Jump to content

Mod-Mondlicht

Moderator
  • Content Count

    90
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About Mod-Mondlicht

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hey folks, I've hidden some posts from this thread and would like to remind you: don't insult others and don't discuss or promote your preferences regarding real life politics on this forum. It's ok to talk about political systems only when referring to in-game organization structures. It's not ok to attack and insult whole countries or groups of people with different preferences regarding real life politics or political systems. Last but not least: please don't provoke each other and try to stay on topic. Thank you! Mellow greetings Mondlicht
  2. Hey @Underhand Aerial, schon mal Danke für die Initiative und sorry für die späte Reaktion - ich war selbst ein paar Wochen raus Ich hab jetzt mal nach oben gerufen und gefragt wie wir das handhaben können, da die Ankündigungen normalerweise nur von CMs vorgenommen werden. Evtl bekomme ich ja grünes Licht diese sozusagen in Vertretung zu veröffentlichen. Sanfte Grüße Mondlicht
  3. Hey @Anubis-1 und @vertex, ich habe eure Beiträge mal aus dem Sammelthread herausgelöst und einen eigenen Thread daraus erstellt, da wir hier noch kein Thema zum AGG haben und es so auch besser von anderen gefunden wird. So vermeiden wir auch im Sammelthread off Topic zu gehen Sanfte Grüße Mondlicht
  4. @Dubble welcome to the forums - glad to see the guest status vanish. By private message I refer to the private message system here on the forums. I'll send you one to discover it and ask any other non-thread related questions you might have on the forum software, moderation or other stuff aimed at me directly There have been some answers regarding EULA interpretation as regarding the out of game/character experience. Maybe you want to share your take on this - does it make sense to you or would a change to better reflect this improve the situation?
  5. Hallo Noveans, da ich hier ein paar Leute sehe, welche Server Updates aus Discord ins Forum holen (zuletzt @Helrym, danke dafür) oder den Server Status anfragen, greife ich hiermit vorübergehend der Entwicklung vor und möchte einen angepinnten Thread zur Verfügung stellen, welchen ihr zum Übernehmen der Meldungen des #announcements Channel im Discord nutzen und so anderen Spielern helfen könnt. Diskussionen, Off-Topic Kommentare und doppelte Meldungen werde ich hier regelmäßig ausblenden, damit sich der Status "Neuer Kommentar!" für diesen Thread möglichst immer nur auf einen neuen Status bezieht. Eine Übersetzung der Statusmeldungen ins Deutsche ist dabei völlig optional - könnt ihr machen, muss aber niemand. Einfach die Discord Nachrichten im folgenden Format kopieren und mit Ctrl+Shift+V (Shift entfernt dabei die Formatierung) hier als Zitat einfügen: Falls sich einige von euch euch dazu entscheiden mitzuhelfen, möchte ich alle anderen herzlich dazu einladen ab und an mal auf das Herzchen zu klicken, um die Helfer motiviert zu halten Danke, viel Spaß und mit sanften Grüßen Mondlicht
  6. Indeed, I think I do follow the guidelines, rules and at least always try to correctly grasp their intent and act accordingly. However, I don't consult NQ on most decisions I make - if I did they could do the moderation themselves as I would just be a relay and not helping at all. Do you follow the rules and accept their intentions too tho? Regular members/players are required to follow the rules and not act against the provider's intent just as well, hence I don't feel like that's a valid argument for or against anything. Your statement almost reads as if you'd imply that this separates me from regular members and by that it could mean you don't consider yourself bound by the rules in place. If that's the case it would not be a wise thing to say to a moderator who is the main instance of achieving the opposite in order to keep this forum a place where everyone feels empowered to have an open and friendly discussion. The last part of the previous sentence is a direct quote from the first statement in the forum rules and part of the intent that you seem to question. Again a violation of our forum rules - see section V, which I explicitly pointed to in my previous comment. Actually there's a chance that my previous as well as this comment might be seen as acting against company guidelines, rules and intent - I did not request authorization to do this in public and it's usually not how things are done, so if you like to take your chances with section V: now would be a good time. However, since you keep spamming your agenda across several threads (yet again, spamming as well as something close to cross-posting also being violations of section III) I've decided to take this public stance and maybe help others to understand how my decisions are made and things are handled by me, basically giving you the tools to have me spanked or even taken out in case I'm wrong. After all communication is one of the most criticized things and I'm doing my part in what I feel is best to take this community's wishes into account. I don't really need to provide proof in public and I've given you the chance to dispute this in private by sending you a direct message to which you didn't reply. But since I'm already out here I will honor your request and just point at your message from which I'm quoting as most relevant proof in this context. This thread's topic is "Mistakes made in the Code of Conduct" and disputing moderation got nothing to do with that - it is 100% off topic and not only in violation of the forum rules section V, as said above, but section III point 1 as well. The same is true for the comment you made before that (edit: the one you made 18 