Make sure to report public servers that kick for no reason

[pilgrim* 3514]

This is why I normally prefer official servers.

 

..//..

Trying to get back into the game over the past couple of days, it's happened so frequently (roughly 1/3 of all servers I've tried to log into) that I could spend my entire time reporting them. No, I'm not hopping, I'm just trying to get into a playable server. This is not helped by the fact that a high proportion of 'official' servers in my neck of the woods are broken.

 

The incentives here are clearly in favour of people doing this rather than not doing it, and something more substantial needs to be done IMHO.

 

Well - last week I had FOUR Public Hive servers I played regularly with 1 barrel on each of them. 

 

This Saturday evening:

2 of them are offline - I thought those 2 were "official" from two different SAs but I guess I was mistaken.. they are being moved to new owners, or the owners have turned them off for the weekend (Public admins have the right to do that). One came online with a new name then went off again.

1 of them is online with a ping of 66 but my FPS on that server is between 3 to 7 FPS in the middle of the forest -  I don't know what is going on there.

And the 4th one kicked me as soon as I joined (thanks guys, whoever the hell you are)

 

SO I HAVE ONE BARREL LEFT OUT of FOUR - do I give a damn about those stashes?  NO of course not

I just wanted to say, I understand the problem you guys are talking about.

 

* * *

 

so my 'playable' list is screwed again (sure, I can search some more ,but it's 3am)

The solution?   A friend has to contact me to say "here is ONE public server that is honest" - it is on the next continent.

I think we are not winning

 

xx pilgrim

Edited January 17, 2016 by pilgrim

[Mookie (original) 799]

No we're not pilgrim... :( There are two issues here.

 

First, I can't see how persistence is going to credibly work with a server structure and process like this. Ultimately, the ability for admins of public hive servers to kick people needs to be removed. And the GSP commitment to operating 'official' servers needs to be toughened up - at the very least.

 

Second, the much broader issue for the devs (and SMoss has posted on at least one of these threads) is that the time and energy investment that players make in an EA game has to be sacrificed for development. I can see that. But a side-effect is (much like the optimisation/engine issue) that it will put people off playing to start with - thereby limiting player feedback and testing. The long-term slump in DayZ SA players might be related to this.

 

So it's a bit circular. And it seems to me that unless development is re-prioritised, this will become a vicious circle.

[Surviv0r1969 151]

Heads Up Server To Avoid

Edited February 18, 2016 by Surviv0r1969

[emuthreat 2837]

thanx for that ColdAtrophy

it's now 3am here in Europe and  and I played 20 mins on a USA server

- ping of 155 to SchwaBAM's

 

seriously - thank you

 

But .. ya know .. can anyone tell me what the Public Hive is FOR any more?  It is just a cheap way of getting a private server for yourself ?

 

OK so the system has fallen to bits

SA has become another in the list of EXPLOIT games

It is sad to see that BI have lost control - after they put in so much effort

You must be "Dave."  Greets.  Help us make Bam's playhouse a more interesting place to set up shop.

 

I'm not sure that BI has put ANY  measurable effort into fixing the server abuse issues plaguing this game since before I started playing.  My first and only ban was because I more-than-hinted at possible actions that could be taken by their disgruntled clientele, should they continue to fail in providing playable public servers for their MMO survival game.

 

This is a serious issue, and they need to show some progress in fixing it.  A simple TOU agreement, and monetary penalties for offending server-renters would all-but-eliminate this issue overnight.

Given how seemingly simple it would be to solve this issue, I can only assume the BI is content with their playerbase becoming increasingly more habituated to abusive and exploitative strategies.

 

It would be a tremendous boost to consumer confidence if they made any sort of perceivable effort to appear to give a shit about how their game is played.

[roguetrooper 201]

To report illegally kicking servers/admins, it would be really helpful to have "last server you were on" (separate for 1st and 3rd person view, both with server name and IP adress) in the server browser. When I select a server from the browser, I look for 1st/3rd, ping, daytime and player amount, but I do not write down the server name with a pen on a paper.

[pilgrim* 3514]

No we're not pilgrim... :( There are two issues here.

 

First, I can't see how persistence is going to credibly work with a server structure and process like this. Ultimately, the ability for admins of public hive servers to kick people needs to be removed. And the GSP commitment to operating 'official' servers needs to be toughened up - at the very least.

 

Second, the much broader issue for the devs (and SMoss has posted on at least one of these threads) is that the time and energy investment that players make in an EA game has to be sacrificed for development. I can see that. But a side-effect is (much like the optimisation/engine issue) that it will put people off playing to start with - thereby limiting player feedback and testing. The long-term slump in DayZ SA players might be related to this.

 

So it's a bit circular. And it seems to me that unless development is re-prioritised, this will become a vicious circle.

