<![CDATA[Xonotic Forums - Xonotic Polls]]>

<![CDATA[Xonotic Forums - Xonotic Polls]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/ Sat, 04 Apr 2026 01:55:41 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[Increase CTF stalemate]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8192 Mon, 16 Dec 2019 13:40:54 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8192 Here's the MR, see discussion there.]]> Here's the MR, see discussion there.]]> <![CDATA[[SOLVED] Crylink primary linkexplode]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8191 Mon, 09 Dec 2019 16:23:39 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8191
Full timeline of changes:
2016-12-31 6ad814437131a61319de9098e07e1a7cb58b4a06 (on Mirio/balance, by Mario, merged into master a couple hours later) linkexplode disabled
2016-04-30 206a6183e94e41e41a8c5db4a0d43469763df4c3 (on Mirio/balance) damage 11->10
2016-02-07 bac64fabd29370fda09e3a4dd6b043a8bb6ffc0d (on Mirio/balance) damage 10->11
2016-02-03 7b2356deb93bff61ff1acf35f55a791517f6b467 (on Mario/balance_v2, merged into master 2016-02-21) linkexplode disabled
2015-12-28 8b4c7b7a86255bc0cff6ae5a74cf2931701b6fe7 (fist commit on Mirio/balance) damage 12->10
2012-02-17 55632e2d4a8f819a11b6151e63b8a19973a77ee5 (by Samual, merged to master 2 days later) damage 10->12

So it appears there were two branches (partially in parallel) suggesting nerfing crylink (Mario's by disabling linkexplode, Mirio's by reducing damage) and they somehow got both merged. I am not sure this was intentional. I didn't follow the discussions about the changes but it appears at least some people were against to the point of running modified configs on servers.

I'd like to officially reenable linkexplode in master as this is what's being used on EU servers and crylink it still not particularly popular - there is no point making it even weaker. According to bones_was_here, this was also tested on Australian servers recently and players like it.

Feedback welcome.

(Note this is not about the crylink secondary changes which are also in testing balance.)]]>
Full timeline of changes:
2016-12-31 6ad814437131a61319de9098e07e1a7cb58b4a06 (on Mirio/balance, by Mario, merged into master a couple hours later) linkexplode disabled
2016-04-30 206a6183e94e41e41a8c5db4a0d43469763df4c3 (on Mirio/balance) damage 11->10
2016-02-07 bac64fabd29370fda09e3a4dd6b043a8bb6ffc0d (on Mirio/balance) damage 10->11
2016-02-03 7b2356deb93bff61ff1acf35f55a791517f6b467 (on Mario/balance_v2, merged into master 2016-02-21) linkexplode disabled
2015-12-28 8b4c7b7a86255bc0cff6ae5a74cf2931701b6fe7 (fist commit on Mirio/balance) damage 12->10
2012-02-17 55632e2d4a8f819a11b6151e63b8a19973a77ee5 (by Samual, merged to master 2 days later) damage 10->12

So it appears there were two branches (partially in parallel) suggesting nerfing crylink (Mario's by disabling linkexplode, Mirio's by reducing damage) and they somehow got both merged. I am not sure this was intentional. I didn't follow the discussions about the changes but it appears at least some people were against to the point of running modified configs on servers.

I'd like to officially reenable linkexplode in master as this is what's being used on EU servers and crylink it still not particularly popular - there is no point making it even weaker. According to bones_was_here, this was also tested on Australian servers recently and players like it.

Feedback welcome.

(Note this is not about the crylink secondary changes which are also in testing balance.)]]> <![CDATA[Blaster switchdelay]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8190 Sun, 08 Dec 2019 12:45:25 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8190 MR to make blaster switching faster.

Testing and opinions welcome.]]> MR to make blaster switching faster.

Testing and opinions welcome.]]> <![CDATA[Keepaway defaults]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8158 Tue, 24 Sep 2019 11:02:57 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8158
BC advantage vs waypoint

Having the ball paints a massive target on your back due to the waypoint so this should be offset by giving the BC some advantage. WTWRP uses g_keepaway_ballcarrier_highspeed 1.5 which feels about right. It might be better to scale it with the number of players (start at 1 for 2 players and approach 1.5 or 2 for infinite players - the exact function would have to be worked out so the jump from 2 to 3 players is bigger than from 10 to 11) but for now a single value seems to be sufficient and works well on WTWRP with around 5 players on the rare occasion KA is played.

Not having a waypoint might be interesting too but wouldn't work well if we decide to give points for time spent holding the ball - people would be encouraged to just hide.