hours ago, not the first of the next double-post). To remind you of its content: among other non-constructive things you offered your personal guarantee that this thread will be locked (which so far is up to me) and you provided a list of alleged preferences regarding entities that I doubt you know well enough to know their preferences - all of which doesn't have anything to do with the optimization of the "Code of Conduct" and therefore is considered off topic by me. So yes, usually I follow the forum rules by the letter, tho right now I'm pretty much in open waters myself. If you disagree with my interpretation of the rules, the actions I take or my decision to make an exception here, please see section V. If you disagree with the rules in place you can make a new thread (as the topic starter did regarding the "Code of Conduct" on this thread, which you repeatedly tried to hijack for your own agenda) and provide a constructive statement about how you think the rules should be improved. If you fail to do this within the rules in place you become subject to moderation, as is evident by the situation we are in right now. If however you refuse to follow the forum rules I'd ask you to refrain from posting in the first place, otherwise I'll have you seen out. My "threats" ain't subtle at all, I just keep it polite and rational while trying to stay neutral regarding involved opinions as long as they're expressed properly. Still, I'm just human too and sometimes try to help by giving my personal take on things, never knowing exactly if I got it right or if NQ fully approves since distribution of responsibilities is rather strict and I'm not involved in matters outside of forum moderation. Yes, the way I know them I actually do. The decision to do this here in public is all up to me and that is probably the reason why the forum rules section V exists. Moderators are there to help ease the weight on CMs' shoulders and it's always possible that a moderator makes a mistake - after all I'm just interpreting guidelines, rules and intent myself and again, being human, it is not guaranteed that I'm without any flaw - or any other member, moderator or employee for that matter. I feel rather sorry that you seem to rule out objectivity on NQ's side regarding section V and I'm not sure how I could possibly change that assertion of yours or find an organizational structure to suggest that ensures that players are represented on the evaluation of such a report. Actually since I am just a player and volunteer on the moderator role, I basically consider myself being part of that representation of the player base. If you take the fact, that I might have been chosen for having the well-being of the community and this project at heart, as reason not to trust me for being a "henchman", I admit I don't know how to help with that issue. In that case all I can refer to are the forum rules that clearly state to "abide by moderators and Novaquark employee’s instructions" and I'm instructing you to follow the rules as I laid them out, or take this incident to forum@novaquark.com as advised in section V. This project is a joint effort which started with a Kickstarter campaign and there are many members in this community who are really awesome in helping this project along by being constructive and even if they disagree they raise their voices in a polite and courteous manner, either here on the forums or they approach our Community Managers directly. Sadly none of this I stumbled upon on your history so far, which I presume will get you removed from the member roster eventually. As said above my "threats" aren't that subtle at all - I've addressed you two times in threads as well as sent you a private message. You're right in one regard - I'm here to uphold and enforce the rules of this forum, which are publicly available and linked by me quite often. If something about moderation is unclear everyone is welcome to approach me directly to inquire about it - for example if a thread vanishes and they don't know why. I don't see it as censorship since I don't have any reason to hide something because of opposition. I hide individual threads based on the initial post's conformity with the forum rules. Same goes for individual comments in the stream and sometimes some comments that refer to a hidden comment vanish too - and if there are too many violations on a thread that's still valuable or counts towards contemporary history, I lock the thread if I feel everything has been said and/or the rule violations outweigh its constructive value. Please take note that this is my final statement on this thread. I've let myself be dragged into this off-topic dispute based on a gut call since you don't seem to respond to the direct approach. In my opinion I've just laid the situation out exhaustively and don't intend to let this excursion proceed to further carry this thread off-topic. You're welcome to continue this in private or report me directly if you like, but I will hide any further deviation from this thread's original topic. @dumpeet your comment just came in - please consider yourself addressed by this as well. To everyone who came here to pursue the original topic and has been annoyed by this excursion: my apologies. I'll do my best to make sure that there won't be any further distractions from the topic at hand Sincerely Mondlicht ps In case anyone wonders why I didn't address the "PPS" made by carijay766: that's because it wasn't there by the time of my reply. While you're editing there should be a notification when others reply to a thread - please don't make significant changes to your posting's contents after other members already replied, as this will make the following comments appear in a different context.
