shrimp

yeah i got something like 230+ unique weapon combinations on here we gon get this shit bustin

you maniac is this what you dm'd me about

this is the only good montage ever to come out of this community, excellent work dream

Fantastic games if you're into Pokemon. Easily emulated with Dolphin. Other games I recommend: Paper Mario and The Thousand Year Door Fire Emblem Path of Radiance/Radiant Dawn Legend of Zelda Wind Waker Chibi-Robo Super Paper Mario All these games emulate super well without a controller.

This used to be the 2nd ROE.

180MB for a fancy AR-15 with an absurd amount of attachments + dependent add-ons. -1

My understanding is that when the firerate exceeds the tickrate, bad things happen. When the tick rate is 16Hz , the server updates every 1/16th of a second, or 0.0625s. The P90 has a default fire delay of 0.067s, which is why it was such a problem child back in the day. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Most places require that each faction have its own discord, owned and setup by the faction leader. The only caveat is that a manager is required to be in a discord for it to be official, whether they are in the faction or not, in order to keep an eye on things. This lets players have some modicum of secrecy in the way they run their faction, as well as allowing a degree of freedom in choosing how they set up their primary means of communication.

In case you guys aren't familiar, servers typically use a platform like Gitlab to facilitate development. The way it works is that there are two branches, a dev branch and a master branch. The master is what the live server runs off of, while the dev branch is the public and accessible branch that can be modified by developers. Changes are made to the code and submitted via merge requests, which have to be approved to before merged, and further approved before being merged to the master branch, so people can't just upload things onto the server without quality control. Additionally, the public dev branch can be altered so that critical components and content that doesn't need to be publicly accessible won't be, to avoid people creating a clone server using GG's custom content.

This suggestion would work best on a NS/Helix base, just saying.

Discord is essential for creating a development community, as you wont get anywhere with TS not saving message history, and the forums mega-threads just aren't practical. When you have mappers, coders, and modelers who all need to work together and coordinate, you need a functional discord.

Well, the way I've seen it deployed is much more relaxed through Discord. Developers can be broken down into three categories; coders, mappers, and modelers. The way a lot of communities do it is have public channels for each of the three categories, where developers and contributors can come together and discuss things they're working on or things they need help with. Suggestions are also implemented in a much more relaxed way, where there is an additional channel where anybody can just brainstorm ideas and spitball with other community members. If a dev or contributor likes an idea, they make it and request it to be implemented. Typically, these larger dev teams have a lot of internal structure beneath the owner to facilitate ease and effectiveness. The team I'm apart of has pushed out over 700+ updates since going open source four months ago because of how efficient the system is. People higher up the chain on the dev team who approve merge requests are more so responsible for quality control and direction of the server than the average dev, and so on and so forth. Lead modelers and mappers have the final say on art direction and aesthetics, etc etc. In the context of GG, the dev team would autonomously generate content, and Garnet's role would simplify to merging content to the live branch of the server.

Another important thing that I've found to be true; people are willing to learn how to contribute if given the proper resources and feedback. Creating an environment where both exist is essential. If someone creates a new SWEP or something and there are a few problems with it, reviewing the changes and helping that person fix them goes a lot further than saying "ur code is shite" and making them figure it out on their own.

You can always rip out the floorboards, but another approach I've been taking part in lately is the artform of building an enormous dev team by making the server open source (with some caveats so people can't just clone it and start their own servers), and encouraging the playerbase to become the dev team through a platform like Gitlab, where contributes can submit their changes and updates through MR's, instead of just suggestion threads. It would take a while to put together, but creating an environment where experienced code monkeys and aspiring developers can come together and improve the server is a way to dramatically increase content output at little to no cost. (I just recently became an official member of an OS dev team of nearly 30 people for an unnamed community because I wanted an internal perspective on how they were able to push out updates so efficiently, which is why I'm making this recommendation. While there are only approx. 30 people on the dev team officially, the total amount of contributors numbers in the hundreds.)

"" Typically, the you-should-know-better argument is applied here. Intentionally breaking the rules of the server as a long-time player never goes well.

