Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] That's not a work around, that's a "I give up". zBlock will already kick everyone who has it disabled from the server, so it's quite pointless to run the addition of this (besides a custom message, which isnt worth much to me) On 11/18/06, Graham Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Best workaround for the moment seems to be > > http://forums.mattie.info/cs/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9940 > > Only problem with it was with bots but that has been fixed in the last > hour. Also worth noting that the mattie beta is now not required. > Running on my warcraft mod at the moment. > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- ___ Wim 'TheUnknownFactor' Barelds [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
Best workaround for the moment seems to be http://forums.mattie.info/cs/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9940 Only problem with it was with bots but that has been fixed in the last hour. Also worth noting that the mattie beta is now not required. Running on my warcraft mod at the moment. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] After a few emails back and forth to VALVe, I didn't get anything else out of it other then "I might bring up the idea of querying users for the value of their convars". Fucking useless. On 11/18/06, LDuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > The CVAR plugins are also used to do things like set my rate, cl_cmdrate, > and cl_updaterate to settings that are not appropriate for my internet > connection. I hate joining a server and having it set my cl_cmdrate and > cl_updaterate to 101 every time I spawn. > > I am against the new CVAR though. > > > On 11/17/06, Whisper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > -- > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > > Oh no Wim, zBlock is evil > > > > It ruins peoples choice > > > > The choice to be a rating retard > > The choice to use see through models and walls > > The choice to not be flashed > > The choice not have to deal with pesky smoke grenades > > The choice not have to run pesky 3rd party programs that could get you > VAC > > banned > > > > See, its all about the clients right to choose! > > > > Gawd forbid people have the right to choose to play > Counter-Strike:Source > > against other people online the way the original creators intended. > > > > On 11/18/06, Wim Barelds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > -- > > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > > > http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/2339/detrain0002mh5.jpg > > > Go zBlock-less servers. > > > > > > On 11/17/06, Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Beetlemod seems to have nailed a decent solution - and I expect that > > > Mani > > > > will follow suit shortly. Pity that Valve continues to rely on mod > > > > developers for implementing things it is too complacent to undertake > > > > itself. > > > > > > > > Having slagged Valve one more time, I will now make a suggestion to > > > them: > > > > > > > > It is reasonable to allow clients to control how client-side > settings > > > are > > > > manipulated. It is also entirely reasonable that game server hosts > be > > > > able > > > > to establish and enforce "rules of admittance". Valve has addressed > > the > > > > needs of the client-side part of the community - but has neglected > the > > > > server side. This is really very simple - implement a change - > > quickly > > > - > > > > that allow game admins to establish configurations that insist on > the > > > > ability to modify certain client settings. Give them the tools to > > deny > > > or > > > > accept players based on the client's choice to allow the > changes. The > > > > default setting can still be restrictive - as long as the server > side > > > > solution provides a means to clearly notify the player why his or > her > > > > connection has been closed. This way, the player is protected and > > given > > > > choice - and the game hoster is able to deliver an enhanced and > > balanced > > > > play experience to those who CHOOSE to join. > > > > > > > > If the mod developers can nail this solution with hours of this > fiasco > > > > unfolding then it can't be that difficult. > > > > > > > > Frazer > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > archives, > > > > please visit: > > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > ___ > > > Wim 'TheUnknownFactor' Barelds > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- > > > > > > ___ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > -- > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > -- > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- ___ Wim 'TheUnknownFactor' Barelds [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] The CVAR plugins are also used to do things like set my rate, cl_cmdrate, and cl_updaterate to settings that are not appropriate for my internet connection. I hate joining a server and having it set my cl_cmdrate and cl_updaterate to 101 every time I spawn. I am against the new CVAR though. On 11/17/06, Whisper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > Oh no Wim, zBlock is evil > > It ruins peoples choice > > The choice to be a rating retard > The choice to use see through models and walls > The choice to not be flashed > The choice not have to deal with pesky smoke grenades > The choice not have to run pesky 3rd party programs that could get you VAC > banned > > See, its all about the clients right to choose! > > Gawd forbid people have the right to choose to play Counter-Strike:Source > against other people online the way the original creators intended. > > On 11/18/06, Wim Barelds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > -- > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > > http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/2339/detrain0002mh5.jpg > > Go zBlock-less servers. > > > > On 11/17/06, Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Beetlemod seems to have nailed a decent solution - and I expect that > > Mani > > > will follow suit shortly. Pity that Valve continues to rely on mod > > > developers for implementing things it is too complacent to undertake > > > itself. > > > > > > Having slagged Valve one more time, I will now make a suggestion to > > them: > > > > > > It is reasonable to allow clients to control how client-side settings > > are > > > manipulated. It is also entirely reasonable that game server hosts be > > > able > > > to establish and enforce "rules of admittance". Valve has addressed > the > > > needs of the client-side part of the community - but has neglected the > > > server side. This is really very simple - implement a change - > quickly > > - > > > that allow game admins to establish configurations that insist on the > > > ability to modify certain client settings. Give them the tools to > deny > > or > > > accept players based on the client's choice to allow the changes. The > > > default setting can still be restrictive - as long as the server side > > > solution provides a means to clearly notify the player why his or her > > > connection has been closed. This way, the player is protected and > given > > > choice - and the game hoster is able to deliver an enhanced and > balanced > > > play experience to those who CHOOSE to join. > > > > > > If the mod developers can nail this solution with hours of this fiasco > > > unfolding then it can't be that difficult. > > > > > > Frazer > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > ___ > > Wim 'TheUnknownFactor' Barelds > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > -- > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
Next could be to forbid server admins to ban players from their servers - how could it be that this bad server admins revokes paying customers from valve the right to play on their servers? :) all cheaters are anyhow catched by VAC so there is absolutly no need to ban someone. Or maybe directly prohibit the use of rcon for all server-admins - they are just allowed to spend the money for server and start it but nothing else is allowed to them :D if someone finds sarkasm, he could keep it ;) Whisper wrote: > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > Oh no Wim, zBlock is evil > > It ruins peoples choice > > The choice to be a rating retard > The choice to use see through models and walls > The choice to not be flashed > The choice not have to deal with pesky smoke grenades > The choice not have to run pesky 3rd party programs that could get you VAC > banned > > See, its all about the clients right to choose! > > Gawd forbid people have the right to choose to play Counter-Strike:Source > against other people online the way the original creators intended. > > On 11/18/06, Wim Barelds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> -- >> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] >> http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/2339/detrain0002mh5.jpg >> Go zBlock-less servers. >> >> On 11/17/06, Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Beetlemod seems to have nailed a decent solution - and I expect that >>> >> Mani >> >>> will follow suit shortly. Pity that Valve continues to rely on mod >>> developers for implementing things it is too complacent to undertake >>> itself. >>> >>> Having slagged Valve one more time, I will now make a suggestion to >>> >> them: >> >>> It is reasonable to allow clients to control how client-side settings >>> >> are >> >>> manipulated. It is also entirely reasonable that game server hosts be >>> able >>> to establish and enforce "rules of admittance". Valve has addressed the >>> needs of the client-side part of the community - but has neglected the >>> server side. This is really very simple - implement a change - quickly >>> >> - >> >>> that allow game admins to establish configurations that insist on the >>> ability to modify certain client settings. Give them the tools to deny >>> >> or >> >>> accept players based on the client's choice to allow the changes. The >>> default setting can still be restrictive - as long as the server side >>> solution provides a means to clearly notify the player why his or her >>> connection has been closed. This way, the player is protected and given >>> choice - and the game hoster is able to deliver an enhanced and balanced >>> play experience to those who CHOOSE to join. >>> >>> If the mod developers can nail this solution with hours of this fiasco >>> unfolding then it can't be that difficult. >>> >>> Frazer >>> ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Thank You Whisper, That is the best thing I've read all day :) On 18/11/06, Whisper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > Oh no Wim, zBlock is evil > > It ruins peoples choice > > The choice to be a rating retard > The choice to use see through models and walls > The choice to not be flashed > The choice not have to deal with pesky smoke grenades > The choice not have to run pesky 3rd party programs that could get you VAC > banned > > See, its all about the clients right to choose! > > Gawd forbid people have the right to choose to play Counter-Strike:Source > against other people online the way the original creators intended. > > On 11/18/06, Wim Barelds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > -- > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > > http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/2339/detrain0002mh5.jpg > > Go zBlock-less servers. > > > > On 11/17/06, Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Beetlemod seems to have nailed a decent solution - and I expect that > > Mani > > > will follow suit shortly. Pity that Valve continues to rely on mod > > > developers