  7. Hey @carijay766 Locking threads is a moderator's decision and in most cases not made by NQ. We do this when members fail to keep it civil, friendly and constructive. Example: if this thread would be locked, your comment would be on the list of reasons for that lock - it's completely off-topic and can be considered trolling and flaming. Please respect the original author's intent for the thread, which is to help improve things - not to spit at your host's feet. Furthermore please refrain from proclaiming about our, the moderators team's, or NQ's preferences. I for one love pizza, moonlight and friendly discussions. Not only is your comment in violation with our Forum Rules, the statements it contains are wrong too. Since I just @mentioned you in one of the other two recently locked threads, where your comments were one of the many reasons I locked those, I begin to wonder about your motivation to partake in this community. If it's merely to troll and flame I'd strongly suggest you to reconsider. Respect the rules, turn the aggression down and politeness and constructivity up. Thanks. In case you want to dispute how moderation is done: take a look at the forum rules as they contain a paragraph at the end about where to send such reports. @Guest Dubble As there has been enough off-topic I want to add something of value: Reading this I'd think that Starfire maybe meant that you could send a private message to one of our Community Managers like @NQ-Naerais. Since forum members can't really solve this here (and I can't send private messages to guests) in fact yes, I considered to just give this statement and lock right away, since the path this would take given current situation was rather obvious - but I thought it could just as well become a topic where members get constructive and come up with suggestions on how to improve the paragraphs you address or add more observations about where documents are lacking in a positive and constructive way. Maybe a bit optimistic, I admit, but you know they say hope dies last Mellow greetings Mondlicht ps @blazemonger your post came in while I was still typing. Thanks for taking it back on topic - my words above clearly didn't take your comment into account. Hope paid off
  8. Hey folks, thank you all for your input. There's nothing wrong with having a debate, but the fronts have hardened and I don't think the opposing sides will come to an agreement any time soon. To not let it be lost in the stream I'll link the follow-up statement by @NQ-Naerais one more time for others to find and after that I'm going to lock this thread. As I see it this settles the matter. There have been complaints in the past that the rules are not being enforced properly and I've seen many fights about rule interpretation too. I even entered those discussions on occasion and shared my personal point of view - especially regarding the advice to take a "better safe than sorry" stance - and those comments of mine have been on top of official clarifications and announcements. That we have two strongly opposing sides in this argument is not new and didn't come with the Market 15 incident. I hope that as things become clearer and more streamlined, most of you will find a way to get comfortable with the rules in place. Let's move on, continue to enjoy the game and build Dual Universe. Mellow greetings Mondlicht
  9. Hey folks, I've just been a bit trigger happy and hid the nice words about moderation being trigger happy and staff's life quality insults. Just as a reminder: if people want to report me or any other moderator and do so here on the forums, it's rather apparent they haven't read the rules or forgot about them. Regarding the attack by @carijay766 on @Moosegun as well as the following engagement I've decided to close this thread since it's too much trouble to clean up and apart from pointless fighting I don't think there's anything of value here anyways. In case you disagree: please see above. Sincerely Mondlicht
  10. @Cytoxx thanks to you too for the edit and you're welcome. As mentioned above: feel free to contact me directly next time. But having this here (in this case) ain't too bad since I got here rather early for a change, so it might even guide others @LouHodo yeah, I admit I struggled a bit pondering what your intent was. Sarcasm can obscure that - even now with your clarification, for a short while, I wasn't sure if the use of sarcasm was meant as provocation or just advice to trust a moderator's decisions. In case of the latter: thanks! And if you want to help even more I think it would be good to either keep the level of sarcasm down a bit or add a nicely phrased explanation in addition, so the other party has an easier time to relate and see your point. That other party being me in this case - not speaking for Cytoxx - as it was me who was a bit puzzled by that
