Strike Reformation

Proterozoic · Dec 25, 2016

November said: ↑

that is your opinion. what other mistakes have there been?
Click to expand...

I know @gamren has already answered this but I'll just also chip in that it's not just about the mistakes that have previously been made, it's also to prevent future mistakes as well. He's already pointed out some pretty glaring flaws in the outdated system, as I'd like to think I have as well. I'm not personally going to go into any particular cases given it's just going to cause more controversy over those decisions, but it's pretty obvious the current system is stupidly ambiguous and outdated.

CrossBoone · Dec 25, 2016

gamren said: ↑

As we can see by the title, I am here today, on this fine Christmas day to be precise, to post a very important topic that should be discussed. After looking back at many situations and scenarios, many of us can come to the conclusion that the strike system is very out-dated, and not only that, but some of the strikes that were given out to players in the past were flat out bs. Today, I am here for one of my many well thought out ideas to the benefit of the CTF community. Before we hop on in, I am not here to call out the committee, as not only is it filled with new and promoted figures, but these events happened awhile ago and mindsets change.

Before we get into it.

Now before you say "wtf r u on gam", bare with me here for a few moments. Lets look back at a few strikes. *Insert flashback dreams and clouds*.

Exhibit A, Skarm. You could say many things fell down on Skarm suddenly and rapidly. Rules were changed because of him in a moments notice, elf got nerfed because he and like 2 other people figured out how to play it and beat the living hell out of others with it (joking about the elf part). After the move from McPvP occurred, his slate was set clean. With that in mind, we should consider that his past strikes never occurred, as it's only fair to have that mindset. One of his strikes we can look at is the use of Toggle-Sprint, which wasn't allowed at the time, but in all honesty it doesn't really give an advantage over players, and it really just seemed like an excuse by certain figures to strike down a player they probably disliked. Not only was he kicked from the match he was playing in, but he was striked right after. He was not informed that the rule was not allowed, as he also played on many other servers that did allow the mod. It would only seem like common sense that the mod would be allowed. Why was he given a strike, when other people in the past were just given warnings for the same instances? Why was he not unstriked afterwards, when the mod was officially allowed on brawl at a later time? Not only that, but lets look into the detective work that led into yet another one of his strikes; There was a member in BK at the time, he went by Ethan. He was a completely different figure, would talk in calls, go over strategy with us, etc. He was a completely different BK member than Skarm/Shinx, and would use that account as his own. Also, he was a very good friend with Shinx, and if I recall they knew each other in real life. At the time, Shinx was also on the team (BK). The committee put on their Sherlock Holmes hats, which resulted in yet another Shinx strike for "alting". It seems at this point the committee at the time had it out for him, and I actually believe they were. TTT was even caught smack talking BK, a team even to this day that they dislike. I have nothing against the people in/involved with TTT, but at the time the bias seemed rather obvious with Bob in the team and possibly leading the show when it came to Skarm's strikes. Besides his strikes, rules were changed in less than a day in behalf of Skarm. About to play in a unofficial match, which was allowed for striked players in the past, the rule was instantly changed, and he was not allowed to play in the match. I could understand if this rule was well developed and announced in advance, but in such a sudden notice? Seems very unfair for the committee to target out this player.

Spacer/Marker

Spacer/Marker

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taken from Bob's thread explaining player/team strikes https://www.brawl.com/threads/56691/

Now, this isn't the main reason I'm posting the thread, just shedding some light on the fact that Shinx has been hit hard with some pretty bogus things. Although I am not showing the full facts behind the Ethan story, if @b0squet would like to explain it himself that would be pretty nice, as it was risky of me to bring up the story without the full information. On a side note, this still reveals one strike that just doesn't add up, and that is why Shinx was striked, but not unstriked for toggle sneak, even when made an allowed mod. The committee should come together and discuss this.

Also, I would like to bring up the fact that Ducksfan and Northunited, a very long time ago, were striked for disrespecting a moderator during an unofficial when the rule by the referees, two of them to be exact, when the rule set by the committee was that strikes needed to be agreed upon and discussed by the whole committee, something I think hasn't been happening.

