Spring RTS Engine

Pffff, you LLC fools will NEVER get me. I WILL NEVER BE BROWBEATE.... ARRRRRGH! REMOVE THAT FROM MY SPLEEN, YOU!

BlackLiger wrote:Pffff, you LLC fools will NEVER get me. I WILL NEVER BE BROWBEATE.... ARRRRRGH! REMOVE THAT FROM MY SPLEEN, YOU!

I support this message.

i made like 1000 cool posts in this thread and they were all deleted

how do you moderators sleep at night

Trick question. I don't sleep.

Well. Don't do it again please.

if we had rep voting, this would have solved the isaac problem! I simply downvote Swift and upvote isaac. problem solved.


smurg!
gorat!

burg
smoat

Even if I see the thread doesn't seem to be much on topic, I would like to say that I fully agree with the topic.

The thing that I would do different than proposed would be that the reputation will not be central but based on your 'connections'. If I say X is a nice player, I value his opinions as well, so I can deduce that players X thinks are nice are nice for me also. The same for nasty players.

This way groups of players will be formed based on their desires - if they like to play with people that spam, it is fine.

The lobby could take this 'rating' into account and not allow people to join battles for example if the hosts (or hosts friends) thinks he is a nasty players.

I do not imply that this should be high priority etc, but still I think it would be a nice idea.

That sounds weird, Malric. How exactly would it work? Take a group of 5 players, all on each others "like list". One of them dislikes another, what happens? O__o

malric wrote: This way groups of players will be formed based on their desires - if they like to play with people that spam, it is fine.

So you would downvote people who spam?

Teutooni wrote:That sounds weird, Malric. How exactly would it work? Take a group of 5 players, all on each others "like list". One of them dislikes another, what happens? O__o

I happen to like 2 players who utterly abhor each other.

I2:Isaacment_Day wrote: If we had 10x the people my system wouldnt work, but we dont

We just needed some sort of "mark as idiot" option... :)

There are not too many idiots, and thats why the moderators could take care of it. Otherwise everyone would be marked as an idiot.

kiki wrote:

Teutooni wrote:That sounds weird, Malric. How exactly would it work? Take a group of 5 players, all on each others "like list". One of them dislikes another, what happens? O__o

I happen to like 2 players who utterly abhor each other.

So what is the problem ? You accept both when you host, and when they host they do not accept each other.

Also you can have for each open game an average (how many players you like and how many you do not.

Boirunner wrote:So you would downvote people who spam?

I would 'downvote' anyone who would annoy me really bad. And I would like to know who annoys others really bad. There are some players which host very decent games, are polite, etc. I trust they would like just players that behave well in their games.

Teutooni wrote:That sounds weird, Malric. How exactly would it work? Take a group of 5 players, all on each others "like list". One of them dislikes another, what happens? O__o

What happens for whom ? If I have someone on the dislike list I will not allow him in my game (for example). Or at least I know I do not want to be in the same team with him. If I do not know anything about a player I could try to 'deduce' it based on my friends opinions (but of course my opinion would take precedence over theirs).



To summarize, I think this idea is somehow what Google did with PageRank, but instead of pages there are players, instead of linking there is the process to click a button 'I like this player'/'I hate this player', and searching is the searching for a nice game to join.

malric wrote: I would 'downvote' anyone who would annoy me really bad. And I would like to know who annoys others really bad. There are some players which host very decent games, are polite, etc. I trust they would like just players that behave well in their games.

Yes but do you consider spamming units annoying?

My personal opinion is that if you play a game, you accept all the options it provides. If you do not like them you can play a different mod or tweak the various options - I saw a very funny game with unit limit 35.

So, no I do not consider annoying any tactic. But probably I would change the mod if every game would be boring.

There's a reason every social networking site nowadays has up/down, no more. It's simple, it's effective, and it works. People come up with their own ideas of what a +1 means and a -1 means, and that's fine.

More complicated schemes are possible. But they're not necessarily better. Just integrate it into the lobby as part of a user's name, and you'll be fine. Best way IMHO would be to have "standing votes"; IOW, you're either neutral for someone, you're +1'ing them, or you're -1'ing them at any given time. and of course that can change at ay time you wish.

Social ranking in communities that aren't specifically intended as social groupings (like gaming communities) can go horribly wrong. The last game I put serious time into was basically ruined by a "kudos" system where you could subtract or add kudos to people for various reasons. What it turned into was whole groups of people dinging people they didn't like, or wars where one guy would ding someone else for doing something very stupid ingame, then a horde of people supporting that someone else would drive the original subtractor's score into the basement in outrage - how dare he take away points from my friend such and such.

This system replaced a purely skill based points system where people were rewarded for killing enemy units and such, which fostered elitism to an extent and led to people playing as 'stat-whores' but neither of those made the game unbearable to play - the social ranking very much did, since playing well got you dinged by idiots, dinging idiots for doing stupid things got you attacked in return, ect, ect.

is dat sum wulfram you speeketh of?