Remove emp_money in the next release.

Trickster's new version of money takes care of quite a lot of the annoying parts, i think. Besides that, money IS a good map for noobs, you have almost indefinite ressources and don't need to worry about a bad start, map control, forward bases, etc.

Additionally it bores veterans to death so they leave the server and the noobs rejoice. :D

 

I know Metal Smith, sarcasm is hard to understand for people like you.

 

@Recon
It shouldn't be any more annoying than "everyone type rtv" spam over both mic and text chat for 30 seconds at a time every five minutes like what happens now on crap maps/games. And, for all we know, everyone will either say yes or exit, because as I've pointed out, almost everyone votes for a map (instead of Don't change) once the list is up, but virtually no one types rtv. If it becomes a problem, I'll just extend the timer from 5 minutes until it becomes a good balance.

 

Having menus that could switch the map showing up every five minutes is worse.

 

Yes because we're all helpless and cannot !revote. Also, as I believe I mentioned, the vote is "change maps?" and upon a ruling of "yes", then a mapvote pops up, so even those who accidently said yes can at that point choose "Don't change".

Are you trolling me by chance, or are you just totally closed off to the idea of improving existing systems? Can you do me a favor, point out a single positive comment you've made to any plugin I've written, or a single instance of you being among the majority with a negative opinion regarding anything I've developed. I mean seriously, do you think playing Negative Nancy is constructive or are you trying to shoot me down? I mean no offense, but unlike people such as Chris, I am unsure how I should be responding to you because text generally fails to capture tone/intent.

 

I dont really get what do you mean by this, can't you say it like. normally?

anyway, i think you dont have enough /context/ to really take part in such a dicussion

also , the "deal with it " doesn't work on not giving a damn and logical people like myself


------

i agree on the rtv % being unthough, it should be 50-60% ( majority is majority, it doesn't have to be 3/4 or more really)

also peole rarely rtv, becuase they know that never (hardly?) happens


i agree with the "vote on the end of the map, not start"
it would both make people who will actually play the next map decide what they want to play next (skipping quiters votes) and eliminate the all-annoying spawn vote menu

 

If I'm not mistaken, the vote at end of map is regarding rating the map, the idea being that if everyone currently on the server has a low rating of a map, there is effectively a 0% chance of it coming up on any mapvote. Highly rated maps would be common on the list. To have that in place, you really should have a vote for the next map before or during play because there's no guarantee there will be enough time for the two votes at the end of a game.

I don't know how effective this really would be though because if everyone hates the map, chances are no one would vote for it anyway, so basically it's just maximinizing the number of "good" map choices per vote. This could pretty easially backfire by everyone voting for different maps, and the three people that all picked one (perhaps everyone elses last pick) getting to act as the "majority". It's the same reason that during a presidential election, the parties reduce candidates to one person each... if the Dems were to run two candidates, chances are they would split their own vote, so it would be 40% rep candidate 1, 30% dem candidate 1, and 30% dem candidate 2. With these numbers the rep would win even though the majority of voters agreed they wanted a dem, just happened to pick different dems... well depends on electorals and whatnot, but hopefully the point is taken.

 

who is the real fool then....

 

Yes I know that spawn. My point was, people will be able to pop up a change maps vote every five minutes. People are remarkably stupid with voting, and it could easily get approved without the majority really intending it.

Absolutely not. If you take a look around the forums, you'll see me trying to get people to improve or switch to more powerful systems.

Certainly:

More positive feedback: Your team balancer seems very promising. There have been serious issues with the community and ATBs in the past, so I'm a little hesitant to try to bring it to the main servers.

I try to prevent potential disasters. Sometimes that comes off as negative.

 

Well, they probably should be able to really... if a portion of the players are not having a good time, they should have an opportunity to change maps, even if the majority shoot down the idea. 5 minutes is a fair amount of time when you're not having fun, and since we have failvote there's another option if rtv fails. 5 minutes is more a formality so it's not "try once 10 minutes in, if it doesn't pass then you're stuck for however long it takes"

I don't see it, but I'm not looking into old threads either, so I will not say it's not happening. I find it odd that you have tended to dislike my works because the majority seem to.

Previous example is at best neutral feedback, and it was tacked on to negative feedback. Regardless, I do appreciate the actual positive feedback you provided this time around.

I can understand that. I am extremely protective of our new server as well.

 

Well, now that we're all cleared, how about a big hug, and a cup of tea, eh?

 

Mmmmm, rotting corpses smell good when you pull them out of the grave.