The Main Topic

Now, to move into the main topic. The strike system at the moment is very out-dated. It claims to be here to discipline and reform players for breaking rules, but instead it serves as a method for teams with good relations to target out players that they dislike at the time, or for individuals to target out a certain player (see the intro). Lets look at strike-stacking, shall we?

Strike stacking is the method of stacking 2 strikes at a time, ultimately nuking and smiting down a player in the way of this method. Usually players targeted by the stacking have 1 strike, have people out for them, and more. When this happens, all methods of reformation are pushed aside. How can a player be disciplined and reform when he is instantly banned from teams, going from one strike to three in a matter of a day. How is this fair? Strike stacking needs to be removed, and exchanged for a more disciplinary way instead.

Currently the strike system works as follows:

First Strike - Banned from official matches for 30 days. Can participate in unofficial matches/practices.

Second Strike - Banned from ALL matches for 30 days. Applies to official, unofficial, practices, and any other type of match.

Final Strike - Banned from CTF Teams entirely. No matches of any sort, nor any affiliation via member or merc is allowed with any team, under any circumstance. This also extends to any alternate accounts owned by the player. Can also be considered as a ban from the match servers.

Personally I feel that the first strike is on point and should stay the same, but afterwards the second strike seems to only repeat the first, offering little to no disciplinary action. The third strike in most cases has occurred in the same week due to strike stacking or a piling of information afterwards, hitting a player hard with almost no chance to reform. Lets take a look at @Vezenite , and in this instance Skarm can also be brought up. Standing with one strike, many disliked him for his ego and attitude. Upon a group of players and mods grouping up in a Skype Chat, a "STQ Pinata" was formed as not only players, but moderators spoke of their dislike for him and gathered up information of him. Ultimately, he was striked for unsportsmanlike conduct/Harassment if I recall, and a surprise strike came out of sexual harassment. Now, to keep safe the privacy of both parties here, I will not be going deep into the sexual harassment side of the strike. All I can say is that unlike most people, I listened for both sides of the story unlike a majority of the committee, and even a few moderators themselves agreed that he did not deserve a second strike in this strike pile. Also, why was only one side punished? The committee needs to look at both sides fairly and try to block out obvious bias. With this said, strike stacking also needs to stop, as it takes away the possibility of players reforming when they instantly receive a stacked strike hammer for being on someone's bad side. With the stories shown earlier, and with other examples, lets get into the most important part of the thread.

Reforming the System, and the players under it.
Here is what needs to be changed, removed, and why.

Problem. Strike stacking needs to be removed. It takes away the point of disciplinary action and the possibility of them reforming. The goal should be reform, not putting someone you dislike out of the picture. Strike stacks are usually a result of bias and uninformed groups.
Solution. Certain rule breaks should be targeted with punishments according to their punishments, and punishment history. For example, if a player commits an act of player harassment and all around lack of common sense, instead of striking the stacks, raise the punishment level, instead of raising the strikes. For example, if someone committed the acts I listed above and currently only have 1 strike from past actions, issue a second strike, which will automatically ban them from all matches on the match server for 30 days. The punishment should increase accordingly to the offense. For example, extreme harassment should result in a month mute as well, and due to the second offense involved besides the harassment, increase the duration of the time not allowed to have matches. Increase the punishments accordingly to the offense, instead of striking stacks. It allows for a player to have a chance to realize their mistakes.

Problem. Many players do reform/have not been unstriked after being striked unfairly. Bias, rule changes, and other can lead to this
Solution. Have the committee look back at this. A third party should be involved to try to strain away from bias if needed. They should check both sides of the story instead of going by one person the whole time. If two parties were involved with the strike (example of harassment), the punished figure and the victim should come to an agreement, like to block each other, make up, etc.

