Why DN is the sole responsability of a unique person ?

[Shizoku]

There is a community core, it is called dn. It was made the community core by the greator majority, there is no need to push it further than it is right now. Obviously Noir still has work to do with his core, life right now is fairly busy for him but work on the core will continue, several new factions are almost ready from what I hear. I think freeza's omircron is slated to be released fairly soon though in this community 'soon' is a relative term.

Bottom line is that if you think you are wise enough to ballance a core that the community would pick as their primary core, then do it from 1.25 just like Noir did.

Also, I know for a fact that Noir would fight for other cores rights not to be put off into the dark corner, as many arguements as he's had with spunky and co. whenever I've asked him he's always said that other cores have just as much right to be played as his. I think a main core is a dumb idea as well.

[Vegeta]

While we are in this discussion.. I also Informed Noir That all "new" dreg modelz and TF modelz ((forth coming)) and alas even Z az a whole(( forth coming)) would be exclusive to DN az He iz doing the skinning and final "prep" work on them all ..(( I just create a faction Pop out some sweet modelz then sit back and let someone elsedo all the hard work, then take Kredit heh)).... And I still stand beside that agreement......Using TF and Dreg Az I originally released them (( aka the old dreg modelz)) IZ acceptable and encouraged az I think of my factionz az part of allegiance az a whole.....((for the record I still getta rub it in peepz face that I made the First 2 player made factionz MUHAHHAAAAAAAAAA I rule)) And any "balacing done to them on varied corez iz fine with me (( az I only Play DN so how would I ever notice))

SO in response to the question I get often..YES Anyone kan use My faction TF and Dreg.... BUT Using any of the New dreg modelz or the forth coming tf modelz..and the long awaited Z faction....Will have to be agreed upon by Noir and Myself...

[Mordechaj]

soon™?

[KGJV]

Why people behave differently when it's abour data and art than when it's about code ?

I've already read too many hypocrite responses here not to say 'fanboy/clan' responses. Dont make me think that 'DN is XT core'. Given some responses here, i'm starting to believe this.

Stick to FACTS and LOGIC.

Fact. http://asgs.alleg.net/asgsnet/factionstats.aspx. All I see here is that DN is the community core already. Why would stats count for games played on other core ? This is illogical since cores have different balance. But then we have some squad games played on GoD. Why ?

Fact. In R4, when we introduce code changes that affect gameplay & balance (Spin of death, miner AI), this generate much debate than when it's a new DN release. Why ?

Fact .Most of you are confusing between BALANCE and FEATURE. XRM AB is a feature. A faction is a feature. But GT cost = 0.8 is balance.
I dont see why the community couldnt set GT cost to 1 in DN without asking Noir or WAITING for him to do so.

Seriously, keep your feeling aside and think with your head plz.

[TheBored]

QUOTE (KGJV @ Jul 2 2007, 11:10 PM) Fact. In R4, when we introduce code changes that affect gameplay & balance (Spin of death, miner AI), this generate much debate than when it's a new DN release. Why ?

Have you been around for a new faction release? Ugg... bitching about everything /glare.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":glare:" border="0" alt="glare.gif" /> Small changes don't get much notice because they are just that, small.

QUOTE Fact .Most of you are confusing between BALANCE and FEATURE. XRM AB is a feature. A faction is a feature. But GT cost = 0.8 is balance.[/quote]True, although 'features' can be used to balance also (XRMs give Sup a good way to end long games, using your example)

QUOTE I dont see why the community couldnt set GT cost to 1 in DN without asking Noir or WAITING for him to do so.[/quote]Because as we have said many times in this thread, Cores changes are left to the core developer and ONLY the core developer unless they give permission otherwise. Unless Noir has given the community permission, kindly back off.

QUOTE Seriously, keep your feeling aside and think with your head plz.[/quote]Just because they don't share your opinion doesn't make them wrong. I'm getting the feeling that this will fall on deaf ears though.

TB

[Snack]

I am not in XT and I think DN is a fun core and superior in all but a couple of things to GoD core. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
Not to mention that supremacy is far more powerful on DN then on GoD core, which is supposedly anti-int core, but really isn't.