  11. This is correct. The reason for the delay is that it's currently a bit hard to keep up - some people don't seem to have read the forum rules and working through reports takes its time. The forum rules can be found here: Excerpt This is the most relevant forum rule and reason why that thread was hidden. @Cytoxx please remove the link and title-quote from your original message - thanks! The only two things to do with exploits are 1. report them to NQ and 2. avoid using them. I'd like point out this recent announcement by @NQ-Naerais A bug or exploit does not need to be listed there in order to be prosecuted if used, so I'd strongly advise to always report at support.dualthegame.com if there is any doubt. I'm not familiar with the development schedule, but I'd think that every issue gets tracked, assigned a priority and will be taken care of as soon as possible. If the support is delayed or the issue doesn't get fixed within a day, a week or even a month it doesn't invalidate the forum rule posted above: promoting exploits is prohibited. As posted by @NQ-Naerais: exploiting is prohibited as well. I'm not a GM or CM, but as it's hard to keep up with the frequency of forum rule violations, I imagine it might just be as time consuming to keep up with in-game rule violations - so I'd personally advise to not mistake it as okay or not prosecuted to use an exploit, just because there's no notice or sanction shortly after. Analog to this I too have my todo list for threads and members to address/sanction for spamming, trolling (provoking), flaming (insulting, attacking), profanity and so on. Meaning: better not let yourself be inspired by other's violations If it's just one answer on a thread the moderation team would just hide that one answer. But if others already quoted and commented it can get very difficult to clean up. If it's too difficult or the original posting already violates the forum rules (which can't be cleaned up either) the according thread will be hidden entirely. Sorry for the resulting inconvenience - in order to avoid it I suggest to just report clear violations of the forum rules and not engage the violation on such a thread. If there's a valuable discussion to be had in line with the rules it's always an option to open up a new thread for this. But as thread starter be mindful that if it's a sensitive topic it can easily get out of hand and might be treated as mentioned above - so it's in the interest of everyone who wants to have a friendly and open discussion, to not engage to provocation, but just report the according comment and keep it calm and polite otherwise. Thanks! @LouHodo no, he just wasn't sure why that thread was gone and made a suggestion for improvement. Your posting reads as if you think this was wrong, but please try to see the positive side of it and keep it constructive, as I take the positive from your posting and agree that issues with moderation should be taken to moderators and not discussed directly on the forums. Two reason for this are that 1. the moderation staff can miss such topics while 2. members on their own can't answer the question "Why?" or solve issues or change how moderation is done without talking to us, the moderators. Next time something vanishes and it's unclear why, please just send a private message to me and I'll look into it to provide an answer Mellow greetings Mondlicht
  12. Hey folks This topic is generally a bit difficult as it crosses multiple domains, so let's take it apart. On the Beta Key trade I don't have exactly matching resources, but I remember the thread Player Recruitment & Advertisement: dos and don'ts, where Beta Keys are being addressed when gifted to others as recruitment incentive. True, that's not the same as selling them, but expecting someone to hold up his end of a bargain by joining your organization after receiving a Beta Key can be seen as a "contract" too and it's been made clear that giving away your keys is your own responsibility: Of course regarding the above I'm not speaking for NQ and you're free to raise a ticket about this. It's just my personal expectation that the result will be something similar to the above. It's not pretty and I'm very sorry for your loss. But consider if it was real life and you had given the money in person to someone in a bar - you probably wouldn't expect the bartender to go after the scammer, as he's got no authority to prosecute criminals. So if I'd treat this as "real life crime" I'd say it's not NQ who should prosecute this - and if I treat this as in-game scam then it brings me to my next paragraph. On the game side of things we're traveling quickly into role play, where not only deals/trade and co-operation take place, but you can also find spying, scams, theft and other nasty deeds. Hence I could treat this thread