for implementing things it is too complacent to undertake > > > itself. > > > > > > Having slagged Valve one more time, I will now make a suggestion to > > them: > > > > > > It is reasonable to allow clients to control how client-side settings > > are > > > manipulated. It is also entirely reasonable that game server hosts be > > > able > > > to establish and enforce "rules of admittance". Valve has addressed > the > > > needs of the client-side part of the community - but has neglected the > > > server side. This is really very simple - implement a change - > quickly > > - > > > that allow game admins to establish configurations that insist on the > > > ability to modify certain client settings. Give them the tools to > deny > > or > > > accept players based on the client's choice to allow the changes. The > > > default setting can still be restrictive - as long as the server side > > > solution provides a means to clearly notify the player why his or her > > > connection has been closed. This way, the player is protected and > given > > > choice - and the game hoster is able to deliver an enhanced and > balanced > > > play experience to those who CHOOSE to join. > > > > > > If the mod developers can nail this solution with hours of this fiasco > > > unfolding then it can't be that difficult. > > > > > > Frazer > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > ___ > > Wim 'TheUnknownFactor' Barelds > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > -- > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- .: =CATS= Gaming :. .: http://www.catsgaming.com :. .: This email contains information that maybe confidential if your not the intended recipient, please delete this email :. -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Oh no Wim, zBlock is evil It ruins peoples choice The choice to be a rating retard The choice to use see through models and walls The choice to not be flashed The choice not have to deal with pesky smoke grenades The choice not have to run pesky 3rd party programs that could get you VAC banned See, its all about the clients right to choose! Gawd forbid people have the right to choose to play Counter-Strike:Source against other people online the way the original creators intended. On 11/18/06, Wim Barelds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/2339/detrain0002mh5.jpg > Go zBlock-less servers. > > On 11/17/06, Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Beetlemod seems to have nailed a decent solution - and I expect that > Mani > > will follow suit shortly. Pity that Valve continues to rely on mod > > developers for implementing things it is too complacent to undertake > > itself. > > > > Having slagged Valve one more time, I will now make a suggestion to > them: > > > > It is reasonable to allow clients to control how client-side settings > are > > manipulated. It is also entirely reasonable that game server hosts be > > able > > to establish and enforce "rules of admittance". Valve has addressed the > > needs of the client-side part of the community - but has neglected the > > server side. This is really very simple - implement a change - quickly > - > > that allow game admins to establish configurations that insist on the > > ability to modify certain client settings. Give them the tools to deny > or > > accept players based on the client's choice to allow the changes. The > > default setting can still be restrictive - as long as the server side > > solution provides a means to clearly notify the player why his or her > > connection has been closed. This way, the player is protected and given > > choice - and the game hoster is able to deliver an enhanced and balanced > > play experience to those who CHOOSE to join. > > > > If the mod developers can nail this solution with hours of this fiasco > > unfolding then it can't be that difficult. > > > > Frazer > > > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > -- > ___ > Wim 'TheUnknownFactor' Barelds > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/2339/detrain0002mh5.jpg Go zBlock-less servers. On 11/17/06, Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Beetlemod seems to have nailed a decent solution - and I expect that Mani > will follow suit shortly. Pity that Valve continues to rely on mod > developers for implementing things it is too complacent to undertake > itself. > > Having slagged Valve one more time, I will now make a suggestion to them: > > It is reasonable to allow clients to control how client-side settings are > manipulated. It is also entirely reasonable that game server hosts be > able > to establish and enforce "rules of admittance". Valve has addressed the > needs of the client-side part of the community - but has neglected the > server side. This is really very simple - implement a change - quickly - > that allow game admins to establish configurations that insist on the > ability to modify certain client settings. Give them the tools to deny or > accept players based on the client's choice to allow the changes. The > default setting can still be restrictive - as long as the server side > solution provides a means to clearly notify the player why his or her > connection has been closed. This way, the player is protected and given > choice - and the game hoster is able to deliver an enhanced and balanced > play experience to those who CHOOSE to join. > > If the mod developers can nail this solution with hours of this fiasco > unfolding then it can't be that difficult. > > Frazer > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- ___ Wim 'TheUnknownFactor' Barelds [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
