server speak for the idea's merit.

That's not how it'll work out. The population between the servers shifts from one to the other, day by day and map by map. If one server experiences a substantial population drop (especially late at night), the population of both servers merge onto a single one. The exception is when the other server is on an undesirable map, in which case players tend to go to sleep or play elsewhere. If the servers are no longer identical, there's more factors to consider and the behavior may change somewhat.

3 seconds is a tad too long

This was a ball park number and not necessarily the number going to be used. All my plugins are periodically tested during the developmental phase. If an aspect of the plugin is problematic, it'll be changed around until a balance is struck. This occurs during the developmental phase and prior to it going live.

It takes less than 3 secs to leave spawn and it takes less than 3 secs for an non-Awping Rushing to have an advantage at long A.

You can't move during freezetime so that's completely untrue.

especially with advertisements.

What?

My worry is that you'll get some idiot who will see it and be like haha, I'm going to buy the awp to be a dick.

There's nothing stopping a player from doing that now. If it's already happening, it'll become worse as more people become aware of binds.

This is going to bring a severe decrease of users on our servers IMO.

I somewhat doubt this will be the case. I went through the top 250 gameme players for popular maps (by hand) and noticed the majority of users had a lower kills by awp percentage than my own. A lot of these users had so little kills with an awp, that the listing actually showed it as 0% due to rounding. I've scrimmed with some of these players before and they awp better than me. I was also very surprised that comparatively, I was in the top 10% of prevalent awpers with only a percentage of 7%. If you think I'm kidding, feel free to look through the gameme statistics before they're reset this August. I inflated the use of awp in my earlier posts because I skipped out on the vast majority of users with a % lower than my own, while listing everyone with a higher %. Joker, your % of kills by awp was only 6%. Not to pick on Mr.Tea, but I can't even fathom how his % of kills by awp is a staggering 42%. I've personally hit the restricted awp message a considerable amount of times while trying to purchase it, so I know exactly what silly is talking about. I personally thought this made a strong case that the awp is in fact being hogged by a select few users, and not necessarily the people most talented with it.

Stop making the servers noob friendly at the expense of how the game was intended to be played.

Why can't you just let people play with the weapons that they want to use? You're part of the problem.

The majority of "noobs" make up the server population. They're accustomed to the existing system and it is likely among one of the factors for them choosing to play here. The "noobs" are also one of the factors for enticing "pros" and other new players as the population count is considerable. I don't mind setting up a server for players to play without restriction, but I don't want to impose that change onto our existing user base. I know for fact that as it stands now, doing so will have negative effects on server population. At one point in the past, the weapon_restrict plugin broke for an entire day because I failed to update it properly on the day prior. The population of 24/7Dust2 on that day was extremely unstable and generally stayed pretty low. The failed update occurred very early the day prior (something like 3AM PST), and was resolved very late in the day (something like 11PM PST).

Although, it should be noted the player population of popular maps and the 24/7 servers are slightly different. For instance, it's pretty apparent there's a larger international presence on the 24/7 servers. This means a lot of them are non-native English speakers and it generally means it'll be harder for them to make bonds, especially when they don't have a microphone. This is important because people will generally play on a server when many of their friends do as well, even if the server has some undesirable qualities. There's also the factor of no-steam players. A lot of them play here for no reason other than having no alternative server to play on. If they get banned from war-lords many of them quit the game entirely. o_O

If the restrictions were never in place in the first place, our player base would've been different. That means there wouldn't be problems with unlimited awps. If we make this change now, the servers will have an unstable population for a while.

You're still both missing the point. It doesn't matter if you haven't individually experienced difficulty buying the awp on these occasions. The fact of the matter is that virtually only one person can have it per team; and granted that there are at least 3 or 4 people, on average, who want to use the awp on a team of 10 (probably an understatement) those other players are being consistently short-changed. I'm usually one of those players (despite being a fast buyer).

Indeed.

I don't want to separate these two servers just yet. Popular Maps #3 is a blank slate. If an admin wants to play around with it, I'll happily give them access via server control panel.

That's just as good.

That's not how it'll work out. The population between the servers shifts from one to the other, day by day and map by map. If one server experiences a substantial population drop (especially late at night), the population of both servers merge onto a single one. The exception is when the other server is on an undesirable map, in which case players tend to go to sleep or play elsewhere.

Yeah, but: "If the servers are no longer identical, there's more factors to consider and the behavior may change somewhat" is what I was thinking also. So, if the (say) popular maps 3 server has a settings and name change (for example: popular maps #3 + awps), I think there'd be more motivation for people to specifically seek out pop maps 3.

