Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

[sinewav]

Maybe a mod can move these last few /shuffle posts to this thread under... development? I guess that's a good spot for that...

I really don't think there are settings or a rule we could change to make substituting players smoother. But if someone does have a solution, please present it in a form we can easily vote on.

[Shock]

If you could join during the round that would work, but as it is, you have no time for shuffling.

Spam? This was already stated.

Mmm, more of a catalyst.
Dev: "Hey, I got an idea! How about allowing to join during a round? Good idea, me."

[sinewav]

Dev: "Hey, I got an idea! How about allowing to join during a round? Good idea, me."

Right. But we are trying to come up with solutions that don't involve development. That takes time and effort from a source that has more important things to do. And even if it were developed, it still has to be tested, then implemented. That could take a long time. (Are you going to write to code for it and get 16 servers updated?)

We have enough creative people to come up with a solution without involving the developers. As awesome as Fortress/Lable is, it's still just one part of Arma. Our part. The players. Our responsibility.

[Shock]

Ohh

Ok

Also, what about SCORE_HOLE -1? I've been pushing for this for a while!

I'm considering putting up a test server with SCORE_HOLE -1, EXPLOSION_RADIUS 1.0, and newbie's 4/6 scoring distribution idea.

^ like

[sinewav]

Yeah, those settings... can we get G5 to try them out in Mega Fort? Anyone think it's a good idea? The scoring is a cool, and 1.0 holes are hardly bigger than the current ones. And that -1 hole score... well, it certainly makes that torpedo at the end of every match a little less obligatory.

[Titanoboa]

Score_hole should remain 0 in competitive matches, but I guess you can vote on -1/0 if that's necessary.

[owned]

-1/0

Did you just divide by zero? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO-

[PokeMaster]

haha that's hilarious woned.

Personally, I agree that score_hole should stay 0, but if enough people back up -1, let's vote on it!

[dreadlord]

why -1, holes are part of the game so why should you be punished for using them?

[AI-team]

why -1, holes are part of the game so why should you be punished for using them?

/team 1 Yes Ja Si

[Gonzap]

why -1, holes are part of the game so why should you be punished for using them?

/team 1 Yes Ja Si

don't you notice they wanna erradicate that part of the game?

[PokeMaster]

No, they just want a penalty. 0.75 doesn't stop holing, it just stops bad and easy holing. The way I see it though, there shouldn't be a penalty for driving through a hole, the sacrifice already was the death of a teammate (and probably 2 points to the other team). And then you could make the argument of why should a team get a reward for an attacker dying by accident (sloppy attack), and then a teammate coming along and taking the hole? Well, that's what you have sweepers for.

[owned]

why -1, holes are part of the game so why should you be punished for using them?

That's the same reason I'm against having hole points. I think you should get 0 points for a hole.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if holing gave the holer -1 points and the guy who made the hole +1

[sinewav]

Speaking of holes, how do you feel about voting on the following sizes: 2.00m 1.00m 0.75m ?

I know we're not having any luck testing hole sizes or that cool new scoring distribution idea, but maybe we don't need too if we can agree that they aren't major game changers anyway?

I'm glad this topic is still active and getting bumped regularly, but it could be a little more robust, no? I just don't want another argument like last vote. If you had something to say then, please say it now.

[Titanoboa]

Well the 4/6 (opposed to 6/4) HAS been tested and appreciated, at least for a bit.
What does that make the options? 4/6, 6/4 and 10/0 ?

0.75 | 1.00 | 2.00 - good options in my opinon. We could add 1.25 as well but I have a feeling that'll just split up the medium size votes in half, giving 0.75 (and 2) a possible advantage.


Oh yeah we need to lay out the zone/round vote so people don't get mixed up with 6/4 vs 4/6.
Is "Round/Zone score: 4/6 | 6/4 | 10/0" really clear enough?

And we of course have the 6v6 | 7v7 | 8v8 vote as usual?

I feel like I'm forgetting something.