Played a lot of 1v1's and didn't know that. I can say for sure, that a host picking AP is EXTREMELY rare, most people would leave if red would call that early game.
Good to know tho, thats one hell of a bug
LTD 1v1 new rule
Moderator: Oversight Staff
- HazarDous
- Staff Department
- Posts: 9051
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 9:36 pm
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 227 times
Re: LTD 1v1 new rule
aRt)Y wrote:@hazardous input for 1) ?
bezdak wrote:Because most on people playing it but not the mode setters have no idea about the glitch. Changing builder is pretty much a necessity after early game, since builders are not balanced and if you don't know the glitch, only randomly join an -ap mode and get ban for something you don't know about is rly odd. For this glitch only a mode setter should be punished imo.
Since this should be temporary ( @broud3r ), I'd just go for the easier path. That is, banning the mode altogether as it is simple; easy to announce, easy to enforce for mods. On the opposite side, allowing mode but banning switching seems to be a mess, hard to explain to users & hard to enforce.
- These users thanked the author HazarDous for the post:
- KiwiLeKiller (Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:40 pm)
-
- Treant Protector
- Posts: 601
- Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 12:44 am
- Has thanked: 166 times
- Been thanked: 120 times
Re: LTD 1v1 new rule
HazarDous wrote:aRt)Y wrote:@hazardous input for 1) ?bezdak wrote:Because most on people playing it but not the mode setters have no idea about the glitch. Changing builder is pretty much a necessity after early game, since builders are not balanced and if you don't know the glitch, only randomly join an -ap mode and get ban for something you don't know about is rly odd. For this glitch only a mode setter should be punished imo.
Since this should be temporary ( @broud3r ), I'd just go for the easier path. That is, banning the mode altogether as it is simple; easy to announce, easy to enforce for mods. On the opposite side, allowing mode but banning switching seems to be a mess, hard to explain to users & hard to enforce.
100% agree. Anyway, everyone playing ap is just for abusing the bug.
"in a moment of extreme passion"
- Beastman (2017)
- Beastman (2017)
- aRt)Y
- Protector of Nature
- Posts: 13142
- Joined: Fri May 03, 2013 9:15 pm
- Has thanked: 10 times
- Been thanked: 174 times
- Contact:
Re: LTD 1v1 new rule
@hazardous but "I just checked and confirmed that his glitch/bug also happens with -sd and -ar modes. So those would also need to be banned and -sdgm and -argm be allowed. -sd and -ar also include the gm and cb, so that's the only way to restrict it."
So we would have to ban any mode which is not gm
So we would have to ban any mode which is not gm
- Information, Rules, Guides and everything else you need to know about ENT is on the ENT Wiki.
- Ignorantia juris non excusat • Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? • Fallacy of composition
- aRt)Y
- Protector of Nature
- Posts: 13142
- Joined: Fri May 03, 2013 9:15 pm
- Has thanked: 10 times
- Been thanked: 174 times
- Contact:
Re: LTD 1v1 new rule
@Bezdak @Broud3r Suggestion denied based on the assumption that this will (is?) fixed.
Please DM the Staff Dept. an ETA.
Please DM the Staff Dept. an ETA.
- Information, Rules, Guides and everything else you need to know about ENT is on the ENT Wiki.
- Ignorantia juris non excusat • Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? • Fallacy of composition
Return to “Suggestion Archive”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 97 guests