Ladle 54

A place for threads related to tournaments and the like, and things related too.

Moderator: Light

User avatar
ElmosWorld
Match Winner
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:38 pm

Re: Ladle 54

Post by ElmosWorld »

You guys picked the unk server after CT USA crashed.
Image
User avatar
AI-team
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 1020
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:17 pm
Location: Germany/Munich
Contact:

Re: Ladle 54

Post by AI-team »

How were we supposed to know that the uNk server is running 0.4?
  
 
"95% of people believe in every quote you post on the internet" ~ Abraham Lincoln
 
 
User avatar
Lackadaisical
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 823
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 4:58 pm
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Ladle 54

Post by Lackadaisical »

AI-team wrote: -1 for uNk. performance was ok, but a tournament server that doesn't allow 0.3 clients is stupid
I would suggest only rating the performance.

Although I think the 0.4 issue should be addressed, it should not affect the server score. It will be a pain to keep track which votes need to be annulled when unk-server changes settings (or when it is agreed upon that moving to stable releases only is what we want)
User avatar
AI-team
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 1020
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:17 pm
Location: Germany/Munich
Contact:

Re: Ladle 54

Post by AI-team »

but how are we supposed to rate the server if we can't even join :P
  
 
"95% of people believe in every quote you post on the internet" ~ Abraham Lincoln
 
 
User avatar
dreadlord
Match Winner
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:26 am
Location: Germany

Re: Ladle 54

Post by dreadlord »

Well, don't rate it then.

uNk's: 0

CT's USA: 0 (pretty stable for an American server)

CT's LIV: 1
User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6472
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 54

Post by sinewav »

Lackadaisical wrote:
AI-team wrote: -1 for uNk. performance was ok, but a tournament server that doesn't allow 0.3 clients is stupid
I would suggest only rating the performance.
Right, measuring performance is the intention of the Server Quality Tracker. It doesn't make sense to take votes from people who didn't actually play on the server. Settings and even entire builds can change between Ladles. What we want to know is if the server holds up well on Sunday nights.

I did record your feedback for CT USA, so thank you. :star:
User avatar
Jip
Round Winner
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 5:32 pm

Re: Ladle 54

Post by Jip »

Yea sry, I will run it with a stable release next ladle.

+1 Z-Man's
+1 Team Elite's
0 CT's LIV
User avatar
ppotter
Match Winner
Posts: 451
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:45 am

Re: Ladle 54

Post by ppotter »

Eckz wrote:Good matches.

I'd have to say that the theme today for mYm was close calls, but it was still surprising how much they frequented. I'm curious why you guys let up on pressuring our center, because, to me, that's what really gave you guys the first match. It seemed like you let off more and more as the rounds continued.
I dunno, we didn't decide to pressure/not pressure, but dread was a (surprisingly) easy target, whereas once liz took centre, she just sealed and got out the way.
User avatar
dreadlord
Match Winner
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:26 am
Location: Germany

Re: Ladle 54

Post by dreadlord »

ppotter wrote:
Eckz wrote:Good matches.

I'd have to say that the theme today for mYm was close calls, but it was still surprising how much they frequented. I'm curious why you guys let up on pressuring our center, because, to me, that's what really gave you guys the first match. It seemed like you let off more and more as the rounds continued.
I dunno, we didn't decide to pressure/not pressure, but dread was a (surprisingly) easy target, whereas once liz took centre, she just sealed and got out the way.
Yeah, my brain kind of blocked after two fast deaths in the first rounds and nothing seemed to work anymore. Althought I died easily, nice pressure slash & potter.
Post Reply