Lock people into readying if they vote for the winning roundtype vote.

[Skull132]

13 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 was more trying to illustrate that your example of malicious vote bombing isn't the only case: ergo, the act of vote locking shouldn't be viewed as punishment/karmic justice.

Upon further consideration, the idea that a vote for a round that didn't win is not necessarily true. Often enough you see people voting in reaction to one mode getting initially dog piled. We're running "Winner takes all", a voting system known for creating 2 majority outcomes: the winner, and the runner up. With proponents of less popular choices hopping onto the "Least bad" option. This means that the system is also subject to reaction voting: "I would rather let this win than let that group get merc." Are the people who initially voted for a mode, even if it was the runner up, not responsible for causing the reactionary votes?

Another way to look at it is, if you're not 100% sure whether you can sink 30 - 60 minutes into the round, perhaps don't vote? Let those who are certain they want to stick around for that time place their bets and determine what they want to do.

[Skull132]

3 minutes ago, Shenaanigans said:

not make the people who deserve it feel bad?

That's just the thing. There are two ways to present this change:

• As punishment.
• As attempting to create a more sportsmanship environment in general.

If I vote for the winning round, without any malicious intent, why do I specifically deserve to have my freedom of choice limited, while everyone else gets a free pass?

If I see 10 players hobble a gamemode I know I won't like, and I join in on voting for the second largest gamemode as a counter vote, why does one of those sides deserve to have their choices limited, while the other does not? Surely they both influenced one another.

So again. The idea is not to punish anyone. But instead, to see if it is possible to foster an environment where only those who are willing to commit to the opening of a round vote.

[DatSamTho]

6 minutes ago, Skull132 said:

Another way to look at it is, if you're not 100% sure whether you can sink 30 - 60 minutes into the round, perhaps don't vote? Let those who are certain they want to stick around for that time place their bets and determine what they want to do.

You're missing the point here, I feel like. I've nothing to do for the next 2 hours, I want to play, but I want to play a chill morning round of RP, without having to bother with an antag blowing up random parts of the station. I vote for extended, secret passes, I cryo, and go off to play some other game or what not. After a few times like that, I get bwoinked and get a note/warning on my record. So I'm really not sure how it is not punishment.

[Skull132]

7 minutes ago, tomkiel said:

You're missing the point here, I feel like. I've nothing to do for the next 2 hours, I want to play, but I want to play a chill morning round of RP, without having to bother with an antag blowing up random parts of the station. I vote for extended, secret passes, I cryo, and go off to play some other game or what not. After a few times like that, I get bwoinked and get a note/warning on my record. So I'm really not sure how it is not punishment.

But the thing is, you do have a third option here. Don't vote. Again, let those who are willing to play a round regardless of voting outcome to vote. And then determine whether you want to play after that. There are people whose prime time SS13 is what you consider late in the evening. And if they get swamped with passing out people from your timezone voting for extended, then they might be very miffed.

[DatSamTho]

6 minutes ago, Skull132 said:

But the thing is, you do have a third option here. Don't vote. Again, let those who are willing to play a round regardless of voting outcome to vote. And then determine whether you want to play after that. There are people whose prime time SS13 is what you consider late in the evening. And if they get swamped with passing out people from your timezone voting for extended, then they might be very miffed.

So you're essentially stripping the right to vote from a chunk of the playerbase under the threat of a warning. Unless you make it, that you are able to retract your vote, when you see the outcome not going your way (Which would make the whole system pointless), you wouldn't know when to not vote. What I suspect will happen, is that probably over half the people that already vote (Which already isn't great due to antag drafting), will stop voting, and the votes will be swayed by a minority of the people that actually are possibly willing to play, and in the dead hours you'll get barely anyone voting.

[Butterrobber202]

I find myself agreeing with tomkiel. With your proposed system Skull, you are not promoting sportsmanship, you are enforcing it.

Some people like secret, some people like extended. I'm usually in the opposite boat of tomkiel, I like bullets flying through my RP, and therefore, I vote secret just about everytime, then I proceed to just leave and do something else when extended wins out. I'd much rather the winning votes be locked in.

[Carver]

How I expect it to go when you force people to play a mode they didn't vote for:

Winning mode is something controversial.

Timmy Fakename OOC: oh ufck offffff

Jimmy Fakename OOC: NOOOOOO

Franny Fakename OOC: REMOVE THIS MODE IT'S SHIT

Renny Fakename OOC: haha eat my dingdong you whiny losers

Or in other terms, I have no remote idea how this would foster sportsmanship instead of just getting people even angrier at each other when a mode they dislike wins.

 

[Cnaym]

I agree with the log generated for people who vote for a winning game mode with no intention of playing, but even that only to a degree, since people might just be joining 10 minutes later for one reason or another, is of any value to me.

This has the same effect as the forcing of antags. NONE. You cannot force someone to play, you cannot blindly shoot into the dark to figure out who voted as meme or who did not (use OOC and deadchat for this please).

The process of voting itself has a different player implication than it does for the server:

1.) You enable our antag choices to increase our chances for slots we would like to play like traitor

2.) You vote for the game mode you want to see played to increase it's chances of winning.

3.) You decide when you want to play. From roundstart, consult the manifest first or observe. Forcing you to sit around for X minutes before going to cryo changes nothing about that.

4.) If you decide to ready up and your game mode won you got a chance to be the antag of that mode.

