Halion Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 this command actually shows the GMs that existed at least once in server not the actual gm my suggestion is to changes this command so it shows the actual GMs online like example: @whogm List: [GM]XXX online cause i keep getting names like [GM]Tinman and others who are no longer on gm team <,<
nines Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 This command is one that is actually needed. Sometimes people who use @request some of the gms ignore request and there supposed to take everyone unless there hosting dice or something. But if we can see which gm is online and ignoring the request it would push gms to be more active and careful.
Masahiro Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 This command is one that is actually needed. Sometimes people who use @request some of the gms ignore request and there supposed to take everyone unless there hosting dice or something. But if we can see which gm is online and ignoring the request it would push gms to be more active and careful. +1 ever so +1
Kittie Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) Isn't there a GM support town they are supposed to idle at...? Edited January 28, 2011 by Kittie
Veggie&Mac Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 This command is one that is actually needed. Sometimes people who use @request some of the gms ignore request and there supposed to take everyone unless there hosting dice or something. But if we can see which gm is online and ignoring the request it would push gms to be more active and careful. +1 Nueves always with the truth ( not really )
Kayleigh Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 this command actually shows the GMs that existed at least once in server not the actual gm my suggestion is to changes this command so it shows the actual GMs online like example: @whogm List: [GM]XXX online cause i keep getting names like [GM]Tinman and others who are no longer on gm team <,< This command is one that is actually needed. Sometimes people who use @request some of the gms ignore request and there supposed to take everyone unless there hosting dice or something. But if we can see which gm is online and ignoring the request it would push gms to be more active and careful. I agree to this! +1 from me
Poringly Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) Well, i agree, & nine already already say it all, so yeh. :D ---------------------------------------- &&; This command is one that is actually needed. Sometimes people who use @request some of the gms ignore request and there supposed to take everyone unless there hosting dice or something. But if we can see which gm is online and ignoring the request it would push gms to be more active and careful. Well, its not as if they got paid, its a voluntary work, so yeh. :\ && They're a human too. They can't just solve everything when you keep doing @request. o wo~ ( This doesn't mean i don't agree ). Edit : Typo. Edited January 28, 2011 by Poringly
Xtopher Posted January 30, 2011 Report Posted January 30, 2011 While this would be great for seeing if a GM is on when you need help it is also abusable. Example: Let's say I cheat at ladder and I know that the only place I can get kills now is the pvp room. Normally I would be very cautious when cheating and probably do it quickly and not draw attention to myself but I would still be easy to catch if a GMs on. However, if I had a command that told me if gms are on or offline I could just do a @whogm and if there aren't any online I can just start feeding in pvp with an alt account outside pvp to keep refreshing @whogm. When a GM logs in I could just leave pvp having fed a bunch of kills. We currently have a map if we need to find GMs, and theres still @request.
HealHard Posted January 30, 2011 Report Posted January 30, 2011 I believe this command still should work, as there is always way to know if there is any GM on. lets say you just have an empty account and you go BC some bad phrases about GMs. if you get ban, then you need to wait before feeding, otherwise gogogogo to pvp. moreover, @whogm will show afk GMs also, which gonna be a stress factor for cheaters.
Halion Posted January 31, 2011 Author Report Posted January 31, 2011 it have its pros and cons, pros are to pm directly a gm instead of waiting ages for someone to awnser in request or the gm ur not looking for awnsers you <,< con would be the one about being feed, they reduced it all to pvp room, so any feeder can be easy to find now just @whogm and ask any instead of doing @request saying "hey keep an eye on dis guy" then they pm u in like 20 mins saying post a ticket about it <.<
Seraphine Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 In my opinion the cons outway the advantages making it easier for pvp feeders by only that point but i'd also like to see some more input from other GM's and see what they think.
nines Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 No one really feeds now. 1. Smaller pvp arena easy to tell. 2. Ladder only works in pvp. 3. People always report cheaters and get evidence. 4. Everyone who ladders stays up late and watches pvp so its easy to notice. 5. People know players aren't always on there GM characters. They do have legit characters.
Ryuk Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 I disagree with this suggestion. Reasons for this being : 1: It increases the possibility of cheating during ladder. 2: This command can actually support bots. 3: We already have 3 possible ways of contacting gms. (Support zone, @request, forums) I agree that the cons overweight the pro's in this suggestion.
Halion Posted January 31, 2011 Author Report Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) but doesn't gms take the job of watching how many times cheaters have killed someone? or tracking the IP of those who died like 300 times = feeders? isn't there a record bout kills in ladder? <.< then the command would be useful -.- Edited January 31, 2011 by Halion
Seraphine Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Theirs no way as far as i know of tracking how many people die and who dies But! if there was a way you could see everyones record and we could pull it up and see their kills and deaths not just the top 30 that could work. Edited January 31, 2011 by Seraphine
Wish Posted February 1, 2011 Report Posted February 1, 2011 As Ryuk mentioned, there are plenty of ways to reach GMs. Also, for those who say GMs don't reply to every @request? They do if they're on, or they'd hear an earful from me and they know it. However, that doesn't mean that sometimes, @requests don't get overwhelming. If one GM is online and 10 people all @request at the same time, it is very hard for them to respond to every single request. If you don't get responded to at first, please just wait for a few minutes and @request again. If a GM is hosting an event, it doesn't hurt to wait until after they've finished up hosting to send your request. Our GMs do the best they can. In addition, the @whogm command only shows those on your GM level and below. For example, level 20 GMs cannot see level 30 GMs on their list. So, normal players wouldn't be able to see any GMs online unless we edited the command, which I'm pretty sure Genesis would not appreciate. And again, I'll point out: You can go to the support center, PM a GM on the forum, add a GM to MSN, or @request in game. They are by no means unreachable. All it takes is a little bit of patience. - Rejected -