Problem. What happens if a striked player truly does reform?
Solution. The strike system should "reward" players for reforming or showing improvement. Strikes should be able to be appealed when given a certain date. So if I was striked for personally insulting a moderator or player and being insanely rude to them, and was to receive a strike, I should be given a time duration to improve and post an appeal. Pretend the committee gave me three months to improve. I would need to improve, and gain the support of a moderator to post a appeal to the committee with reasons and proof that my attitude has improved. If the committee agrees on it, the strike should be replaced with probation. Probation is basically just the moderators keeping an extra eye out on you for a certain duration. Basically, a player strikes should be taken away if they truly have improved. If the appeal is denied, they should be required to wait another segment of time until re appeal, under the approval of a moderator.

Problem. Bias is occurring.
Solution. Player should be aware when they are being looked into under the possibility of a strike. The players should be able to tell their side of the story, along with any additional information. The committee should look at both sides of the story, try to get the actual truth instead of getting trigger happy, and make their decision as a complete group. Although the committee is technically supposed to do this, sometimes it seems it doesn't.

Overall, the strike system desperately needs to be reviewed and reformed. It needs to discipline players, instead of removing them from the scene altogether. Just because we may dislike a certain individual, doesn't mean it is fair to remove them from the scene.

I will edit any grammatical errors, incorrect information, etc in a bit.
Tags:
@kevshadowslayer
@Nohox (I offered to work on this with you but you never messaged me, so here we go).
@b0squet
@wintergreen3
@Xelia_
@Miskey
@LordCh4os (We talked about this a lot and you gave me good ideas).
@TheZombieKat
@SoCool21 (Although not officially a CTF mod, you are heavily involved with the team scene and have probably seen me talking about this).
@Jul13n
Forgive me if I have forgotten to tag anyone/give credit.

Click to expand...

*Applauds* You didn't wrote a 3 sentence idea like I do!

Squidward · Dec 25, 2016

CrossBoone said: ↑

*Applauds* You didn't wrote a 3 sentence idea like I do!
Click to expand...

"You didn't wrote", believe you meant "you didn't write".

5ive_Head · Dec 25, 2016

What I think should happen is mods should not be able to allow more than 1 strike per situation. Sure a super bad thing can happen. I don't that should give you the right to more than 1 strike. I remember on McPvP Shinx got 2 strikes in one because of something REALLY stupid he did. Sure, it was stupid as hell. I do think he deserved some punishment. I don't think it should've been 2 strikes. Reasons be, it had nothing to do with McPvP or CTF in general. How does that make it possible to give the person 2 strikes for something that doesnt even involve ctf? The point of the strike system is if you **** up once, you have 2 other **** ups before you get banned. Not you **** up really hard once and you get 3 strikes instantly.

Squidward · Dec 25, 2016

5ive_Head said: ↑

What I think should happen is mods should not be able to allow more than 1 strike per situation. Sure a super bad thing can happen. I don't that should give you the right to more than 1 strike. I remember on McPvP Shinx got 2 strikes in one because of something REALLY stupid he did. Sure, it was stupid as hell. I do think he deserved some punishment. I don't think it should've been 2 strikes. Reasons be, it had nothing to do with McPvP or CTF in general. How does that make it possible to give the person 2 strikes for something that doesnt even involve ctf? The point strike system is if you **** up once, you have 2 other **** ups before you get banned. Not you **** up really hard once and you get 3 strikes instantly.
Click to expand...

I agree, strikes are given by the 1. Not by 2 or 3, that is just straight up unfair. Just because you may not like someone doesn't mean you have the right to abolish their right to a fair judgement.

Magnificent · Dec 25, 2016

you see there is no purpose of a 3 strike system if ur just gonna go
"heyheyhey get ****ed 2 strikes at once bye have a good time"

minecraftnoob999 · Dec 25, 2016

See the thing is, your changes are good, but it's a lot more work. People like to work less. Like @Vezenite said:

Vezenite said: ↑

"heyheyhey get ****ed 2 strikes at once bye have a good time"
Click to expand...

It's easy to give strikes out to people and say get ****ed. It's simple, but the players pay the price.