as part of role play. The game provides the trade window where players can check that they receive all the things both parties agreed on. With this you're pretty safe when closing deals. But if you decide to trade things that are not visible in the trade window, you decide to base your business on trusting your trade partner and it might turn out that your trust has been misplaced with some individuals. As scams in game are part of role play, I wouldn't expect prosecution by NQ either unless rules were broken, like exploiting a bug or any of the other rules - tho personally I don't think that applies here. But that's stuff for CMs to talk about - not my expertise as forum moderator, which brings me to my final consideration. On the forum side of things, I could treat this whole thread as violation of section III, which reads: Tho I feel that would solely play into the hands of scammers and personally I think there should be a way for both sides to act and react. I've seen a bounty in the past posted by another member and had to make a similar call to treat it as naming and shaming or as part of role play - I decided on the latter. I'm going to apply that to this thread too, but I want to make it clear that stuff like this can quickly cross the verge and represent a violation of our forum rules. To avoid this I ask everyone in such a situation to keep it on the role play side when taking it to the forums. Generally speaking: if you've been the victim to an in-game scam and freely traded your in-game assets to another player who then didn't hold up to his end of the bargain (whatever it may have been), you've experienced an unfortunate in-game scam and should only seek retribution in game too. If you decide to prosecute this outside of the game, these forums are not the right place to do so by calling that player out and thereby violate the forum rules Since this forum serves as part of game related communication, it's generally ok to use it to organize in-game retributions like posting bounties or asking for in-game help. However, on the General Discussions section it's a bit misplaced and not exactly clear, but we don't have a better section right now and I'll tolerate it here. Still, I ask everyone to keep this in mind: stick to the role play side and avoid a violation of the rule quoted above. I do hope to see a dedicated section in the future that makes it clear when it's about in-game retribution and role play One final request: please don't use my posting to silence others in an aggressive manner. Not referring to this thread, but I've seen some people talking in a fashion like "NQ said it's ok, so stop whining!" or even worse - which is not ok. Try to feel for others, help them out if you can, but at least advise instead of telling them off. Don't just try to shut them up and don't provoke or laugh at them - stuff like this happens to the best and we need not throw salt into open wounds. Always remember the first sentence of the forum rules: we want this to be a place where everyone feels empowered to have an open and friendly discussion Mellow greetings Mondlicht
  13. Thank you for that clarification - in context that nuance slipped past me. When you addressed joao and questioned his social abilities directly, it seems to have biased me a bit towards interpreting the rest as criticism of his character. After that I've read "I wouldn't make such a stupid assumption" as if you were referring to his opinion/assumption about "most ppl playing MMOs". Sincerely sorry for calling that out, but at the same time I'm a bit happy I did too, because this gave the chance to make it perfectly clear. Reading again with your additional statement your comment comes across less aggressive and takes a bit off the edge in the sentence before that. Still a bit fierce, but I guess not enough to be called out like that. Well, he said "most ppl" and not "anyone doing x" - a small but significant difference as well. But yes, it's not ok to storm into a biker's bar and announce something negative starting with "Most bikers..." either, as too many might feel addressed and provoked by this. When doing something like this one should at least start with "In my opinion..." or provide some statistic to back up the claim. Even better to replace "most" with "many" or if not provable "some" at best, just to make it less bold and keep it humble, which always sits better on the receiving end and takes them into maybe fruitful consideration instead of defense. However, choice of words ain't always perfect (especially since many of us don't have English as their native language) and the receiver might make a mistake too - as seen above that doesn't exclude me either. So by default I'd prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt, as I should have doubted my initial interpretation of your posting when writing that small foreword above my wall of text Mellow greetings Mondlicht
