Create an account


Poll: Will you use this system?
This poll is closed.
Yes.
50.00%
5 50.00%
I will try.
40.00%
4 40.00%
No. (Why?)
10.00%
1 10.00%
Total 10 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
[MUST SEE!] Using Pirate Pad to democratically decide on ideas

#1
Information 
I rarely use the forums (Mainly because I dislike this forum system, and also because there is just far too much content on here to respond to with work) but I have seen several threads about balance/physics which are just a complete and utter mess. There must be at least 20 threads discussing balance and physics decisions which are spread about across the whole forum system, so I propose a solution to simplify and organize development.

Previously for Xonotic decision making we have used Pirate Pad to come to conclusions about certain development and project decisions through a simple and democratic method where everyone contributes ideas and then later votes on those ideas. I believe that using this system again in an even wider manner would greatly help for balance and physics proposals.

Now, for the first little experiment, I have set up one page discussing the laser balance/laser jumping issue. Essentially follow the guidelines of the page which are already there and please do submit your suggestions for the laser! FruitieX, kojn, ANYONE ELSE MAKING A BALANCE WHO HAS DETAILED IDEAS ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO -- Submit your ideas to the suggestions of this post and then perhaps we can do voting on it.

Pirate pad link: http://piratepad.net/tAbcP7SuWm

Note: If anyone has any ideas on improving the main post itself, please let me know.
Reply

#2
interesting idea.

(11-05-2010, 05:03 PM)Samual Wrote: Note: If anyone has any ideas on improving the main post itself, please let me know.
Yep. An absolute golden rule in every single complex engineering process (which is never observed in almost all hot threads) is:
- A first round should be dedicated ONLY to "what are problems with Nexuiz 2.5.2?". In other words, it does not make sense to start with "I propose to lower the refire time by 0.1s", which is already a solution. Any form of solution must be banned. Typically, problems should be expressed with words, not with cvar.

- Then everybody commits on this set of problems. After this stage, noone can say: "no no, problem X is not really a problem".

- Finally, suitable solutions are investigated in a third round.
Fat.bot.Slim
Reply

#3
Sounds like a good idea. As for 2.5.2 problems, I'd have to say balance, especially on hit scan weapons. My balance (which is on a different file than the physics) almost works as a drop in replacement for 2.5.2's balance and works well with it's physics, so maybe we can start there and throw it out if it sucks.

Specific things that annoyed me about 2.5.2 balance:

Nex was EXTREMELY EASY TO ABUSE
Shotgun was too powerful
Machine gun turns mouse 1 into the "I win" button

Modifications I made:
Put a subtle (you won't notice it, but it's there) delay on nex switching
put a refire delay in nex switching
shotgun made mostly like it was in 2.4.2
machine gun nerfed a little

Those introduced a number of problems though, to solve them I had to rebalance everything.
ECKZBAWKZ HUGE LIST OF ACHIEVEMENTS GOES HERE....


Oh wait.
Reply

#4
(11-05-2010, 06:45 PM)Rage_ATWM Wrote: interesting idea.

Yep. An absolute golden rule in every single complex engineering process (which is never observed in almost all hot threads) is:
- A first round should be dedicated ONLY to "what are problems with Nexuiz 2.5.2?". In other words, it does not make sense to start with "I propose to lower the refire time by 0.1s", which is already a solution. Any form of solution must be banned. Typically, problems should be expressed with words, not with cvar.

- Then everybody commits on this set of problems. After this stage, noone can say: "no no, problem X is not really a problem".

- Finally, suitable solutions are investigated in a third round.
Absolutely, it's a fairly simple method too which could easily be done with pirate pad. However there is a problem with the first stage in this case, since the evidence against the laser is subjective for the most part. Personally I would say the issue is a problem with the current physics where players can essentially be far too fast too easily, and I think most people can agree to that. Because of this, the laser could be almost a game breaker for certain gametypes such as CTF which would kill gameplay in a few different aspects.

This is the standpoint of which I have started the current pirate pad, and I believe it should be adequate enough for us to go to "stage 2" where we would propose solutions. However one thing about the pirate pad is, someone could potentially suggest just leaving the laser exactly as it was. Personally I wouldn't want that, but it's possible... Essentially i'm saying, it's open to all suggestions, and that means it doesn't even *need* stage 1 to begin with.

Another point: There will ALWAYS be someone who disagrees... Always. Stage 1 is fundamentally flawed :3

(11-05-2010, 06:48 PM)Lee_Stricklin Wrote: Sounds like a good idea. As for 2.5.2 problems, I'd have to say balance, especially on hit scan weapons. My balance (which is on a different file than the physics) almost works as a drop in replacement for 2.5.2's balance and works well with it's physics, so maybe we can start there and throw it out if it sucks.

Specific things that annoyed me about 2.5.2 balance:

Nex was EXTREMELY EASY TO ABUSE
Shotgun was too powerful
Machine gun turns mouse 1 into the "I win" button

Modifications I made:
Put a subtle (you won't notice it, but it's there) delay on nex switching
put a refire delay in nex switching
shotgun made mostly like it was in 2.4.2
machine gun nerfed a little

Those introduced a number of problems though, to solve them I had to rebalance everything.
You're getting a little ahead of yourself there, right now we want to focus on individual weapons and behaviors and test out pirate pad to see if this is actually an acceptable way to make decisions.
Reply

#5
(11-05-2010, 08:22 PM)Samual Wrote: Another point: There will ALWAYS be someone who disagrees... Always. Stage 1 is fundamentally flawed :3
hm... if stage 1 is flawed, I advice you to urgently write some new revolutionnary theory of engineering because stage 1 is used by all engineering companies in the world. Smile
Obviously, there is always people complaining. But there is no big deal with this. Stage 1 tries to gather all opinions, including marginal ones. Typically, a (neutral) project leader does this. Then, mainstream statements are selected by a majority vote.
After this stage, people still complaining have 2 choices: either they calm down and look for solutions with the rest of the community, either they go to play another game...

(11-05-2010, 08:22 PM)Samual Wrote: ....and I think most people can agree to that.
....
I believe it should be adequate enough for us to go to "stage 2" where we would propose solutions.
Here, you repeat the exact same error made endlessly on this forum. You skip stage 1 because you think that most of the difficulty lies on stages after.
Which is wrong most of the time (when problems are stated clearly, solutions are generally immediate to derive).
The goal of stage 1 (and the vote after) is not to actually identify what are the true problems, but is to officially freeze a list of problems.
The problem you propose to solve has zero value, because, at this stage, you're the only one proposing it. All the solutions you will develop to overcome it will be instantly destroyed by someone saying: "he, btw, I was not agree with the problem you raised".
This is what it happens in the laser thread and in all other balance threads.

Oh, and i forget one thing: if you want your approach to work out, someone legitimate from the dev team has to be involved in the process. Smile
Fat.bot.Slim
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Map ideas - ancient tombs, buildings and battle settings Hypnotix-2000 2 2,893 04-07-2012, 11:47 PM
Last Post: Hypnotix-2000
  My mapping ideas - pick one! CuBe0wL 28 23,851 07-07-2011, 06:48 AM
Last Post: CuBe0wL

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

Forum software by © MyBB original theme © iAndrew 2016, remixed by -z-