Magnificent · Dec 25, 2016

chemicalcompound said: ↑

See the thing is, your changes are good, but it's a lot more work. People like to work less. Like @Vezenite said:

It's easy to give strikes out to people and say get ****ed. It's simple, but the players pay the price.
Click to expand...

i mean i dont think bob cared when he striked me twice and then later said it was a mistake in a skype PM but then he did nothing about it

shoutout bob

multiple ppl can attest to that xd

minecraftnoob999 · Dec 25, 2016

Vezenite said: ↑

i mean i dont think bob cared when he striked me twice and then later said it was a mistake in a skype PM but then he did nothing about it

shoutout bob
Click to expand...

And he's not mod anymore, which makes it worse.

Magnificent · Dec 25, 2016

chemicalcompound said: ↑

And he's not mod anymore, which makes it worse.
Click to expand...

yup LOL

and when i tried to talk to a mod (not jmod) about it

i got ignored! ;D

CrossBoone · Dec 25, 2016

Rezolute said: ↑

"You didn't wrote", believe you meant "you didn't write".
Click to expand...

Oh autocorrect is good :3

Cardonation · Dec 25, 2016

*Applause*

Magnificent · Dec 26, 2016

5ive_Head said: ↑

What I think should happen is mods should not be able to allow more than 1 strike per situation. Sure a super bad thing can happen. I don't that should give you the right to more than 1 strike. I remember on McPvP Shinx got 2 strikes in one because of something REALLY stupid he did. Sure, it was stupid as hell. I do think he deserved some punishment. I don't think it should've been 2 strikes. Reasons be, it had nothing to do with McPvP or CTF in general. How does that make it possible to give the person 2 strikes for something that doesnt even involve ctf? The point of the strike system is if you **** up once, you have 2 other **** ups before you get banned. Not you **** up really hard once and you get 3 strikes instantly.
Click to expand...

Late response from yours truly StrikeTQ here but;

The mods don't care if the system is 1 - 2 - 3 and you're out or not. It's their system and they'll abuse it how they wish and then give an extremely lacking reason as to why they did what they did and why they can do what they did. The committee governs the gamemode, not things outside of it. They've gone out of their own defined boundaries to punish people.

CommunistBelgian · Dec 27, 2016

This thread summed up my feelings about the strike system, @gamren I wanna share my ideas with you

Galzac · Dec 29, 2016

gamren said: ↑

As we can see by the title, I am here today, on this fine Christmas day to be precise, to post a very important topic that should be discussed. After looking back at many situations and scenarios, many of us can come to the conclusion that the strike system is very out-dated, and not only that, but some of the strikes that were given out to players in the past were flat out bs. Today, I am here for one of my many well thought out ideas to the benefit of the CTF community. Before we hop on in, I am not here to call out the committee, as not only is it filled with new and promoted figures, but these events happened awhile ago and mindsets change.

Before we get into it.

Now before you say "wtf r u on gam", bare with me here for a few moments. Lets look back at a few strikes. *Insert flashback dreams and clouds*.