 

Development means that patches and changes will happen - I am OK about that. Of course.

but half way through 'persistence' the game broke its spine.

BI lost control of the Public Hive

I'm not angry, I'm saying this because [i'm depressed] it is a pity to see so much effort go down the drain.

The game itself has become just one more exploit game on the heap;

There are plenty: DayZ failed to keep control of the Public Hive and it has become another game on that pile.

That's the new fun in playing - There is a list of dried, failed, exploit games that still exist for their exploit fun.

*

 

What is the advantage of following the Public Server Rules?  = zero

What is the disadvantage of breaking the Public Server Rules?  = zero

BI has lost control of the Public Hive - BI tried hard, but they did NOT win.

(even sadder because the Public Hive itself is 100% owned by BI, not by the SPs)

 

GSPs legally will not ever close a client account because of something that happens inside a game (that includes kicking)

Shutting a server = closing the client account. Same thing. The SPs will never close a client account because of a complaint from a player.

Check the law.

Now the Public Server exploit is a standard joke (everywhere except here)

Anyone and your mate, rent a Public Hive Server, you kick everyone; you do what the hell you like, you farm it,

and you can still go across the Public Hive to collect loot and to PVP.

This is like having your own LOCAL server running your game for 3-5 players

PLUS when you want, you can mess around on the other servers too

The gear you generated privately at home works anywhere in the world.

Doesn't matter what happens to you on other servers, you hop bases, you get killed, so what?

You log back to your own kick-server full of free food, free vehicles, and free gear. Do it as much as you like.

The players who say "play fair" are laughed at.  Who one cares about them online?

This is not a place for "fair play" people - go find some other game. This is an exploit game.

It could have been a great game.

At the end, a few dedicated players will run 'a few' private-list servers and it will be a minority game.

 

 

xx pilgrim

 

Edited January 18, 2016 by pilgrim

[ColdAtrophy 1850]

To report illegally kicking servers/admins, it would be really helpful to have "last server you were on" (separate for 1st and 3rd person view, both with server name and IP adress) in the server browser. When I select a server from the browser, I look for 1st/3rd, ping, daytime and player amount, but I do not write down the server name with a pen on a paper.

 

As much as I hate Reddit, I do check it occasionally. The devs communicate on there much more than they do on here. I found this. Hope it helps. https://www.reddit.com/r/dayz/comments/41c9me/dayz_last_multiplayer_server_script_for_windows/

Edited January 18, 2016 by ColdAtrophy

[pilgrim* 3514]

To report illegally kicking servers/admins, it would be really helpful to have "last server you were on" (separate for 1st and 3rd person view, both with server name and IP adress) in the server browser. When I select a server from the browser, I look for 1st/3rd, ping, daytime and player amount, but I do not write down the server name with a pen on a paper.

 

You highlight the game you want to play

You click Details

You take a screenshot with the STEAM screenshot key

Then you play

Now you have a permanent list of ALL the details of each server you play on - they are in order and dated.

( full IP - server name - number of players - it's all there stored for whenever you need it )

OK

 

Edited January 18, 2016 by pilgrim

[ColdAtrophy 1850]

It could have been a great game.

At the end, a few dedicated players will run 'a few' private-list servers and it will be a minority game.

 

It ain't over til it's over brother. Don't throw in the towel just yet.

[emuthreat 2837]

(snip)

What is the advantage of following the Public Server Rules?  = zero

What is the disadvantage of breaking the Public Server Rules?  = zero

BI has lost control of the Public Hive - BI tried hard, but they did NOT win.    Please do tell, where they tried hard to combat public server abuse.

(even sadder because the Public Hive itself is 100% owned by BI, not by the SPs)

 

GSPs legally will not ever close a client account because of something that happens inside a game (that includes kicking)

Shutting a server = closing the client account. Same thing. The SPs will never close a client account because of a complaint from a player.

Check the law.

(snip)

xx pilgrim

 

All it takes is a TOU/EULA.   A document stating that by agreeing to rent a public hive server, you agree to operate the server in accordance with all the rules--provided to server renter at the time of transaction.

 

Please do show me a law where it says that if a user breeches their service contract, that the service provider cannot legally cancel the service...

Or better yet; simply revoke admin privileges.  Problem solved.

Edited January 18, 2016 by emuthreat

[pilgrim* 3514]

All it takes is a TOU/EULA.   A document stating that by agreeing to rent a public hive server, you agree to operate the server in accordance with all the rules--provided to server renter at the time of transaction.

 

Please do show me a law where it says that if a user breeches their service contract, that the service provider cannot legally cancel the service...

Or better yet; simply revoke admin privileges.  Problem solved.