I've been writing a lot of research papers lately, and there's this neat psychological phenomenon called forced compliance, and it might be an important concept to consider going forward with making suggestions of this nature. Forced compliance occurs when an individual performs an action that is inconsistent with his or her beliefs. The behavior can't be changed, since it was already in the past, so dissonance will need to be reduced by re-evaluating their attitude to what they have done. Basically, people will change their attitude towards a task, like kidnapping in this case, if they're obligated to do it. The point is to ensure that the peacetime to-do's aren't void in reward, and have some level of necessity. If people are required to do these things to guarantee whatever goal that's set, they'll be inclined to do so, and enjoy doing so. (Kidnapping isn't a great example, but the principle is applicable to a lot of tasks in the relative context). //Kendal DM'd me for clarification, here is my response.

Using bipods was a lot more popular when prone was around, because you could just set up anywhere by laying down. While I haven't found a veritable fix for the prone addon, I did find this juicy bit of code, might be worth playing around with to make bipods more widely applicable without prone:

Here's some insight for the people who have made or are going to actually make suggestions towards the specific stat values. While many of you will use the F2 menu in game to determine and make amendments to stats, these are what the values from Garnet's side looks like: (The values are from the default CW AR-15, for reference) Important Variables: SWEP.FireDelay = 0.066666666666667 SWEP.Recoil = 1.05 SWEP.HipSpread = 0.045 SWEP.AimSpread = 0.003 SWEP.VelocitySensitivity = 1.8 SWEP.MaxSpreadInc = 0.04 SWEP.SpreadPerShot = 0.007 SWEP.SpreadCooldown = 0.13 SWEP.Damage = 28 SWEP.DeployTime = 0.6 SWEP.ReloadTime = 1.65 SWEP.ReloadTime_Empty = 1.65 SWEP.ReloadHalt = 1.9 SWEP.ReloadHalt_Empty = 3.1 The moral of the story is that the values displayed in-game aren't exactly accurate. For example, a post about the SR-2 came up in which an image of the F2 menu was used as a baseline. The fire rate displayed in-game was "900", but the default value in the code for fire delay was 0.067. That being said, there are certain discrepancies you should be aware of when changing CW weapons, discrepancies that Garnet knows much better than me, but I still know enough. A fire rate of 1200 RPM equates to a fire delay of 0.05. Any fire delay at 0.5 or approaching that magnitude can easily cause problems when attempted in a large multiplayer server. In my opinion, scaling down the fire rates of all weapons (in a general sense) so that SMGs are still the fastest, but well away from anything approaching 1000+ RPM. Closer 800-850 RPM (Fire delay = 0.075-0.086) is probably what should be aimed for. Range wasn't included with the above stats because of the way it's calculated, so some basics to understand is that 1 meter is equal to 39.37 distance units in gMod. That being said, 75-100 meters is a super far shot for an SMG firing a pistol caliber. Something that should be avoided here is allowing categories of weapons to not only fulfill their own role, but also the role of another weapon. SMG's shouldn't be a substitute for an AR, and the opposite is also true. A good standard to abide by is, when you're making a table of all the stat ranges for each weapon type, make sure that none of the similar weapons have overlapping ranges in qualities that determine their usefulness, like SMG's and rifles having a similar effective range. A better value for SMG effective range would be somewhere between 50-60m assuming damage falloff begins at 25-30m. While the menu might say that damage falloff begins at half the effective range, that value is also apart of the range calculation and it too can be overridden.

