Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: /I disagree to play with ...  (Read 11526 times)
Cacatoes
Banned for leasing own account
Posts a lot
*

Cakes 73
Posts: 1427


also banned for baiting another to violate rules


« on: October 21, 2011, 05:01:56 AM »

This is rather conceptual and I didn't yet think much of what it would imply, but the idea is the following:

-> Implement a feature which would allow to ignore every actions caused by some specific player. That means: receive no damage, probably not see the ignored player at all, which could technically mean that the server wouldn't need to send data about that player (to the player who ignored it).

The problem is then about the "game state", since it's meant to be commonly shared between every players. In particular, weapons would disappear, flags be captured, which would indirectly affect the ignoring players.
Other players would be affected by ignored players, so we would see some players getting pushed like for no reason. Which brings some more weirdness.

This idea seems close to some peer-to-peer game problematics, while the intent here is not to get rid of servers nor to make something potentially massively played.

I suppose the server could hold several game states, which means, one different for every connected player. Which could be used to reduce the impact of the ignored player over the general game state.

The rational is to let players play with players they agree to play with on playstation. I'd be interested in the side-effects due to the lack of server authority to get a consistent world which are normally negatively perceived, while I believe they could not be.

If you have links to games or even posts who have a similiar approach I could be interested too. I mentionned P2P, I know it's been discussed on the web, but it is not the part I am the most interested in.
Logged

Todo: Walk the cat.
Bane
Member


Cakes 5
Posts: 225



« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2011, 06:56:50 AM »

I do have a link to a game where if you ignore the player they you cannot see them at all and there actions do not affect you. However it is an MMORPG and it is called Sherwood Dungeon. There  web address is http://www.maidmarian.com/
Logged
Gig
In the year 3000
***

Cakes 45
Posts: 4386


WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2011, 07:06:19 AM »

Letting me decide a player from who I don't want to get any damage at all? Sounds a bit like cheating...
Logged

I never want to be aggressive, offensive or ironic with my posts. If you find something offending in my posts, read them again searching for a different mood there. If you still see something bad with them, please ask me infos. I can be wrong at times, but I never want to upset anyone.
PopeJo
Lesser Nub


Cakes 12
Posts: 105



WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2011, 07:35:46 AM »

Letting me decide a player from who I don't want to get any damage at all? Sounds a bit like cheating...

lol, was also the same thing that came to my mind:
nice idea for a haxx, Cacatoes. Would also render the "ignored" player invulnerable to attacks + invisible.
cant even beat that with aimbot and wallhack.  Cheesy Wink
Logged

WingedPanther
Member


Cakes 4
Posts: 190



« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2011, 12:42:11 PM »

I can see all kinds of problems with that.  Let's say you have two teams (CTF), each with eight players.  In a degenerate scenario, each player ignores all but two opposing players, so that you have a sort of "loop" through the players of who can see whom.  You would have to keep half of your players in the base just to be sure you could cover defense.  Imagine this on CTF4ish, where you see your flag disappear and two of your team-mates go nuts.  All you can do to help them is snag the enemy flag.  The two players you see might not even be reacting to the chase.

Also, in 1-Flag CTF, imagine 2 players sitting on the white flag spot.  When a score happens, who gets it?
Logged

Programming is a branch of mathematics.
Cacatoes
Banned for leasing own account
Posts a lot
*

Cakes 73
Posts: 1427


also banned for baiting another to violate rules


« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2011, 06:32:48 PM »

Precisions:
The scenario for which that feature is intended is more like: Imagine a server with 10 players. Several players (3-4) could ignore 1 or 2 other players when they've shown themselves to be particularly annoying. The rest is okay to deal with them, while if they're really annoying it wouldn't harm if everyone ignores them (the effect would be rather the same than they've gotten kicked)
I guess some use of that feature would also be "oh, I use it since I don't want to be laminated", but when you use it with several, you can't interact anymore with them, so if you abuse that feature it's like you're left alone playing. Invicible, yeah, but alone (or much less players), fun ?
A player's decision to ignore another player wouldn't affect other player's choice. I'm free to ignore player X, but others will continue to play against player X.
Choices to ignore would be advertised, so we would know players disagreements. In some cases, players would be understanding of one's choice to ignore, in some others they would complain. Some part of the bet is there would be more good will players than others.

@WingedPanther,
I'm not sure I understood well, so I'm unsure my explanations make your scenario still apply. However, I don't think there is any point in "making a loop", since the goal is not to handle/kill every players.

