Thanks for opening up a discussion on this. Prepare for an incoming wall of text:
The "in-game control configuration" is not what anyone is referring to when they say "key binding" in reference to your gameplay and movements. You are correct that the Battlefield 1942 in-game control configuration could also be referred to as "what are your key bindings in this game?" But that's not what is being referred to here.
Gaming keyboards, mice and other input controllers allow for binding more than one action to a single button. And of course there are software-only solutions for achieving that same thing, too. Since software is essentially what's always doing it, even if it was bundled with specific hardware.
For example, if there is a particular sequence of multiple actions or movements that makes you "run faster", you can bind a sequence of those actions and movements to a single key or button. And from then on, simply press the "run faster" key rather than having to deliberately maintain or keep utilizing more of your fingers for repeating that key sequence over and over, while you're doing other things like looking at the map or looking behind you.
Same for a key sequence of "stop firing primary weapon, switch to a secondary weapon, ignite that secondary weapon, switch back to primary weapon, resume firing primary weapon" and similar. You'll "never get it wrong" and "never be able to do it any faster" than when you're having the computer handle it for you
in response to a single key or button.
Those are the kinds of "key bindings" that are being referred to in response to unusual aspects of someone's gameplay or movements: The ability of those kinds of hardware or software solutions to define a sequence of one or more actions or movements and assign then to a single key or button. And the "having the computer do it for you" aspect is what many consider to be "unsportsmanlike conduct", regardless of whether it's "illegal" or not.
The EA117 server does not currently have any rule against using any software or hardware that allows you to "replay specific key or movement actions" such as this.
One of the primary reasons we don't have such a rule currently is because we believe it would be impossible to enforce. There is no way to "prove" that you're not just some seven-fingered freak who is manually hitting all the buttons "that quickly" and "that consistently". Versus someone who is having the computer perform those sequences for them instead.
Which means "what will we do?" in this situation is the same thing we'll do for other situations where "there wouldn't be a way to prove this anyway." We simply won't worry about it, until
someone's gameplay (regardless of whether it's a result of specifically this or a combination of any other factors) becomes "a significant enough" and "a consistent enough" issue that we'll ask that player to tone down their game play.
Meaning we'll ask that player to "do less of whatever they're doing", such that "as close to everyone as we can" will be having a good time on the server; and not just a few people at the expense of others.
Mali Mrav wrote: ↑
March 20th, 2019, 10:41 pm
but ADMINS u should do better job when ppl start to accuse others
it should be the same as on other servers
when someone say hack they got kicked
so think about it
That definitely is a rule on many servers, and we have had serious discussions among admins whether such a rule should be applied on EA117. But for now, the only time at which we've "clamped down" on hacking accusations is when it continued to the point of becoming an in-game chat spam distractions. For example, someone who just stops playing and won't talk about anything else. We have had those cases, and directed them to continue in the forum if they needed to continue talking about it. And then kicked them if they wouldn't stop after an admin asked them to stop.
The EA117 server does not currently have any rule against "hackusations" or saying that you think someone is hacking, regardless of whether the accusation is serious or just a joke.
Personally, and the input I give to the admin discussion of "Should we have a rule about hack accusations?"
, is that I think hacking accusations serve a purpose. Yes, they are also messy. And yes, they are many times wrong, too. (I'm looking at you, Christina.)
But they can also be right. And when multiple players are noticing something, my opinion is they should be allowed to call it out, exactly when and where they are seeing it. "Silencing" them -- in the absence of "proof" ever coming out any other way -- is just protecting and enabling those who would intentionally misbehave.
In the absence of having PunkBuster or something else working for us that we could rely on -- and therefore not being able to declare "don't make any hacking accusations, because if there was something wrong, the player would have already been caught or will soon be caught"
-- I think "hacking accusations from the playing community" actually plays a role in identifying and "applying pressure" to these situations where there will never will be any other "proof" forthcoming.
In many cases, disruption of the server and playing community is all we will have "evidence" of any more. And hacking accusations are part of that disruption. Stopping that disruption is what our administrative actions intend to solve, regardless of whether there might have been any actual "hacking" or something else entirely that was causing the disruption.
What if you aren't hacking, but don't like being called out for hacking? Find a different gear to play in which still lets you have fun but doesn't result in as many accusations. That was the part of the reason for Jolly recommending "tone down your gameplay." So that there would be less of these reports in the future, rather than more of them.