Balance gun categories to themselves. For instance, every rifle has the same DPS, every SMG has the same DPS, so on and so forth. Variation within each category's respective weapons would be in fire rate and damage, where the variation between categories is in overall DPS, accuracy, spread, etc. An example of intra-category variation would be the AK and M4 having the same DPS for sake of balance, but AK has a slower rate of fire, but higher damage than the M4. Spread and accuracy are mostly the same, so it all boils down to a matter of preference. A good metric to judge this by is ammo caliber. The biggest problem something like this would run into is tick-rate influencing rate of fire, which may cause a wonky effect when the fire delay is less than the tick rate (Ex. When the tick rate is 16Hz , the server updates every 1/16th of a second, or 0.0625s. The P90 has a default fire delay of 0.067. When the fire rate is faster than or close to the tick rate, weird things start happening). The equation for finding RPS based on damage and DPS is simply RPS = DPS/dmg. The code (SWEP.FireDelay) input for rate of rife, based on the above assumption that the fire delay is the duration of a tick * a multiplier, can be calculated via FireDelay = 1/RPS. (eg. Fire rate of 19 rnds/s is a fire delay 0.053) An example, using ambiguous value ranges: Submachine Guns: Static DPS: approx. 300 dmg/s Damage: 22 - 27 dmg RPS: 11-14 rnds/s (SMG's can be given damage anywhere in that range, but must have a ROF that makes the DPS equal 300. That's the idea here.) From that premise, the other stats can be modified within reason to both control to speed of gameplay, and compensate for other features that might give weapons an advantage. Two SMG's with the same damage and fire rate might have different spread values because one SMG has a 60 round drum. The point is to establish a standard for the categories stat wise, create balance, and then add variations for the specific weapons from there, create imbalance. The core stats should be static depending on what type of gameplay is desired, but the variables other than that are pretty much up entirely for interpretation, because there are a lot of factors in play. I shouldn't have to say how the weapon categories should actually work, but just in case. Automatic Rifles - The be the most versatile weapons. Fire rates for any assault rifles shouldn't even come close to an SMG, and they should pretty much be ineffective at super close or super long ranges. A good middle ground, with variations for larger calibers, as mentioned before. SMGs - The easiest way to waste an urban map is to allow SMGs to dominate all encounters. SMGs should have a significant rate of fire, but not be bullet hoses. Compensate for capacity and caliber (A PP-Bizon with its big ass tube shouldn't be on the upper end of fire rate). SMGs should be most useful at close range, but suffer a severe damage and accuracy penalty even remotely long ranges. Shotguns - Should effectively be a preference substitute to SMGs, in which volume of fire is sacrificed for the one-shot in close range. Make use of modified ammo attachments and chokes and shit. Base pellet spread should be pretty wide. DMRs - DMRs really need to be specialized ARs in practice. Semi-auto, slow fire rate but not sluggish. ACCURATE, BUT NOT PRECISE. Used to reach out at longer ranges than an AR is viable for, but still more versatile than a sniper. Shouldn't dominate the sniper rifle's niche, but shouldn't occupy to much space in the realm of AR's either. (Note: If DMR's are still the weirdly modified M14 and shit, there's a better way to do that). Precision Rifles - The purpose is in the name; precision. Sniper rifles are the only weapon that should be both accurate and precise at long ranges. To compensate for having a near infinite reach, highly specialized sniper rifles should only really be useful at just that; sniping. While there are a lot of ways to do this, I think the best way is what was experimented with in the past with the hold-breath feature. Shots taken while the user is not holding their breath will lose suffer serious drawbacks to accuracy, requiring snipers to actually be used like snipers, freeing up space for DMRs to be used as more mobile ranged weapons. (Another Note: I don't actually know where the code for the hold-breath stuff is, otherwise I'd have an actual solution here. Someone let me know). LMGs - I think a lot of big FPS titles have started to figure out how to use LMGs, and I think the same concept is applicable here through CW, given weapon mounting is a thing. Fairly certain that every LMG has the ability to attach or has a default bipod available (even the HMG). Back in csdesert, bipod-M60s were actually super common, and I think there's merit in rewarding static positioning and weapon emplacement. While off the bipod, LMGs should basically just be bigger, less maneuverable ARs, but much more accurate in sustained fire with the bipod. I might be a little late on this, but keeping bipod mounting in consideration when constructing cover in and around objectives might be a way to expand on the idea. (Another note; Spread increase is a good way to punish LMG users for not stabilizing their weapon). Sidearms - Lastly, pistols and revolvers. There was a suggestion by Bendak a while back to change how pistols work, and the outcome was a huge accuracy and weapon change speed buff. While it was neat, it doesn't really do much to make pistols combat viable, and they've only really been used in combat consistently maybe once or twice (OTS, SR1-M). I think that pistols should be adjusted for what calibers they use, both revolvers and semi-automatics. Sidearms should be quick, maneuverable, and dangerous at super close range in order to make the actually useful in high-paced combat. I'm talking two-three shots for a kill, but damage is drops off dramatically outside of 10-15 meters. Revolvers should have the same DPS as the semi-automatics, but much higher damage to compensate for capacity and fire rate, as well as slightly increased range.

