Make sure to report public servers that kick for no reason

[General Zod 1114]

hmmm..so what is a  "one person server"  exactly ??

 

xx

Server with one person on it. 

[pilgrim* 3513]

Server with one person on it. 

 

 

Ok thanks for that, Zod i'm totally impressed by your IQ there - I thought a "one person server" was a public server where the admin kicked everyone else who joined..

 

we used to call them loot farms but now they are standard so we call them public "one person servers" according to KenoSkir88

 

Around where I live pretty much ALL the public servers with 1-3 people online late evening will very often  kick a stranger within a few minutes of joining

 

you might get to play for 10 - 12 minutes but often NOT

 

Note: the other thing these "one person servers" do is turn the server OFF when the admin is not playing  (how 'private' can you get and still be 'public hive'?)

 

I live in France - Boneboys knows the situation here.

 

Look back through the threads, people - I have spent plenty of effort and research anbd time on this subject.

 

I have reported abuses. I know exactly how many people investigate abuses, per SP, per continent.

I know their names, I know what they do, I know the hours they work, I know their job descriptions.

 

I have written whole essays explaining what happens, and WHY it happens.

 

You guys DO realise that for each SP there is ONE person in Europe with a job description that MIGHT let him check if an admin is acting BAD  ??

 

You do REALIZE the ONE STAFF has Other Stuff to Do and his job description says "deal with paying clients", and the player who complains is NOT a  paying client ??

 

You do realize the GUY is NOT at work in his OFFICE after 7pm in the evening, so he is NOT CHECKING ANY ABUSES AT ALL during normal playing hours ??

 

==

 

I asked those specific SP employees - very politely, by name  - to  join in these forum discussions, but not one took up the offer

 

But yes, PLAYERS,  sure, keep sending in the complaints.. this IS YOUR GAME. And  In the meantime read back through the forums and see why and how this  mess got started

 

UNDERSTANDING the problem is the Only Way anyone can begin to make it better. The problem  is NOT bad admins, the problem is how they are policed.

 

xx

 

 

WHY

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                        

Edited December 16, 2015 by pilgrim

[UKA Harrysoon 67]

Don't understand why they can't just remove commands and block tools allowing to kick from public servers. Remove BEC so they can't whitelist. Remove option to password the server, and block RCon admins, so tools like DaRT can't be used.

[q.S Sachiel 470]

--snip--

WHY

 

                                                                                                                        

 

Interesting rant.  Not going to verify your information on declared assets etc, but if correct, it would appear that even if you were to make it economic to check and assess complaint validity, it would be uneconomic in the long run for complaints to be acted upon (and servers / admins punished).

 

So long story short, if the information is valid, these practices are guaranteed to continue and there is no forseeable solution, short of some benevolent party with lots of money to come to the table and pick up the slack, ie: host the servers -inadvertantly causing a competition issue with these smaller guys, putting them out of business anyway, likely- or implement check/punish processes in an automated/economic way (which would ultimately result in loss of clients in my opinion to the smaller companys anyway, again).

 

So nothing changes; players win and companies lose; or ???? profit

 

BI could open it up to client hosted, but then badmins would have complete control and there would be less demand for corporate dedicated servers, or BI could host the servers (very unlikely) and then the smaller guys would be eked out, again.

Edited December 16, 2015 by q.S Sachiel

[pilgrim* 3513]

Interesting rant.  Not going to verify your information on declared assets etc, but if correct, it would appear that even if you were to make it economic to check and assess complaint validity, it would be uneconomic in the long run for complaints to be acted upon (and servers / admins punished).

 

So long story short, if the information is valid, these practices are guaranteed to continue and there is no forseeable solution, short of some benevolent party with lots of money to come to the table and pick up the slack, ie: host the servers -inadvertantly causing a competition issue with these smaller guys, putting them out of business anyway, likely- or implement check/punish processes in an automated/economic way (which would ultimately result in loss of clients in my opinion to the smaller companys anyway, again).

 

So nothing changes; players win and companies lose; or ???? profit

 

BI could open it up to client hosted, but then badmins would have complete control and there would be less demand for corporate dedicated servers, or BI could host the servers (very unlikely) and then the smaller guys would be eked out, again.

 

No it is not a RANT

it is a concise outline explaining how the games industry is structured, made simple to be understandable even to naive folk, young people, gamers with very limited business experience, and interested parties with short attention spans. Anyone who can watch a 30 minute documentary but can not read 12 lines of simple text is SCREWED. This is not an insult, it is a simple general truth about life; and  I mean - you shall have problems in your lives and you shall NEVER know where they are coming from. You will not solve those problems.

 

The info you "are not going to verify" is public domain, The government in any Western country REQUIRES this information, it is unlikely to be false (governments don't like false declarations). I gave the links. This stuff is open to everyone and it is public domain for a reason (you have heard of democracy?) - check it out. Put 2 and 2 together for yourself.