5.) If you got selected for antag you once more decide whether or not you wish to play as one, you can always opt out via ahelp or cryo. There is no rule against either and it is impossible to enforce since I can just do nothing for the time you wish me to hang around before going to cryo.

6.) If you do not get selected for antag you can just cryo as well. There is no way for a staff member to provide evidence that you decided to only ready up for antag slots, or whether or not you got to leave unexpectedly unless you tell them so in an ahelp, deadchat or OOC. It is impossible to enforce a rule that forces you to play, unless you require all players to play the entire round until transfer, evac or death (even then I can just sudoku against the first antags and leave).

I hope it becomes a bit clearer that there is exactly nothing that can be done about a player voting "in bad faith" unless they express it themself. Changing the vote system itself would decrease the possibilities for abuse. Things like locking the same gamemode from being voted twice in a row, decreasing chances for modes in the secret rotation and so on.

This entire suggestion is duct tape at first glance and thin air at the second.

There is exactly one group of players being punished here: Those that vote in good faith and are honest about it when asked by staff. Those that ready up for a specific job, to see the slot taken by someone who cryos 10 minutes later. Or in other words, probably the people who wish this system to be implented in order to stop the meme votes.

Now about the concept of meme voting itself. Wizard wins when one player is willing to go antag, so does malf. This is not a lowpop problem at all. What is a frequent situation we experience is 5-10 votes for extendo and 1-3 players who ready while the entire rest leaves for a more interesting server. We even see four way splits with modes like malf, loner, secret and extendo and people stay for whatever wins except extendo. You can count that down to personal taste if you wish, for me it is the result of a long following track of people thinking that during extendo roleplay standards are somewhat harsher. They are not. You decide on a round to round base if you wish to follow the server rules or not. 

If people would participate with their characters on secret, instead of hiding with their two meta buddies in an office during extended and outright not playing secret, it might just not make such a big difference which game mode wins and in turn those hoping for a more interesting round might even feel welcome during extended rounds instead of cryoing after ten minutes of absolute silence and not finding a single person outside the mentioned offices.

[Faye <3]

Yeah no, while in the past I thought this project would be a very good change for the server to prevent meme votes,- if I vote for x round and y round is selected and I don't personally enjoy y round or am not in the mood for it, I'm not going to play that round. I'm not going to feel obligated to play a game-mode that I don't like / didn't vote for. SS13 and Aurora is a hobby and something I play to relax, and if I am not in the right headspace / mood for a round of stressful antag RP I am not going to frce myself to. The same should go for a player who wants antag interaction and not extended idle RP,- if they don't like the gamemode and didn't vote for it, why should they have to stay? 

Tomkiel's right, I can't say I support this if it is to be implemented in this form. This isn't going to make me carefully consider voting, it's going to make me not vote in the first place and cryo if I don't like the roundtype selected.

 

-1

Edited January 17, 2021 by Faye <3

[Lmwevil]

A code solution would be porting a dynamic gamemode ala goon /tg/ and /vg/, and a few others?

functionally it uses weighting and points to detect things like living antags, living players and inserts side antags or random events to make it not totally dull if say the traitor shoots himself roundstart or accidentally dies 

part of the voting issue is the damn voting window sometimes takes longer to open than the vote, a solution would be removing a lot of the options or letting people set their preferential vote so you *always* vote that at the start. So I could say "I prefer these top three" as a preferential vote

Secret 1 
Borers 2 (honk)
Extended 3 

so we could have votes on shitty meme modes carry over to other things if that vote fails, such votes exist for maps on some servers. feel free to google how the maths works  

[Scheveningen]

I am quite glad I am not in the habit of voting anymore. Otherwise the PR as mentioned could actually negatively impact my personal experience. Still pretty silly of a PR implementation though.

Edited January 17, 2021 by Scheveningen

[KingOfThePing]

This is even worse than what was proposed. I'll just stop voting altogether, as soon as this is in, what a shame

[niennab]

I have to withdraw my support as well. I typically only enjoy extended and that means if I vote and lose, I will more than likely just wait 2 hours and try again.

With the proposed version it just seems as though the losing side is being punished by trying to vote for what they want. Worse yet I fear this will cause am even greater less likelihood that we will see extended voted for, since it often loses.

Only the winning votes should be readied.

Edited January 17, 2021 by niennab

[Skull132]

The PR will be modified to only affect the round winners.

While my qualms about this approach remain, I suppose it's better than nothing.

[Carver]

Highballing the initial PR to then lower the plan back to the original goal, disregarding the arguments against said goal (such as people who prefer to join within 5-10 minutes of roundstart). Clever.

[Skull132]

1 hour ago, Carver said:

Highballing the initial PR to then lower the plan back to the original goal, disregarding the arguments against said goal (such as people who prefer to join within 5-10 minutes of roundstart). Clever.

 

So developers should only PR ideas that they can fully stand behind, instead of working out compromises between their own ideas, and those of the player base? Got it.

I chose to modify my PR in light of feedback. How many of those ideas I personally accept seems like a very petty thing to get your knickers in a bunch over, though.

Also. Like a well taught engineer does, I did analysis before implementing a solution. I arrived to the conclusions that I outlined in this thread, for the reasons that I outlined. I implemented my initial draft in good faith and nothing else. If you do not believe this, then. Well, there's not much I can do about this level of paranoia.

[Scheveningen]

lmao @ the accusation of highballing, siiiiiiiiiiiiiigh never change