  14. Hey folks, first of all: don't tell others their statement is "bullshit" or that their assumption is "stupid" - this doesn't help anyone. Keep it nice and let the other party know that you disagree with them in a polite way. Thanks! Now on topic All I can tell you so far is that a formal policy will follow soon. I don't speak for NQ now, but I want to help evaluate the situation for the time being. It's a bit of a long read, but there will be a short version at the end - don't jump there if you don't want any spoilers As I see it there is a very basic concept to consider. First of all there's the question of what we do know and what we don't. Next how to make an educated guess about things we do not know for sure just yet. Since @NQ-Naerais gave a very clear statement about the "zero tolerance policy towards cheating and exploiting" in that previously linked announcement, I think it would be a good idea to start with the definition of exploits, because I don't see this provided by NQ yet. In case I just missed it, please point me towards it - thanks in advance. In order to make an educated guess about what might or might not be considered an exploit I'll just use the first reference that comes to mind: Wikipedia article "Video game exploit" And I quote the first sentence: I don't know if NQ shares this exact definition, but I think it's good enough for this evaluation. Now that we got this covered it leads us to the next question: What is the intent of the game's designer here? Having read this thread I think everyone agrees that the intent of the maneuver permission on own tiles is to enable landowners to move all constructs out of the way that are parked on their tile. So far so easy. Where people seem to disagree is on the question if this permission is intended to allow docking such constructs in order to take them away far outside the boundaries of the maneuver tool and the owned tile(s) on or for which the permission has been granted in the first place. But there's a problem - I can't find a Wikipedia article about NQ's intent regarding this. So if we want to proceed to evaluate the situation before that formal policy is released we have to find a different approach. Again, having read this thread I took note about your opinions and while some aren't exactly clear, I found that 4 people are in favor of this being intended/allowed, while 11 people oppose that assessment/opinion. Further I found 1 "probably in favor" and 3 "probably against" as well as 2 more people against it who added some constraints like "stealing in general would be cool, but not like this" or "against it but don't think it's an exploit". Don't confuse these numbers with a vote tho - it's just an observation and I don't even guarantee that I got everything right So this is just a very rough approximation, but to sum it up: 5 people think it's more or less ok 16 people think it's not ok Now I could try to make an educated guess based on this and say that the landowner's maneuver permission is probably not intended to be used for docking. That right to maneuver is probably just intended to be used to maneuver constructs off the landowners claimed tile in order to solve another issue and nothing else. So just based on your comments here the probability for this being an exploit is rather high. Granted, it's always hard to guess someone's intent and to base this on the opinions of players instead of Novaquark employees further dilutes the accuracy of this speculation. But if we include the possibility that NQ might take players' feedback into their considerations, it counteracts this dilution a bit. I can't tell you what is going to happen or what that formal policy is going to say, but personally I'd like to strongly advise against using this mechanic to dock and abduct for the time being. At the very best I think it's dangerous to do it - especially since there is a certain level of awareness that there's a good chance it will actually be considered an exploit and it may be hard to claim "But I didn't know!" - pure speculation on my part tho and just meant to convey why I think it's a dangerous path to follow. If you remember the aforementioned "zero tolerance policy" regarding exploits, at least I wouldn't want to take that chance even if I rounded the numbers down to "only" 3 to 1 against me. Or if I move the "3 probably against" from the original numbers towards the "in favor" side it still results in 13 to 8 against and I wouldn't bet my access on odds like these. But it's your account and your own risk to take if you decide to go for it anyways - after all, as moderator, as said repeatedly, I don't speak for NQ regarding game-related things. So much for the evaluation. My guess is as good as