 

NO, it is not true that "these practices are guaranteed to continue". It IS TRUE that there is no mechanism in place to improve the situation.

 

Time to set up an oversight mechanism, right?

 

The actors involved are BI and the SPs.. Given this FACT, it is very easy for anyone with half a brain see why the situation has arisen and why it continues.

 

There is an agreement between BI and each of the SPs. When you find it, put it up here on the forum to remind everyone what it states exactly. And tell us what happens when the terms of the agreement are broken? Just the bit about illegal server admin activities. HOW are they POLICED ?

 

[edit] SPs in normal operation have NO interest in what goes on inside a game. The SP provides the server, it installs the game. An SP might be paying for 25,000 servers with 300 different games running on them, at at typically 6 games instances per server. So the SP has maybe 7500000 individual games, set up to hire out. The SP does NOT interest itself - it does not ever interfere at all - in what happens inside those games. Game-play is not the SPs business.

 

And note - not all the SPs are very small (in manpower) - at least one chosen by BI, is pretty BIG, and games are just a minor sector of it's activities.

 

So the BI agreement with SPs was to bring together the Game Designer and the Server Provider. Then both sides could cooperate in a way that does not normally happen with SPs. It is an unusual agreement - based on this game having unusual game-play requirements, and instance use/abuse, game-maintenance, and unpaid 'official' servers, The aim was to make DayZ work for the players.

 

What are the Sanctions in this agreement? How is it Enforced? WHO checks complaints from players who have not hired a server (ie gamers who are not clients of an SP and have no hire&support agreement with the SP). How much free support should the SPs give them? Normally SP's never provide player support, only technical server support. Have some SPs decided they are being asked too much?

 

IF goodwill is not enough - what can BI do if it thinks the SPs are not upholding the BI-SP agreement or if the SPs are not going with the SPIRIT of the agreement? Who checks the SPs actions?

What should BI do, exactly?

 

I worked out the situation, and pointed to the future problems, and some possible answers to this stuff a year ago, I don't have anything to add - have a nice christmas.

 

xx

Edited December 31, 2015 by pilgrim

[q.S Sachiel 470]

Sorry, no intent to wound with 'rant' i think you called it such in the post.  3/4 down first page.  I think you meant it in a self-depreciative but innocent way as did i.  I should have said 'informative text'.

And by not verify i mean double check against the information you provided, ie: take your listed 'freedom of information' information on face value.

I found it interesting, and you put at least a minimum of effort into researching these companies' information to provide what would appear to be a semi-fact based argument at least.

 

Yes, it's not guaranteed the practices will continue, and that there are few checks in place.

Ultimately it appears to be a rather unregulated area of an already grey-zone-to-the-ceiling software industry.

 

I feel it's unlikely to see any change if there is no driving force, incentive or regulation required.  Ultimately in the absence of these factors, profit maximisation will be the dominating force on behavior, and as you said, most companies are small and can not afford to bother, and the ones that can will see it as a largely un-necessary expense.

 

The only main driving factor i could see at the moment is if the problem devolves to a point where the credibility and / or reliability of experiences to be enjoyed in the game are damaged, or public perception sees it as such, forcing one's hand.

 

And again, i see any real change being a direct threat to these smaller companies, based on your information.  Not that that should matter at all, as such is business, and it's not like DayZ is the sole game out there propping them up.  I'm sure there are alternatives, so the savvy business would just switch to something more reliable (read: less input required) if they were faced with a requirement of administering greater degrees of oversight and paid work.

Edited December 16, 2015 by q.S Sachiel

[IgnobleBasterd 161]

Like the topic says, if a public shard server is kicking you for no reason make sure to report them to their GSP. I've reported two in the last 24hrs myself. Read here for information on reporting. People can't run a public shard server and treat it as private for themselves or their clan mates. If they want to kick, then they need to run a private shard. 

There really needs to be an in-game Report Server option. It is just too much of a hassle to mail around to different server owners and shit.

[Bonappetit 117]

As someone mentioned above, report and get rid of one server and two new servers pop up which are against the rules. So how do we deal with that? My suggestion would be to inforce the public rules for every new server owner and for the name server to go through some type of approval when naming server therefore the server won't go active until they accept the server name that fits the legall server naming norm.

Edited December 18, 2015 by Miracool

[KenoSkir88 181]

Ok thanks for that, Zod i'm totally impressed by your IQ there - I thought a "one person server" was a public server where the admin kicked everyone else who joined..

 

we used to call them loot farms but now they are standard so we call them public "one person servers" according to KenoSkir88..

