Alberyk Posted January 11, 2021 Posted January 11, 2021 1 hour ago, Carver said: Punishing people administratively for voting and not playing just seems silly, especially given that there's both always a workaround for this mechanic and numerous sudden+valid reasons to not play. You can only give so many it was my brother's excuses. Also, there is no reason other than being a diphead to vote for a gamemode and don't play at all.
KingOfThePing Posted January 11, 2021 Posted January 11, 2021 (edited) I still disagree and again point out that there is no rule that states that I have to play the game. The fact that a PR, #10964 'Vote Checking' kind of quietly implements this as a first stage right now, without the locking in part despite the controversy is nothing I feel good about. It should at least have a proper feedback thread. The only that comes out of this is that people will just not vote and/or just not ready up. Edited January 11, 2021 by KingOfThePing
Alberyk Posted January 11, 2021 Posted January 11, 2021 25 minutes ago, KingOfThePing said: I still disagree and again point out that there is no rule that states that I have to play the game. If this suggestion is added, a rule will also be added making clear that voting and just leaving won't be tolerated. I am unsure what is the benefit of letting people vote for whatever and not joining, what is there to gain for them? I see no other reason besides to mess with the people that want to do something else that you might not like. 26 minutes ago, KingOfThePing said: The fact that a PR, #10964 'Vote Checking' kind of quietly implements this as a first stage right now, without the locking in part despite the controversy is nothing I feel good about. It should at least have a proper feedback thread. This is useful when you consider that there is cases where some people keep stopping the round from starting by voting gamemodes that have a high player count choice that won't really be reached for it to start.
Zundy Posted January 11, 2021 Posted January 11, 2021 27 minutes ago, KingOfThePing said: The only that comes out of this is that people will just not vote and/or just not ready up. I think people will see that as a better outcome or indeed the desired outcome, then people voting for a gamemode they're not going to play anyway. It is bad form to vote for X thing you have no intention of doing/being part of across all walks of life, not just this server.
KingOfThePing Posted January 12, 2021 Posted January 12, 2021 20 hours ago, Alberyk said: I am unsure what is the benefit of letting people vote for whatever and not joining, what is there to gain for them? I am, on the other hand, not sure how much gain there is to "force" people to play, so to say. Why not raise the required player count for "meme" roundtypes, so a few voters cannot sway the /entire/ server and then not join. With a high enough player need, the majority of the server has to actually ready up. 20 hours ago, Alberyk said: This is useful when you consider that there is cases where some people keep stopping the round from starting by voting gamemodes that have a high player count choice that won't really be reached for it to start. If the majority of the people want to play that gamemode and there arent enough players it will be randomly drawn anyway. Not sure what seeing the names adds to anything. 20 hours ago, Zundy said: It is bad form to vote for X thing you have no intention of doing/being part of across all walks of life, not just this server. Sorry, but this is a straw man argument. Just because I do not instantly join the round type I voted for, does not mean I "have no intention of being part" of it. I will ignore the second part because it has nothing to do with voting for a game mode on a video game. For your argument to work every vote that is being "meme-y" (read: anything else than secret and extended) is being made with malicious intent, which is inherently wrong, except you want to accuse the playerbase of the opposite.
Alberyk Posted January 12, 2021 Posted January 12, 2021 37 minutes ago, KingOfThePing said: If the majority of the people want to play that gamemode and there arent enough players it will be randomly drawn anyway. Not sure what seeing the names adds to anything. If it is a voted gamemode and not secret, which is what I am talking about, it will call another vote instead of starting the round. That delays things even more. 38 minutes ago, KingOfThePing said: I am, on the other hand, not sure how much gain there is to "force" people to play, so to say. Why not raise the required player count for "meme" roundtypes, so a few voters cannot sway the /entire/ server and then not join. With a high enough player need, the majority of the server has to actually ready up. If people want to decided the gamemode, they should participate in it. That is the basic principle here. If you the gamemode to be x, you should contribute to it by joining.
Zundy Posted January 12, 2021 Posted January 12, 2021 1 hour ago, KingOfThePing said: Sorry, but this is a straw man argument. Just because I do not instantly join the round type I voted for, does not mean I "have no intention of being part" of it. I will ignore the second part because it has nothing to do with voting for a game mode on a video game. For your argument to work every vote that is being "meme-y" (read: anything else than secret and extended) is being made with malicious intent, which is inherently wrong, except you want to accuse the playerbase of the opposite. I wasn't strawmanning. People vote and don't play those rounds. By doing so you're messing with people who actually want to play. By not joining on secret you're forcing the system to choose a lower pop gamemode. It's frustrating to be part of. It's not malicious to game the votes, it's inconsiderate. We are a community afterall.
Doxxmedearly Posted January 12, 2021 Posted January 12, 2021 Force, eh. Admin logging and a new rule? Fabulous idea. If you're not going to participate in the game, you should not decide what game will be played. It is that simple.