Beetlemod seems to have nailed a decent solution - and I expect that Mani will follow suit shortly. Pity that Valve continues to rely on mod developers for implementing things it is too complacent to undertake itself. Having slagged Valve one more time, I will now make a suggestion to them: It is reasonable to allow clients to control how client-side settings are manipulated. It is also entirely reasonable that game server hosts be able to establish and enforce "rules of admittance". Valve has addressed the needs of the client-side part of the community - but has neglected the server side. This is really very simple - implement a change - quickly - that allow game admins to establish configurations that insist on the ability to modify certain client settings. Give them the tools to deny or accept players based on the client's choice to allow the changes. The default setting can still be restrictive - as long as the server side solution provides a means to clearly notify the player why his or her connection has been closed. This way, the player is protected and given choice - and the game hoster is able to deliver an enhanced and balanced play experience to those who CHOOSE to join. If the mod developers can nail this solution with hours of this fiasco unfolding then it can't be that difficult. Frazer ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
Yes, it is simple. Much more difficult is to explain to few thousands players occasionally playing on my servers how and why they need to do this. So I need something that will run together with cvar-x to inform people that they need to set cl_restrict_server_commands to 0 in order to play on this server. Regards, Roman On 17/11/06, Scott Pettit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We shouldn't need to work around this - setting it to default as 0 is extremely simple, Valve just need to see enough of an outcry :) *starts picketing* -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frazer Sent: Saturday, 18 November 2006 2:24 a.m. To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? So - unless someone has any other ideas, it would appear that a quick and dirty solution would not be terribly effective without negatively impacting player experience. Something deeper might work - but beyond my meager skills. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] You know every community has to take a stand, or walk, but I have to say a day would not make the right statement, I think a week might send a clear message. Your bigger problem here is that money is all ready in the hands of Valve for each game sale, any one have any idea how many new sales of CCS are out there? Seems like you pretty much get it bundled right? Now if we all band together and stop running any Valve related server regardless for a week, that might help Valve understand the pain. How many servers do you have Valve? Seems to me that your kind of biting the hands that feed your clients so to speak. Dustin Tuft > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com> Subject: Re: [hlds] > Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 13:14:26 > +> > According to all the moderators on the steam forums we're running > too> many mods on our servers anyway. Because CS wouldn't have been born if> > it wasn't for those mods.> > Time to organise a day where GSPs shut down > their servers for a day in protest?> > On 17/11/06, Roman Hatsiev <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> wrote:> > Well, gentlemen, I suppose we have enough threads to > discuss a> > rationale behind Valve decisions and how Valve treat admins > community,> > please let's be more specific in this one - we have a problem > we need> > to solve unless we quit from this business right away.> >> > In > accordance to my little research EventScript won't do the trick> > since it > cannot start script on client connect event and it cannot> > read non-network > client variables. What else? Another requirement is> > to check this cvar > before zblock or cvar-x to provide player with> > reasonable justification > for disconnect. Ideas?> > ___> To > unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit:> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
Don't forget he's probably working today but... http://www.mani-admin-plugin.com/forums/index.php?topic=3303.0 ... he has posted here. On 17/11/06, Andreas Grimm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: perfect ... mani ? are you out there ? your plugin need that function, too ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
perfect ... mani ? are you out there ? your plugin need that function, too > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Hackmett > Gesendet: Freitag, 17. November 2006 14:36 > An: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > Betreff: Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? > > Hi, > > Beetle just did such a check ;): > http://www.beetlesmod.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=12128#12128 > http://www.beetlesmod.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2798 > > > 1. I'm looking for plugin which will disconnect players > trying to join > > the server with cl_restrict_server_commands set to anything > other than > > 0 with message like "Please set cl_restrict_server_commands to 0 to > > play on this server". > > > > 2. cl_restrict_server_commands should be added to the list > of blocked > > cvars in cvar-x config files. > > > > Any ideas how first item in my list can be done using existing > > plugins? EventScript maybe? Anything else? > > > > Regards, > > > > Roman > > > > -- > > greetz > > [Team America] Hackmett > > Freedom is not free > > www.tawp.de > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
"You must have a ping of 50 or higher to play on this server - slow your ass down" -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frazer Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 9:49 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? H What about a LOW ping kicker? Hehehe - just kidding... Maybe Frazer ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