Theorically, "Agreement" already occurs in some way on servers with current version of OA (or any multiplayer game), since when you join one, you accept to play with the players there, or could leave and play with other players. Moreover, there is a "slot" limit, which acts like you would "disagree" to play with "rest of the world" (who can't join)
Sometimes you could feel like you would leave the server not to play with someone, but you don't do it since going elsewhere means you have to play with another player base and you don't expect players would follow you. So if we assume slots act as a filter, this feature could be seen as a way to provide some flexibility with them.
In real life, space can also act as a filter in some way, since you can choose where and who with you go.

Now if the game state is a mess, or if some specific game modes turn almost impossible, I wouldn't mind so much, while I was hoping not all the rules would have to be discarded. I'm still too dumb to imagine and realize how applicable this idea is, but took the risk to say it anyway :p
That idea came following that ignore command request to conceptually extend it, since with it we clearly see some client-side decision can spare us some annoyance while not having any effect on the rest.
Logged

Todo: Walk the cat.
WingedPanther
Member


Cakes 4
Posts: 190



« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2011, 09:49:55 PM »

My really absurd example:  suppose on red you have players 1-8, and on blue you have 9-16.

1 can see 9&10
2 can see 10&11
3 can see 11&12
4 can see 12&13
...
8 can see 16&9

By symmetry, that means
9 can see 1&8
10 can see 1&2
11 can see 2&3
...
16 can see 7&8

Can you see how this would be bananas in 1flag CTF or CTF?

I realize, that's not the intended, but I can see weird stuff happening.
Logged

Programming is a branch of mathematics.
Cacatoes
Banned for leasing own account
Posts a lot
*

Cakes 73
Posts: 1427


also banned for baiting another to violate rules


« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2011, 03:54:32 AM »

Yeah, that would mean something like:
1 9 10 8 2 11 would be forming like a group, but 11 is connected to 3, and 3 is connected to 12 while not connected to 1.
I get the chained-circle idea, but... is it like some "funny" scenario you describe, or is it some "worse-case" scenario ?
Your scenario preserves "bounds between every player", so it's like there is no player which is "not legitimate to play".
Your scenario also has the particularity the server, if it was intelligent, couldn't "cut" the game in isolated parts since everyone is bound.
I would almost say the scenario you describe is an efficient scenario :p (since many players are evicted, while none is neglected).

Now, you don't need to do that to provoke problems in 1CTF or 2CTF. Imagine everyone but one person (let's call it P) ignores player X. That means player X plays almost alone, but P plays with everyone. That means X could easily take profit from the overwhelming situation of P. Once X gets the flag or something, only P could stop it (and he'd be easily targeted by the whole enemy team)

So I still don't get if you were pointing a gameplay problem (like my example), or something more fundamental ?
Logged

Todo: Walk the cat.
Gig
In the year 3000
***

Cakes 45
Posts: 4386


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2011, 07:44:06 AM »

The whole thing still seems difficulty appliabe in practice to me, I fear it would cause so much kinds of problems.
Examples:
- You decde to ignore someone from the enemy team, and you are playing CTF. If you get the enemy flag, that guy cannot defend his own flag, and it does not seem fair. If he gets your flag, you cannot retrive it (will you see it moving suspended in the air?), and you may cause your team to lose!
- In an Elimination or Last Man standing mode, we need only one man to survive... but there would be the risk to end up with two people that cannot harm each other!
- In general, players may decide to ignore other players not because they are lamers, but because they are better than themselves, and this would be like cheating.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2011, 06:06:17 PM by Gig » Logged

I never want to be aggressive, offensive or ironic with my posts. If you find something offending in my posts, read them again searching for a different mood there. If you still see something bad with them, please ask me infos. I can be wrong at times, but I never want to upset anyone.
fromhell
Administrator
GET A LIFE!
**********

Cakes 35
Posts: 14520



WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2011, 02:31:07 PM »

Yeah I was thinking this would be prone to abuse. You can't disagree a team objective.
Logged

asking when OA3 will be done won't get OA3 done.
Progress of OA3 currently occurs behind closed doors alone

I do not provide technical support either.

new code development on github
Peter Silie
Member


Cakes 2008
Posts: 610



« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2011, 03:18:48 PM »

OA needs some kind of "Scassapala"-Mode:
- simple ignore method, which filters all chat messages from a selected player. maybe with menu? Smiley
- simple kick/ban method from within the menu. I always forget the right cmd to get the player ID Smiley
- an anouncer who says "Vote in progress!" or something like this, otherwise nobody realizes that there is a vote Smiley

Just an idea. maybe with an /exec scassa,cfg to start? scnr
Logged
Bane
Member


Cakes 5
Posts: 225



« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2011, 05:16:07 PM »

Also Peter maybe while the vote is in progress there could be like a couple seconds of time out to let people vote. What does everyone think about that ?
Logged
Gig
In the year 3000
***

Cakes 45
Posts: 4386


WWW
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2011, 06:14:22 PM »

