GM Feedback Survey

[Vri]

so does this mean that Evil could potentially return?

I am sure he is still in-game and hasnt been caught yet. Just like Pandamoos but i think he might have given up.

[Sickesthater]

Ive gotten forum warnings for simply giving my opinion just like everyone else. I was not using and vulgar words or insulting anybody. Then a guy sent me a message saying "hey use your real account on the forum, what your doing is evasive." And i got an account strike from him too. I have 2 accounts with alts on them man! Mostly to reserve names i obviously dont play all of the characters. In other words i get account strikes for just about anything i do here.

[wargrimnir]

Ive gotten forum warnings for simply giving my opinion just like everyone else. I was not using and vulgar words or insulting anybody. Then a guy sent me a message saying "hey use your real account on the forum, what your doing is evasive." And i got an account strike from him too. I have 2 accounts with alts on them man! Mostly to reserve names i obviously dont play all of the characters. In other words i get account strikes for just about anything i do here.

I checked the two warnings you have and both times you were insulting someone. They look proper to me.

[Toshutkidup]

I completed it and I'm in favor of strict ruleset and bans. Cheat banned perma, exploiting after warning perma ban,

[Acidic]

For me the choice of review per bans is a little hard to answer. I feel that a ban is a ban however the concern I have is why the ban was issued. Would like the appeal question to have a choice to say “should there be a review of if the ban was correctly issued . As form my point of view GM do not recuse themselves from decisions that they are actually involved in. This makes certain bans appear off.

[reyaloran]

For me the choice of review per bans is a little hard to answer. I feel that a ban is a ban however the concern I have is why the ban was issued. Would like the appeal question to have a choice to say “should there be a review of if the ban was correctly issued . As form my point of view GM do not recuse themselves from decisions that they are actually involved in. This makes certain bans appear off.

The issue with the ban is a ban mentality is what if the ban is a grey area where the player could reasonably not be in the wrong but still get banned. As an example there was the large scale ban from a year ago where both sides killed a lord outside the keep within a day of each other. While the players that play often know that's not allowed a new player being in that area would have also been picked up in that ban despite not knowing it's not allowed. That player should be allowed to appeal their ban on the grounds that they would have nothing to tell them they can't do that and the players that they are told are good at the game and knowledgeable are doing it.

[Acidic]

For me the choice of review per bans is a little hard to answer. I feel that a ban is a ban however the concern I have is why the ban was issued. Would like the appeal question to have a choice to say “should there be a review of if the ban was correctly issued . As form my point of view GM do not recuse themselves from decisions that they are actually involved in. This makes certain bans appear off.

The issue with the ban is a ban mentality is what if the ban is a grey area where the player could reasonably not be in the wrong but still get banned. As an example there was the large scale ban from a year ago where both sides killed a lord outside the keep within a day of each other. While the players that play often know that's not allowed a new player being in that area would have also been picked up in that ban despite not knowing it's not allowed. That player should be allowed to appeal their ban on the grounds that they would have nothing to tell them they can't do that and the players that they are told are good at the game and knowledgeable are doing it.

Not really a believer in ignorance as a defense. More often than not ignorance is was not 100% sure but do it anyway cos the crowd ..
The problem to me is when those bans came as a knee jerk reaction and banned players in the area as they were seen, aka one guild leader who could show on twitch he did nothing wrong , got a ban as players said he was there . There even is guilds mass reporting just to get ppl banned, apparently (risk of conspiracy theory) even comment in private discords has been used as reasons . This type of ban is where I think this server has issues.

[Aluviya]

May I please ask why this survey was not held in-game (as previous surveys were held), where it could reach a larger audience compared to those who might only occasionally check the forums? I've heard that people are using anonymous accounts to give feedback (if they even bother - which is an entirely different chapter) - how could the quality of such feedback really be useful?

[wargrimnir]

May I please ask why this survey was not held in-game (as previous surveys were held), where it could reach a larger audience compared to those who might only occasionally check the forums? I've heard that people are using anonymous accounts to give feedback (if they even bother - which is an entirely different chapter) - how could the quality of such feedback really be useful?

The survey is linked directly on the launcher, I would hope everyone sees it before logging into the game if they're not in too much hurry. You don't need to visit the forums or discord to see it. The results are publicly available after you complete the survey if you want to judge the value for yourself. Also, if you can only take it in-game, that would exclude people most affected by GM sanctions, and despite being banned from the game, their opinion would also be useful and valid.

[Aluviya]

I fear that the feedback will be mostly biased, as most people can't really be bothered to fill out surveys these days unless they have an extraordinary reason, such as friends being banned, etc. (I speak as someone who also collects data at the university level). The in-game survey was somewhat more direct, confronting everyone, even those who are not directly willing to participate.