Spring RTS Engine

Make !autolock require a vote so every game doesn't get escalated to 16 players by nubs while people are waiting.

Also, make an option to not lock but just autospec new joiners beyond some player number.

Disable !votestop so a running game won't get interrupted by nubs (happened yesterday).

Auswaschbar wrote:Disable !votestop so a running game won't get interrupted by nubs (happened yesterday).

Votestop is needed to avoid clogged autohosts. Imagine 2 people ingame refusing to quit while rest is waiting for a re.

TheFatController wrote:Make !autolock require a vote so every game doesn't get escalated to 16 players by nubs while people are waiting.

This can be configured easily by SPADS autohost administrators. Actually SPADS was initially configured like this by default, but then I reverted it because players were too much used to Springie behaviour (cf this post ).

JohannesH wrote:Also, make an option to not lock but just autospec new joiners beyond some player number.

This is also already implemented in SPADS (cf this post).

bibim wrote:

JohannesH wrote:Also, make an option to not lock but just autospec new joiners beyond some player number.

This is also already implemented in SPADS (cf this post).

This was also already implemented in Springie using the !manage command... months ago.

well, good idea tho not very effective - someone unlocked for 16, u call vote to lock at 12, before vote pass 3 ppl join ( 15 ) vote pass, game is locked and u need to call another vote D:

Wombat wrote:well, good idea tho not very effective - someone unlocked for 16, u call vote to lock at 12, before vote pass 3 ppl join ( 15 ) vote pass, game is locked and u need to call another vote D:

If the vote for autolock 16 passed, then it means the active majority chose it, so I guess there is no need to call another vote for 12.
By the way, it's possible to use map presets, so autohost administrators can limit the maximum number of players depending on the current map.

So this request is more for autohost owners than developers.!

TheFatController wrote:Make !autolock require a vote so every game doesn't get escalated to 16 players by nubs while people are waiting.

the majority of players in most games are nubs and they all want 8v8 on their dsd game so they use their good computers and take the best porcy positions at the back while all the good ppl (me) have to take the shity front position!

Players under rank 5 shouldn't be allowed to vote for DSD.

People like 8v8s cause they reduce personal responsibility for the team losing, any failure can easily someone else's fault so noone really has to concentrate or cooperate or play well. Not to mention when this just takes the form of people just hiding at the back playing sim city.

This style of play can be fun but it's sad that it's how the majority of games are played

TheFatController wrote:Make !autolock require a vote so every game doesn't get escalated to 16 players by nubs while people are waiting.

No.

Make the autohost lock the game at 12, then if people want to increase it, make them vote, but have a different voting system, so people have to actively vote to get the change (Like a 75% majority for it) not the current system of 'If nobody disagrees, its passed'.

Instead of having 10 8v8 DSD hosts, we should vary them to have maybe:

FFA Hosts that can only run FFA Maps
1v1 Hosts that can only run 1v1 Maps
2v2 Hosts that can only run 2v2 Maps
And so on...

JAZCASH wrote:Instead of having 10 8v8 DSD hosts, we should vary them to have maybe:

FFA Hosts that can only run FFA Maps
1v1 Hosts that can only run 1v1 Maps
2v2 Hosts that can only run 2v2 Maps
And so on...

With "we" being who here? And are you really saying that map choices on autohosts should be more limited, whats the point in that?

yer but its up to the autohost owner to chose wat he wants it to be. there currently is already 1v1 hosts and 2v2/3v3 hosts but i think the autohost owners who want to their autohost to be used lots and get lots of ingame time will set up a 8v8 autohost with dsd as main map

JohannesH wrote:

JAZCASH wrote:Instead of having 10 8v8 DSD hosts, we should vary them to have maybe:

FFA Hosts that can only run FFA Maps
1v1 Hosts that can only run 1v1 Maps
2v2 Hosts that can only run 2v2 Maps
And so on...

With "we" being who here? And are you really saying that map choices on autohosts should be more limited, whats the point in that?

Map choices on maps are already too limited. It seems to be a mix up of Tabula, DSD, Altored, Tropical etc etc...

What I'm saying is there is currently bots that host DSD which allows up to 6 players and onwards.

DSD was designed for 5v5ish gameplay and that's how it plays best. None of this 8v8 Porcnoobragefests which only noobs enjoy.

Imo something should be done about people playing the same maps over and over when there are so many better playing and better looking maps out there. There's some really wonderful work mappers have made that is much better than this usual stuff but nobody plays them because a lot of the autohosts don't have their maps....

This thread isn't about which maps people play fyi, just the autolock issue, take the DSD rage to another thread pls

JAZCASH wrote:Imo something should be done about people playing the same maps over and over when there are so many better playing and better looking maps out there.

i agree, i think best solution would be to make autohosts have different maps, for example there could be 2 DSD hosts only, and then 2 tabula, 2 something etc...

so you wouldnt be able to change the maps to ANYTHING, if you want to play some specific map, you would join into that host that has the map you want to play.

it could be done like, splitting the 1000 available maps with 60 autohosts = each autohost would be able to play about 30 maps (since there can be 2 autohosts with same map, so we overlap half of the maps).

then when you wanna play a game, you select which map you want to play, and then it will autojoin you to open autohost with that map. if theres no open autohost with that map, it would ask you to join on already running game to wait it to be finished. or it would join you to the autohost which has the map, but which is not selected yet, so you can !votemap and change it to whatever you wanted.

to make this work:
1) we need a lobby which automatically filters empty autohosts out, so we can add as many autohosts as we want, without disrupting the usability to select a game from the list.
2) lobby client needs a function to autojoin on the correct autohost, and lobby client needs to know which autohost has which maps...

How about integrating damn voting mechanisms and voting interface into lobby spec/prot so that the chat screen isn't cluttered with inane voting messages and hundred WAITING 4 VOTES messages.