MP Native Kingdoms [Persistent Kingdoms Successor]

[Froi]

Just for reference, during the meeting Roy was sharing a presentation on what his idea for the timeline would look like:

https://i.gyazo.com/92d08d12cdfdffb29d4241b940a38191.png

Seems more realistic to me, albeit maybe adding a bit of salt to that timelines because... ya know, taleworlds.

I mean hey if he's right, great, unfortunately I doubt that to be the case. I also didn't have the graphic to go on, as I would never attend some sort of meeting like this as it's just a waste of time, so only the audio that you provided is what I had to go on.

Anyone have any info on what the plans are for the servers when the mod goes up? Is it going to be the same thing where whoever has an excess of spare money to throw at server owners to ensure that their clan is on top running stuff? Hoping it will be a mod team hosted server for longer than the couple week test period with limited policing like how original PW was. PW was always the most frustrating to try and manage with man-children controlling groups of other people and refusing to let their 50 people play if things aren't going their way.

I'm just really hoping for less admin intervention on servers that aren't specifically those RP ones. You just need smart mod and level design choices that make playing like a normal person a better option that just RDMing everyone you see. The whole 7 pages of rules that you had to constantly have up on a second monitor while playing to ensure that the way you're about to do XYZ doesn't break Rule 342, subsection 8 is crazy, and I hope that gets addressed by whoever is gonna be running servers.

 

[Younes]

The slightest experience of development will tell you giving a timeframe as detailed as that with the phases will not go that way. One thing gets delayed and the rest snowballs, we're talking about working on free time to develop the mod, not a 9 to 5.

 

[Faer]

The slightest experience of development will tell you giving a timeframe as detailed as that with the phases will not go that way. One thing gets delayed and the rest snowballs, we're talking about working on free time to develop the mod, not a 9 to 5.

Better late than never, I hope.

 

[Master_]

Anyone have any info on what the plans are for the servers when the mod goes up? Is it going to be the same thing where whoever has an excess of spare money to throw at server owners to ensure that their clan is on top running stuff? Hoping it will be a mod team hosted server for longer than the couple week test period with limited policing like how original PW was. PW was always the most frustrating to try and manage with man-children controlling groups of other people and refusing to let their 50 people play if things aren't going their way.

I'm just really hoping for less admin intervention on servers that aren't specifically those RP ones. You just need smart mod and level design choices that make playing like a normal person a better option that just RDMing everyone you see. The whole 7 pages of rules that you had to constantly have up on a second monitor while playing to ensure that the way you're about to do XYZ doesn't break Rule 342, subsection 8 is crazy, and I hope that gets addressed by whoever is gonna be running servers.

The question of server ownership has always been an interesting one. If the server owner(s) aren't going to be impartial from the beginning, then we'll suffer the same cycle that we had during the Avalon vs Nexus and Avalon vs Oasis drama from back in the day. Further, any server that offers an in-game monetary incentive for the massive clans to donate is setting itself up for failure. Once the house is 'given away' to leaders of organized groups, it's rather risky to try and take it back. Peasant's last iteration of Avalon was a perfect example of this, as was the final days of Oasis EU. Dead clans/Clans in name only getting tens of millions of gold from Peasant in his bid to kill Oasis NA, and the banning of Tavington which put the final nail in Oasis EU.

Dealing with the clan leaders was always the biggest struggle, and I expect that to continue with Bannerlord. I'd personally like to see more of a mutual respect between server administration and clan owners, but only time will show if that will be the case. If clan owners are going to try the same strong arm tactics that have been used in the past, this mod is already dead. Just a matter of time.

As for less admin intervention, I completely agree as we've previously discussed. By the end of PW's life cycle, the rules had become rather disgusting. Administration teams, yours and mine included over the years, tried to graft the rules to every specific situation. The unfortunate aspect of PW's community is that everyone wanted a one up on everyone else, so many tried to abuse the system/rules in place. More and more exploits, led to further and more extensive editions of the ruleset. As an example, I don't feel as though cart glitching/blocking really needed to be explicitly stated, but heaven forbid we didn't add it.

With any sort of influx of new players, a ruleset of 7+ pages from the past will surely drive them off.

I don't expect this mod in any sort of timely fashion, simply because TW is TW. Time will tell. But any attempt at a 'timeline' for development at this point is far too premature.