The majority of "noobs" make up the server population. They're accustomed to the existing system and it is likely among one of the factors for them choosing to play here. The "noobs" are also one of the factors for enticing "pros" and other new players as the population count is considerable. I don't mind setting up a server for players to play without restriction, but I don't want to impose that change onto our existing user base. I know for fact it negatively affects server population. The weapon_restrict plugin broke for an entire day because I failed to update it properly the day prior. The population on 24/7Dust2 was extremely unstable for the entire day and generally stayed pretty low. The failed update occurred very early the day prior (something like 3AM PST), and was resolved very late in the day (something like 11PM PST). If the restrictions were never in place in the first place, our player base would've been different, so obviously there wouldn't be a problem with unlimited awps. If we make this change now, the servers will have an unstable population for a while.

Then truthfully, I guess the question comes down to this: Is it better to have lots of "nooby" players, or really good servers? I'd rather play against pros and be able to awp when I want.

Anyways, I'm quite happy with having just one pop map server with awps enabled.

[M. Bison]

So, if the (say) popular maps 3 server has a settings and name change (for example: popular maps #3 + awps), I think there'd be more motivation for people to specifically seek out pop maps 3.

That's right. This will result in a population base consisting of people more tolerant of awps.

Then truthfully, I guess the question comes down to this: Is it better to have lots of "nooby" players, or really good servers? I'd rather play against pros and be able to awp when I want.

I like nooby players, though. They're often quite funny.

Anyways, I'm quite happy with having just one pop map server with awps enabled.

I'll try to get the ball rolling for it. :eek:

If the problem is only a few can buy an AWP...Again make it so everyone may override 1 AWP per team restriction once. Every casual AWPer could AWP that one time because they get so frustrated that they can't (which is a load of shit BTW). I've mentioned this 6 or more times now, but certain trolling and other comments it keeps getting ignored and overlooked.

Alright, how about something like this:

I'll add a force buy command for users which will guarantee their first awp purchase. If used on the round before, the awp will instantly be bought, counted against the awp limit, and added to their inventory on the following round.

A user spamming binds will never be able to beat someone using a force buy. This is ensured because the first 15 milliseconds (0.015 seconds) of the round will not allow you to purchase anything. The force buy takes place during this time, so you obviously can't beat it. This will ensure every player is guaranteed an awp at least once over someone who has had one before.

If the amount of people using force buy on the round exceeds the awp limit, it'll then randomly select which of the users get the awp. The users who use the command and don't get the awp for whatever reason (lack of funds, too many users, etc), will not lose their force buy.

After they've wasted the force buy command, they'll then join the pool of people which are competing for the awp against both other players and force buy users.

A player will reattain their force buy every half. Attempts to circumvent the force buy tracker such as rejoining the server will not work at giving you another.

Notifications

I will throw in the following notifications.

1). A notification will be sent to any user with a force buy available. The notification will be sent when they attempt to purchase an awp and run into the awp limitation message. The notification will inform them on how to use the force buy command.
2). After a user wastes their force buy, the notification will instead inform them on how to bind "buy awp," so that they can remain a competitive awp purchaser.
3). A notification will be dispatched on round start informing people on how many awps are available for purchase. The number will be calculated with existing awps and force buys removed.
4). A notification will be dispatched whenever someone purchases an awp. The notification will only be sent to the players team and it will provide the name of the player who bought it.

-----

I believe this system will solve the problems of the D2 implementation because:
1). Everyone can't waste their force buy on the same round. (awp limit)
2). The awp limit doesn't get circumvented by force buys.
3). The awp users will be more varied.

I believe this system will solve the problems of the old implementation because:
1). Each player will be guaranteed the ability to purchase an awp once.
2). Each player will have knowledge of binds so they can remain competitive.
3). Each player will know how many awps are available. (no more ppl asking about the awp limit)

Anyways, I'm quite happy with having just one pop map server with awps enabled.

I like this idea.


In general I'd prefer no restrictions at all actually, it's just how the game is.
The P90 is just as annoying to me, though I've never seen a server with the P90 restricted. People use it all the time, throw two flashes and run and spray with the p90.
And now that we're talking about annoying, how about the deagle? It's among the cheapest things you can buy in css and you can hs people from so far away.
And fuck if I don't hate those damn nades too, losing half your health before you even started.

Restrict it I say!

