Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Improve Quality of Life (IQoL) #2 - Spectator Rambling

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Improve Quality of Life (IQoL) #2 - Spectator Rambling

    Mission Statement: I am a firm believer that if you could improve the quality of life of any organization, no matter how major or minor, inevitably the system will grow and improve. Therefore, I will start a series of suggestions and feedback to what I believe may be a positive impact in the zone. Feel free to leave your constructive criticism, whether it be support or against the premise. Trolls will not be tolerated.

    Topic: Spectator Rambling/Spam

    Pros: Communication is part of the game and there are people who do enjoy reading spectator's conversation while playing.
    Cons: Sometimes the game becomes philosophical and people vent their anger on certain topics in public chat while others are playing. This leads to unnecessary spam and frustration.

    Solution #1: Implement a command to allow people to turn off "Spectator Communication" - simply a toggle command, i.e. "!spectator off/on".

    Solution #2: Do a complete block of spectator communication while a player is actively playing, similar to the blue-out setting in twdd. This method is more aggressive than solution #1 because it does not give the option to turn on/off spectator. Personally, I prefer solution #1.

  • #2
    I think the !spectator command is a good idea. Actually it might be the best idea I ever saw from someone on these forums. Really impressed by this turtle.
    Last edited by Dierienow; 11-12-2018, 03:11 PM.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      Might not be technically possible tho.

      Comment


      • #4
        i vote for !spectator on/off

        great idea
        Leland

        Comment


        • #5
          Excellent work on targeting specific problems, talking about both sides of the issue, and proposing specific solutions.

          First, it's not a wall of text post that doesn't take into consideration the value of its audience's time (editing down to a minimum number of words needed to get the full point across shows respect for your audience, and is far more effective, but requires much more time and effort).

          Second, by proposing solutions (ideally a series of them), it makes it easy to put such things into action, should enough people agree. Only place to improve there would be to bullet-point some possible pros/cons to each solution.

          Solution #1 is unfortunately not technically possible with our server, the old-fashioned subgame2. It would be possible on an ASSS server, however.

          Solution #2 has been proposed before, and through testing was shown not to have a big negative impact on the game. However, it's certainly still a big step, and we'd need many people to agree to it to do it on a permanent basis. Currently we have the possibility to implement #2 on a manual basis (STFU can be bought back to back endlessly, and costs only $3K) so it's almost de facto implemented, for anyone who is bothered by spectators chatting in public. There is also a regular arena reminder that pops up when many spectators have been speaking in pubchat in the last minute, letting people know STFU can be purchased for a very small amount of money.
          "You're a gentleman," they used to say to him. "You shouldn't have gone murdering people with a hatchet; that's no occupation for a gentleman."
          -Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by qan View Post
            Excellent work on targeting specific problems, talking about both sides of the issue, and proposing specific solutions.

            First, it's not a wall of text post that doesn't take into consideration the value of its audience's time (editing down to a minimum number of words needed to get the full point across shows respect for your audience, and is far more effective, but requires much more time and effort).

            Second, by proposing solutions (ideally a series of them), it makes it easy to put such things into action, should enough people agree. Only place to improve there would be to bullet-point some possible pros/cons to each solution.

            Solution #1 is unfortunately not technically possible with our server, the old-fashioned subgame2. It would be possible on an ASSS server, however.

            Solution #2 has been proposed before, and through testing was shown not to have a big negative impact on the game. However, it's certainly still a big step, and we'd need many people to agree to it to do it on a permanent basis. Currently we have the possibility to implement #2 on a manual basis (STFU can be bought back to back endlessly, and costs only $3K) so it's almost de facto implemented, for anyone who is bothered by spectators chatting in public. There is also a regular arena reminder that pops up when many spectators have been speaking in pubchat in the last minute, letting people know STFU can be purchased for a very small amount of money.
            Personally, I don't like solution 2. Listed because it's a solution. However, it seems too aggressive and will cause a big change to the dynamic of communication, which is a cornerstone of this game. Therefore, I am proposing... a solution 3 - a semi-aggressive approach that can be readjusted anytime.

            Solution #3: Spam filter, if technically possible. Basically a variation of: https://forums.trenchwars.com/forum/...nd-shenanigans

            How it works:
            • Option 1: Add line limit on what spectator freq can send to pub freq - e.g. instead of allowing 5 lines of text, reduce it to 2 lines, or you can go by character limitation. This will force spectators to keep their comments efficient and to the point, thus reducing unnecessary spam.
            • Option 2: Add a timer on when next msg can be sent, for spectator to pub: 5-10 seconds (can be adjusted) until next msg can be sent to pub. Psychologically speaking with a refractory period in place, people may change their mind to send another text if they have to wait that long.
            • Option 3: Combination of option 1 and 2 - line limitation and refractory period.
            Pros: Basically solves all the problem, if technically possible. With STFU option already in place, a spam filter will be complementary to it.
            Cons: It will anger some trolls. Trivia in limbo.
            Last edited by Lrim's Turtle; 11-13-2018, 11:38 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Qan is retarded, similar to TL;DR on why he wont read solutions.

              Well TS;DR has been my natural trollish response, learn to read and write and I might take you seriously.

              Half the ideas posted here are what I've been saying for a month now, suddenly you like them when it comes from someone else. Typical pride staff lets their ego get in the way of taking care of the zone.

              Also the idea of playing to earn lines of chat defeats all these ideas, and it's 100% possible to implement according to a server host and the person who made your JAVA bot core, Jowie.
              Last edited by Falconeer; 11-13-2018, 12:16 PM.

              Comment

              Working...
              X