[SUGGESTION] Ability to change votes in game

I think that Xonotic should include the option to change your vote. I think everyone has had an accidental vote or two and wished they could change it.

I think the whole voting system requires a giant revamp.

Voting should be majority, and players that do not vote should be counted as abstained.

I think that voters that do not vote shouldn't be counted at all. Say there are 10 people on the server and only 5 vote but 3 out of the 5 vote yes, then the vote should pass. If the other people didn't see that is there fault. There is a huge thing on the side of the screen telling you that there is a vote. If you decide not to vote, you should not be counted.

as for map voting etc I think the most fun way to utilize this would be to count ppls votes by frags...

example:
after a match
player 1 has 10 frags
player 2 has 6 frags
player 3 has 5 frags

and at the map voting each has the same number of points as the number of frags to vote.

so lets say player 1 votes his 10 points for map1
if the other two would both vote for another map then their map will win, if not then player1's map will win - this can be made more fair to let the points stack if the map you voted earlier for didn't win then your points from the previous matches adds to the current

yes - that's basicaly how voting in ut2k4 works ;-)

There is an option that enables changing your mind/vote.. can't remember why i did not enable it back then. Maybe it can be enabled by default. Server admins can do it anyway..
There are also several options that change the factor needed to pass a vote. Problem is that "what would be good" depends a lot on the vote.. Kicking a teamkiller usually has only the "own" team voting for it as the other team does not even know what he is doing. Changing maps should involve all players. Also i think right now the 'non-voters" are counted as "don't care". Not totally sure though, but that actually makes the most sense. For example it helps a lot in the team killer case.
Thats also one of the prime examples where emede's idea would usually fail terrible...

I think that would only work for a death match game type.

As esteel pointed out, this does exist. It's a server cvar called

sv_vote_change - set to 1 to allow to change you vote/mind

It's set to 0 by default. I would agree with setting it to 1 by default.

I changed the thread title to better reflect the topic. It was too vague.

Having some OCD moments about thread titles Dokujisan? =P

This makes me remember on the UT99 mod Monsterhunt, where a variable could been set, that it counted points for users whom where the final decision was made against them. For example there were 3 users online, a map change came, and each had to vote for a map. 2 voted for a map, 1 for a different one, the 2 came through, but in the next round the losing user's vote was given a +1, as being lost in the past round, so actually his vote was equal to 2 votes. Some similar method could be also used in Xonotic too in my opinion, if it does not exist already...

I'd like to see that voting system in place just to test it for a bit. I kind of like that idea.

It's set to 0 by default. I would agree with setting it to 1 by default.

It should be checked that there is no spaming possible. I think in my first implementation there was a message each time a client made his choice (to remind others to vote too). Must admit i'm not totally sure if that still is true with the current voting as that has a much better "hint" now.


Oh and please make sure to NOT confuse the voting system and the "next-map" voting. Both are somewhat seperate!

I'd like to see that voting system in place just to test it for a bit. I kind of like that idea.

Oh, let me also not forget, that after when a decision was made in his favour, his counter was reset, and had to start from 1 again. If you own UT99, or have it already installed, look for a so called "Monsterhunt" server, which is actually a Cooperative playmode against monsters, you can test the method there too!

---

Oh and please make sure to NOT confuse the voting system and the "next-map" voting. Both are somewhat seperate!

Agree, but still this same method can be somehow also implemented, as the counter goes only up, until the decision will be made against your favour. After that it goes back to 1 again. It would be worth at least testing it once, then we could see how it would work out.

as for map voting etc I think the most fun way to utilize this would be to count ppls votes by frags...

example:
after a match
player 1 has 10 frags
player 2 has 6 frags
player 3 has 5 frags

and at the map voting each has the same number of points as the number of frags to vote.

so lets say player 1 votes his 10 points for map1
if the other two would both vote for another map then their map will win, if not then player1's map will win - this can be made more fair to let the points stack if the map you voted earlier for didn't win then your points from the previous matches adds to the current

yes - that's basicaly how voting in ut2k4 works ;-)

I don't agree with this. It would be unfair on the less experienced players if the top players could just dominate the map votes.

There is an option that enables changing your mind/vote.. can't remember why i did not enable it back then. Maybe it can be enabled by default. Server admins can do it anyway..
There are also several options that change the factor needed to pass a vote. Problem is that "what would be good" depends a lot on the vote.. Kicking a teamkiller usually has only the "own" team voting for it as the other team does not even know what he is doing. Changing maps should involve all players. Also i think right now the 'non-voters" are counted as "don't care". Not totally sure though, but that actually makes the most sense. For example it helps a lot in the team killer case.
Thats also one of the prime examples where emede's idea would usually fail terrible...