As for using DN stuff in your own core, I don't see the problem really, since many of DN features (or whatever you call it) are a direct result of a community advice. It is not his to "copyright it" anyway. Given the nature of Allegiance right now, trying to push for some copyright issues is absolutely rediculous. Noir might have given his money for the core, but other people have given their own money for various servers (not to mention DN server) and their coding time/money for other useful Allegiance utilities. Trying to make your own core in some way copyrighted, knowing that you made it on a game someone else made, with a utility someone else made, with advice of someone else and that you continue to balance it based on tools someone else made, is quite literally insane however you try to spin it around.

Frankly, any feeble attempt at legal action towards any part of this community would make the said person most hated and rejected person in the community, besides making him look even more rediculous then in McDonalds court cases.

I am, however, hopeful that all problems, if they really exist (which I have a hard time to beleive in), can be worked out with Noir on TS.

[Raveen]

QUOTE (Mr. Kltplzyxm @ Jul 3 2007, 03:09 AM) Banning Noir is a bit silly IMO. Any way you dice it, you can't avoid the fact that he's a contributor to the community and punishing him for it is going overboard.

Not that I'm advocating anything here but there is precedent for banning someone who threatens legal action against FAO. If Thal decided to take ownership of DN and Noir threatened to sue then Noir could be justifiably banned (based on past actions).

Now I think it's a non-issue but that's probably why it was brought up in the first place.

[spideycw]

QUOTE (spideycw @ Jul 2 2007, 03:24 PM) Hasn't Noir been alienated before and withdrew his hosting for servers? I say no need to go through such again (if I am correct about the above)

And can someone explain a bit more what you mean about a "community core" I dont really follow.

In my eyes there is a forum for discussion about each core in which changes and balance is discussed and then whoever administers it has the final decision and implements the changes. Am I wrong about this and if so how?

Does anyone in this thread know the answer to these questions?

[Grimmwolf_GB]

QUOTE (spideycw @ Jul 2 2007, 09:24 PM) Hasn't Noir been alienated before and withdrew his hosting for servers? I say no need to go through such again (if I am correct about the above)

Yep, he does not host them anymore. While the servers were good, we have plenty of servers atm. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

QUOTE (spideycw @ Jul 2 2007, 09:24 PM) And can someone explain a bit more what you mean about a "community core" I dont really follow.

I think it is supposed to be something like A+ in theory (of course I am not talking about the changes), but with less influence of a single person. Spunky discussed the stuff before he changed it, but in the end, he controlled it. The community core would probably be more democratic... With all the good and bad sides to it.

QUOTE (spideycw @ Jul 2 2007, 09:24 PM) In my eyes there is a forum for discussion about each core in which changes and balance is discussed and then whoever administers it has the final decision and implements the changes. Am I wrong about this and if so how?

This is correct and KGJV would like that to be changed, at least for the new main community core, mainly because a simple discussion in the forum does not mean that changes will follow. For example: It took months for Noir to change the carrier pain that ruined the gameplay.

[KGJV]

QUOTE And can someone explain a bit more what you mean about a "community core" I dont really follow.[/quote]

I think you're not the only one seeing the responses we got here.

Let's be clear then.

Community core = Official core of the community =

1. the one and only core for which games stats are collected and ranks computed from these stats.
2. the one and only core set on the permanent newbie server(s)
3. the one and only core inline documentation (F1) describes
4. the one and only core CDT & ACS teaching sessions will talk about
5. the one and only core official squad games will use
6. a ZoneLeader (ZL) will be appointed by the community to maintain it and have final word on changes. This ZL can appoint assitants or a full team if he wants.
7. At anytime the community can change this ZL without prior notice.
8. no copyright or IP of any kind will be placed on this core

Other cores can exist and be hosted and played but they'll be considered as 'mods'.
Free Allegiance = Allegiance code (currently R3) + "community core". Anything else is a 'mod'.

That's my definition of 'Community core' and what i'm talking about since the 1st post.