MageddonJoin Date: 2013-06-24
Post Count: 2450 |
Support awesome idea. |
|
|
all u kids stfu and listen to mick, hes the only smart person here yall remember that. support
-manliest man in any clan- |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
-"Find a valid point."
It is a valid point, much like exploited servers don't count as wins defenses don't. Ask literally anyone of the Clans and Guild forum, they represent the clan world.
-"Thanks for restating what I just said."
You implied in your post that this idea would be the Armageddon of clans, and that if this is implemented then all clan would fall.
No.
Clans survive and thrive. They have lasted since groups began and this idea would encourage clans.
-"ROBLOX will mess it up"
They may, and I can't be held responsible for that. I am suggesting my idea as I have posted it and the way people support, if ROBLOX mess it up then it's on them.
-"once again, look at weather. Hard to script but ROBLOX won't add it themselves)."
Once again, look at the topic, it's not weather.
This is easy to add to ROBLOX, it's not a massive update but a small one. Looking at Player points and dynamic lighting the devs would spend a fraction of the time.
-"But unlike you I can actually analyze the information"
My sides!
You ignore all my points, even now you ignored the point below that line.
Analyzing ≠ ignoring valid points
-"majority of users on ROBLOX"
Firstly, this is not a topic about weather, I don't carer who or how many want it or how it works, this is about a raid tally for clans.
Secondly this is for the clan world, not the majority. Front page games won't use this, the average Bill and Joe won't sue this. Clan developers and high-ranks will depend on this.
Weather could be in the works, who knows as it can take months to add the smallest feature. Much of the clan world, and I, would much rather this simple to add update than weather.
-"The more reason why ROBLOX won't spend time on it."
There is a member count on your group, below the logo. Did you notice? Well that was a very small update so your argument is invalid.
-"The war points would be highly unbalanced if one group has the prevention scripts while the other doesn't"
And again we're back to the not reading.
As I have said, countless times, they just won't use the war system in this situation.
"Implying groups don't already raid back to back."
You are using my own point to prove yourself wrong here.
If clans already raid back to back, and take videos then nothing changes when this idea is implemented.
The videos count as player made war points, this acts as official war points.
And you say you "actually analyze the information"
-"Most free models aren't straight forward."
However plenty are. I've used free models and it's pretty easy to find easy to use ones. The recent like/dislike feature helps separate the easy and good from the bad.
-"add 1 point to the raiders win count."
Or more, analyze.
I said when I made that rubbish script "Give[enemy clan ID],[war code] "1" warpoint"
The's a "1" implying you can change it to anyone to is an 'expert analyzer'.
-"Knowing ROBLOX, they'll add a limit"
I'm not suggesting this, you are trying to make a point by saying 'BUT ROBLOX COULD CHANGE YOUR IDEA SO YOU MUST BE WRONG'
No. If ROBLOX change it, blame them.
This is not a point or flaw in my idea.
-"if there is no standardization to it."
If you have ever been in a clan which has had a war, you will know that war terms are discussed before every single war. In these war terms they discuss terms such as how many raids, final battle or not... This would just be one of the things discussed as how many points are given per raid. This is not a issue.
-"I take which means simply uploading a decal."
Decals take at least two hours to upload, I along with everyone would rarther an instant path to a more fair end.
-"All hated updates."
"ROBLOXians hate all updates these days."
You say all updates are hates, many aren't as I proved.
-"people were confused to how it would work"
As I said, that idea was less developed, I expanded onto it in this thread, even then it got fair support.
-"Got any better ideas?"
Yes, it's in the original post.
There is no need to force clans to use ROBLOX flags.
-"no limitations other than hiding the war code."
"no limitations" Here is the point that supports me. There is and should eb no limitations. ROBLOX is built on creativity, why impose limitations where they are not needed.
-" I can probably give groups -infinite points."
Then you would just be wasting your time, not much more to it.