Scoring

The current 1 for BCK (Ball Carrier Kill), 1 for KAC (Kill As Carrier) together with a waypoint means it's usually better to just camp and kill BCs instead of taking the ball unless you have a very high stack and are likely to kill multiple people before they kill you (at which point you could still just kill multiple BCs without touching the ball for probably less risk).

If we keep the waypoint, points for staying alive while holding the ball (timepoints) seem reasonable given just staying alive requires effort. The most desirable ratio of timepoints vs BCKs+KACs should be discussed.

Points for BCK vs KAC is also interesting - higher BCK means camping and kiling BCs from a distance is encouraged. Higher KAC means BCs get a large number of points from killing noobs who keep DuMbrushing them without having to fight more experienced/stacked players.

Damage between nonBCs

Currently WTWRP doesn't allow it which seems reasonable given most people think everything teamless is DM. However it significantly alters the gameplay - with many players the BC is the only one who effectively takes damage as everyone converges on the waypoint and gets killed almost instantly. I like to say that the gamemode degenerates with the number of players (as does DM). With damage enabled the players are likely to hurt each other which will probably discourage forming large crowds. The disadvantage is that people playing it as DM are frustrating to have to deal with.

Given KA turns into a perpetual 1 vs way-too-many mess without damage enabled i am now inclined to keep it enabled. It also offers more elaborate strategies like fighting leading players even when they don't have the ball.

Misc

Timelimit should probably be reduced to at least 15 minutes (like DM), maybe 10. Pointlimit needs to be adjusted after deciding on scoring.

There seems to be a delay between killing the BC and being able to pick the ball up. This is incredibly frustrating and should be removed.

Might wanna increase g_keepawayball_respawntime - currently it's lower than CTF and it's somewhat disappointing to fight over something that just disappears before you can get to it. OTOH, might wanna respawn it faster if it's in lava/slime like the flag.

Additional discussion in the MR (click "toggle thread" to expand the discussions). Note that my opinions are not set in stone (except that some players are DuMb). I am particularly uncertain about damage between nonBCs.

Options

Currently default KA is not particularly interesting to play nor popular. WTWRP is already testing some changes (use cvar_changes after voting KA). There are many options depending what kind of gamemode we want it to be - e.g.:

Keep the waypoint - should probably give advantage to BC, should probably allow damage between nonBCs. The BC will have to try stay alive and keep moving, will have more chaotic gameplay.
No waypoint - probably no timepoints, might not need BC advantage, damage between nonBCs is probably not such an issue since there probably won't be large crowds and rushing. Likely to have slower, more tactical gameplay.

The current WTWRP settings are somewhat better than defaults but degenerate with too many players. Would be nice to come up with a config that supports a wider range of player counts. Please provide opinions and suggestions.]]>
BC advantage vs waypoint

Having the ball paints a massive target on your back due to the waypoint so this should be offset by giving the BC some advantage. WTWRP uses g_keepaway_ballcarrier_highspeed 1.5 which feels about right. It might be better to scale it with the number of players (start at 1 for 2 players and approach 1.5 or 2 for infinite players - the exact function would have to be worked out so the jump from 2 to 3 players is bigger than from 10 to 11) but for now a single value seems to be sufficient and works well on WTWRP with around 5 players on the rare occasion KA is played.

Not having a waypoint might be interesting too but wouldn't work well if we decide to give points for time spent holding the ball - people would be encouraged to just hide.

Scoring

The current 1 for BCK (Ball Carrier Kill), 1 for KAC (Kill As Carrier) together with a waypoint means it's usually better to just camp and kill BCs instead of taking the ball unless you have a very high stack and are likely to kill multiple people before they kill you (at which point you could still just kill multiple BCs without touching the ball for probably less risk).

If we keep the waypoint, points for staying alive while holding the ball (timepoints) seem reasonable given just staying alive requires effort. The most desirable ratio of timepoints vs BCKs+KACs should be discussed.

Points for BCK vs KAC is also interesting - higher BCK means camping and kiling BCs from a distance is encouraged. Higher KAC means BCs get a large number of points from killing noobs who keep DuMbrushing them without having to fight more experienced/stacked players.

Damage between nonBCs

Currently WTWRP doesn't allow it which seems reasonable given most people think everything teamless is DM. However it significantly alters the gameplay - with many players the BC is the only one who effectively takes damage as everyone converges on the waypoint and gets killed almost instantly. I like to say that the gamemode degenerates with the number of players (as does DM). With damage enabled the players are likely to hurt each other which will probably discourage forming large crowds. The disadvantage is that people playing it as DM are frustrating to have to deal with.