This is what 'abstained' means... or not exactly, but it is what is counted. When you `vabstain`, you're counted as "doesn't care".

This makes me remember on the UT99 mod Monsterhunt, where a variable could been set, that it counted points for users whom where the final decision was made against them. For example there were 3 users online, a map change came, and each had to vote for a map. 2 voted for a map, 1 for a different one, the 2 came through, but in the next round the losing user's vote was given a +1, as being lost in the past round, so actually his vote was equal to 2 votes. Some similar method could be also used in Xonotic too in my opinion, if it does not exist already...

I think this gives unnecessary power to a minority.

I don't agree with this. It would be unfair on the less experienced players if the top players could just dominate the map votes.

Agreed.

As for teamkillers, a new vote.
vcall teamkiller <playername/number>
Displayed only to the tker's team, can only be called by someone on the tker's team, and only the tker's team can vote yes or no. A passed vote means a kick and recording of the player's name and IP. If the same name or IP is kicked for tking again, a ban is set in place.

As for teamkillers, a new vote.
vcall teamkiller <playername/number>
Displayed only to the tker's team, can only be called by someone on the tker's team, and only the tker's team can vote yes or no. A passed vote means a kick and recording of the player's name and IP. If the same name or IP is kicked for tking again, a ban is set in place.

I do agree with this, to an extent. I think it's a little harsh for the ban to be set into place after the second offense. I've seen kick votes be abused before. There could be someone that gets kicked when they aren't really doing anything. Then if it happens again they will be banned. I think maybe if it happens a couple of times in a certain time frame instead. Or maybe the owner of the server gets a notification and can check how many times the user has been kicked for that over time and make the decision himself.

I do agree with this, to an extent. I think it's a little harsh for the ban to be set into place after the second offense. I've seen kick votes be abused before. There could be someone that gets kicked when they aren't really doing anything. Then if it happens again they will be banned. I think maybe if it happens a couple of times in a certain time frame instead. Or maybe the owner of the server gets a notification and can check how many times the user has been kicked for that over time and make the decision himself.

You're right about that, but I don't trust the machine to tell if they're tking or not. They could teamkill just out of the time period that triggers kicking. I think the best thing to do is to a. prevent calling tker votes if they haven't tked in the current game, and b. to send the admin a notification with the name(s) and IP(s) of the tker and let them handle it.

This will work until we have robot server admins.

Its not that hard i guess, but you need someone to do it and get it accepted

Well if I had more time I would. =(

I think that it's a waste of time to include the option of changing the vote, because:
1. the vote process lasts less than 30 seconds
2. it is likely that your vote is not a decisive one
3. a map plays in less than 15 minutes

So I say be more careful when you vote, and even if you vote the wrong map, the play time for the maps is not that big.

I say we have to be more selective with the features we implement. Implementing a feature that will be used in 10% of the time or just by 10% of the players, is really inefficient.

later edit: Just realized that the thread is not only about map voting, but the arguments still stand.

Talking about team-kills, Hidden and Dangerous 2 had a pretty nice feature for avoiding this:
Every Friendly Fire was replied with 150% more damage back. Or even more, 200%. So if you hit someone and managing 50 points damage, you will get hurt by -75 HP. So sometimes some shots were not only harmful to your team-mate, but sometimes fatal for yourself too.
There was also an option turning FF simply off, or not using any penalty on FF. "FF Penalty" could be an option.

Xonotic already has that.. its called mirrordamage.. Its a factor for the damage done. Its low by default around 0.25 if i remember right..

I think that it's a waste of time to include the option of changing the vote, because:
1. the vote process lasts less than 30 seconds
2. it is likely that your vote is not a decisive one
3. a map plays in less than 15 minutes

So I say be more careful when you vote, and even if you vote the wrong map, the play time for the maps is not that big.

I say we have to be more selective with the features we implement. Implementing a feature that will be used in 10% of the time or just by 10% of the players, is really inefficient.

later edit: Just realized that the thread is not only about map voting, but the arguments still stand.

I don't understand your argument. What is the harm of being able to change your vote? It doesn't change the efficiency of anything. The point is that if someone calls a vote for the timelimit to be -1 and I vote yes by accident I would very much like to be able to change it to no.

Well, there is no problem with that. It's just that I don't think many users will use it, and there are more pressing matters to attend to right now.

You should put a poll on this thread to see what percentage really need it. Just have a "yes", "no", "don't care".

I must point out that this is not a bad idea. It's just that I'm not sure if it's worth being implemented.