It's not abuse, it's just time wasting as you don't get anything out of it.
-"The abuse as you are relying the users to do it 100%"
Oh yes, I did ask the users to organize a web development team to work on every clans page to add this idea. Once the user made web development team is done then they can work on adding the ability to do it in studio.
Dynamic lighting as audio weren't just given to to user, ready they had to add it to their places.
When gamepasses came out users still have to script the effects such as giving tools or extra cash. They do now have access to teleporters and that's it.
You have no argument here.
-"Once again, give an idea. You have yet to do so."
You're yet to analyze plain English.
-"Then you know ROBLOX will mess up the idea"
Cool, because I'm responsible for this. You know, if ROBLOX messes up any update just blame me.
No.
Just no.
I have all the details needed in the original post.
-"You mention the slightest changes to groups."
As this idea is also a slight change, and compared to these.
-"not put in the war ID into the flag"
You still don't get it do you?
I have said this time and time again, you keep ignoring my valid posts so why should I even bother responding to this if you won't read it anyway.
I will let you read my older posts, you will see the answer about 50 times.
-"your idea it'll be abused."
hei guiez. i wi11 enamy rand0m grup and g1ve them 100 war ponts it wil be so tr0llzy he hha heh aahhawww.
Abuse ≠ timewasting
-"First off, it takes 1 hour."
Hmmm, takes much longer for me and when I see others upload. I dunno, still an hour is absurdly long, an instant result is much better and saves clans dedication a raid image moderator to check all the decals.
-"Especially if you put them all in a set."
It is simple to count, yes. however clans bicker and every single pic the enemy will demand to see, even 100. They will check every detail to make sure there are no duplicates, which many clans add. This will put an end to that.
-"I know what it is like."
Then you will know the hassle and need for this.
-"I haven't seen any devs post anything recently."
Proof that you can't read as in the link the dev was considering it.
anliz3 m4st0r
-"I've made many points but you only just read them."
Oh yes because these wordwalls have just been me reading them. No.
One valid point, the others not.
-"This doesn't have anything close to your idea"
"This could be added to a tally for the groups, perhaps."
lrn2analyse. |
|
|
1) "It is a valid point, much like exploited servers don't count as wins defenses don't. Ask literally anyone of the Clans and Guild forum, they represent the clan world."
I have never talked about exploiting in any my post. Stop pulling things out of your arse and calling it a point.
2) "You implied in your post that this idea would be the Armageddon of clans, and that if this is implemented then all clan would fall."
Once again, stop pulling things out of your arse. I never said this, I said your idea is too flawed to be implemented.
3) "I am suggesting my idea as I have posted it"
All you've said was the name of it war points, and what it does. Never how it works specifically.
4) "Once again, look at the topic, it's not weather."
lrn2analyze
5) "You ignore all my points, even now you ignored the point below that line."
You change the meaning of my points as you don't understand them.
6) "Firstly, this is not a topic about weather, I don't carer who or how many want it or how it works, this is about a raid tally for clans."
I guess you've never written a quality paper before. Weather would be my outside research. lrn2analyze x2
7) "As I have said, countless times, they just won't use the war system in this situation."
Then you limit the amount of groups said group can raid. That's less freedom. Not a good idea.
8) "You are using my own point to prove yourself wrong here.
If clans already raid back to back, and take videos then nothing changes when this idea is implemented.
The videos count as player made war points, this acts as official war points.
And you say you "actually analyze the information""
I'm not pulling things out of my arse here, unlike you. War points would be corrupt with the few restrictions you've put on it. The video would work better currently due to how abusive war points are based on the scripts in game.
9) "Or more, analyze.
I said when I made that rubbish script "Give[enemy clan ID],[war code] "1" warpoint"
The's a "1" implying you can change it to anyone to is an 'expert analyzer'."
Thanks for proving yet another flaw.
10) "No. If ROBLOX change it, blame them.