Scheveningen Posted January 12, 2021 Posted January 12, 2021 I'd rather see the mod team just have info to enable them to crack down on bad faith abusers of the current system rather than punishing the majority who otherwise use the system in good faith but probably have to leave all of a sudden. It is all too easy to mistake malice for circumstantial happenstance.
Shenaanigans Posted January 12, 2021 Posted January 12, 2021 46 minutes ago, Scheveningen said: I'd rather see the mod team just have info to enable them to crack down on bad faith abusers of the current system rather than punishing the majority who otherwise use the system in good faith but probably have to leave all of a sudden. It is all too easy to mistake malice for circumstantial happenstance. The alert system will definitely help, but I'd still rather the force method to be honest. My reasoning for this being that it'll be a lot easier to miss a certain ckey coming up as flagged more than once when you could deter people from doing it at all with the idea of being locked into playing and then having to go to the effort of cryoing after. It just seems more efficient. I also don't particularly see the reason for wanting to push back against this (as a general response to people doing so in this thread) because it's very easy to avoid being caught up in it. Don't vote if you aren't 100% sure that you will play and have time to remain in at least some of the round. Easy. Voting is the mechanism by which players decide what the next round will look like, and if you aren't going to participate then you should not get to decide. It'd be like casting a vote for what to have for dinner when you're not eating.
Scheveningen Posted January 12, 2021 Posted January 12, 2021 I speak as someone who almost never votes for the game mode unless kyres logs on to state in all caps "EXTENDED" which I will kindly oblige and then play the round. Sure, this change wouldn't affect me, but I find that this theoretical mechanic would probably just discourage folks from voting if their reason for joining the round is moreso motivated on what characters are actually in the round rather than voting for the game mode.
Carver Posted January 12, 2021 Posted January 12, 2021 1 hour ago, Scheveningen said: I speak as someone who almost never votes for the game mode unless kyres logs on to state in all caps "EXTENDED" which I will kindly oblige and then play the round. Sure, this change wouldn't affect me, but I find that this theoretical mechanic would probably just discourage folks from voting if their reason for joining the round is moreso motivated on what characters are actually in the round rather than voting for the game mode. This sentiment is often my own for not joining a round. Especially in the case of modes like Extended, where it hangs entirely on character interaction and good dynamics - and I may pick an entirely different character depending on whom is there. On a similar note, with ANY mode, I often prefer to latejoin a couple minutes after the start unless I'm explicitly rolling for the antagonist position or a single-slot role. It is extremely valuable for me to be able to appraise the manifest and in particular which character and role I'd want to play. For I doubt it is truly an improvement if someone votes a mode, then has to cryo immediately to rejoin quite some time afterwards as the lone engineer or lone medical crew. I say this as someone who keeps a repertoire of characters specifically made just to play certain roles.
KingOfThePing Posted January 13, 2021 Posted January 13, 2021 Basically what Carver said. I can see the reasoning but don't think the solution is a good one
Zundy Posted January 13, 2021 Posted January 13, 2021 If I recall correctly if you instant cryo there is no cool down. Am I wrong? I remember doing this twice and it working but I might just be misremembering.
Rushodan Posted January 13, 2021 Posted January 13, 2021 I mentioned this ages ago and am pleasantly surprised someone chucked it on the forums. Yes there are downsides to this, but in my opinion they are pretty niche and small compared to the problem this fixes. Doing the funny B O R E R (or something similar) in chat, having a bunch of people vote for a good wee chuckle and then having 3 out of like 20 people play the round with the rest going afk for two hours massacres player pop. Turning a server from decent pop to deadpop for your meme votes isn't fair on the people that actually want to play and enjoy the game. The main issue I can see with this is wanting to check who's in which department before actually playing after voting. I like to play engineering if there aren't many engineers for example, but I imagine this could be fixed by giving voters 5 minutes to join before the admemes get the 'this user isn't being a good boi' message. Ultimately I think this is a good half measure - if it was my decision alone i'd just force secret every time and then let the players decide if they want to play while not knowing the round. I understand why this isn't a good solution for everyone however.
MEDTECH Posted January 13, 2021 Posted January 13, 2021 Why don't we settle for a middle ground? I don't know if it's technically difficult, but can we prompt what department the player who have readied up wants to play based on the selected character in the lobby tab? Anyway, you have my full +1 on this suggestion, especially since they vote secret when I want to go for a gamemode like Loner for example, but they don't play.
Carver Posted January 14, 2021 Posted January 14, 2021 18 hours ago, SHODAN said: The main issue I can see with this is wanting to check who's in which department before actually playing after voting. I like to play engineering if there aren't many engineers for example, but I imagine this could be fixed by giving voters 5 minutes to join before the admemes get the 'this user isn't being a good boi' message. I wouldn't completely hate a 'soft lock' of this sort, as it does somewhat offer the desired room to appraise the manifest.
