Feature: Warsow-like voting system

[webhead]

2: Warsow-like voting system, or maybe even one that's better - webhead, KoreMagna

add plz.

[Eiii]

What do you mean by Warsow-like?

[jitspoe]

Indeed, please elaborate.  Is this for vote kicking?  Voting on settings?  What?

[coLa]

probably for all of them. i too would like to see this implemented. i think sk89q was already working on something like this. instead of kicking, it may be better to have a mute <player> vote. with all the young new players that come into the game, the kick vote could be exploited for someones pleasure. and maybe a change map vote, but only in the beginning or at the end of a map. this would rule out constant map changes during a game. settings are fine the way they are. i don't see where that would help too much.

[sk89q]

You can already ignore a player individually (not that I've tried it), although a mute would still be cool.

[webhead]

probably for all of them.

yup, pretty much. i know there was a feature request for voting on server settings, but this covers more than just that.
as far as server settings, i think they could be voted on, but how about making the settings change only for the duration of the map, and then for the next map they'd reset to what an admin had set them at before?
this also includes what jitspoe called "votenextmap", or voting to trigger the current map to end and either take votes or just go to the next map, depending on whether the server has map voting enabled or not.

instead of kicking, it may be better to have a mute <player> vote. with all the young new players that come into the game, the kick vote could be exploited for someones pleasure.

exploited? how do you mean? i'm not sure i'm getting that.

and maybe a change map vote, but only in the beginning or at the end of a map. this would rule out constant map changes during a game.

what do you mean by constant map changes?

[jitspoe]

but this covers more than just that.

Well, try to keep your feature requests more specific.

[lekky]

i still dont get this one! What is their voting system like?

[webhead]

Well, try to keep your feature requests more specific.

will do. i was just copying and pasting the ones I came up with on the old list, and no one commented on it then, unfortunately. This way seems to be a LOT better, especially because ... look how many responses i got now.

[Cobo]

Im guessing this voting system is like the one I made a vote for in the 2007 thread isnt it? Except they are not customizable.

[webhead]

You're talking about this:

7: Configurable voting system for server settings - Cobo, Apocalypse, KiLo, y00tz, SkateR, T3RR0R15T, Chef-Killer

I'm not sure exactly what that means. What about it would be configurable/customizable?

[jitspoe]

The server could set up a config to execute a specific command (such as change a map, kick a player, change the gravity, etc.) when a player voted for it.  It wouldn't be locked down to any specific settings.  Server admins could set up votes for any server setting.

[webhead]

ok so it looks like this idea will include voting for any server setting to be temporarily changed, votenextmap, and voting to mute a player.

about the player muting: maybe a muted player should be shown an error message of some sort when they try to say something... "Error: Cannot send message - you have been muted." or something like that. that way they don't think people are hearing them. oh also, the player that's being voted on shouldn't be able to vote. how about just not even notifying him of the vote unless it passes.

[Cobo]

oh also, the player that's being voted on shouldn't be able to vote. how about just not even notifying him of the vote unless it passes.

That wouldnt be the best idea.
What if you are playing against only one person and they vote mute you?

[webhead]

hmm... well then i'd be muted, unless i'm missing something.
although ... anyone who would vote mute me, i probably would have already muted them. so in that case it wouldn't really matter.
besides, i guess i could just reconnect if i wanted to.

[Cobo]

hmm... well then i'd be muted, unless i'm missing something.
although ... anyone who would vote mute me, i probably would have already muted them. so in that case it wouldn't really matter.
besides, i guess i could just reconnect if i wanted to.

But why go though all the trouble. You should just be able to vote if someone wants to mute you.

[webhead]

what would be the point of that? nobody would vote to mute themselves.

how about this, add an automatic "no" vote for the person being voted on. that would fix the 1v1 situation.

[coLa]

exploited? how do you mean? i'm not sure i'm getting that.

maybe exploited was a bad word. what i meant was, by having a vote kick, it would mean there would be constant votes for kicks from 12 yr old kids that just want to laugh or have fun. instead of using it to kick hackers/cheaters or idle players.

what do you mean by constant map changes?

i don't know if you have ever played while people are constantly voting to change maps. sometimes i see people that just join up in the middle of a game and vote to change a map. by only allowing the voting in the beginning and ending of maps, it would force people to finish the map once it starts.

[Cobo]

There would probably be a max votes per person.

i don't know if you have ever played while people are constantly voting to change maps. sometimes i see people that just join up in the middle of a game and vote to change a map. by only allowing the voting in the beginning and ending of maps, it would force people to finish the map once it starts.

That is pretty annoying.

[coLa]

oh also, the player that's being voted on shouldn't be able to vote. how about just not even notifying him of the vote unless it passes.

i think they should be able to vote, i mean it does deal with them. they should be able to vote yes or no.

hmm... well then i'd be muted, unless i'm missing something.
although ... anyone who would vote mute me, i probably would have already muted them. so in that case it wouldn't really matter.
besides, i guess i could just reconnect if i wanted to.

if you have been vote muted, you shouldn't be able to call a vote until you reconnect or are voted to be unmuted. that way it eliminates alot of back and forth votes.

But why go though all the trouble. You should just be able to vote if someone wants to mute you.

yes, you should.

what would be the point of that? nobody would vote to mute themselves.

how about this, add an automatic "no" vote for the person being voted on. that would fix the 1v1 situation.

just let them vote. it's the right way.