This is not a point or flaw in my idea."
You've left your idea open to change due to how little it was described. You must thing of the what ifs, just like when scripting.
11) "If you have ever been in a clan which has had a war, you will know that war terms are discussed before every single war. In these war terms they discuss terms such as how many raids, final battle or not... This would just be one of the things discussed as how many points are given per raid. This is not a issue."
Or it can not be talked at all by making it 1. Or the opposing group can not follow terms as, well, its called a war for a reason.
12) "Here is the point that supports me. There is and should eb no limitations. ROBLOX is built on creativity, why impose limitations where they are not needed."
Haha, no. It supports me as those groups will bicker more than before and will not want to raid unfair groups, especially as war points will be "official". Or groups will want to boycott them more than other features.
13) "Then you would just be wasting your time, not much more to it.
It's not abuse, it's just time wasting as you don't get anything out of it."
Doesn't answer my question. Do you even know what your reading? I'd agree with you if you would give me answers to my questions, but all you do is debate them. I try telling you what to fix but you are so ignorant and won't change your idea at all because its "perfect". Guess what, it isn't.
14) "You say all updates are hates, many aren't as I proved."
You provided about 3, I provided about 10. Keep listing good ones.
15) "As I said, that idea was less developed, I expanded onto it in this thread, even then it got fair support."
If I want to use something, I want to know exactly how it works. Not just the general purpose of it.
16) "Yes, it's in the original post.
There is no need to force clans to use ROBLOX flags."
If it was the original post, I would of stopped suggesting ideas. Reread point 13 to see my meaning.
17) "You have no argument here."
This isn't related to those updates in the slightest. Your argument does not work there as those updates ALLOW for the creativity. War points doesn't. It needs to be straight to the point but allow for the slight adaptive to how to gain the points. You would have to compare war points to player points, but the mods would have to moderate war points a lot stricter than player points. And how long has player points been in beta? 3 months or so? Still isn't good.
18) "You're yet to analyze plain English."
Last I checked someone who got a 5/5 on the AP Language test knows what they are talking about. Maybe I should stop explaining things at that difficulty and go down to elementary for you.
19) "I have all the details needed in the original post."
You said war codes, and the script command (sort of) to obtain points. You didn't put limits on anything, you didn't account for any cases that would make war points abusable. I have brought points, but you've ignored them due to points made in 13.
20) "As this idea is also a slight change, and compared to these."
No it isn't, it was designed to stop the bickering like you said. Make wars fair. Currently, it does not accomplish this.
21) "hei guiez. i wi11 enamy rand0m grup and g1ve them 100 war ponts it wil be so tr0llzy he hha heh aahhawww."
This must be how you read things as you can't comprehend anything I write. With your system I could just give negative points.
22) "It is simple to count, yes. however clans bicker and every single pic the enemy will demand to see, even 100. They will check every detail to make sure there are no duplicates, which many clans add. This will put an end to that."
And you assume war points will be the law. IF you get one, you definitively one. k i c ur l0gik
23) "Then you will know the hassle and need for this."
I've dealt quite fine for 5 years. Never had a problem. You must fight groups similar to your age.
24) "Proof that you can't read as in the link the dev was considering it."
They considered surrendering to end the war as a point system. They talked about overall defeat, not individual battles. lrn2analyze
25) ""This could be added to a tally for the groups, perhaps."
lrn2analyse."
Right back at you. Unlike you, I fully understood what the mod said.
""Concede Defeat" button for the owner only, which declares the other group victories. This could be added to a tally for the groups, perhaps."
"owner only"
"other group victories" (bad grammar from a mod, what?)
"tally for the groups"
Right now, it is hard to tell due to the bad grammar line there. This doesn't work in game at all. Either it is an official surrender button, or it is for the owner to count for her/himself how many times they've lost to another group in a raid/defend. Then again, I don't see owners doing this because they'll be like "u aa we auto win".