 

Put your toys back in the pram sunshine. It's a server with 1 person on it, you can't ask a stupid question and complain when someone answers it for ya ;)

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

We can simply start by closing all servers with names that are advertising kicking AND ban the people who made them.

 

Then work your way through servers with legit names that still kick, banning the players who make those.

 

In time it will whittle down the numbers at least.

 

Also, low pop isn't just for looting.

 

That only applies if all you do is PvP.

 

Some of us play on low pop to avoid KoS.

 

I have a better variety of experiences on 1PP servers that are less than half full and the chances of running into pure KoS seem less on average because like minded players are regulars on the same type of servers.

Edited December 19, 2015 by BioHaze

[pilgrim* 3513]

Put your toys back in the pram sunshine. It's a server with 1 person on it, you can't ask a stupid question and complain when someone answers it for ya ;)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#Dialectic

 

Nope, a "one person server" is a server where the admin kicks everyone who tries to join - go take a look. Or maybe just read the thread.

 

( you gonna be hungover this morning ) sunshine

Edited December 19, 2015 by pilgrim

[yazar8 584]

Ok thanks for that, Zod i'm totally impressed by your IQ there - I thought a "one person server" was a public server where the admin kicked everyone else who joined..

 

we used to call them loot farms but now they are standard so we call them public "one person servers" according to KenoSkir88

 

Around where I live pretty much ALL the public servers with 1-3 people online late evening will very often  kick a stranger within a few minutes of joining

 

you might get to play for 10 - 12 minutes but often NOT

 

Note: the other thing these "one person servers" do is turn the server OFF when the admin is not playing  (how 'private' can you get and still be 'public hive'?)

 

I live in France - Boneboys knows the situation here.

 

Look back through the threads, people - I have spent plenty of effort and research anbd time on this subject.

 

I have reported abuses. I know exactly how many people investigate abuses, per SP, per continent.

I know their names, I know what they do, I know the hours they work, I know their job descriptions.

 

I have written whole essays explaining what happens, and WHY it happens.

 

You guys DO realise that for each SP there is ONE person in Europe with a job description that MIGHT let him check if an admin is acting BAD  ??

 

You do REALIZE the ONE STAFF has Other Stuff to Do and his job description says "deal with paying clients", and the player who complains is NOT a  paying client ??

 

You do realize the GUY is NOT at work in his OFFICE after 7pm in the evening, so he is NOT CHECKING ANY ABUSES AT ALL during normal playing hours ??

 

==

 

I asked those specific SP employees - very politely, by name  - to  join in these forum discussions, but not one took up the offer

 

But yes, PLAYERS,  sure, keep sending in the complaints.. this IS YOUR GAME. And  In the meantime read back through the forums and see why and how this  mess got started

 

UNDERSTANDING the problem is the Only Way anyone can begin to make it better. The problem  is NOT bad admins, the problem is how they are policed.

 

xx

 

 

WHY

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                        

 

This is why BI should take care of the abuse complaints. Not some poor guy called Lee.

[KenoSkir88 181]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#Dialectic

 

Nope, a "one person server" is a server where the admin kicks everyone who tries to join - go take a look. Or maybe just read the thread.

 

( you gonna be hungover this morning ) sunshine

 

Since you were quoting me in the first place, i'm fairly sure i know what meaning i assigned to the words mate. Servers with one person on them. We're all aware what they're used for but you can have a gold star anyway if that makes you feel better. The upshot of my statement as everyone except you seems to understand, is that nothing is likely to be done about them but they ARE easily avoided if you don't like being repeatedly kicked.

 

It's a bit strange to complain loudly about not being able to loot risk free, while complaining loudly about someone else being able to loot risk free.

[General Zod 1114]

It's a bit strange to complain loudly about not being able to loot risk free, while complaining loudly about someone else being able to loot risk free.

Is it ? Yes we complain because they give themselves and advantage by breaking the rules. Plus with the rampant kos from massive stockpiles of weapons in the game is discouraging people from playing on populated servers. 

[KenoSkir88 181]

Is it ? Yes we complain because they give themselves and advantage by breaking the rules. Plus with the rampant kos from massive stockpiles of weapons in the game is discouraging people from playing on populated servers. 

 

Umm.. yeah it is. Read carefully tho, i didn't say either was ok. Neither are exactly above board.

 

My point is, if a person wants to join 0 or 1 person servers so they can loot risk free, they have a lesser leg to stand on looking down at the server owner for wanting the same thing.

 

In my opinion the only people with room to complain are the ones playing on full servers like you're supposed to, and constantly fighting fully geared players from one or other of the above groups. Note, these people literally never get kicked because they don't join extremely low pop servers to avoid risk.

[pilgrim* 3513]

. Read carefully

..//..

In my opinion the only people with room to complain are the ones playing on full servers like you're supposed to ...