[lin3ar]

Seems like a great idea so far. Here's a few suggestions:

1. Global awp limit based on server population with the exception of the select few imbalanced maps on pop maps (where awp limit will be custom). For example, 20- players = 1 awp, 30 players = 2 awps, 40 players = 2-3 awps
2. Give donators 2 !fb per half on pop maps, 3 !fb per half on office and d2, side note - also suggesting that donators also be given the ability to buy the other team's weapons
3. Top 10 players get 2 !fb per half on all servers - reset gameme points (but keep other stats intact such as kd) every 1-2 months so everyone has a chance
4. Top 10 and donator status don't 100% overlap as to give people like 4 !fb per half on pop maps and 6 !fb on office and d2 - therefore cap !fb for donator/top10 at 2 !fb per half on pop maps (unless limit is custom on imbalanced maps) and 4 !fb per half on office and d2.

[Spartacus]

Seems like a great idea so far. Here's a few suggestions:

1. Global awp limit based on server population with the exception of the select few imbalanced maps on pop maps (where awp limit will be custom). For example, 20- players = 1 awp, 30 players = 2 awps, 40 players = 2-3 awps
2. Give donators 2 !fb per half on pop maps, 3 !fb per half on office and d2, side note - also suggesting that donators also be given the ability to buy the other team's weapons
3. Top 10 players get 2 !fb per half on all servers - reset gameme points (but keep other stats intact such as kd) every 1-2 months so everyone has a chance
4. Top 10 and donator status don't 100% overlap as to give people like 4 !fb per half on pop maps and 6 !fb on office and d2 - therefore cap !fb for donator/top10 at 2 !fb per half on pop maps (unless limit is custom on imbalanced maps) and 4 !fb per half on office and d2.

Bison doesn't want to give donors/donators an unfair gameplay advantage.

That's right. This will result in a population base consisting of people more tolerant of awps.

Notifications

I will throw in the following notifications.

1). A notification will be sent to any user with a force buy available. The notification will be sent when they attempt to purchase an awp and run into the awp limitation message. The notification will inform them on how to use the force buy command.
2). After a user wastes their force buy, the notification will instead inform them on how to bind "buy awp," so that they can remain a competitive awp purchaser.
3). A notification will be dispatched on round start informing people on how many awps are available for purchase. The number will be calculated with existing awps and force buys removed.
4). A notification will be dispatched whenever someone purchases an awp. The notification will only be sent to the players team and it will provide the name of the player who bought it.

-----

I believe this system will solve the problems of the D2 implementation because:
1). Everyone can't waste their force buy on the same round. (awp limit)
2). The awp limit doesn't get circumvented by force buys.
3). The awp users will be more varied.

I believe this system will solve the problems of the old implementation because:
1). Each player will be guaranteed the ability to purchase an awp once.
2). Each player will have knowledge of binds so they can remain competitive.
3). Each player will know how many awps are available. (no more ppl asking about the awp limit)

As complicated as this sounds, this just might work. Couple this with Global awp limit on server populations.

Everyone has a chance to awp. Once force buy is used by everyone, its back to the all fastest fingers first. (with binds being taught to the noob to buy an awp)

Bison got his butt covered real well.

I believe whatever Bison thinks is right is right. He runs the servers and he knows best.

[Spartacus]

I believe whatever Bison thinks is right is right. He runs the servers and he knows best.

That's pretty much blind faith. Community here won't learn anything if we don't constructively criticize each other's suggestions.

Having said that, his suggestion on force buy commands sounds pretty legit. However, his opinion against donors having an "unfair" advantage in gameplay is debatable still (that's another story).

[M. Bison]

Community here won't learn anything if we don't constructively criticize each other's suggestions.

That's why I tried spamming the awp limitation thread to awpers. I needed to see their concerns and opinions so I could conform the limitation to them. If I wanted to blindly push an idea there's really nothing stopping me. A sneaky way one might do it while looking legitimate is by spamming the thread to everyone who hates awps. That would've been a very easy way to bias the poll. A lot of awp haters out there! :p

Having said that, his suggestion on force buy commands sounds pretty legit.

Yeah, it better sound legit. I went through a lot of ideas to get here. :p

However, his opinion against donors having an "unfair" advantage in gameplay is debatable still (that's another story).

nou!

I believe this system will solve the problems of the D2 implementation because:
1). Everyone can't waste their force buy on the same round. (awp limit)
2). The awp limit doesn't get circumvented by force buys.
3). The awp users will be more varied.

I believe this system will solve the problems of the old implementation because:
1). Each player will be guaranteed the ability to purchase an awp once.
2). Each player will have knowledge of binds so they can remain competitive.
3). Each player will know how many awps are available. (no more ppl asking about the awp limit)

The current change has already ensured 90% of the above motives. If there is really too many awp going around at the any given time, simply put a cap on the total per round (although i usually dont find this idea appealing).