- simple kick/ban method from within the menu. I always forget the right cmd to get the player ID Smiley

I'm not in front of the game now (so I could be wrong)... But I think that "callvote kick x" is available from the ESC menu... And usually you can simply use player name, insted of his ID, no? Or were you talking about something else?
Obviously, I'm talking about kicking... I don't know how to execute banning at all.
Logged

I never want to be aggressive, offensive or ironic with my posts. If you find something offending in my posts, read them again searching for a different mood there. If you still see something bad with them, please ask me infos. I can be wrong at times, but I never want to upset anyone.
Peter Silie
Member


Cakes 2008
Posts: 610



« Reply #13 on: October 23, 2011, 10:18:50 AM »

Some player names are realy hard to type (like mine).
So you have to look for the ID (/clients ?) before you can do the /callvote kick

Anyway: blocking scassas spam would already help me a lot, becuase usualy i play not this kind of serious and always use the chat to communicate during the game. not like s spamer, more to say "thx" if somebody pushed me back to base, givin information about flag status (safe in base) or whatever.

And the announcer seems to be a fine way to notify all players about a vote. some ppl just miss the vote because of the simple "beep".
Logged
Cacatoes
Banned for leasing own account
Posts a lot
*

Cakes 73
Posts: 1427


also banned for baiting another to violate rules


« Reply #14 on: October 23, 2011, 01:47:38 PM »

There is some "Vote now" sound available in the game, but it doesn't seem to be activated.
Some other way, which I would prefer, would be to distinguish the "callvote" sound from the "chat beep" sound.
Printing the "please vote" message in center of the screen (did I dream it or did someone suggested that ?) could be annoying, it already visually stays for some time in the corner of the screen. I suppose if people don't vote there are other reasons.

@Bane, there is already a "timeout", it's displayed for some time, did you mean something else ?

Logged

Todo: Walk the cat.
Bane
Member


Cakes 5
Posts: 225



« Reply #15 on: October 23, 2011, 02:26:33 PM »

@ Cacatoes Yeah I meant when a vote is being cast the game pauses for about 1 or 2 second to just give you enough time to read it and press F1 or F2.
Logged
Cacatoes
Banned for leasing own account
Posts a lot
*

Cakes 73
Posts: 1427


also banned for baiting another to violate rules


« Reply #16 on: October 23, 2011, 04:15:09 PM »

Ah, the game would pause ... hmm, the problem is pauses are seriously affecting gameplay (I think aftershock has the ability to call a vote to make a "break" in the game, I don't know if their implementation works perfectly well), and some people like to call many useless votes so it would get really annoying if it paused each time.
Logged

Todo: Walk the cat.
Gig
In the year 3000
***

Cakes 45
Posts: 4386


WWW
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2011, 04:28:18 PM »

Some player names are realy hard to type (like mine).
So you have to look for the ID (/clients ?) before you can do the /callvote kick
I'm still writing from mobile phone, so I can't check yet. Are you sure the callvote option from the ESC menu (frm the GUI) does not allow to graphically select a player from the list?
Logged

I never want to be aggressive, offensive or ironic with my posts. If you find something offending in my posts, read them again searching for a different mood there. If you still see something bad with them, please ask me infos. I can be wrong at times, but I never want to upset anyone.
RMF
Member


Cakes 12
Posts: 694



« Reply #18 on: October 25, 2011, 02:01:12 PM »

I only read the first few posts in this topic, but the idea seems impossible and impractical to me in so many ways I don't even know where to start. Most of them are probably named above though.

An option to mute anyone might be good, but that has been suggested many times. The only realistic thing to add is removing railgun knockback from a teammate, this is often abused in instantgib and especially on space maps.
Logged
Cacatoes
Banned for leasing own account
Posts a lot
*

Cakes 73
Posts: 1427


also banned for baiting another to violate rules


« Reply #19 on: October 25, 2011, 02:29:04 PM »

This is both a technical challenge and a curiosity, it's not something I expect to be implemented, unless someone is mad enough to do it.
My intent was to get some light about this, and to celebrate my 1337 posting, but it's not the right forum to ask.
Logged

Todo: Walk the cat.
Peter Silie
Member


Cakes 2008
Posts: 610



« Reply #20 on: October 25, 2011, 03:17:54 PM »

btw: there was "leet" instead of "1337" XD
Logged
Cacatoes
Banned for leasing own account
Posts a lot
*

Cakes 73
Posts: 1427


also banned for baiting another to violate rules


« Reply #21 on: October 26, 2011, 06:43:03 AM »

Tongue
Logged

Todo: Walk the cat.
Peter Silie
Member


Cakes 2008
Posts: 610



« Reply #22 on: October 26, 2011, 09:19:40 AM »

u r so 1337 XD

thx 4 the pic!
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to: