Stupidity

[Davis]

Azzer, when you're told by the people that they tried to upgrade their servers and ****ed up and that they were still trying to fix it you should have imidiatly made it so people can log in but get a message "sever had this issue, game is froze until server's are stable" but instead he puts up a overview message and disappears leaving the server in chaos, some people haven't even had issues getting online while others the sever comes up for about 30 seconds then goes back down. Not near enough time to plan/send defense. Now ontop of this people can rush and then the server goes down for some people while others it doesn't so it continues to tick but no defense can be sent, and a few times (this is all just from the alliance i am im sure it has happened elsewhere) it doesn't even show up to anyone till its atf2 due to server lagging about.

Now another issue this brings is that the people that sent out attacks all day and got land shouldn't be punished, they did nothing wrong they sent attacks like always and just happened to get lucky due to stupidity. but there seriously needs to be something done about this. However I'm not able to offer a solution due to never having experiance with what azzer is capable of doing with the sever, but the only thing i can think of that would be fair is set everyone that lost land/troops's staff/land back to what it was before the server issues, but don't send anyone into the negative, idk just all so confusing, should have and could have been prevented.

 

[Alcibiades]

Shouldn't this be in gripes?

And I don't think a rollback is fair for those of us who've been able to play since we may have gained a lot (or not) in the interim. I don't think it's possible for Azzer to do a rollback to a recent time (i don't know how the servers and backups work either); however I do know that it is impossible for him to return troops/land since this issue has come up before with fraudulent BCs etc.

Let the game roll on!

 

[Davis]

alci i know its possible to some extent because when SOTB got raped by azzer for land farming afterwards azzer gave all the dutchies their troops back because they convinced him that not speaking good english meant they didn't know they were land farming just sending where told

 

[Alcibiades]

Well considering that it's been a full day (almost) of server stutters, I think the number of attacks out and the complexity of the involved attacks would prove it to be very very difficult.

I don't know the conditions of the SOTB rape, but i suspect if he did it with Gov't Units, then it would be a simple matter for him, instead of a BR where multiple players were involved, with different units. I think that might be a trifle more difficult than simply replacing lost staff to Gov't Units.

 

[Zaheen]

Shouldn't this be in gripes?

And I don't think a rollback is fair for those of us who've been able to play since we may have gained a lot (or not) in the interim. I don't think it's possible for Azzer to do a rollback to a recent time (i don't know how the servers and backups work either); however I do know that it is impossible for him to return troops/land since this issue has come up before with fraudulent BCs etc.

Let the game roll on!

You don't think it's fair on those who have been able to play?

With almost every post you make you sound like such a dumbass, so it's perfectly fair for those who were unable to load up the login page to be raped/farmed? That is fair to you?

You missed the point entirely, as usual.

 

[Hobbezak]

Shouldn't this be in gripes?

And I don't think a rollback is fair for those of us who've been able to play since we may have gained a lot (or not) in the interim. I don't think it's possible for Azzer to do a rollback to a recent time (i don't know how the servers and backups work either); however I do know that it is impossible for him to return troops/land since this issue has come up before with fraudulent BCs etc.

Let the game roll on!

You don't think it's fair on those who have been able to play?

With almost every post you make you sound like such a dumbass, so it's perfectly fair for those who were unable to load up the login page to be raped/farmed? That is fair to you?

You missed the point entirely, as usual.

Nah, I don't think he missed the point.
He's just looking at it from another perspective.
Sure it's majorly unfair on whoever got killed because they couldn't log on. I don't think alci is trying to deny that.
He's merely saying that the users that did get in, did put effort into killing the others. If you just perform a rollback, then whoever planned the attacks, did all that in vain. It's obviously not fair on him (and the attackers) either to then just say "oh you put in effort. Tough break.".

So we're dealing here with a matter of "the lesser of two evils", imho. And I think that's what alci was trying to say.

 

[Dark_Angel]

Moved to Gripes.

I completely get what you're saying in this post - You're one of many people who are understandably frustrated because you've lost out because of server downtime.