..//..

these people literally never get kicked because they don't join extremely low pop servers to avoid risk.

 

OK I understand :

If everyone joined low pop servers, then those servers would be full servers

 

I wonder why nobody thought of that?

 

Let's all try it

 

xx

 

(no offence, hope you don't mind a little irony there, KenoSkir88 )

Edited December 19, 2015 by pilgrim

[KenoSkir88 181]

OK I understand :

If everyone joined low pop servers, then those servers would be full servers

 

I wonder why nobody thought of that?

 

Let's all try it

 

xx

 

(no offence, hope you don't mind a little irony there, KenoSkir88 )

 

You don't sound clever, and there is no irony at work here.

 

If everyone joined lowpop servers, we'd have a LOT of people on here complaining about being kicked a lot. Oh actually it seems like that's exactly what's happened and what needs to stop to rectify the situation (on the understanding that the server providers aren't going to lose money to fix things).

 

No offense taken, this is the internet and there's always one ;)

[General Zod 1114]

You don't sound clever

And here we go ad hominem. 

Can't beat them ? Insult them. 

Zod out, 

[KenoSkir88 181]

Can't beat them ? Insult them. 

 

Did both, won internet.

[General Zod 1114]

Did both, won internet.

Your insult invalidates any point you made since you started with a insult. 

[KenoSkir88 181]

Wow.

 

Look, have some beanz and listen because this all just sounds stupid now.

 

Your post about everyone joining lowpop servers just didn't make a lot of sense given the discussion. All I've done is draw a parallel between people using their server for private looting (i do not condone this) and the people who most often complain about them, by which i mean those who join near 0 pop servers with the goal of a risk free looting session (i also do not condone this). I note that it is unlikely we will see any large amount of loot servers removed because the server providers will not want to lose their income, and in the absence of this option the best bet is to just play on servers with more people on them, which i quietly consider a "more legitimate" way to loot anyway.

[General Zod 1114]

It's not just risk free. It's about item re spawn rate and distribution. Some items are very common, all assault rifles, and magazines, or military clothing. But some items that should be more common are too rare which means you can't find them on populated server. Hence trying to find it on low pop. The difference is, anyone can join that server and loot too. While no one can loot on server with abusive admin. 

Edited December 19, 2015 by General Zod

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello there

 

Note in this thread a member I assisted a day or so ago reported a bunch of servers and successfully had them taken down etc.

 

Keep reporting in the correct way.

 

Rdgs

 

LoK

[General Zod 1114]

Hello there

 

Note in this thread a member I assisted a day or so ago reported a bunch of servers and successfully had them taken down etc.

 

Keep reporting in the correct way.

 

Rdgs

 

LoK

 

One down 99 more to go 

[pilgrim* 3513]

OK, So here are some FACTS - so we can have something concrete to argue about

-Tonight I set my server list to show ping <100 .And this is what I saw tonight, Saturday night 1800h in Europe (primetime?).

 

I see 450 public servers:

 

only 40 servers out of 450 public servers have 15+ players online

 

250 public servers have 5 to 14 players (max) per server (usually around 8-11 players)

 

160 public servers have 1-4 players

 

*

410 public servers from those 450 have an average of less than 7 players online tonight (that's 91% of all the public servers I polled)

 

 

Why am I am seeing 40 medium/high pop and  400 low pop ?

( just 7 public servers were really full in my list )

 

If we take it that 15+ players counts as 'high pop' then it works out that for each 1 high pop public server there are 40 low pop.

So, for instance, all these "hoppers" each have to hop 40 times to turn up just once on each of the low pop servers. I think hoppers are an urban myth.

 

When I do the math, from the figures for 'who is online tonight' from my list (remember I have to count 15+ players as 'high pop" - what I call "medium to high pop")

To get the figures, I average out the players per server according to the populations I have noted, I find the max possible, the min possible, and average those -  and ...

 

medium to high pop players =  1100

low pop players =  2775

 

players on 'real' high- pop (i.e. FULL) public servers = about 450

 

so are the 400 low pop admins sad and lonely on their pubic servers?  There are a REAL LOT of low pop public servers on Saturday night.. right? 

If they ARE all kicking strangers, as KenoSkir88 suggests, I guess they want to stay 'clan-only' and low-pop? Or they just don't like strangers?

And if they are not kicking, why do 400+ public servers have around 7 players per server? Do 'vanilla' players like to crowd together on a couple of maxed-out servers?

 

So now you all can argue from the facts, instead of arguing from emotion with no logical backup.

 

I have one little question (just for myself) What number of players makes a server "legitimate" to play on?  Is 40/40 the ideal ?

More than two-thirds of tonight's public server players are on servers with tops 14 players or less - are they all "wrong"?

 

xx

Edited December 19, 2015 by pilgrim