dont text me and not reply smh

Research papers have ruined my ability to talk about something like a normal human. While my personal experiences aren't the most relevant information, I've commonly been met with arguments referencing some of my past initiative by people with particularly good memory, and I thought it would be a good opportunity to get ahead of those responses by acknowledging where I'm coming from in this discussion. So lets start here. I think it's important to understand the reason that either of us are here writing these posts to begin with, and that is the steady decline of the server over the years. As a result, we're now in a situation where threads questioning the state of the server are somewhat commonplace and appear often. The server itself is still very much there, but suffering an identity crisis. Threads like this one should be the indicator that tells us that there is no longer much to lose by taking a different route. The server has been unstable for a very long time, and requires a lot of external attention to even operate at a functional level (see: In July when it very nearly collapsed). My question is, why would we continue to do and suggest the same things we've been doing for literal years and expect different results? (Einstein defines this as insanity). And why wouldn't we want to create a hard structure where the experience creates itself, if stability is the goal? Right, which is why I tried to make it very clear in my original post that the total number of people who join the server for those specified reasons is limited, and that's the population we've been exhausting for years, and it's now that we're starting to experience the effects of that in a way that cannot be ignored. I like a good challenge, more on this when I address the GM stuff. When it comes to features that enhance gameplay, roleplay related or not, certain functions are necessary to create loops in progression to increase player retention. Features that give every player a more rewarding experience proportional to the amount of time they put in, as opposed to burning them out quickly. Depth is an important factor when creating a server, and is what keeps a player interested. In MRP's case, the player operated functions of the server, which is primarily the factions, has gradually grown more shallow over the years for a variety of reasons, increasing the rate in which players join and eventually leave the server, chewing through that finite population I previously mentioned faster and faster. The simple answer for creating depth and a cyclic feature of gameplay has always been "roleplay" in the broadest context. However when it comes to custom features, Garnet and I were working on some pretty complex systems to push the server in a certain direction prior to my departure in the spring (see: The Logistics Update). With these types of systems, it wouldn't be forced upon the player to come up with things to do, but the server would naturally provide a constant flow of tasks and rewards for doing them (rewards that actually matter). I'm just gonna hit all of this at once. I became the GM Director way back when and put in an unprecedented amount of work trying to make it the best it could be with the tools I was given to do so, solely at the request of Garnet. While I didn't believe it was possible, I didn't know if it was impossible either, so I accepted the challenge and gave it a shot. The GM department and event server were simply the first step in a series of initiatives Garnet and I were mulling over at the time to push the server in a more sustainable and unique direction, but we had some personal disagreements and it never panned out. That being said, I still consider Garnet to be a longtime friend, despite our numerous falling-outs and differences. Every now and then I'll get a text about some idea or proposition and get asked for my input because it's subjects I've spent a lot of time looking into. I'm not here typing "essays" because I'm looking for a reason to come back, but because I've probably put more time into this server than anybody other than Garnet himself, and I would really hate to see it fail.