It is worth remembering that as a website Bushtarion is an extremely reliable game. Downtime is not something we as users have to put up with very often. The truth is, though, all servers suffer this at some point (whether through a fault, or, as in this case, during maintenance). The Bush server has only ever been down a handful of times, yesterday being one of our more troubling downtime experiences. Bushtarion, simply because of the way the game works on a tick-based basis, is prone to downtime being very damaging on it's users. Many of the problems caused are really difficult to avoid/prepare for.

On behalf of Azzer I'd like to apologize to all those affected by the downtime.

-

Additionally, for those of you unable to view Messages from Admin (eg forum only users)

Yesterday's Server Issues:
The data-centre in Chicago that Bushtarion is hosted in yesterday upgraded their major core routers - these can be considered the "Lifelines" or backbones of a data-centre, and it's not something a data-centre would do regularly (once a decade!?). While it should have been a fairly smooth and seamless operation that wouldn't have had much impact on any servers (and thus you guys and other websites) - things didn't go according to plan, which affected every single server in the data-centre (not just Bushtarion). You can see the full progress report as they discovered and worked on various problems, along with a very apologetic letter from the owner of Steadfast Networks, here. I can only apologise for the trouble this may have caused, and remind people that the Bushtarion ticker automatically stops if it cannot make it's own connection to the outside world (each tick, it tries to connect to major servers such as Google, Yahoo and others - if it's unable to, it won't tick that tick - if it manages to get a connection in reasonable time, it ticks). Thanks for being patient with it yesterday!

 

[Razorwolf]

Nah, I don't think he missed the point.
He's just looking at it from another perspective.
Sure it's majorly unfair on whoever got killed because they couldn't log on. I don't think alci is trying to deny that.
He's merely saying that the users that did get in, did put effort into killing the others. If you just perform a rollback, then whoever planned the attacks, did all that in vain. It's obviously not fair on him (and the attackers) either to then just say "oh you put in effort. Tough break.".

So we're dealing here with a matter of "the lesser of two evils", imho. And I think that's what alci was trying to say.

what effort in attacking? attacking people that couldnt defend... so not much effort was needed... and what more looking at it from another angle,its not fair on the defender if they couldnt even get online... and if there was a roll back (not saying there will be) then the attackers arnt being punished, they just simply would have been stopped from taking advantage of the situation

 

[Hobbezak]

Nah, I don't think he missed the point.
He's just looking at it from another perspective.
Sure it's majorly unfair on whoever got killed because they couldn't log on. I don't think alci is trying to deny that.
He's merely saying that the users that did get in, did put effort into killing the others. If you just perform a rollback, then whoever planned the attacks, did all that in vain. It's obviously not fair on him (and the attackers) either to then just say "oh you put in effort. Tough break.".

So we're dealing here with a matter of "the lesser of two evils", imho. And I think that's what alci was trying to say.

what effort in attacking? attacking people that couldnt defend... so not much effort was needed... and what more looking at it from another angle,its not fair on the defender if they couldnt even get online... and if there was a roll back (not saying there will be) then the attackers arnt being punished, they just simply would have been stopped from taking advantage of the situation

How would the attackers have known that the defenders couldn't defend? Wouldn't it seem obvious that if the game was responding well enough to attack, there was the possibility that the game was responding well enough to defend? Sure, it would've been a ***** to coordinate, but if player A can send an attack, it would only seem normal that he'd assume player B can come online either to send out, or send defence.
The knife cuts both ways. If the defenders did manage to organise defence, then it would be a ***** for the attackers to figure the situation out, possibly leading to bad calls on recalling etc.

And @Zaheen: I would think that my post was fairly objective. I clearly stated no opinion on whether or not the situation should be rollbacked, merely saying there are 2 sides to the story. An objectivity one would expect from someone like you, being not involved in either of the 2 sides.