 

[explanation edited out]

 

this will not happen

 

xx

Edited January 19, 2016 by pilgrim

[emuthreat 2837]

Yes, I do not mean to cause offense at all.. just follow the argument: thanx:

 

- a EULA - that would be an agreement between the GSP and the account holder with the GSP.  An EULA is signed between Two Parties, you know this.

 

Where does Bohemia come into that?  BI is a separate company. They don't hire out DayZ instances. BI does not decide if the GSP opens a contract or not with a GSP client.

 

You might mean that AS WELL as opening an account with a GSP (and paying them) you would ALSO have to make a legal agreement with BI before the account was activated?

That is 2 separate agreements with two different companies. OK.

 

So those 2 companies - BI and the GSP - would have to agree BEFOREHAND that they would operate like this. Then BI would have to give an OK on each contract between the GSP and the person hiring a DayZ instance from the GSP before the account with the GSP was opened (that would be a first in online gaming).

 

OR do you mean that Bohemia could veto an account agreement between the GSP and one of their clients after the account was opened for that game, if Bohemia made a formal complaint to the GSP about that client? So that the GSP was forced by agreement with a third party (BI)  to close the contract they have with one of their clients? Well I know that in USA law the FBI can (as far as I understand) do that on FORMAL request, but I don't know that Bohemia International can do that. At the moment, I very strongly believe they can not.

 

OR - That you open a contract, sign the EULA, with BI first (free or paid), then BI give you a ticket that permits you to open a contract with a GSP?  Would GSPs accept that degree of business-oversight from a game-producer? Even if they did (unlikely!)  they would firstly double the price of DayZ hire to offset the costs of this new arrangement, which is a completely new activity outside the GSPs business structure.

OK - Well - that would be a first in online gaming at this level. Let's see if it happens.

 

OR (for example) - Does BI ever make any complaints to GSPs about the in-game actions of GSP contract holders?

Because if any of these scenarios were ever implemented BI would have to make formal complaints to the GSPs on specific instances, right?  And then the GSPs would be obliged by contract to act on them.

 

Finally - what have any of these THREE-SIDED contractual agreements between < BI - the GSP - and the BI-GSP Account Holder> what have they have to do with complaints from players?

Players have no contract with GSPs - They have a contact with STEAM.  Where does STEAM come into this?

 

Right. (ps - in passing:  a GSP could not ban a player even if it wanted to. And as for an admin - do you expect a GSP to blacklist his credit card number, but only for use on dayZ, not on other games?).

 

NO contract is going to be closed without legally valid evidence. What evidence would that be? Do you think 100 pissed-off players complaining about "unfairness" would be accepted as evidence? How do you know they didn't all make that up? You can not terminate a client's contract because someone is trolling him.

if you close a client's contract, what is to stop him opening another the next day?

 

Bohemia DO have complete control over their own Public Hive Server itself (I mean the place your character is stored) because that is their own equipment.

They could decide who could access that info (in order to play on Public Hive instances) but to what extent can they do that without a complicated negotiation with STEAM first?

Because when you buy the game from STEAM you buy access to the BI Public Hive Server included with the game. Right?

 

= = =

 

Even then - The bottom line is not "agreement" - it is WHO has the will and the time to enforce that agreement?

Look around you - you know the answer to this one.

 

Sorry to be so boring, but agreements that can be acted on between profit-making companies in the real world are not made by a couple of guys saying  "right dude, we'll kind of definitely do something about this, really, OK?" .. nothing happens. So your idea is great - "revoke admin privileges" - but it will not work, it does not happen, and no one will agree to it.

 

I'll be totally happy to be shown wrong.

 

xx

 

I might be oversimplifying it, but an ELUA is a ubiquitous implicit contract included in every piece of commercial software .  By using the software, you are agreeing to do so in a manner consistent with the expectations of the manufacturer, and license to use such software can be revoked at will.  In the US, there is quite a bit of power held by those who make the products, but they generally don't have to enforce it often.  Still it is fairly common for gaming accounts to be sanctioned, suspended or banned for disruptive behavior.

 

The difference here, is that the public hive system is profoundly exploitable, and heavily exploited.  I have never personally rented a server, but I would expect the rental agreement to include a copy of the Public Server Hosting Rules. The rules are published; it is not a matter of knowing what to do; it is not a matter of hammering out the terms; it is simply a matter of ensuring that GSP's are providing the service as specified in the server hosting rules.

 

If a customer rents a public hive server and names it "High LOOT [MLG] Clan Only, Join=Kick" they should have their server reverted to default settings, all admin privileges suspended, and their payment retained; they should get a message stating exactly what they did wrong, a link to where that information was previously given to them, and a reminder that they may continue to rent their server, and that their admin privileges will be restored in four weeks.  If after those four weeks, they still administer the server in a forbidden manner, they will receive another suspension of admin privileges.