At some point here I'll just repost your idea but with all the flaws removed. |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
-"never talked about exploiting in any my post"
You're talking about the clan world laws, exploiting in an example of one as is deference's don't count as wins.
-"your idea is too flawed"
Name one flaw.
-"Never how it works specifically."
I have said all the info that is needed.
I don't know how to script, so I can't add an example script to this, however other users have helped with this.
-"lrn2analyze"
Keked hard at this.
silly billy
-"you don't understand them"
I do understand, however you don't read my points much less understand them.
anlolsis mathter
-"Weather would be my outside research."
>Still not a thread about weather
-"groups said group can raid."
No, they can raid anyone.
anlolsis mathter
-"arse here, unlike you"
insult 1/1
uses:too many
times valid: none
gg
-"how abusive war points are"
look daddy, i can abuse numbers to do nothing yayyyyyy
-"Thanks for proving yet another flaw."
The flaw that I can't script so have a bad example script to outline how it would kind of look like if I was a scripter?
gr8b8m8
-"You've left your idea open to change due to how little it was described."
There is not much room for interpretation unless you're stupid and can't read... oh wait...
-"the opposing group can not follow terms as, well"
Then they don't have a war and claim an auto win. This already happens and is nothing new to the clan world. you follow the rules the two clans set or you lose.
-"and will not want to raid unfair groups"
Guess what already happens.
Go on, this is an easy one.
That's right youngling!
Clans already avoid unfair groups!
-"groups will want to boycott them more than other features."
I can promise you they will use this extensively.
-"Guess what, it isn't."
Well point out a flaw then.
If you have questions list them as questions, not arguments.
-"14)"
You still can't tell the difference between "all" and "Some".
Jee golly
-"Not just the general purpose of it."
That's why I have the full idea on this thread.
-"If it was the original post"
It was
-"would have to compare war points to player points"
They are entirely different.
Apart from the word "Points".
-"mods would have to moderate war points"
I see those reading lessons need to be increased.
Like this is just stupid, plain and simple.
I have no response to this, it just.. I can't gasp how you can sit there and type it.
-"someone who got a 5/5 on the AP Language test knows"
i put it on the internet so it must be true lol gies
>Still can't read
-"You didn't put limits on anything"
Because there are no limits, as I've said.
There don't need to be limits.
-"would make war points abusable"
>Implying they can be abused.
-"Currently, it does not accomplish this."
Stops arguments of legitimacy of raids
Stops arguments over war score
Stop arguments over legitimacy of raid pics
Simplifies the system
Provides anlolsis mathter powers
-"I could just give negative points."
One fair point, I humbly applaud you for this fair point which I can adress now:
have points only addable, not subtractable.
A fair point there. 2 Points.
-"war points will be the law"
To be like you, oy uwot m8 u mol dis ut ur arse.
I never said they were or like.
-"You must fight groups similar to your age."
No, I just deal with real clans. You know, the proper clans that raid and that.
-"war as a point system."
They talked about a group war tally...
war points
raid tally...
hmmm
-"don't see owners doing this because they'll be like "u aa we auto win"."
This is true for some clans, unfortunately. However they are looked down upon.
|
|
|
Good this is getting easy to respond to. I can ignore half of what you said as you just threw together random words I said.
1) "You're talking about the clan world laws, exploiting in an example of one as is deference's don't count as wins."
You pulled anti-raid system to anti-exploit. GG
2) "Name one flaw."
Ignorance is bliss for you I guess. Don't need to repeat myself for the fifth time.
3) ">Still not a thread about weather"
>Still relevant. When you write a paper for a class, do you just make up the information that exist yourself? Or do you actually do some research. My research here is that ROBLOX doesn't add important updates. And since this could be one, ROBLOX won't add it.
4) "insult 1/1
uses:too many
times valid: none
gg"
(Uses quoting incorrectly as he knows he is out of valid reasons why his idea doesn't work)
5) "There is not much room for interpretation unless you're stupid and can't read... oh wait..."