Exhibit A, Skarm. You could say many things fell down on Skarm suddenly and rapidly. Rules were changed because of him in a moments notice, elf got nerfed because he and like 2 other people figured out how to play it and beat the living hell out of others with it (joking about the elf part). After the move from McPvP occurred, his slate was set clean. With that in mind, we should consider that his past strikes never occurred, as it's only fair to have that mindset. One of his strikes we can look at is the use of Toggle-Sprint, which wasn't allowed at the time, but in all honesty it doesn't really give an advantage over players, and it really just seemed like an excuse by certain figures to strike down a player they probably disliked. Not only was he kicked from the match he was playing in, but he was striked right after. He was not informed that the rule was not allowed, as he also played on many other servers that did allow the mod. It would only seem like common sense that the mod would be allowed. Why was he given a strike, when other people in the past were just given warnings for the same instances? Why was he not unstriked afterwards, when the mod was officially allowed on brawl at a later time? Not only that, but lets look into the detective work that led into yet another one of his strikes; There was a member in BK at the time, he went by Ethan. He was a completely different figure, would talk in calls, go over strategy with us, etc. He was a completely different BK member than Skarm/Shinx, and would use that account as his own. Also, he was a very good friend with Shinx, and if I recall they knew each other in real life. At the time, Shinx was also on the team (BK). The committee put on their Sherlock Holmes hats, which resulted in yet another Shinx strike for "alting". It seems at this point the committee at the time had it out for him, and I actually believe they were. TTT was even caught smack talking BK, a team even to this day that they dislike. I have nothing against the people in/involved with TTT, but at the time the bias seemed rather obvious with Bob in the team and possibly leading the show when it came to Skarm's strikes. Besides his strikes, rules were changed in less than a day in behalf of Skarm. About to play in a unofficial match, which was allowed for striked players in the past, the rule was instantly changed, and he was not allowed to play in the match. I could understand if this rule was well developed and announced in advance, but in such a sudden notice? Seems very unfair for the committee to target out this player.

Spacer/Marker

Spacer/Marker

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taken from Bob's thread explaining player/team strikes https://www.brawl.com/threads/56691/

Now, this isn't the main reason I'm posting the thread, just shedding some light on the fact that Shinx has been hit hard with some pretty bogus things. Although I am not showing the full facts behind the Ethan story, if @b0squet would like to explain it himself that would be pretty nice, as it was risky of me to bring up the story without the full information. On a side note, this still reveals one strike that just doesn't add up, and that is why Shinx was striked, but not unstriked for toggle sneak, even when made an allowed mod. The committee should come together and discuss this.

Also, I would like to bring up the fact that Ducksfan and Northunited, a very long time ago, were striked for disrespecting a moderator during an unofficial when the rule by the referees, two of them to be exact, when the rule set by the committee was that strikes needed to be agreed upon and discussed by the whole committee, something I think hasn't been happening.

The Main Topic

Now, to move into the main topic. The strike system at the moment is very out-dated. It claims to be here to discipline and reform players for breaking rules, but instead it serves as a method for teams with good relations to target out players that they dislike at the time, or for individuals to target out a certain player (see the intro). Lets look at strike-stacking, shall we?

Strike stacking is the method of stacking 2 strikes at a time, ultimately nuking and smiting down a player in the way of this method. Usually players targeted by the stacking have 1 strike, have people out for them, and more. When this happens, all methods of reformation are pushed aside. How can a player be disciplined and reform when he is instantly banned from teams, going from one strike to three in a matter of a day. How is this fair? Strike stacking needs to be removed, and exchanged for a more disciplinary way instead.

Currently the strike system works as follows:

First Strike - Banned from official matches for 30 days. Can participate in unofficial matches/practices.

Second Strike - Banned from ALL matches for 30 days. Applies to official, unofficial, practices, and any other type of match.

Final Strike - Banned from CTF Teams entirely. No matches of any sort, nor any affiliation via member or merc is allowed with any team, under any circumstance. This also extends to any alternate accounts owned by the player. Can also be considered as a ban from the match servers.

Personally I feel that the first strike is on point and should stay the same, but afterwards the second strike seems to only repeat the first, offering little to no disciplinary action. The third strike in most cases has occurred in the same week due to strike stacking or a piling of information afterwards, hitting a player hard with almost no chance to reform. Lets take a look at @Vezenite , and in this instance Skarm can also be brought up. Standing with one strike, many disliked him for his ego and attitude. Upon a group of players and mods grouping up in a Skype Chat, a "STQ Pinata" was formed as not only players, but moderators spoke of their dislike for him and gathered up information of him. Ultimately, he was striked for unsportsmanlike conduct/Harassment if I recall, and a surprise strike came out of sexual harassment. Now, to keep safe the privacy of both parties here, I will not be going deep into the sexual harassment side of the strike. All I can say is that unlike most people, I listened for both sides of the story unlike a majority of the committee, and even a few moderators themselves agreed that he did not deserve a second strike in this strike pile. Also, why was only one side punished? The committee needs to look at both sides fairly and try to block out obvious bias. With this said, strike stacking also needs to stop, as it takes away the possibility of players reforming when they instantly receive a stacked strike hammer for being on someone's bad side. With the stories shown earlier, and with other examples, lets get into the most important part of the thread.