Edits; trash typing at 6 am.

 

[Younes]

The question of server ownership has always been an interesting one. If the server owner(s) aren't going to be impartial from the beginning, then we'll suffer the same cycle that we had during the Avalon vs Nexus and Avalon vs Oasis drama from back in the day. Further, any server that offers an in-game monetary incentive for the massive clans to donate is setting itself up for failure. Once the house is 'given away' to leaders of organized groups, it's rather risky to try and take it back. Peasant's last iteration of Avalon was a perfect example of this, as was the final days of Oasis EU. Dead clans/Clans in name only getting tens of millions of gold from Peasant in his bid to kill Oasis NA, and the banning of Tavington which put the final nail in Oasis EU.

Dealing with the clan leaders was always the biggest struggle, and I expect that to continue with Bannerlord. I'd personally like to see more of a mutual respect between server administration and clan owners, but only time will show if that will be the case. If clan owners are going to try the same strong arm tactics that have been used in the past, this mod is already dead. Just a matter of time.

As for less admin intervention, I completely agree as we've previously discussed. By the end of PW's life cycle, the rules had become rather disgusting. Administration teams, yours and mine included over the years, tried to graft the rules to every specific situation. The unfortunate aspect of PW's community is that everyone wanted a one up on everyone else, so many tried to abuse the system/rules in place. More and more exploits, led to further and more extensive editions of the ruleset. As an example, I don't feel as though cart glitching/blocking really needed to be explicitly stated, but heaven forbid we didn't add it.

With any sort of influx of new players, a ruleset of 7+ pages from the past will surely drive them off.

I don't expect this mod in any sort of timely fashion, simply because TW is TW. Time will tell. But any attempt at a 'timeline' for development at this point is far too premature.

Edits; trash typing at 6 am.

Interesting points, agree completely on the whole clan's and server administration relation. Clans do have a kind of "leverage" over servers due to the action and activity they bring to said server, but I feel like this was a side effect mostly due to the popularity of the game altogether. I would presume this "leverage" would be less of an issue in bannerlord servers because of a massive amount of players willing to form their clan and only so many factions.

But as you said this is only a matter of time before the numbers dwindle during some periods and the issues start to pop up, I think the first severs for the mod will have a big task of changing this aspect and if they fail to do so, will ensure a continuation of PW like communities for the future to come. Rivalry between servers are normal, but it should be focused on improving the server instead of sabotaging the other like the way it did in PW as you've said with the said example of Oasis and Avalon.

As for the rules I am unsure if there will ever be a solution to it, the rules kind of defines how PW is played and unless they can shorten it by adding in game preventions for breaking such rules (thinking about how we had combat log for example), I don't think it will ever be fixed unless you change how PW/PK is played.

You could go for full anarchy but for obvious reasons, it would not be very fun.

 

[Master_]

Interesting points, agree completely on the whole clan's and server administration relation. Clans do have a kind of "leverage" over servers due to the action and activity they bring to said server, but I feel like this was a side effect mostly due to the popularity of the game altogether. I would presume this "leverage" would be less of an issue in bannerlord servers because of a massive amount of players willing to form their clan and only so many factions.

But as you said this is only a matter of time before the numbers dwindle during some periods and the issues start to pop up, I think the first severs for the mod will have a big task of changing this aspect and if they fail to do so, will ensure a continuation of PW like communities for the future to come. Rivalry between servers are normal, but it should be focused on improving the server instead of sabotaging the other like the way it did in PW as you've said with the said example of Oasis and Avalon.

As for the rules I am unsure if there will ever be a solution to it, the rules kind of defines how PW is played and unless they can shorten it by adding in game preventions for breaking such rules (thinking about how we had combat log for example), I don't think it will ever be fixed unless you change how PW/PK is played.

You could go for full anarchy but for obvious reasons, it would not be very fun.

Clans will always have at least a degree of leverage; its the responsibility of the server owner and administration team to limit their influence. Through my many years of working as an administrator and leading administration teams, I've found that using clan members as admins is especially detrimental. I've had staff members in the past - even high ranking senior staff - stop adminning at peak population because of a 'banner call' by their clan leader. I've always avoided working with admins who have ties to clans, and will continue to do so in Bannerlord; be that in terms of bringing new admins on board or even having said admins handle my own complaints.