But no one believes "if Mali changes his gameplay today, the hacking accusations will stop tomorrow." It's been more than a year of playing this way, and of the accusations that it raised during that time. So I expect it probably has to take at least months of toning down your play -- if not longer -- before players who have been here this whole time would begin to believe "yeah, I guess he's toning it down, and not playing that way as much."
While we are on this topic: You have repeatedly said in game chat that "Trench knows I am not cheating, or else I wouldn't be able to play here." That is not
something that I or any other admin "know". We don't "know" it for you, any more or less than we could "know" that for any other player. Only in the most stupid or lazy cases do we ever have "actual proof" that someone is cheating any more. (I'm looking at you, Jim2102.)
But "absence of evidence" is not the same thing as "absence of cheating."
Which is why our enforcement in 2015 and beyond has been "in response to disruption to the server", regardless of whether there happened to also be any suspicion of cheating or not. As you well know, since although it's very rare that it's had to happen, you've seen us enforce this and remove players for exactly that reason.
Mali Mrav wrote: ↑
March 20th, 2019, 10:41 pm
and im an admin too and i know how hard it is
but with this way ur only gonna lose more players.
The irony of your statement is that by not
having done anything about it, EA117 has already lost players. Long-term players who have cited specifically your
gameplay -- and the fact EA117 "does nothing about it"
-- as they reason they no longer play here.
No, you would not be "the only one" who ever has been requested to tone down their play. Nor will you be the last person requested to tone down their play. We've had this issue in the past and had to take action. We expect to have this issue again in the future, and will have to take action then, too. But if it's a question of "trading one player for whom there are multiple complaints against", as opposed to "players who have been with EA117 for a decade" -- yes, perhaps we should have done something even before now.
And yes, a request to tone down gameplay absolutely could end up being made in the future to any of the other five players you're thinking of in your head right now, and that you're about to name in a "but why not player X?" reply. Those players will get their request too, if and when its decided they are creating a significant and consistent enough disruption, too. Maybe the complaints against them just haven't reached enough "critical mass" in order to take action. Or maybe they are doing a better job of "toning it down and letting everyone have fun" more often than not.
Mali Mrav wrote: ↑
March 20th, 2019, 10:41 pm
BUT im done with this tone down because i did tone down and other still complaine about me
That's absolutely your choice to make. And this has been the choice everyone had to make once they were asked to tone it down when playing on EA117. If playing differently on EA117 for the long term is not what you're interested in doing, that's completely understandable, and clearly your right to choose.
But again, no one believes it would be realistic to think "if Mali changes his gameplay today, the hacking accusations will stop tomorrow." It's been going on for a long time, and it will presumably take a long time for others to believe anything has meaningfully changed. If you expected it would change overnight, or if that's what you needed to happen, I think given how long you have been playing here and playing in this manner, you will need to adjust your expectations.
The fact that you play "pro" is a great accomplishment. But not everyone is trying to be "pro". EA117 is here as a server to just play and have fun, for people who have been enjoying an old game for years. For everyone
to enjoy, and not just for a select few who come in and run over everyone else. If "pro" is what you absolutely must need to do -- and you expect to be playing against "pro" players, or players who are anxiously trying to achieve "pro" gameplay -- then you will probably end up needing to find and do that somewhere else.
It would be like going to a public ice skating rink and wondering why they pulled you off ice for trying to run your hockey drills during general admission when every one else is there just to skate for fun. Yes, the level of ice skating ability needed for hockey is very "pro", and is something everyone there could
actually train for and try to achieve if they dedicated their time and energy into doing that.
But that's not what the general admission public rink is there for, and not what the people who came there to relax and enjoy skating are trying to do. If you continually disrupt everyone with your "pro" skating at two or three times the speed of everyone else, they're going to ask you to stop or leave. You can't just say "well everyone here should just learn how to skate like a hockey pro." I mean, you "can", but you'll still be made to leave.
Let me be entirely clear here though:
From what I saw, Jolly only "recommended" that you tone things down, in the helpful and friendly way that Jolly works to resolve issues among all our friends who play here. He was discussing a way to change your behavior and see less complaints against yourself, and to be "more positive contributor" to the community. Rather than tending to always be the subject of complaints or accusations.
What has not happened
, is for you to receive a request of "tone down your game play, or else you cannot play here at EA117 any more." I know Jolly and everyone else would be more interested for us to have a discussion about the accusations you're seeing, and the reasons why your style of game play elicits so many negative reactions. And maybe even to hear from other players what their concerns or observations are.
And your post here is a welcome step towards that. So let's see where this discussion goes first, and then we'll conclude with whether a "hard request" of "please tone down your game play" also needs to be made.