This is complete bull.
Anyone who sets up an autohost, and add himself as admin, will notice the little line there that grants lobby mods rights.

Also, if the situation arises that people on an autohost need help, and none of the registered autohost mods are around, its the smart choice to let lobby mods step in.

No not everyone will notice that. It would be smart if the autohost user was notified that there is someone else than him having access to his host.

The "Lobby moderator" access given by default to all lobby moderator is just there to allow these moderators to easily close the autohost battle if the autohost is using a wrong Spring version, or even shutdown the autohost if the bot is bugged and spamming a channel for instance. Else, the lobby moderators would have to ban the autohost account.

Then limit their rights to only these things so they can't mess with the settings/kick/spec people?

i dont think lobby mods would go into a autohost and abuse there privaliges. If they do there status as lobby mod would need review, lobby mods have access because of the reasons given above.

this is probably regret raging because he got kicked out of a bot for trolling or griefing of some sort, so i wouldnt give it any particular attention.

The reasons are logical for what bibim said. It makes no sense for them to be able to kick players/stop games/change server settings otherwise.


The poster of an idea/complaint has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the idea/complaint. Maybe you should put your personal insecurities aside and not derail topics needlessly?

Honestly I agree with Regret here there's no reason to give them more permissions than what they need.

I can't complain that my autohosts are trolled by moderators. :) If someone is trolling my autohost and avoids kicking by vote(that will take about a minute each time that's quite annoying) i would be glad if someone from moderators get it and ban him.
Removing priviledges from moderators sounds like hiding user password from root for him not to abuse her :)

Excuse me, exactly how is not giving access to your resources to random individuals similar to OS user hierarchy?

Moderator can ban someone from lobby. I.e. random individuals can just ban you. So why then must not be able to ban you on concrete autohost if they can do it global?

Because they are not the owners of said autohost. The lobby is only a relay.

dunno :) i'm too lazy to reconfigure it anyway
btw, bibim, i convinced spring devs to provide autohost with endgame stats. Try to use it for balancing

Could you make the maxspecs setting not connect extra specs to the game, instead of kicking them from the channel?

I don't think this is possible without changes to the lobby client/protocol.


I'd like to encourage autohosts to not use the maxspecs setting at all, by the way. I've seen players who really want to spectate work around this by joining as a player and then just resigning immediately.

That might have been me... did it happen recently?

Kick them so they wont try it again as often.

I'm late to the discussion, but I don't see any reason not to grant moderators the ability to sort out games if no users with rights are available for a host. I do think the choice is that of the person running the host, however, but... eh.

Licho did not respond whatsoever to an autohost suggestion I made and while I was one of the primary supporters of Springie in ages past with nearly a score of hosts, and still prefer the command syntax, I figure I might just turn over the idea to you, bibim. Personally, I think with some revisions SPADS might replace Springie for me when I bring back my hosting. It just seems like a number of the commands are different just to be different while others are implemented unintuitively.

Anyway... new balancing methods. Possibly very useful when the ladder returns. Anyway, I think these could be handy. Certainly more useful than Springie's ELO.



Anyway, keep it up!

Note that i plan big redesign of springie asociated with winter and new central server for them.
They will work very differently and im open to suggestions just dont expect it to be done soon, since its winter dependent :)

As for balancing, i would be afraid of using ingame stats. Springie has them too but i did not want to use them for several reasons:

1) in a team game, player with best stats was not necessary the most usefull. If you sacrifice or just hold the line while others tech you can have crap score but effectively be the most important team member.

2) stats whoring - you will get what you measure. If you measure damage done people would try to optimize this on the expense of other aspects (for example in team game with communism, they might neglect economic buildup and rely on their team instead).

I suggest to measure everything. Make some formula(algorithm?) that will calculate efficiency of a player in game. Probably it must be BA specific not to be way general.
As if player made great eco but his resource sharing is 0 and damage dealt is 0, he proably was teching in the corner and should be low ranked.
Something like this :)

How would this be better as opposed to just measuring if team wins or not..
If its a team game, there is only team victory or team defeat. Nothing else..

If the player sacrifices himself with something that ruins him, like comm drop, but this leads to victory it would be unfair to punish him.