The first servers need to set the bar. The administration team for the first server needs to be one who can shape further iterations. It should be a team of long standing members of the community with administration experience who are willing to take a 'hands off' approach. No 'random' events (I,e - Kill the courser which was always a terrible idea), and focus on handling complaints in a timely fashion, especially senior staff. Admins should admin and let the players play. The goal of the administration team should be to administrate, not to screw around playing 'find the carrot' events.

Server rivalry is to be expected, but the DDoS attacks of old need to stop. By the end of PW, the NA community, frankly, did not deserve a stable server to play on. We killed it ourselves; we bought and paid for our own lack of a server. I simply hope this mod moves NA in the right direction.

As for the issue with rules, there is definitely a solution; simplify the rules, and allow the admins to admin. Set basic ground workings of rules, and allow the admins to use discretion and intelligence to solve any issues that arise (This goes back to having an admin team that is competent and experienced). If a player has an issue with the response a member of the administration team gives, they need to follow the proper channels. No one needs to be told how to halt people in 7 individual steps with pictures and 'what-if' scenarios in the rules. No need for a 'punishment chart' telling admins exactly what punishment to give. Training staff that way gives very poor results from my experience; you get admins who need to stop and consult a checklist on every complaint. The rules are not the tutorial that they'd essentially become, and that needs to be changed if this community wants to stop writing short novels as rules.

 

[Younes]

As for the issue with rules, there is definitely a solution; simplify the rules, and allow the admins to admin. Set basic ground workings of rules, and allow the admins to use discretion and intelligence to solve any issues that arise (This goes back to having an admin team that is competent and experienced). If a player has an issue with the response a member of the administration team gives, they need to follow the proper channels. No one needs to be told how to halt people in 7 individual steps with pictures and 'what-if' scenarios in the rules. No need for a 'punishment chart' telling admins exactly what punishment to give. Training staff that way gives very poor results from my experience; you get admins who need to stop and consult a checklist on every complaint. The rules are not the tutorial that they'd essentially become, and that needs to be changed if this community wants to stop writing short novels as rules.

A simplification of the rules would for sure give admins give more room to decide whenever someone did something bad but basic rules such as the need to halt does seem beneficial to the game's gameplay or else people would just start doing RDM at random and call it a halt.

Leaving things open would in result I believe worsen things, but there is only one way of telling I suppose.

 

[Roy1012]

Anyone have any info on what the plans are for the servers when the mod goes up?

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/kingdoms-persistent-kingdoms-successor.403981/post-9744428

I asked the question here, you can read Bridge Troll's answer as I don't feel like repeating what has already been said. Also, as far as I know, Clarky will be making a server for NA when possible. No idea about other NA servers or EU.

The question of server ownership has always been an interesting one. If the server owner(s) aren't going to be impartial from the beginning, then we'll suffer the same cycle that we had during the Avalon vs Nexus and Avalon vs Oasis drama from back in the day.

I can't speak highly of other server owners, but Clarky has been impartial as ****. I set him up as owner of Infinity originally to try to be a puppet, but many a time he has cock blocked me from being able to push my agenda (not going to lie, that's exactly what happened). So, at the very least, you don't have to worry about that from him -- much to the dismay of myself and other clan leaders.

Further, any server that offers an in-game monetary incentive for the massive clans to donate is setting itself up for failure.

TW will blacklist any server which does this, so even if we wanted this to happen, it won't be.

Dealing with the clan leaders was always the biggest struggle, and I expect that to continue with Bannerlord. I'd personally like to see more of a mutual respect between server administration and clan owners, but only time will show if that will be the case. If clan owners are going to try the same strong arm tactics that have been used in the past, this mod is already dead. Just a matter of time.

To be honest, its the server owners who need to give the clan leaders respect. Like you mentioned, Tavington getting banned (for no reason mind you) should never have happened. It was because the owner felt like he needed to show strength/authority and prove that he's the one in charge. As we all saw, that wasn't the case. It's clans which keep the mod alive, nobody wants to play without them, which is evidenced by the fact that the mod only survives when clans are up, and dies when clan leaders don't want to play.

As for less admin intervention, I completely agree as we've previously discussed. By the end of PW's life cycle, the rules had become rather disgusting. Administration teams, yours and mine included over the years, tried to graft the rules to every specific situation. The unfortunate aspect of PW's community is that everyone wanted a one up on everyone else, so many tried to abuse the system/rules in place. More and more exploits, led to further and more extensive editions of the ruleset. As an example, I don't feel as though cart glitching/blocking really needed to be explicitly stated, but heaven forbid we didn't add it.

