Too Quick to Ban?

What do you meen they could have a cape that is animated it's moving is distracting.

But seriously, I don't see why staying on a map is a bannable offence? If someone dies they deserve to lose there map for not paying attention to there health and mana in the case of a mage. If you go afk you have 3 mins to get back if you don't make it back in that time tough luck.

 

I don't understand where you're coming from at all and I don't think I'm the only one.
Being AFK on someone's map is not a bannable offense, never has been and never will be. However continuing to be disruptive / annoying on someone else's map when the mapowner has asked you to leave him or her alone is a bannable offense for obvious reasons.

 

In response to someone else.

He stated he would ban them for that even if they were just afking there and doing other things not interacting on the map at all.

 

^this most likely

 

I never said what you're claiming I have and I would appreciate it if you didn't insinuate I did. As Dimitri said, "Being AFK on someone's map is not a bannable offense, never has been and never will be. However continuing to be disruptive / annoying on someone else's map when the mapowner has asked you to leave him or her alone is a bannable offense for obvious reasons."

In the post you quoted, both people are actively at their keyboards, not AFKing as evidenced by both Person A and Person B making a statement to each other in chat. Please don't be so ridiculous.

 

Player B stops answering aka goes afk player a reports him you said that is banable to what you said you would ban player B even tho he went afk was not distracting the player or anything he was afk. So yes it has 100% to do with what you said.

Ever way the gm's on this server are willing to ban people over the drop of a needle but what does it matter i only log on to do gatcha or sell ap resets to people anyway.

 

Clearly it matters to you if you're taking the time to misconstrue what I said.

In the situation you quote in your latest post, again, there is dialog between Players A and B. Player B refused to leave the map and even said that they will not leave the map. They clearly aren't AFK and that is why it would be reportable.

 

What if as John mentioned, Player B was not afking, and refused to leave the map, but at the same time did not harass the map owner, did not jumping around the map to disrupt the map owner, but just standing there? The the main concern is to ensure that Player B did not ks, harass and disrupt the map owner. If he was not doing all that, shouldn't he be allowed to stay in the map, regardless he is afking or not?

 

oh look someone who finally understands...

 

Okay so I hear a lot about map ownership and about how much ownership a person has over a map. So the way it sounds is that the map is yours and you have the authority or option to ask people to leave your map if you do choose too, but how about this scenario. Say you and your friend owns a map and are talking vulgar to each other, can a random person who just cced in the map SS that and report you for a ban? Whether it be your map or not? Just curious is all.

 

Pretty sure that wouldn't be bannable since the two friends weren't even talking to other guy, nor is a training map a public location. If it was very vulgar and somewhere like fm, kpq lobby where a lot of people then it might be.

Reports on vulgarity and toxicity have nothing to do with mapowner.

 

To be honest, I don't think it would hurt to explicitly define what rights you have as the map owner. I've seen it used to stop ksing as well as just to remove people from maps even though no offence seems to have been committed and I feel more transparency might reduce the amount of preventable bans. Can't really blame staff either since most of the reports are pretty one-sided by nature, especially when the accused doesn't offer their perspective.

I wish the community as a whole wasn't so quick and eager to report everything. I think people on here are mature enough to resolve a situation without resorting to pettiness. We are all here for the same reason

 

idk, im here to read about other people's problems and dramas to make my problems go away

 

I was wondering what getting aggressive or rude entails, if the following comments below were directed at the map owner after being asked to leave.

A : No, I refuse. I will sit here and watch a movie while having the game windowed. (does not attack, does not loot)
B : No, you <insult>. I do what I want. (does not attack, does not loot)
C. : So? I'm doing nothing. If I'm doing nothing, then there's nothing to concern yourself about. Even if I did leave, someone could just change channel, or coincidentally went on this map. Whatever pressure you feel from my presence is your own anxiety. (does not attack, does not loot)
D : Nah, I'll stay here. (does not attack, does not loot)
E. lol look at this guy train, he's sooo lame. his damage is puny (does not attack, does not loot)
F. haha this guy has anxiety problems. nope, surrry. (does not attack, does not loot)
G. No eeenglish. (does not attack, does not loot)

It seems like anything could be considered aggressive as long as it was not a cooperative action / is conflicting interest. I don't want to leave because I shouldn't have to + I want to leave, because I'm scared of losing the map.

