Ladle 54
Moderator: Light
- ElmosWorld
- Match Winner
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:38 pm
- AI-team
- Shutout Match Winner
- Posts: 1020
- Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:17 pm
- Location: Germany/Munich
- Contact:
Re: Ladle 54
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
- Lackadaisical
- Shutout Match Winner
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 4:58 pm
- Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Ladle 54
I would suggest only rating the performance.AI-team wrote: -1 for uNk. performance was ok, but a tournament server that doesn't allow 0.3 clients is stupid
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)
Official Officiant of the Official Armagetron Clan Registration Office
Back (in the sig) by popular demand: Lack draws
Back (in the sig) by popular demand: Lack draws
- AI-team
- Shutout Match Winner
- Posts: 1020
- Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:17 pm
- Location: Germany/Munich
- Contact:
Re: Ladle 54
but how are we supposed to rate the server if we can't even join 

"95% of people believe in every quote you post on the internet" ~ Abraham Lincoln
Re: Ladle 54
Well, don't rate it then.
uNk's: 0
CT's USA: 0 (pretty stable for an American server)
CT's LIV: 1
uNk's: 0
CT's USA: 0 (pretty stable for an American server)
CT's LIV: 1
Re: Ladle 54
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.Lackadaisical wrote:I would suggest only rating the performance.AI-team wrote: -1 for uNk. performance was ok, but a tournament server that doesn't allow 0.3 clients is stupid
I did record your feedback for CT USA, so thank you.

Re: Ladle 54
Yea sry, I will run it with a stable release next ladle.
+1 Z-Man's
+1 Team Elite's
0 CT's LIV
+1 Z-Man's
+1 Team Elite's
0 CT's LIV
Re: Ladle 54
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.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.
Re: Ladle 54
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.ppotter wrote: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.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.