Unfortunately I have to agree. But it's just going to happen tbh. People always want to one up the others and get others banned; I will admit I have been pretty toxic in this regard. However, if the clan leaders and server owners come to an agreement of trying to "localize" enforcement of the rules, as in, the clans give their best attempt at disciplining their members and making sure they understand the rules and are following them, rather than always taking it to the forums to gain more salt, I think it could at least in theory work. I would do my best effort to keep my guys in line to ensure that we aren't getting any unfair advantage by bending the rules, after all, the more unfair advantages you take, the less the propaganda value of such victory is.

But as you said this is only a matter of time before the numbers dwindle during some periods and the issues start to pop up, I think the first severs for the mod will have a big task of changing this aspect and if they fail to do so, will ensure a continuation of PW like communities for the future to come.

We have an opportunity, or if you would view it a different way, responsibility, to change things for the better. Old habits die hard, and if we set an example for how things should be at the beginning, people will, ultimately, follow that. If we set the tone of the mod at the beginning as one of some level of mutual respect, it will be very difficult to break that.

Rivalry between servers are normal, but it should be focused on improving the server instead of sabotaging the other like the way it did in PW as you've said with the said example of Oasis and Avalon.

I can't speak to EU, but I think Clarky is universally liked, much due to his unbiased approach. He genuinely wants to help the community have a fun place to play, regardless of affiliation. He has said before that he will host a server as long as people wish to play, so at least on NA, I don't worry about this as long as he's there.

Clans will always have at least a degree of leverage; its the responsibility of the server owner and administration team to limit their influence.

It's that very attitude that alienates clan leaders and ultimately their players. It's that very attitude that destroyed Nexus.

Through my many years of working as an administrator and leading administration teams, I've found that using clan members as admins is especially detrimental.

Unless its someone specifically unbiased and uncorruptable as clarky, yeah. I gotta agree.

 

[Master_]

1. I can't speak highly of other server owners, but Clarky has been impartial as ****. I set him up as owner of Infinity originally to try to be a puppet, but many a time he has cock blocked me from being able to push my agenda (not going to lie, that's exactly what happened). So, at the very least, you don't have to worry about that from him -- much to the dismay of myself and other clan leaders.

2. TW will blacklist any server which does this, so even if we wanted this to happen, it won't be.

3. To be honest, its the server owners who need to give the clan leaders respect. Like you mentioned, Tavington getting banned (for no reason mind you) should never have happened. It was because the owner felt like he needed to show strength/authority and prove that he's the one in charge. As we all saw, that wasn't the case. It's clans which keep the mod alive, nobody wants to play without them, which is evidenced by the fact that the mod only survives when clans are up, and dies when clan leaders don't want to play.

4. Unfortunately I have to agree. But it's just going to happen tbh. People always want to one up the others and get others banned; I will admit I have been pretty toxic in this regard. However, if the clan leaders and server owners come to an agreement of trying to "localize" enforcement of the rules, as in, the clans give their best attempt at disciplining their members and making sure they understand the rules and are following them, rather than always taking it to the forums to gain more salt, I think it could at least in theory work. I would do my best effort to keep my guys in line to ensure that we aren't getting any unfair advantage by bending the rules, after all, the more unfair advantages you take, the less the propaganda value of such victory is.

5. We have an opportunity, or if you would view it a different way, responsibility, to change things for the better. Old habits die hard, and if we set an example for how things should be at the beginning, people will, ultimately, follow that. If we set the tone of the mod at the beginning as one of some level of mutual respect, it will be very difficult to break that.

6. I can't speak to EU, but I think Clarky is universally liked, much due to his unbiased approach. He genuinely wants to help the community have a fun place to play, regardless of affiliation. He has said before that he will host a server as long as people wish to play, so at least on NA, I don't worry about this as long as he's there.

7. It's that very attitude that alienates clan leaders and ultimately their players. It's that very attitude that destroyed Nexus.

8. Unless its someone specifically unbiased and uncorruptable as clarky, yeah. I gotta agree.

I'll just break my response down by number, because boomer lmao.