 

I'll have to concede that it comes down to Bohemia putting pressure on GSP's to only allow servers hosting DayZ in a compliant manner. There are dozens of instances of servers that are in clear violation of the rules.  Correcting these will have negative consequences for whom?  If BI and GSPs are afraid of losing customers who abuse the game, they are putting themselves at risk of liability for taking money for every copy of the game that they sold, having failed to act to provide public servers in a manner in which their own publications specify.

 

This isn't an either-or situation.  BI has specified the rules for hosting a public server.  These rules have not been effectively enforced.  I have heard that an integrated server reporting tool will be added into the game at some point.  But the problem still persists, that the longer they allow this type of behavior, the more ingrained it will be.  And if after Beta, this has still not been effectively dealt with, this will be an enormous public embarrassment.

 

Public server renters need to be held accountable to the standards of the public hive system.

 

If BI does not have this capability, they need to get it, and use it.

 

If BI does have this capability, they need to use it sooner rather than later, to prevent the prevailing game culture from degrading any further.

[Mookie (original) 799]

 

I might be oversimplifying it, but an ELUA is a ubiquitous implicit contract included in every piece of commercial software .  By using the software, you are agreeing to do so in a manner consistent with the expectations of the manufacturer, and license to use such software can be revoked at will.  In the US, there is quite a bit of power held by those who make the products, but they generally don't have to enforce it often.  Still it is fairly common for gaming accounts to be sanctioned, suspended or banned for disruptive behavior.

 

The difference here, is that the public hive system is profoundly exploitable, and heavily exploited.  I have never personally rented a server, but I would expect the rental agreement to include a copy of the Public Server Hosting Rules. The rules are published; it is not a matter of knowing what to do; it is not a matter of hammering out the terms; it is simply a matter of ensuring that GSP's are providing the service as specified in the server hosting rules.

 

If a customer rents a public hive server and names it "High LOOT [MLG] Clan Only, Join=Kick" they should have their server reverted to default settings, all admin privileges suspended, and their payment retained; they should get a message stating exactly what they did wrong, a link to where that information was previously given to them, and a reminder that they may continue to rent their server, and that their admin privileges will be restored in four weeks.  If after those four weeks, they still administer the server in a forbidden manner, they will receive another suspension of admin privileges.

 

I'll have to concede that it comes down to Bohemia putting pressure on GSP's to only allow servers hosting DayZ in a compliant manner. There are dozens of instances of servers that are in clear violation of the rules.  Correcting these will have negative consequences for whom?  If BI and GSPs are afraid of losing customers who abuse the game, they are putting themselves at risk of liability for taking money for every copy of the game that they sold, having failed to act to provide public servers in a manner in which their own publications specify.

 

This isn't an either-or situation.  BI has specified the rules for hosting a public server.  These rules have not been effectively enforced.  I have heard that an integrated server reporting tool will be added into the game at some point.  But the problem still persists, that the longer they allow this type of behavior, the more ingrained it will be.  And if after Beta, this has still not been effectively dealt with, this will be an enormous public embarrassment.

 

Public server renters need to be held accountable to the standards of the public hive system.

 

If BI does not have this capability, they need to get it, and use it.

 

If BI does have this capability, they need to use it sooner rather than later, to prevent the prevailing game culture from degrading any further.

 

Couldn't agree more. Putting the onus on us as players to report servers might have worked when they were an occasional exception to the rule.

 

But the problem is now so widespread that (i) if I reported every server that kicked me, I would essentially have no time to actually play the game and (ii) even if the GSPs were once doing something about such reports, they certainly are not now (not least because some GSPs are at best 'virtual' organisations).

[pilgrim* 3514]

I have run in to this just the once so far. I reported them and it seemed to have worked in my case. I agree with the OP, don't take that kinda crap, report it!

 

 

Sorry to reply so late to your post cash81 but I am afraid you are mistaken:

 

Please check:

You will see the server you reported is still running with the same IP and another name.

 

You have no way of knowing if the admin is the same or not.

GSPs do not close client accounts when their account holders kick players from DayZ

 

sorry to be so blunt

xx pilgrim

[cash81 506]

Sorry to reply so late to your post cash81 but I am afraid you are mistaken:

 

Please check:

You will see the server you reported is still running with the same IP and another name.

 

You have no way of knowing if the admin is the same or not.

GSPs do not close client accounts when their account holders kick players from DayZ

 

sorry to be so blunt

xx pilgrim

No worries, i just know that once i reported them i stopped getting kicked over and over lol

[Brokenbones 62]

4 hours ago, lorinacoghlan said:

Savvy comments , Coincidentally , if your business have been needing to merge some PDF files , my secretary used a tool here http://www.altomerge.com/.

A perfect example of the spam that got away !

[[DGN] Johnny 115]

I absolutely despise this practice.