Reread all my post and you'll see. Oh wait, that requires reading AND analyzing. Much work such wow.
6) "I can promise you they will use this extensively."
"When you assume you make an arse out of you and me". Ever heard that saying? Probably not, you haven't accounted for all the possible assumptions, such as boycotting a feature that could potentially suck if not added correctly.
7) "i put it on the internet so it must be true lol gies
>Still can't read"
The only way I could prove this is if I gave you my College Board acc, but that's stupid to do. My GPA is also 4.08. Can't force you to acknowledge it, but I'll just put it out there. Reading isn't everything you know. It helps if you use some basic logic, but that isn't teachable. Guess what you don't have.
8) "Because there are no limits, as I've said.
There don't need to be limits."
>Abuseable
>Flaw
>You are too ignorant to recognize it
9) "Stops arguments of legitimacy of raids
Stops arguments over war score
Stop arguments over legitimacy of raid pics
Simplifies the system
Provides anlolsis mathter powers"
Read point 8. Understand it. See that I've already clearly stated it at least 5 different times. I don't even know what to say about "anlolsis mathter". Must of been deep up your arse.
10) "One fair point, I humbly applaud you for this fair point which I can adress now:
have points only addable, not subtractable.
A fair point there. 2 Points."
Thank you, after many long post I have finally broken you. But there is still work to be done. If you understand point 8, then that'll be great.
11) "I never said they were or like."
"Stops arguments of legitimacy of raids
Stops arguments over war score
Stop arguments over legitimacy of raid pics
Simplifies the system
Provides anlolsis mathter powers"
That's what you want it do it. That's like "the law". But it'll never be unless all flaws are removed.
12) "No, I just deal with real clans. You know, the proper clans that raid and that."
I do as well.
13) "This is true for some clans, unfortunately. However they are looked down upon."
Then don't deal with them. Your system needs to stop these people for good. That's what your system should do.
14) "They talked about a group war tally...
war points
raid tally..."
Not sure where you got raid tally from, but I'll let you assume (reread point 6)
Finally I've gotten to you on some points. Accept the others and that will be great. This has been quite an enjoyable flame war, especially when its been so easy. |
|
|
Support
`Bow down to my siggy` |
|
XenonLiJoin Date: 2009-08-19
Post Count: 5013 |
bicker*
i would prefer that Davidii created a Clan War place |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
Don't have much time atm so I I will make this brief.
You keep throwing "Abuseable" around but you have never said how is abuseable.
You said clans would be unfair with it but they already are, those type of clans will always have stupidly long timers, bad bases admin abuse e.c.t.
I have been saying that most clans avoid the unfair clans and they will do after this update.
Giving as much points as you want isn't abuse if you really want to give away points.
Yes exploiting is a weakness although there is nothing really to stop that even now, only ROBLOX can fix that.
Can you clearly list what you think is abuseable with this. |
|
|
I never asked for these word walls |
|
jatinxyzJoin Date: 2011-09-18
Post Count: 982 |
Support until "The Sith Knights" declared war on "International cavemen" who attacks "Superman organization of '86" who shoots "Dinosaur federation" into extinction
#blowupargentina |
|
jatinxyzJoin Date: 2011-09-18
Post Count: 982 |
AND WHEN Puppy luvers declare war on "BLOOD HATRED AND MURDER" who attack "Toys R US fans" Who declare war on "RoGo New magazines" Who get attacked and beat by "BLOOD MURDER DEATH GORE X-LEGION" Who are destroyed by "X-men"
#blowargentina |
|
vat21sJoin Date: 2010-06-07
Post Count: 2508 |
ts=game:GetService("TallyService")
for i=1,100 do
ts:AddPoint(id,1)
end
Nope... It would be too easy to abuse. |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
Vat, how? You only can give raiders points so you will just be wasting time. |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
Oh vat, are you saying that clans could guess random number combinations and add points?