1. The issue with Clarky was never that he wasn't impartial. Clarky just wasn't around when we needed him. If memory servers, he had family **** going on at the time. Can't blame him for that, but it didn't help matters.

2. Good. But what TW knows about isn't always the same as what happens. That'll just fall back on the owner; if they take money from players for any reason, it'll just be the same. With the amount of DDoSing thats gone on in this community, would you really be surprised if someone still tried to throw money for gold, despite being explicitly told not to?

3. I disagree with that whole heartedly. Respect is a two way street, regardless of what you or your clan leading counterparts may think. Clan leaders have been strong arming server owners for years. I was removed not once, but twice from Phoenix because of Tavington twisting the arm of the SO. Clans will always be the lifeblood of PW, but that doesn't justify terrible behavior. Without an SO or admins who volunteer their time, the clans have no server tom play on. I don't think anyone who hasn't adminned before understands just how toxic it is to try and help this community just to get **** on, and on a nightly basis. Why do you think it's nearly always been a struggle to bring on, and then retain, competent staff?

And I was the HA who banned Tavington. The man was having his guys grief the servers entire population to get at Connor. I was the one who ran the meeting; the one where every clan on EU PW at the time came in and gave their essential testimony as to what was happening. I may not have been the most popular member of the community historically, but I've never banned unjustly or without cause.

4. Discipline should not be up to the clan leadership. If a server rule is broken, the admins should resolve the issue without fearing repercussions from the clans. I recall being head hunted on ShatteredRealms (might have been Sacred Oath actually? Can't recall, its been nearly a decade) for a good while after I made HA and finally started dropping the hammer. Hell, I remember a time on old Avalon that the whole Gypsy tag was hunted after some bans went down. Breaking the server rules should fall to staff and staff alone. Self policing leads to nothing but vigilante-ism. That is neither helpful nor useful. "That guy RDMed so I RDMed him, you're welcome!".

You can claim that you'd do your best to enforce things on your guys, but thats a hollow promise and you know it. There's no oversight by staff with that method. If I have a mass RDMing member of your leadership, and its mid war, don't expect me to belief that you'd remove them from the clan mid war. I've been RDMed by Lannisters far too many times to be that naïve. The only 'localization' of rule enforcement that needs to be done are staff members having a spine and not bending to the will of players. Localize some will and do what needs done. It's all about being fair, firm and consistent. Nothing more, nothing less.

5. I agree with that, as per my original post. Mutual respect; the clan leaders are going to lead, and the staff are going to enforce the rules. Shouldn't be 'salt' when it comes to rule enforcement. If a clan member griefs a castle, his tags should have no merit. By the same token, admins should not be dropping a wipe on a player of a clan he likes, and then 3 day banning a member of a rival clan for the same offense. Need checks and balances, which come from having experienced staff - especially senior staff.

6. I can't disagree. I've been HA under Clarky before and have no issues with him. Him going inactive, which I mentioned above, was the only issue I ever recall having with him. Now, to be fair to both sides, by the time I was HAing for Clarky, I had been burnt out for a long time, and I was on my way out of the PW scene which didn't help matters. But if it were Clarky, I'd have no issue with that. Hell, I'd even throw on tags for Clarky again if he'd have me.

7. Again, I disagree. We've seen servers with strong administration teams, and those ran by the clans. Nexus, the original, went on forever. Legacy had a long run. Oasis, the original, had a long run. Sacred Oath, Shattered Realms, and Infinity did not. History proves my point. When the ownership and administration bend to the will of those who lead the clans, the server suffers. Anyone who has ran an administration team can attest to the disruption staff in clans can cause. Influence the wars and politics of the server itself, leave the rule enforcement to administration. The only 'alienation' that comes from an SO not having a backbone are the general playerbase at large who get screwed over by terrible admins and rulesets. Infinity under Illuminati had very little internal strife and the server did well. He backed his administration team, and we resolved admin issues in-house. Avalon under Peasant when the True Cross took over all of the senior staff positions? Not so much.

8. You agree to my sentiment in response 7 here. Clan admins are an extension of clan leader influence on administration and should be prevented, or limited as much as possible, by those who own the server. Case in point.