Given KA turns into a perpetual 1 vs way-too-many mess without damage enabled i am now inclined to keep it enabled. It also offers more elaborate strategies like fighting leading players even when they don't have the ball.

Misc

Timelimit should probably be reduced to at least 15 minutes (like DM), maybe 10. Pointlimit needs to be adjusted after deciding on scoring.

There seems to be a delay between killing the BC and being able to pick the ball up. This is incredibly frustrating and should be removed.

Might wanna increase g_keepawayball_respawntime - currently it's lower than CTF and it's somewhat disappointing to fight over something that just disappears before you can get to it. OTOH, might wanna respawn it faster if it's in lava/slime like the flag.

Additional discussion in the MR (click "toggle thread" to expand the discussions). Note that my opinions are not set in stone (except that some players are DuMb). I am particularly uncertain about damage between nonBCs.

Options

Currently default KA is not particularly interesting to play nor popular. WTWRP is already testing some changes (use cvar_changes after voting KA). There are many options depending what kind of gamemode we want it to be - e.g.:

Keep the waypoint - should probably give advantage to BC, should probably allow damage between nonBCs. The BC will have to try stay alive and keep moving, will have more chaotic gameplay.
No waypoint - probably no timepoints, might not need BC advantage, damage between nonBCs is probably not such an issue since there probably won't be large crowds and rushing. Likely to have slower, more tactical gameplay.

The current WTWRP settings are somewhat better than defaults but degenerate with too many players. Would be nice to come up with a config that supports a wider range of player counts. Please provide opinions and suggestions.]]> <![CDATA[[MERGED] CTF flag autoreturn time]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8123 Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:41:50 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8123 like to increase the default time until the flag returns from 15 s to 30 s.

It should lead to more fights in different and more interesting locations (i.e. not just bases). Currently i feel like there's not enough time to get the flag again if an FC dies because often it autoreturns before i get there (especially if i wanna grab a few items along the way). Sometimes i just go attack the enemy base again even before it returns because i know it's gonna come back there pretty soon and there will likely be less resistance so i can just grab it and run off with it. OTOH, for defenders this means they have the option of defending the flag wherever it is dropped if they think it's a better position - at least for a while (until other teammates retake the base).

I also have good experience with it in overkill. It discourages stalemates when there are only few players - e.g. in 1v1 CTF you can leave the flag on your base and go attack the other player with less risk of letting him return the flag if you die.

I heard the return time used to be 30 s but was reduced to 15 because the flag sometimes got stuck at the bottom of lava/slime pits. This should no longer be an issue since now in those cases it autoreturns immediately (exceptions are when it's in very shallow lava/slime but there it can be retrieved or pushed with blaster, if there are maps where it's still an issue, the code could be fixed to always autoreturn as soon as any part of the flag touches such a liquid).

Opinions welcome.]]> like to increase the default time until the flag returns from 15 s to 30 s.

It should lead to more fights in different and more interesting locations (i.e. not just bases). Currently i feel like there's not enough time to get the flag again if an FC dies because often it autoreturns before i get there (especially if i wanna grab a few items along the way). Sometimes i just go attack the enemy base again even before it returns because i know it's gonna come back there pretty soon and there will likely be less resistance so i can just grab it and run off with it. OTOH, for defenders this means they have the option of defending the flag wherever it is dropped if they think it's a better position - at least for a while (until other teammates retake the base).

I also have good experience with it in overkill. It discourages stalemates when there are only few players - e.g. in 1v1 CTF you can leave the flag on your base and go attack the other player with less risk of letting him return the flag if you die.

I heard the return time used to be 30 s but was reduced to 15 because the flag sometimes got stuck at the bottom of lava/slime pits. This should no longer be an issue since now in those cases it autoreturns immediately (exceptions are when it's in very shallow lava/slime but there it can be retrieved or pushed with blaster, if there are maps where it's still an issue, the code could be fixed to always autoreturn as soon as any part of the flag touches such a liquid).

Opinions welcome.]]> <![CDATA[[SOLVED] MachineGun Burst Spread]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8122 Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:20:15 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8122
Recently, it was discovered that a regression was merged into the game's balance around the release of Xonotic 0.8 that caused the MachineGun's secondary burst attack to have no spread. This allows it to be used effectively at any range.