H What about a LOW ping kicker? Hehehe - just kidding... Maybe Frazer ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
We shouldn't need to work around this - setting it to default as 0 is extremely simple, Valve just need to see enough of an outcry :) *starts picketing* -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frazer Sent: Saturday, 18 November 2006 2:24 a.m. To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? So - unless someone has any other ideas, it would appear that a quick and dirty solution would not be terribly effective without negatively impacting player experience. Something deeper might work - but beyond my meager skills. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
It looks like Beetlemod is flipping the "say" binding to do this - question is: how does the mod know which key the client has bound to "say" in the first place? I suppose it could be draconian and simply reject any client which doesn't bind "T" to "say" ... Is there a way for the server to determine client key bindings? My god, Valve has put us on a slippery slope with this. See also thread about enforcing client-side DLLs. It is possible, by the way. Scary shit. Frazer -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hackmett Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 9:36 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? Hi, Beetle just did such a check ;): http://www.beetlesmod.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=12128#12128 http://www.beetlesmod.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2798 > 1. I'm looking for plugin which will disconnect players trying to join > the server with cl_restrict_server_commands set to anything other than > 0 with message like "Please set cl_restrict_server_commands to 0 to > play on this server". > > 2. cl_restrict_server_commands should be added to the list of blocked > cvars in cvar-x config files. > > Any ideas how first item in my list can be done using existing > plugins? EventScript maybe? Anything else? > > Regards, > > Roman > -- greetz [Team America] Hackmett Freedom is not free www.tawp.de ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
Hi, Beetle just did such a check ;): http://www.beetlesmod.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=12128#12128 http://www.beetlesmod.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2798 > 1. I'm looking for plugin which will disconnect players trying to join > the server with cl_restrict_server_commands set to anything other than > 0 with message like "Please set cl_restrict_server_commands to 0 to > play on this server". > > 2. cl_restrict_server_commands should be added to the list of blocked > cvars in cvar-x config files. > > Any ideas how first item in my list can be done using existing > plugins? EventScript maybe? Anything else? > > Regards, > > Roman > -- greetz [Team America] Hackmett Freedom is not free www.tawp.de ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
This is a multipart message in MIME format. -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Not sure what you wrote Roman, the latest unnecessary and unsolicited update to my email program must have set cl_accept_message_body to 0 by default. In any event, after my morning coffee, I have thought about my name-flipping approach and have realized that it will not work because it is too easily defeated by a client who knows where the console key is. I guess the test could be periodically repeated - but this would be annoying to players and unlike others who I will refrain from naming, most admins care about their customers. I have also thought about rebinding a key to send its original command plus an authenticating "say" - but I can't see a way to determine individual client-side key bindings on the server - so no way to predict which key to use. So - unless someone has any other ideas, it would appear that a quick and dirty solution would not be terribly effective without negatively impacting player experience. Something deeper might work - but beyond my meager skills. Frazer From: Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 9:05 AM Subject: Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
According to all the moderators on the steam forums we're running too many mods on our servers anyway. Because CS wouldn't have been born if it wasn't for those mods. Time to organise a day where GSPs shut down their servers for a day in protest? On 17/11/06, Roman Hatsiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, gentlemen, I suppose we have enough threads to discuss a rationale behind Valve decisions and how Valve treat admins community, please let's be more specific in this one - we have a problem we need to solve unless we quit from this business right away. In accordance to my little research EventScript won't do the trick since it cannot start script on client connect event and it cannot read non-network client variables. What else? Another requirement is to check this cvar before zblock or cvar-x to provide player with reasonable justification for disconnect. Ideas? ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