 

[Bridge_Troll]

not really wanna disturb your conversation, but this thread should be about the mod, not about server administration and clan politics. There surely is a connection between all this, but not in this thread please

 

[Master_]

not really wanna disturb your conversation, but this thread should be about the mod, not about server administration and clan politics. There surely is a connection between all this, but not in this thread please

Fair enough. But on the topic of administration, are the admin tools going to be the same as on PW? I recall the standard teleport, invisible, and spawning commands, but will these all remain and will there be anything else added?

Sorry if I've missed that in the previous 13 pages.

 

[Bridge_Troll]

yes, admin tools will be included as they were in PW/PK. Whatever we see fit or by suggestion from the community will be added to the basic tools

 

[Roy1012]

yes, admin tools will be included as they were in PW/PK. Whatever we see fit or by suggestion from the community will be added to the basic tools

I apologize if this is already a thing as it’s been years since I’ve used admin. But, as I remember, you’d have to either ask the player or look in the logs for someone’s GUID. Is it possible to have a “lookup GUID” button with a list of players, when you click on one, it pops up as a chat message. Perhaps it could also pop up past used names. Could help skip a step of hopping on any sort of panel your server uses to find that info.

 

[Master_]

yes, admin tools will be included as they were in PW/PK. Whatever we see fit or by suggestion from the community will be added to the basic tools

My only suggestion is to have both teleporting behind as well as teleporting in front of players. Having one or the other on PW was always an annoyance, as both have their own situational uses.

Also, how will admin armor be done, and will the armor itself be fixed? Admin armor could be, for the longest time, worn by standard players. I recall on at least one map - Valley of swamps I think it was - admin armor was purchasable by players, which was horrible.

 

[Bridge_Troll]

I apologize if this is already a thing as it’s been years since I’ve used admin. But, as I remember, you’d have to either ask the player or look in the logs for someone’s GUID. Is it possible to have a “lookup GUID” button with a list of players, when you click on one, it pops up as a chat message. Perhaps it could also pop up past used names. Could help skip a step of hopping on any sort of panel your server uses to find that info.

not sure if a GUID from the game software itself is still going to be a thing, it's probably going to be replaced by your steam id, at least that would be what I'd like to see. Easier management and makes players be identified better. This will also make sense since the battleeye anti-cheat probably also identifies banned players by their steam id, given mods/servers are able to interact with the battle-eye service for bannerlord to verify global bans etc. Even if not, Steam integration is already there, so it would make sense to use it for player management

My only suggestion is to have both teleporting behind as well as teleporting in front of players. Having one or the other on PW was always an annoyance, as both have their own situational uses.

Also, how will admin armor be done, and will the armor itself be fixed? Admin armor could be, for the longest time, worn by standard players. I recall on at least one map - Valley of swamps I think it was - admin armor was purchasable by players, which was horrible.

both ways of teleporting were already possible back then, so that'll be added again
And on the Admin Armor topic, not sure if that is going to be a thing anyways, there are probably better ways to make an admin noticeable / mark a character as Administrator. Might just make a return for nostalgic reasons, but there is no necessity in my eyes.

 

[Younes]

Has there been made any consideration for multiple profiles/custom in game names like warband? Taleworlds said multiple profiles would come, but i honestly don't think it's coming at this point.

 

[Namakan]

not sure if a GUID from the game software itself is still going to be a thing, it's probably going to be replaced by your steam id, at least that would be what I'd like to see.

as it is currently, player IDs look like this (take straight from the History.json file you can find in your own documents):
"PlayerId": "2.0.0.76561198060843944",
2 indicates its a steam ID, 0 and 0 no clue, rest is literally just steam64 ID.
Other platforms such as Epic Games have other starting numbers and then their own ID system.

 

[Roy1012]

Has there been made any consideration for multiple profiles/custom in game names like warband? Taleworlds said multiple profiles would come, but i honestly don't think it's coming at this point.

This is pretty important tbh. Clan tags are pretty necessary for in-game purposes, and asking hundreds of people to change their steam name permanently is just bonkers.

 

[Froi]

This is pretty important tbh. Clan tags are pretty necessary for in-game purposes, and asking hundreds of people to change their steam name permanently is just bonkers.

What's wrong with changing your steam name? Other games such as Rust have it that way, and no one has ever complained about that. Only 10 seconds of work...

 

[Roy1012]

What's wrong with changing your steam name? Other games such as Rust have it that way, and no one has ever complained about that. Only 10 seconds of work...

Maybe some people don't want to change their steam name based on one game?