 

[Razorwolf]

How would the attackers have known that the defenders couldn't defend? Wouldn't it seem obvious that if the game was responding well enough to attack, there was the possibility that the game was responding well enough to defend? Sure, it would've been a ***** to coordinate, but if player A can send an attack, it would only seem normal that he'd assume player B can come online either to send out, or send defence.
The knife cuts both ways. If the defenders did manage to organise defence, then it would be a ***** for the attackers to figure the situation out, possibly leading to bad calls on recalling etc.

i never said that the attackers wouldnt have known if they could defend or not. However, the point is being that the defenders didnt have the same opportunity as the attackers, And by accident or purpose it gave them an unfair advantage

 

[Hobbezak]

How would the attackers have known that the defenders couldn't defend? Wouldn't it seem obvious that if the game was responding well enough to attack, there was the possibility that the game was responding well enough to defend? Sure, it would've been a ***** to coordinate, but if player A can send an attack, it would only seem normal that he'd assume player B can come online either to send out, or send defence.
The knife cuts both ways. If the defenders did manage to organise defence, then it would be a ***** for the attackers to figure the situation out, possibly leading to bad calls on recalling etc.

i never said that the attackers wouldnt have known if they could defend or not. However, the point is being that the defenders didnt have the same opportunity as the attackers, And by accident or purpose it gave them an unfair advantage

Of course it gave them an advantage, I'm not saying it didn't. I'm saying the attackers did put in effort to get this attack going, having the same limitations as the defenders. Which means that their effort will be in vain if you rollback the situation.
Again, I am not saying it should or shouldn't be rolled back. I'm just saying there are 2 sides.

 

[Razorwolf]

how the hell can they have the same limitations as the defenders if the defenders cant even get online in the first place... You yourself said it gave them the advantage? And imo their efforts should be in vain because it wasnt fair, plain and simple. Im not asking for a rollback, i just dont want people thinking that they did something great simply because they managed to kill a few people who couldnt defend. No effort needed

That said, there should have been a plan for this kind of situation. The server really shoulda been frozen until all the issues had been sorted and therefore this whole conversation would have been redundant.

 

[tobapopalos]

That said, there should have been a plan for this kind of situation. The server really shoulda been frozen until all the issues had been sorted and therefore this whole conversation would have been redundant.

No doubt in that scenario we'd have another load of people moaning on here about how the server was down and there should be back-ups so that it never does. In a situation like this there are always going to be people who complain. They need to get over it.

 

[Hobbezak]

how the hell can they have the same limitations as the defenders if the defenders cant even get online in the first place... You yourself said it gave them the advantage? And imo their efforts should be in vain because it wasnt fair, plain and simple. Im not asking for a rollback, i just dont want people thinking that they did something great simply because they managed to kill a few people who couldnt defend. No effort needed

Do you want to discuss or do you just want to repeat what you've said over and over again, without reading what I've said?

1. Attackers do not know whether defenders can come online/can send. Ergo they plan an attack assuming they can. This requires effort. The attackers cannot possibly know whether the defenders can come online, otherwise they would obviously have to invest less effort into planning.

2. Attackers have to manage to send. If defenders complain about not being able to defend, then attackers must be in a difficult position if they want everyone to send as planned. This requires effort.

3. Attackers and defenders have the same limitations. An attacker might not be able to send, leading to a possibly failed attack. Defenders might not be able to send, leading to a possibly failed defence. Both have the same limitations, being the server. If the defenders manage to pull off a succesful defence, it's possible the attackers cannot recall due to them suffering from server problems, leading to a succesful defence and a failed attack.
Ergo in this case, the attackers took a major risk, and it would be unfair on them to take away their reward for taking this risk.

4. The advantages the attackers have over the defenders, are:
- The initiative (as always when attacking)
- The fact that with the crap connection, it would be difficult to coordinate defence, and that offliners could have a difficult time to come online. Emphasis on could.

Anyway, no one is saying they did great, or if they did, I haven't seen it. I am just saying, regardless of the server situation, planning and executing an attack requires effort, and doing this attack with the server situation meant taking a risk as attackers.

Then on the other hand you have the defeners who, as you said, had some people who couldn't get online, and got killed without having a fair chance at defending themselves.

There are two sides to the medal, even if you don't want to see it.

edit: And I'm going to leave it at that. Posting any more on this would just be me reiterating the same point over and over again.

