Port “CKEY readied as OCCUPATION” from Bay12

[Butterrobber202]

Read title. It helps to know which job slots are being contested so I can switch to a different character.

 

for those that don’t know, it basically takes up the (Ready) skit kn the lobby and replaces it with (Readied as OCCUPATION)

 

Edited January 13, 2021 by Butterrobber202

[Faris]

This would remove anonymity some people want when playing as it’s not hard to know who is who when the roles are made obvious and compared to the manifest. 

 

I don’t mind the idea but not in the current version. 

[niennab]

I agree with Abo. There are some players who prefer anonymity and I would hate to see that feature taken from them.

However if there was a way to somehow detach the name from the roles being fought over, I'd be on board.

[MattAtlas]

@niennab and @Aboshedab, the feature on Bay has a preference that disables showing the role altogether.

If it were to be ported, it would come with that.

Edited January 13, 2021 by MattAtlas

[Carver]

As long as there's a preference toggle. I don't want people knowing I went for a single slot role and thus trivially knowing my character, or the bigger meta of knowing I readied for a role and that role didn't spawn in because I rolled nuclear operative or wizard - thus revealing that there are off-station antags (which is doable already, but only if you either count the readied players, or know who people typically ready up as).

[Scheveningen]

No thanks. This would simply invite people to more easily metagame and/or harass the player for whatever their character does in the round.

[Caelphon]

I like the idea, think it'd be fine with the toggleable option. 

[MattAtlas]

1 hour ago, Scheveningen said:

No thanks. This would simply invite people to more easily metagame and/or harass the player for whatever their character does in the round.

It'd be a preference toggle that's on by default, though. You can just toggle it off.

[Scheveningen]

It would be much better to see, flatly, that someone is readying up for this or that role, seeing as how the major point of this suggestion is to arm people with the knowledge that they shouldn't take a chance on a contested single-slot role and try to join with something else in mind instead.

 

[MattAtlas]

18 hours ago, Scheveningen said:

It would be much better to see, flatly, that someone is readying up for this or that role, seeing as how the major point of this suggestion is to arm people with the knowledge that they shouldn't take a chance on a contested single-slot role and try to join with something else in mind instead.

This would be pretty hard to do and far beyond the bounds of this suggestion due to how prefs work.

[KingOfThePing]

While I am not against this suggestion or is there anything wrong with it I wonder how much it adds, when most people turn it off anyway. Not sure if it's worth the effort?

[MattAtlas]

8 minutes ago, KingOfThePing said:

While I am not against this suggestion or is there anything wrong with it I wonder how much it adds, when most people turn it off anyway. Not sure if it's worth the effort?

Most people won't. The "majority" you're seeing here is a very tiny subsection of people who browse the forums and particularly dislike this idea.

[KingOfThePing]

Well if that's the case, nothing speaks against it. Or maybe make a poll to get a more representative insight on what the players think 

[Carver]

On a thought, I'm curious to the mindset of this being suggested when not too long ago ckeys in the post-game antag list were removed. Both this and post-game ckeys offer fairly equal potential for harassment, no?

[Butterrobber202]

1 hour ago, Carver said:

On a thought, I'm curious to the mindset of this being suggested when not too long ago ckeys in the post-game antag list were removed. Both this and post-game ckeys offer fairly equal potential for harassment, no?

you'd be able to disable this if you don't like it. That would not be the case for the old antag ckey display.

[MattAtlas]

1 hour ago, Carver said:

On a thought, I'm curious to the mindset of this being suggested when not too long ago ckeys in the post-game antag list were removed. Both this and post-game ckeys offer fairly equal potential for harassment, no?

How? This feature can be disabled by the player, the post-game antag list couldn't. The post-game antag list was a definite "X was played by Y", whereas this feature simply says you're playing a role, which is only ever absolute in the cases of single slot roles.

[Carver]

2 hours ago, MattAtlas said:

How? This feature can be disabled by the player, the post-game antag list couldn't. The post-game antag list was a definite "X was played by Y", whereas this feature simply says you're playing a role, which is only ever absolute in the cases of single slot roles.

Per your own argument, a majority won't disable it. If it's on by default, it's far more metagame-able, and with paying attention to the lobby you can fairly easily figure out who is who at roundstart just by their role alone (especially if you're more familiar with the server playerbase and get a feel for who plays who, something made easier by this system) - in addition to my earlier remark that this will make it generally easier to determine when it's a mode with off-station antags.

If Jimbo Fakename is readied for Warden, and I come into the roundstart seeing there's no Warden, then I can safely assume Jimbo is the antagonist. In a similar vein without antagonists, if Jimbo Fakename is the only one to ready for Warden and there's a Warden at roundstart, I now know exactly who Jimbo plays.

On an additional note: The more people use who this feature, the less valuable disabling it is for those who don't.

Edited January 16, 2021 by Carver
Additional note.

[Butterrobber202]

5 hours ago, Carver said:

Per your own argument, a majority won't disable it. If it's on by default, it's far more metagame-able, and with paying attention to the lobby you can fairly easily figure out who is who at roundstart just by their role alone (especially if you're more familiar with the server playerbase and get a feel for who plays who, something made easier by this system) - in addition to my earlier remark that this will make it generally easier to determine when it's a mode with off-station antags.

If Jimbo Fakename is readied for Warden, and I come into the roundstart seeing there's no Warden, then I can safely assume Jimbo is the antagonist. In a similar vein without antagonists, if Jimbo Fakename is the only one to ready for Warden and there's a Warden at roundstart, I now know exactly who Jimbo plays.

On an additional note: The more people use who this feature, the less valuable disabling it is for those who don't.

what does it matter if you know who the antagonists are? You can already accurately narrow down the possible gamemodes by comparing the readied up total to the crew manifest roundstart. This changes literally nothing.

Additionally, as far as I can tell, most people don't care that people know what characters they play. If Jimbo wanted to not be noticed, he could've just turned it off? 

Edited January 16, 2021 by Butterrobber202

[Carver]

7 hours ago, Butterrobber202 said:

Additionally, as far as I can tell, most people don't care that people know what characters they play. If Jimbo wanted to not be noticed, he could've just turned it off? 

Therein lays the problem, post-game change was designed to prevent harassment by default. This change would enable harassment by the default setting.

7 hours ago, Butterrobber202 said:

what does it matter if you know who the antagonists are? You can already accurately narrow down the possible gamemodes by comparing the readied up total to the crew manifest roundstart. This changes literally nothing.

I explained exactly how this makes narrowing to a specific person far easier. As it presently stands, unless you already know who plays who, you won't know the antagonist ckeys. The present manifest method is worthless for this unless you already know who plays who (which is still unreliable if they have multiple characters).

[Butterrobber202]

if people are concerned with being harassed then just turn the setting off????

 

even better, REPORT harassment or the admins so they can actually handle it????

[Butterrobber202]

I am once again asking for a bump.

[SierraKomodo]

As a note, Bay's added the option for players to hide this information in their preferences. That could also be ported over alongside the original request.

Edited February 5, 2021 by SierraKomodo