Spectator Chat?

Phytotron · Post by **Phytotron** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:32 pm

Walking Tree wrote:(with surround sound even)

Heh, Armagetron Advanced in Dolby 5.1?

iceman · Post by **iceman** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:15 pm

if you are gonna allow spectators chat to appear in the game then expect to see spammers called Admin annoying players

Walking Tree · Post by **Walking Tree** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:00 pm

yeah, spectators should chat seperately from real players

Post by **Lucifer** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:14 pm

Oscilloscope wrote:
Walking Tree wrote:(with surround sound even)
Heh, Armagetron Advanced in Dolby 5.1?

Heh. Ummm, ok. Why not?

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:11 am

wrtl: What you call "Client" (and we do most of the time for convenience, too) is actually a client/server hybrid. It can act as both. And yes, the bots on a server are like local players on a client.

Iceman: no worries, spectators will appear in the player list. They can call themselves Admin all right, but everyone will see that. Just like it is today.

Post by **Lucifer** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:17 am

Not to mention, we can ban players by name now, so a server admin can ban "Admin" if it's a problem.

wrtlprnft · Post by **wrtlprnft** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:17 am

Well kicking players by name is nothing new... You could always put

Code: Select all

kick Admin
kick Player 1
kick

in your everytime.cfg...

And yes, I know the hybrid thing... If you wanna make a dedikated server you ./configure it with --disable-glout and nothing more

Am I correct if I say that even the dedicated server could act as a client without graphical output?

Post by **Lucifer** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:36 am

Kicking players was almost worthless. It was fun to say "Hi player 1, bye player 1", but for the admin name abuse it wouldn't work. They could just rejoin.

Of course, I think kicking a person enough times will cause an automatic ban now, configurable of course.

I like having a server with sharper teeth.

Now if we could regex for things and kick players on it, maybe we can clean up some of the really bad behavior. That would be a worthy hack to put on the wiki, I'd probably want to throw it into cvs right away (hint hint).

Phytotron · Post by **Phytotron** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:50 am

Lucifer wrote:
Oscilloscope wrote:
Walking Tree wrote:(with surround sound even)
Heh, Armagetron Advanced in Dolby 5.1?
Heh. Ummm, ok. Why not?

No reason. In fact, it would probably be pretty cool (for those affluent enough to own a 5.1 system, anyway). The idea just struck me as humorous for some reason.

iceman · Post by **iceman** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:01 pm

z-man: thanks im glad that spectators will appear in the list and be kickable

Sniperiid · Post by **Sniperiid** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 4:21 pm

iceman wrote:if you are gonna allow spectators chat to appear in the game then expect to see spammers called Admin annoying players

It would be a great idea instead of Admin to be saying:
*SPECTATOR*Admin.

Isn't this a great idea?

joda.bot · Post by **joda.bot** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 8:08 pm

guess this is a really hot feature request then

gnorty · Post by **gnorty** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:50 pm

further to the waiting room thing, I got thinking it might be kinda cool to have a second server linked to the main one, as a kind of waiting area/practice ground.

for example - you want to play fortress, but it is full. automatically you go to the fortress "creche" (hosted somewhere different, but similar settings, and some kind of connection maintained between client and the main server.

in the creche there is another fortress type game. When another player leaves the main game, the server sends a message to the client that is next in line, and he gets a choice of joining the main server or not. The creche would be good for warming up, trying things out and schooling noobs, it wouldn't be as serious as the main server, and hence noobs wouldn't be getting kicked for, well, just for being noobs. Maybe a few zones (inert, but good for practicing in) and some open space to fight in. players would automatically respawn when they die.

If there are slots available on the main server, then of course the client could connect immediately. It would also be possible to connect to the creche server directly if required.

Just spitballing really, but it seems feasible. The extra traffic on the server would be absolutely minimal (just a few occaisional bytes for each waiting client between rounds maybe).

gnorty · Post by **gnorty** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:02 pm

whoopsie!

I seem to have missed 2 pages ofposts, and posted something now way off topic. Sorry. Still think it is a sound idea.

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:43 pm

Gnorty: I've been thinging about something along these lines as well, so it must be a good idea

I was pondering to use the second server as a selection method, where your prowess is tested and only if you're worthy, you get to the main fortress. This breaks down, of course, on no way of telling a client to go to a different server right now (doable), and no way of testing the prowess of a single player for fortress (difficult unless you specifically test the goalie on Sumo).

Sniperiid wrote:It would be a great idea instead of Admin to be saying:
*SPECTATOR*Admin.

Umm, what exactly would this change? What problem does it solve?