 

[timtadams]

meh, it might have been crappy for some players

Im heading for the 'get over it angle'. But i understand some peoples frustration

Anyway, minus the hostility and b*tching, i sorta agree with Davis' initial post; would be a good idea to freeze it and leave a message

also reckon recall all attacks/defence so when it unexpectedly comes online, anyone that needed to recall but left wont get 0ed

 

[pinpower]

That said, there should have been a plan for this kind of situation. The server really shoulda been frozen until all the issues had been sorted and therefore this whole conversation would have been redundant.

No doubt in that scenario we'd have another load of people moaning on here about how the server was down and there should be back-ups so that it never does. In a situation like this there are always going to be people who complain. They need to get over it.

QFT

There's never gonna be a way to please everyone. I think the way the server works currently is the best solution. Lesser of 2 evils or w/e.

 

[Alcibiades]

Shouldn't this be in gripes?

And I don't think a rollback is fair for those of us who've been able to play since we may have gained a lot (or not) in the interim. I don't think it's possible for Azzer to do a rollback to a recent time (i don't know how the servers and backups work either); however I do know that it is impossible for him to return troops/land since this issue has come up before with fraudulent BCs etc.

Let the game roll on!

You don't think it's fair on those who have been able to play?

With almost every post you make you sound like such a dumbass, so it's perfectly fair for those who were unable to load up the login page to be raped/farmed? That is fair to you?

You missed the point entirely, as usual.

No sir, I believe you missed the point.

The risks were the same for both sides who were attacking or defending. The only advantage we had was the advantage that any attacker has, the initiative. We had members sending who were unable to send due to the server stuff, we had people lose units due to the server stutters, we had people almost die when they got retalled due to being unable to send out. There were inherent risks in attacking when you're not sure you can recall. We were lucky, others weren't so lucky. It's perfectly fair that since the game was working for me (on and off, mind you) I was allowed to keep playing.

My sympathies go out to those who were unable to get on, but I don't see why it should stop me from playing. I highly doubt if the circumstances had been reversed we would have received mercy due to being unable to reliably get online.

Thanks Zaheen, for another invective filled post; next time, try to express your opinion without letting your unnatural hatred boil through.

what effort in attacking? attacking people that couldnt defend... so not much effort was needed... and what more looking at it from another angle,its not fair on the defender if they couldnt even get online... and if there was a roll back (not saying there will be) then the attackers arnt being punished, they just simply would have been stopped from taking advantage of the situation

The effort involved to get people online who were struggling, work out an attack plan, make sure everyone sent right etas/ticks etc. A lot of hard work went into trying to use our time as effectively as possible. We didn't just attack players who couldn't get online (how could we know who could/couldn't get on?) And what are you on about we "wouldn't be punished with a rollback?" We sure as hell would. A day's worth of attacking, planning, time etc all wasted because some people were having server issues? Pfft. Again, if the situation was reversed there's no doubt in my mind you guys would be arguing the opposite position

And again, for the rollback, what about those players who weren't rank 1/2/3? Are you going to punish them because you think it was unfair that events totally out of control of the game, playerbase, creator led to some people being unable to get on? Bullshit. That would be the far greater of the two evils we're discussing here imo.

 

[Dax]

I couldn't get on; I didn't shed any tears about it. Why are you complaining about an issue that is well out of everyone's hands? Azzer genuinely couldn't do anything to help the issue, so just stop being so childish. If some people pressed refresh that many times that they could attack; Good for them. I wasn't going to be doing it, so I went and did something constructive.
The fact is, you aren't getting your staff/land back - So soldier on.

 

[Davis]

I couldn't get on; I didn't shed any tears about it. Why are you complaining about an issue that is well out of everyone's hands? Azzer genuinely couldn't do anything to help the issue, so just stop being so childish.

except exactly what my original post said?

read, think, then well. dont even post then.

 

[Dax]

except exactly what my original post said?

read, think, then well. dont even post then.

You're a hypocrite. My point is simply:

The fact is, you aren't getting your staff/land back - So soldier on.

You threw a childish tantrum in IRC about something no one can stop, and then brought that to the forums when very few people agreed with you.
Much like the server crash - It couldn't be entirely avoided, nor could it be immediately fixed.
I'll say again to clarify for you; Grow up, and soldier on.