Seems like the mapowner system is more trouble than it's worth in terms of administrative upkeep, community interaction costs and training experience.

It might just be better to make an instanced solo-version dungeon available (if most players just play solo on these grind maps anyways) or limit map ownership to a maximum of three hours per channel per day per account per person.

 

Sorry but I think solo dungeon map is not good idea (just not suit Royals) also limit ? That won't solve problem anyway. Mapowner is great idea and in my opinion it shouldn't be change at all. People just should be able to be not on their maps even if we will call it "waiting to steal map". We can't make everyone happy, if someone dc and lose map then simply has to deal with it. "Seems like the mapowner system is more trouble..." < Sorry but I can't agree with you, without this great idea people would get ksed all the time and noone would have chance to kill boss in peace and grind. You saying it's trouble but did you realise how many people it helped to play in peace and not to deal with being ksed and stressed ? Also we talked about this already and I see no point to bring it back all over again

 

The point of playing Maplestory or any game for that matter is to derive satisfaction or enjoyment.
Certain features of Maplestory appeal more to certain demographics over other players.
MapleRoyals distinguishes itself from the official servers by features that enhance the player's
experience or enjoyment in several ways which the official server cannot.

A hacker-free environment.
A functioning economy.
An established playerbase.
Functional party quests.
NX-obtainable goods.
Removal of cash-dependent upgrades
Balanced rates.
Continual Development

This translates into, player integrity, and therefore player achievement and satisfaction.
This translates into, accessibility of gear, and therefore player achievement and satisfaction.
This translates into, accessibility of gear and socialization, therefore player achievement and interaction, and thus satisfaction.
This translates into, re-experiencing content that has become obsolete, therefore player satisfaction.
This translates into, accessibility of cosmetics for the less spend-intended players, therefore player satisfaction.
This translates into, player integrity (time is mesos and EXP), therefore player achievement and satisfaction.
This translates into, player retention, by scaling the time necessary to do certain things that are relevant to the demographic. Most people don't have 12-16 hours a day like when
they are a child, but making progress possible by leveling in 1-4 hours is more than sufficient.

Map ownership benefits players who train at the map by providing a KS-free environment. At the same time, it hinders the experience of other players, whereever players converge
at leveling. If there is only one map which provides the highest EXP efficiency, then all players who are achievement-orientated will compete for obtaining said map. If there
are more than a subset of 12 players at any time, then it is more than likely that the only players on that map will be a HSer/HS mule + attacker, unless the map has multiple rows
where the absolute power of each individual is insufficient for multi-mobbing multiple rows.

If most of these players typically only follow this behavioral pattern, then it seeks to make sense that an instanced-based map would expand the number of possible players
that can level at their leisure in a solo-based environment at any particular level at that given efficiency. It makes no sense to limit it to a subset of 12 or 24 potential candidates
at any given time. (Although it's always possible to train in a map that provides 12% less EXP).

It also incentivizes map-holding behavior for the sake of it, and not merely training (i.e. map selling while on an overleveled character retaining a map), which goes against
the point of having that map in the first place. Not only that, but there's no reason to dedicate 10-20% of the staff's resources to a mindless activity in verifying whether
someone wants someone banned for not leaving a map (which to me seems like anti-MMO, and more like we should just improve the solo experience for solo players if we're going
to enforce this kind of policy anyways). That 10% or 20% of the staff's time could be used to run events, manage and smooth out player base issues that are of higher concern and priority (like bugs, glitches, harassment, hacking)- not, John was on this map that Emma stayed on for 5 seconds and Emma disliked John's presence so we should go and ban him for being there.