Well, gentlemen, I suppose we have enough threads to discuss a rationale behind Valve decisions and how Valve treat admins community, please let's be more specific in this one - we have a problem we need to solve unless we quit from this business right away. In accordance to my little research EventScript won't do the trick since it cannot start script on client connect event and it cannot read non-network client variables. What else? Another requirement is to check this cvar before zblock or cvar-x to provide player with reasonable justification for disconnect. Ideas? Regards, Roman On 17/11/06, Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Should be very simple... Attempt to change the player name from say: "LeetPwner" to "LeetPwner*randomdigit*" - check to see if the name gets changed, if so - change it back with a "Welcome" message - or a "Sorry" and kick for players where the name cannot be changed. Might be possible to accomplish before the client was even in a game-ready state. The bigger question is why would we even need to ponder such ponderings in the first place. I am curious how Valve determines functional requirements for its updates. As some posters have already noted, the businesses, groups and individual hobbyists represented on this list comprise a pretty significant part of Valve's eco-system. How hard would it be and how much more considerate would it be to simply solicit some feedback on ideas before they turn to code? They would not be compelled to pay attention to the feedback, but maybe, just maybe they would gain some additional insight that the apparent cloud of arrogance or indifference seems to obscure today. Frazer -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roman Hatsiev Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 5:12 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? 1. I'm looking for plugin which will disconnect players trying to join the server with cl_restrict_server_commands set to anything other than 0 with message like "Please set cl_restrict_server_commands to 0 to play on this server". 2. cl_restrict_server_commands should be added to the list of blocked cvars in cvar-x config files. Any ideas how first item in my list can be done using existing plugins? EventScript maybe? Anything else? Regards, Roman ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] I'm pretty damn sure we have tried to have this happen as well Frazer. Pity we couldn't have brought this upon ourselves as well. On 11/17/06, Frazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Should be very simple... > > Attempt to change the player name from say: "LeetPwner" to > "LeetPwner*randomdigit*" - check to see if the name gets changed, if so - > change it back with a "Welcome" message - or a "Sorry" and kick for > players > where the name cannot be changed. Might be possible to accomplish before > the client was even in a game-ready state. > > The bigger question is why would we even need to ponder such ponderings in > the first place. I am curious how Valve determines functional > requirements > for its updates. As some posters have already noted, the businesses, > groups > and individual hobbyists represented on this list comprise a pretty > significant part of Valve's eco-system. How hard would it be and how much > more considerate would it be to simply solicit some feedback on ideas > before > they turn to code? They would not be compelled to pay attention to the > feedback, but maybe, just maybe they would gain some additional insight > that > the apparent cloud of arrogance or indifference seems to obscure today. > > > Frazer > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roman Hatsiev > Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 5:12 AM > To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > Subject: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? > > 1. I'm looking for plugin which will disconnect players trying to join the > server with cl_restrict_server_commands set to anything other than 0 with > message like "Please set cl_restrict_server_commands to 0 to play on this > server". > > 2. cl_restrict_server_commands should be added to the list of blocked > cvars > in cvar-x config files. > > Any ideas how first item in my list can be done using existing plugins? > EventScript maybe? Anything else? > > Regards, > > Roman > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
Should be very simple... Attempt to change the player name from say: "LeetPwner" to "LeetPwner*randomdigit*" - check to see if the name gets changed, if so - change it back with a "Welcome" message - or a "Sorry" and kick for players where the name cannot be changed. Might be possible to accomplish before the client was even in a game-ready state. The bigger question is why would we even need to ponder such ponderings in the first place. I am curious how Valve determines functional requirements for its updates. As some posters have already noted, the businesses, groups and individual hobbyists represented on this list comprise a pretty significant part of Valve's eco-system. How hard would it be and how much more considerate would it be to simply solicit some feedback on ideas before they turn to code? They would not be compelled to pay attention to the feedback, but maybe, just maybe they would gain some additional insight that the apparent cloud of arrogance or indifference seems to obscure today. Frazer -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roman Hatsiev Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 5:12 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: [hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ? 1. I'm looking for plugin which will disconnect players trying to join the server with cl_restrict_server_commands set to anything other than 0 with message like "Please set cl_restrict_server_commands to 0 to play on this server". 2. cl_restrict_server_commands should be added to the list of blocked cvars in cvar-x config files. Any ideas how first item in my list can be done using existing plugins? EventScript maybe? Anything else? Regards, Roman ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
[hlds] Workaround for cl_restrict_server_commands ?
1. I'm looking for plugin which will disconnect players trying to join the server with cl_restrict_server_commands set to anything other than 0 with message like "Please set cl_restrict_server_commands to 0 to play on this server". 2. cl_restrict_server_commands should be added to the list of blocked cvars in cvar-x config files. Any ideas how first item in my list can be done using existing plugins? EventScript maybe? Anything else? Regards, Roman ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