If so a different war code ID will have to be thought of. Maybe 8 digit with letters and numbers to stop any mistaken ID? |
|
jatinxyzJoin Date: 2011-09-18
Post Count: 982 |
Micky, what about when cavemen declare war on Mass Effect groups? |
|
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
Jat, then they raid as normal, as they would if they were to have a war right now.
Reapers v cavemen lel |
|
|
"You keep throwing "Abuseable" around but you have never said how is abuseable."
Negative points, which we cleared already.
No standardization of points given out.
Giving out a billion points to make it look like a group hacked their points.
No limit to points a fort can have per day or whatever time period.
No stopping back to back raids.
No stopping unofficial raids.
One side could give out war points while the other doesn't.
Do random raids get war points or no?
"You said clans would be unfair with it but they already are, those type of clans will always have stupidly "
You wanted your idea to stop the "bickering" and make wars more fair. That goes against your point there. |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
-"Negative points, which we cleared already."
True
-"No standardization of points given out."
As I've said, these will be discussed in war terms, although I suspect clans will generally go for 1 point per raid to make things simple.
-"Giving out a billion points to make it look like a group hacked their points."
Then both groups see something is wrong, and agree to either continue on the last known war score or reset the score. Maybe have an audit log entry of how many points given and when, it would fit right into the audit log.
-"No limit to points a fort can have per day or whatever time period."
This is not abuse, there are infinite points at every place on ROBLOX, base or not. ROBLOX can't/doesn't discriminate against bases and places.
-"No stopping back to back raids."
This already happens.
-"One side could give out war points while the other doesn't."
Then they will see that points aren't being given out and either claim a fair autowin or call a cease fire.
-"Do random raids get war points or no?"
Does one raider in an empty server get points or no? Maybe, if the clans don't use the very simple validation.
For example in the RAT v VAK war recently any not RAT or VAK were kicked instantly from servers.
Or just stick a group only door at the terminal for the defenders and enemy group..
Or have a script that detects if there is atleast 3 enemy group members.
Too many ways which are simple. |
|
|
"As I've said, these will be discussed in war terms, although I suspect clans will generally go for 1 point per raid to make things simple."
1 would solve all the problems.
"This is not abuse, there are infinite points at every place on ROBLOX, base or not. ROBLOX can't/doesn't discriminate against bases and places."
Fine. If you accept the 1 point thing, that would be good enough.
"Then they will see that points aren't being given out and either claim a fair autowin or call a cease fire."
1 point thing.
"Does one raider in an empty server get points or no? Maybe, if the clans don't use the very simple validation.
For example in the RAT v VAK war recently any not RAT or VAK were kicked instantly from servers.
Or just stick a group only door at the terminal for the defenders and enemy group..
Or have a script that detects if there is atleast 3 enemy group members.
Too many ways which are simple."
Some groups are still oblivious. Maybe ROBLOX can make a script available that kicks non-group members. Make it more obvious. That seems like the easiest solution. |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
You 1 point idea is fair, however if clans want to give 1 pint every time they gets the terminal to 50% and 2 when it gets to 100% then they will have to script the point giver to repete its self.
It would me much simpler to gibe clans the freedom to just award however many points they want.
The one point won't affect "One side could give out war points while the other doesn't." this, as one point is not being given anyway.
There are already group kick scripts, all they require is to input into the script the ID of your and the enemy clans and it will kick all non members.
You can find these in free models. |
|
jatinxyzJoin Date: 2011-09-18
Post Count: 982 |
Do both sides have to agree? |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
Jat, in just about every war there are always war terms discussed, they discuss rules and how many raids, if allies can join, if there is a final battle.
This will just be one of those things they discuss, how many points given per raid. |
|
mickyy5Join Date: 2010-02-20
Post Count: 11059 |
b1 |
|