Reforming the System, and the players under it.
Here is what needs to be changed, removed, and why.

Problem. Strike stacking needs to be removed. It takes away the point of disciplinary action and the possibility of them reforming. The goal should be reform, not putting someone you dislike out of the picture. Strike stacks are usually a result of bias and uninformed groups.
Solution. Certain rule breaks should be targeted with punishments according to their punishments, and punishment history. For example, if a player commits an act of player harassment and all around lack of common sense, instead of striking the stacks, raise the punishment level, instead of raising the strikes. For example, if someone committed the acts I listed above and currently only have 1 strike from past actions, issue a second strike, which will automatically ban them from all matches on the match server for 30 days. The punishment should increase accordingly to the offense. For example, extreme harassment should result in a month mute as well, and due to the second offense involved besides the harassment, increase the duration of the time not allowed to have matches. Increase the punishments accordingly to the offense, instead of striking stacks. It allows for a player to have a chance to realize their mistakes.

Problem. Many players do reform/have not been unstriked after being striked unfairly. Bias, rule changes, and other can lead to this
Solution. Have the committee look back at this. A third party should be involved to try to strain away from bias if needed. They should check both sides of the story instead of going by one person the whole time. If two parties were involved with the strike (example of harassment), the punished figure and the victim should come to an agreement, like to block each other, make up, etc.

Problem. What happens if a striked player truly does reform?
Solution. The strike system should "reward" players for reforming or showing improvement. Strikes should be able to be appealed when given a certain date. So if I was striked for personally insulting a moderator or player and being insanely rude to them, and was to receive a strike, I should be given a time duration to improve and post an appeal. Pretend the committee gave me three months to improve. I would need to improve, and gain the support of a moderator to post a appeal to the committee with reasons and proof that my attitude has improved. If the committee agrees on it, the strike should be replaced with probation. Probation is basically just the moderators keeping an extra eye out on you for a certain duration. Basically, a player strikes should be taken away if they truly have improved. If the appeal is denied, they should be required to wait another segment of time until re appeal, under the approval of a moderator.

Problem. Bias is occurring.
Solution. Player should be aware when they are being looked into under the possibility of a strike. The players should be able to tell their side of the story, along with any additional information. The committee should look at both sides of the story, try to get the actual truth instead of getting trigger happy, and make their decision as a complete group. Although the committee is technically supposed to do this, sometimes it seems it doesn't.

Overall, the strike system desperately needs to be reviewed and reformed. It needs to discipline players, instead of removing them from the scene altogether. Just because we may dislike a certain individual, doesn't mean it is fair to remove them from the scene.

I will edit any grammatical errors, incorrect information, etc in a bit.
Tags:
@kevshadowslayer
@Nohox (I offered to work on this with you but you never messaged me, so here we go).
@b0squet
@wintergreen3
@Xelia_
@Miskey
@LordCh4os (We talked about this a lot and you gave me good ideas).
@TheZombieKat
@SoCool21 (Although not officially a CTF mod, you are heavily involved with the team scene and have probably seen me talking about this).
@Jul13n
Forgive me if I have forgotten to tag anyone/give credit.

Click to expand...

"I listened for both sides of the story unlike a majority of the committee"
I did as well... not going to elaborate though.

Rezolute said: ↑

#STQfortheunstrike #EveryoneElseForUnstrike
Click to expand...

uh...

Vezenite said: ↑

you see there is no purpose of a 3 strike system if ur just gonna go
"heyheyhey get ****ed 2 strikes at once bye have a good time"
Click to expand...

Severity factors in but true, 2 strikes at once is bs.