Me too, and I find these discussions to be very interesting and fulfilling to take part in despite there being virtually no payoff for me. It's entertaining to think about. Let's get into it then. I first arrived at this conclusion a long, long time ago. We're talking years. At that point in time, it was biased in the sense that this was the type of experience that I as an individual preferred due to my various love affairs with games like SS13 and whatnot. Over time I pushed and lobbied for a variety of things that were both conducive to the RP experience or things that outright destroyed it due to my responsibilities at the time as a faction leader or otherwise and the ulterior motives therein. As the years went on and my affiliations changed and I got to take either in active role in handling these aspects of the server (Creating RU, GM stuff, etc.) or a back seat role (being completely absent), I've been able to see a variety of perspectives on the topic, but additionally, and far more importantly, I've been able to see how other communities operate from a very entrenched position. In my original post, I referenced briefly that I was talking about player quantity, not player quality, as Gildarts had requested we refrain from doing in the thread. As I also stated, I believe that player quality is directly proportional to player quantity. As a result of having a larger sample size of players, the number of players that display positive characteristics (leadership capacity, maturity, productivity) increases. When these traits are emphasized and rewarded, the portion of the active player base that can be deemed of good quality increases, and the community itself benefits. It should also go without saying that players that don't inherently display positive traits will be encourage to develop them in an environment where said traits are rewarded, in order to benefit. This is why I emphasize increasing the population, and how the "current population" by my definition is and always will be finite. That is an unavoidable fact, and coupled with the natural rate of decay, always poses a threat to the community, and therefore the community itself is always changing. New voices are coming in and old voices are leaving, constantly. Pure reiteration of population dynamics aside, and before we get back to what's happening elsewhere in the world, let's talk about the GG dynamic, and specifically the coexistence of DarkRP and MRP, and the differences between the two. There are two broad categories of RP server in gMod. The first, and most crowded, is DarkRP as a general rule. DarkRP is the standard metric, the players simply cycle between communities and their average duration of interest is a fraction of what you would see elsewhere because of the density of the category and options for the player therein. There is no real dominant community in category, but a large handful that do very well, GG being one of them over the years. MRP is a part of the other category, which is Niche RP servers that cover dozens of subcategories (HL2RP, MafiaRP, FORP, etc.), all of which categories typically have a clear frontrunner. The players that are spread out among the niche servers typically move laterally between them, but the time between transitions between communities is much, much longer than that of the typical DarkRP player, because the servers require a time investment to truly be rewarding. DarkRP can and often does require a time investment as well, but it's an investment dictated by the player and server (grinding money and such), whereas niche server are often dictated by interpersonal relationships and communication. Human operators. MRP is one of the much older niche categories, and GG has long since been a strong competitor in the category, however not a clear frontrunner as long as I've been around. Having been a part of other such niche communities in the past months and years, I've had the opportunity to dissect the kings of their respective categories and determine, at a functional level, what makes these communities see a level of success that hardly seems logical. Garnet and I have personally discussed a handful of these servers, but for the sake of not advertising, I'll refrain from using specifics. The most important takeaway from my time in these communities, and the one factor that always stood out to me was the fact that none of the current frontrunners were the first to attempt to develop a server for that category, however they saw what their competitors weren't doing, and did it far better than their competition had the hopes of doing, mostly in the realm of custom content and unique features. Once you're in the lead, it's hard to lose it for reasons I don't believe need explaining and the rest is history. Large interest brings good players, good players turn into competent staff and leadership, competent staff and leadership make a good server, a good server brings in donations, and donations fund further development of the unique features that got the server started. Again, I'd like to emphasize that it's the unique features that get the attention of people, not simply doing the same thing as other servers but slightly better. Once upon a time, the war timer was the unique feature that propped up this server, now it is a victim of its own design. That being said, this is why I feel that the RP path is superior than the other options available. Now, I've outlined the specifics of what that path entails in the path but I refrained from doing so in my post because I feel that it is simply my creative vision speaking, and not a structure formulated with any real research in mind. Is it something I feel would be very interesting? Yes, but it ends there. The RP path is just that, a path for the server to walk down, and not an immediate solution or answer. With that out of the way, lets talk about the other two options. I believe this phrasing of the combat oriented model is more reminiscent of what we already have, rather than what I was referencing. When I say "sacrifice RP for combat", I mean truly to cut out a strong majority of RP, and even RP features to allow the combat function of the server to take precedence. This includes the elimination of things like the war timer, factions, anything that would hamper or subtract from the combat experience (maybe not this extreme, but these are really the only RP features remaining that I could think of). With combat at the helm, the player experience naturally suffers at the hand of the limitations of the engine. This is happening in the current model as well but not quite as severely because players still have the faction element to look towards when attempting to derive satisfaction from anything other than combat. So, when you have to sacrifice all these elements to have a "fun and relaxed" shooter, you lose the only things that make the server worth playing against everything else out there. Coming back to this, there a variety of things that need to be considered. Firstly, I'd like to state that the things I did and attempted to accomplish as a GM Director were initiatives designed to spoon-feed the community bits of quality RP and get the player base at the time accustomed to being in character. It was very strange to even try and do, as the typical player had very little experience in this sort of situation, and the hard structure of the server was not and never has been built to accommodate intuitive RP. RP, as I'm sure you all have noticed in recent times, isn't very entertaining when it's reliant on the player and their imagination. Most of the current and past populations have had very little experience in anything related to RP, so when the RP aspect of the server isn't built for it, it feels wrong and forced. What the roleplay focused path means is to just add content and unique features to the server. A lot of content. Content that makes roleplaying feel natural and essential to the gameplay, and not a chore. It may seem hard for a lot of you to believe but it can be done, and it's done often. The servers that do roleplay well do well in general. Based on experience and my own personal feelings, GMs are non-essential to a good RP server, as functions and features of the server itself allow for RP to simply happen without relying on the player or an appointed individual. Making somebody do regularly scheduled events is a really quick way to burn them out. I've only seen one really successful server have GMs, and the server wasn't even close to dependent on their job. Having dealt with the potential player population that prefers high quality servers with good RP and custom content, I can assure you that, well, they not only find it appealing, but tend to put up a lot of money for it.