Indeed, time should be a determinant of player outcomes. However, should time spent looking for a map and camping a map be 'it' or should grinding/killing monsters be the factor
that determines someones level. The longer the time needed to do something, the less people are able to do it, and the higher the valuation it possesses. This can be artifically low
drop rates for high-demand things like maps, skill books or whatever. Nevertheless, does looking for a map/camping a training map provide a better experience for the overall playerbase
or does someone entering a solo-map to do what they need to do make it better (like carnival trailers).

Certain things are -however- desirable to be limited in quantity, and thus make sense to be of limited availability by map or cooldown like skill books and such because they are end-game items, things which are determinants of whole-goods. If everyone could get these, then everyone would quit. But a solo-instance of just leveling wouldn't necessarily mean everyone would become level 200 the next day, they would still take time and it would absolve the notion/idea of something inane/benign like map selling, map holding and reports on trivial issues that could have its resources spent on things that actually improve the player experience.

An alternative is to nerf these high-exp maps or to buff the non-high exp maps, and pqs to levels where people can consider more than one choice when it terms to maximizing their leveling experience so this doesn't occur.

If you examine the logic of the "three-minute AFK" rule, you will see;
to improve the player's experience by giving them a chance at getting a map to train, by ensuring that if there's no usage of it- then it is up for grabs regardless.

This obviously obviates some idea of 'fairness' or 'equity' for any player. This equity or fairness could be achieved by an instanced map of similar or comparable EXP efficiency than 12 limited channels for 60 characters over a 30-level range for training. It doesn't necessarily have to be solo either, a party could be utilized after inviting them in some sort of lobby (a.k.a. carnival trailer).

 

People from different countries do not share the same knowledge of MULTIPLE culture's, as everyone knows and speech is the most common factor of what i think is wrong with most of the bans. The lack of communication between the involved parties in most cases is just poor. The lack of knowledge of the English language ((which i dont think is the number one spoken language on this server) BUT it is what the rules state you should communicate GLOBALLY with) is what many people have trouble with dealing with situations that could be easily avoided.

Saying "cc" or "cc pls" is so much easier for anyone to say, than to actually go out of your way to have a "small conversation" with someone eg. "Can you please find another channel this one is mine ~mapowner". Because its so much quicker and more efficient to say "cc", people actually find it rude for some reason and its almost "baiting or inviting" to say this in my opinion to spark a response from someone.

I can use an example of my culture and a situation i actually was so embarrased and had to explain to a random person i had in my party.

I was at petri's recieveing HS from a person when a good friend of mine come along to say hello.

Side note: Now in my country the "c" word is thrown around VERY lightly here and is barely considered offensive anymore because its used that much. (strayaaaaa)

So he says hello to me, and my hser replys with hello aswell. So my friend decides to reply with "sup c#$%" and as soon as i saw it i literally facepalmed. I did not know this person who was giving me HS, but i did know my friend was most likely going to cop a ban. Until i decided to go out of my way to explain to her our culture and she immediately "understood" thankfully, he did not mean to offend her obviously from "our cultural point of view".

Now i am good friends with this person to date and she is my current guild leader and she often calls me bad words now because she knows she can.(f4) and im going to quote someone that i saw in a thread a long time ago " people need to grow a thicker skin" i mean come on guys its 2016 on the internet, i dont mean that as if to say you can get away with whatever you want and have no consequences.

Honest opinion, to many loopholes for people to exploit. To many people think they are the local sheriff as well, but recently it seems people are actually going out of their way to entice people into getting banned, because they know they will get banned.

 

also id like to say this is the pot calling the kettle black in my eyes. you participated in calling lyrium a scammer over smegas today even though i assume it was a joke, in the public eye people who dont speak much english might not have known you were joking and just see a group of people saying "lyrium scammer" and assume he is a scammer. just my 2c if you are putting someone else on roast when this is the same thing "defamation of character" and not one of you did say you were kidding after it i may add

 

There was clear, significant difference between the type of smegas that were being sent in the situation @Jeen was referring to and the situation that involved @Lyrium. The messages being sent in the first case were stuff that I would never smega even about my least favorite person on the server. That level of toxicity and hatred has no place being publicly broadcast across the whole server.