Magnificent · Dec 29, 2016

Galzac said: ↑

"I listened for both sides of the story unlike a majority of the committee"
I did as well... not going to elaborate though.
Click to expand...

Can confirm you didn't.

Galzac said: ↑

Severity factors in but true, 2 strikes at once is bs.
Click to expand...

It's a 1, 2, 3 strikes and you're out system, regardless of severity. Not as 5ive_ChristmasTree said "You **** up really hard once" and you're gone.

Galzac · Dec 29, 2016

Vezenite said: ↑

Can confirm you didn't.
Click to expand...

Tried to at least, you told me to go to someone else for your side of the story, but they didn't answer, you only told me a little bit.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Magnificent · Dec 29, 2016

Galzac said: ↑

Tried to at least, you told me to go to someone else for your side of the story, but they didn't answer, you only told me a little bit.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Click to expand...

If you genuinely want to know PM me your skype.

Tenshirox · Dec 29, 2016

The CTF team committee just doesnt function, it's quite obvious with the fact that these stories basically paint the committee in 2 different sides of each situation. The power dynamic of the committee is seriously questionable as well as the integrity of the committee by this point. I didnt read too deep into the thread but if multiple mods were against the actions I would like to know if they ever tried to address that and the system in place to determine which side ends up being the dominant. The entire committee is flimsy, not just the strike system.

If we dont know how the committee functions or even comes to their final decisions, how can we consider anything truly fair?

Similar Threads	Forum	Date
Minecraft \| How to Build an Incredibly Beautiful House, Which Strikes The Imagination \| vanstar	Videos	Aug 24, 2021
Intro The New Strikebogle	Intros & Outros	Apr 11, 2021
Complete Desert Strike VI	Map Submissions	Nov 19, 2020
Idea New PPM Strike System	Capture the Flag	Aug 26, 2020
Complete Medieval Strike	Map Submissions	Jan 31, 2020

Strike Reformation

Proterozoic Wiki Team is a Semi-Staff Rank

CrossBoone enjoy life

Lifetime MVP

Squidward BEST WARZ SMOD NO KAPPA (ง'̀-'́)ง

Lifetime ELITE

5ive_Head Well-Known Member

Lifetime MVP

Squidward BEST WARZ SMOD NO KAPPA (ง'̀-'́)ง

Lifetime ELITE

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

minecraftnoob999 Well-Known Member

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

minecraftnoob999 Well-Known Member

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

CrossBoone enjoy life

Lifetime MVP

Cardonation CTF JMOD | CMS Leader

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

CommunistBelgian Well-Known Member

Galzac Well-Known Member

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

Galzac Well-Known Member

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

Tenshirox C a p t u r e F l a g

Lifetime MVP

About

Community

Shop

Useful Links

Useful Searches

Strike Reformation

Proterozoic Wiki Team is a Semi-Staff Rank

CrossBoone enjoy life Lifetime MVP

Squidward BEST WARZ SMOD NO KAPPA (ง'̀-'́)ง Lifetime ELITE

5ive_Head Well-Known Member Lifetime MVP

Squidward BEST WARZ SMOD NO KAPPA (ง'̀-'́)ง Lifetime ELITE

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

minecraftnoob999 Well-Known Member

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

minecraftnoob999 Well-Known Member

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

CrossBoone enjoy life Lifetime MVP

Cardonation CTF JMOD | CMS Leader

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

CommunistBelgian Well-Known Member

Galzac Well-Known Member

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

Galzac Well-Known Member

Magnificent Dallas Fuel

Tenshirox C a p t u r e F l a g Lifetime MVP

CrossBoone enjoy life

Lifetime MVP

Squidward BEST WARZ SMOD NO KAPPA (ง'̀-'́)ง

Lifetime ELITE

5ive_Head Well-Known Member

Lifetime MVP

Squidward BEST WARZ SMOD NO KAPPA (ง'̀-'́)ง

Lifetime ELITE

CrossBoone enjoy life

Lifetime MVP

Tenshirox C a p t u r e F l a g

Lifetime MVP