Skull132 Posted January 16, 2021 Posted January 16, 2021 https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/11005 PR is up, with some alternations to the original idea. Everyone who voted is going to be locked. Why? Because the ultimate goal here is to develop good sportsmanship in the player base, everyone who tries to alter which game mode gets played (by voting), should be willing to participate in the round. Limiting this only to winners could be seen as punishment for something that's not directly within their control -- which game mode ultimately wins. Those who disconnect after the fact and remain DC-d until the round begins, effectively dodging this mechanic, get logged for admins to deal with as they spot a pattern. Even if this is "easy" to do, a regular pattern is easy to spot and can be culled by staff.
DatSamTho Posted January 16, 2021 Posted January 16, 2021 (edited) I very, very much don't like this if it's going to be everybody who voted that's locked in. Sometimes in the mornings or at night, I just don't feel like dealing with antags, so I vote for extended. I am willing to participate in the game, if it's during a specific gamemode. This is doing way too much, rather than the initial intention of stopping meme voters. A -1 from me, in its current form. Edited January 16, 2021 by tomkiel
Skull132 Posted January 16, 2021 Posted January 16, 2021 1 hour ago, tomkiel said: I very, very much don't like this if it's going to be everybody who voted that's locked in. Sometimes in the mornings or at night, I just don't feel like dealing with antags, so I vote for extended. I am willing to participate in the game, if it's during a specific gamemode. This is doing way too much, rather than the initial intention of stopping meme voters. A -1 from me, in its current form. If this wasn't done the way it is, then your classification of vote memer would be anyone who votes for the winning mode. Which sounds sort of off: again, no singular person has control over what ends up winning, so why should only those whose choice won be required to participate, if everyone else who voted had just as much effect on the outcome?
Shenaanigans Posted January 16, 2021 Posted January 16, 2021 Yeah if this is going to be the only way that post-voting lock ins happen, I have to retract my support completely. I see no purpose in forcing people to play a gamemode that they didn't vote for. There are some modes that I know I would not want to play were they to win, and my tastes vary wildly from those of other players. I wouldn't want to force them to play when they're uninterested in the antag type, just as I wouldn't want to be dragged into, say, a tower defense or borer round when I voted for extended in the hopes of having a laid back round. This is not the way to go in my eyes.
DatSamTho Posted January 16, 2021 Posted January 16, 2021 2 minutes ago, Skull132 said: If this wasn't done the way it is, then your classification of vote memer would be anyone who votes for the winning mode. Which sounds sort of off: again, no singular person has control over what ends up winning, so why should only those whose choice won be required to participate, if everyone else who voted had just as much effect on the outcome? If a person does a "meme" vote, and that gamemode doesn't win, then their vote is inconsequential, it's essentially somebody abstaining from a vote. And I really don't see anybody complaining about that. What people do have a problem with, are people voting for "ToWeR DeFeNsE", it actually passing, and everyone having to be stuck with the shitstorm that ensues, while the voters go off saying "Welp, not my problem!"
Skull132 Posted January 16, 2021 Posted January 16, 2021 1 minute ago, tomkiel said: If a person does a "meme" vote, and that gamemode doesn't win, then their vote is inconsequential, it's essentially somebody abstaining from a vote. And I really don't see anybody complaining about that. What people do have a problem with, are people voting for "ToWeR DeFeNsE", it actually passing, and everyone having to be stuck with the shitstorm that ensues, while the voters go off saying "Welp, not my problem!" That is unfortunately not the only problem we are dealing with. The staff have observed, over a long period of time, that people also tend to silently vote for things like extended, and then observe for the remainder of the round. This is very typical in deadhour. There is no OOC drive attached to those either. The outright malicious mode of conduct you present is not the only thing I am attempting to get at, and is actually pointing out something that I wanted to avoid by making it apply to every voter: finger pointing and general "othering".
DatSamTho Posted January 16, 2021 Posted January 16, 2021 1 minute ago, Skull132 said: That is unfortunately not the only problem we are dealing with. The staff have observed, over a long period of time, that people also tend to silently vote for things like extended, and then observe for the remainder of the round. This is very typical in deadhour. There is no OOC drive attached to those either. The outright malicious mode of conduct you present is not the only thing I am attempting to get at, and is actually pointing out something that I wanted to avoid by making it apply to every voter: finger pointing and general "othering". And. . .how would that not fix it. .? If those people voted for extended, they'd still be forced to play, if it passed. I really don't see your point here.
Shenaanigans Posted January 16, 2021 Posted January 16, 2021 14 minutes ago, tomkiel said: And. . .how would that not fix it. .? If those people voted for extended, they'd still be forced to play, if it passed. I really don't see your point here. I have to agree with tomkiel here. I don't see how people voting for something and then ghosting when it doesn't win impacts the round, as this is a hobby and choosing not to partake in round types you don't like should be a right for players to keep. The only time voting and then not playing is actually harmful is when it sways the vote. Generalizing this to all voters basically punishes people who did nothing wrong in an attempt to... not make the people who deserve it feel bad? I don't understand it, honestly.
Recommended Posts