yours, but if I may further add my own opinion/guess: since construct owners have to deliberately grant the "maneuver construct" permission using the RDMS, it's clear that it's not meant to be granted to enemies. I see the fact that this permission is being granted to landowners as an exception that's solely meant to solve an actual issue and for nothing else. I think it's meant to enable landowners to help them keep their land usable and this permission should not transpire outside the owner's land in any form. That should exclude the option to use it to dock constructs to your own if not granted explicitly through the RDMS by the owner of the parked construct. You remember the "EVE doesn't give you a warning" sentiment on this thread, which was countered by "this isn't EVE"? Just consider that DU gives everyone a distance indication as soon as they approach or leave the PVP Zone. Players flying towards a planet get a notification that reads something along the lines of "You have entered the Safe Zone". Again, not speaking for NQ, but I think planet surfaces so far are "intended to become unsafe" once territorial warfare gets introduced - not before. I think attacking from non-pvp space into pvp space is clearly not ok, but the only thing I actually know is that a formal policy will follow soon. Again, until then I just recommend to think twice about how sure you are regarding the developer's intend. When you confirmed the existence of a "possible exploit" and there's any doubt if this is intended, the safest route to take is: make a report and get permission first before you use it. In that case you will always have the report on your side for the first time you did it, if it remains the only time you did it. This is just in case if it will actually be considered an exploit that you just discovered. I think exploits don't need to be specifically listed in order to be punished, because you can't list anything that has not been discovered yet Here's the promised short version. The whole essay above boils down to: Mellow greetings Mondlicht
  15. Hey Pseudolukian, zuerst mal Entschuldigung für die Unannehmlichkeiten. Ohne den Inhalt deiner Tickets zu kennen stimme ich zu, dass die Antwortzeiten aktuell sehr hoch sind, was verständlicher Weise zu Frustration führen kann. Ein bis drei Monate ist eigentlich nicht üblich oder repräsentativ. Allerdings muss ich gleich als nächstes darauf hinweisen, dass dies keinen Grund darstellt ausfallend zu werden. Beleidigungen und Provokation sind in diesem Forum nicht gestattet. Bitte sieh dies als Erinnerung an unsere Forenregeln: Zum Thema Patches am Samstag kann man entweder als schlechte Entscheidung einstufen, oder man könnte wertschätzen, dass das Team sogar am Wochenende durcharbeitet. Was zu deinen aktuellen Performanceproblemen führt kann ich als Moderator leider nicht beantworten, habe dieses Problem persönlich nicht im Spiel und gehe davon aus, dass es entweder schon wieder besser ist, oder nur einen Teil der Spieler betrifft. Englisch ist bei den Tickets auf jeden Fall kein Problem. Sogar hier im Forum sind die französischen und deutschen Kategorien nur kleinere Bereiche, während der Großteil der Kommunikation auf Englisch stattfindet. Ich hoffe nur, dass dein obiger Beitrag kein Indikator für den Tonfall der Tickets ist Ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob deine letzte Zeile tatsächlich bedeutet, dass sich deine Fragen erübrigt haben, oder ob ich diese als unnötigen Sarkasmus einstufen sollte. Auf jeden Fall ist das Forum kein Ort um Novaquark-Mitarbeiter anzugreifen und zum Duell herauszufordern. Besonders da wir jetzt einen deutschen CM haben würde ich empfehlen dich mit akuten Problemen an @NQ-Nudbrokk zu wenden. Die anderen Spieler hier im Forum können nicht beim Service-Team nachforschen, ob da vielleicht etwas verloren gegangen ist, oder warum deine Tickets noch länger als aktuell üblich ohne Antwort bleiben. Falls du ihn kontaktierst sende ihm bitte gleich die entsprechenden Ticket-Nummern mit Wenn die Tickets bereits bis zu 3 Monate alt sind, dann beziehen sie sich wohl zumindest teilweise noch auf die Alpha. Seit dem ist eine Menge passiert und sich an einen CM zu wenden um herauszufinden, wo diese verschollen sind, ist meiner Meinung nach der beste Ansatz. Da dieser Thread bereits mit Regelverstößen startete und eine Diskussion an dieser Stelle auch nicht bei der Bearbeitung von Tickets oder bei der Lösung von Problemen mit unserem Support-Team helfen würde, werde ich ihn an dieser Stelle schließen. Konstruktive und freundliche Kritik nehme ich gerne via Privatnachricht entgegen. Davon abgesehen bitte ich noch mal um Nachsicht für unser Support-Team. Es wird bereits daran gearbeitet die Situation zu verbessern, was jedoch auch seine Zeit braucht. Aufrichtige Grüße Mondlicht
×
×
  • Create New...