Seeing as this change has been in the Xonotic balance for a few years at this point, we see this as an opportunity to let the community decide on how to proceed with the MachineGun's balance!

For those who would like to test the spread value that was used prior to Xonotic 0.8, you may vote for spread on the [HUB] Duel (KANSAS) server.

Would you like to see it restored to the original value, kept as it is or something entirely different?
I look forward to hearing your feedback!]]>
Recently, it was discovered that a regression was merged into the game's balance around the release of Xonotic 0.8 that caused the MachineGun's secondary burst attack to have no spread. This allows it to be used effectively at any range.

Seeing as this change has been in the Xonotic balance for a few years at this point, we see this as an opportunity to let the community decide on how to proceed with the MachineGun's balance!

For those who would like to test the spread value that was used prior to Xonotic 0.8, you may vote for spread on the [HUB] Duel (KANSAS) server.

Would you like to see it restored to the original value, kept as it is or something entirely different?
I look forward to hearing your feedback!]]> <![CDATA[[REJECTED] Vortex charge]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8121 Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:29:47 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8121
a) Use `g_balance_vortex_charge_always 1`. This makes it charge up even when holding some other weapon. However it barely affects comboing - the min damage you do when you combo fast it still 59 (or so).

b) Disable charge completely (g_balance_vortex_charge 0) and reduce damage to compensate (g_balance_vortex_primary_damage 70 or 65).

Please share your opinions - which change you prefer (or god forbid if you like the current situation) and how much the damage should be reduced if you wanna remove charge completely.]]>
a) Use `g_balance_vortex_charge_always 1`. This makes it charge up even when holding some other weapon. However it barely affects comboing - the min damage you do when you combo fast it still 59 (or so).

b) Disable charge completely (g_balance_vortex_charge 0) and reduce damage to compensate (g_balance_vortex_primary_damage 70 or 65).

Please share your opinions - which change you prefer (or god forbid if you like the current situation) and how much the damage should be reduced if you wanna remove charge completely.]]> <![CDATA[[SOLVED] Blaster horizontal push]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8117 Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:07:12 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=8117
What happened:

The blaster has two cvars to control its push: g_balance_blaster_primary_force (300 by default) and g_balance_blaster_primary_force_zscale (1.25 by default). Zscale scales for force along the Z axis (up/down) by multiplying.

In 0.6 (I tested this one) and probably 0.7 (released in 2013) everything worked correctly: blaster's horizontal push force was 300 and vertical was 300*1.25=375.

In 2014 a bug was introduced during a rafactoring which caused zscale to multiply all 3 components of the force vector instead of just Z. Therefore blaster's push was 375 in all directions.

Recently the bug was fixed which means blaster feels weaker when using it on walls.

You can test both versions by compiling Xonotic on the commit which fixes it and the one before. However that is slow and requires a map restart every time you toggle between the two versions. A faster way is to compile just the new version (the fix or any commit after) and toggle just the cvar values:

g_balance_blaster_primary_force 300; g_balance_blaster_primary_force_zscale 1.25 will keep the new behavior

g_balance_blaster_primary_force 375; g_balance_blaster_primary_force_zscale 1 will give you the old behavior (from 0.8 until a few days ago)

Note that changes to weapon cvars in general take up to 5 seconds to take effect.

All feedback is welcome.]]>
What happened:

The blaster has two cvars to control its push: g_balance_blaster_primary_force (300 by default) and g_balance_blaster_primary_force_zscale (1.25 by default). Zscale scales for force along the Z axis (up/down) by multiplying.

In 0.6 (I tested this one) and probably 0.7 (released in 2013) everything worked correctly: blaster's horizontal push force was 300 and vertical was 300*1.25=375.

In 2014 a bug was introduced during a rafactoring which caused zscale to multiply all 3 components of the force vector instead of just Z. Therefore blaster's push was 375 in all directions.

Recently the bug was fixed which means blaster feels weaker when using it on walls.

You can test both versions by compiling Xonotic on the commit which fixes it and the one before. However that is slow and requires a map restart every time you toggle between the two versions. A faster way is to compile just the new version (the fix or any commit after) and toggle just the cvar values:

g_balance_blaster_primary_force 300; g_balance_blaster_primary_force_zscale 1.25 will keep the new behavior

g_balance_blaster_primary_force 375; g_balance_blaster_primary_force_zscale 1 will give you the old behavior (from 0.8 until a few days ago)

Note that changes to weapon cvars in general take up to 5 seconds to take effect.

All feedback is welcome.]]> <![CDATA[Gametype Creator]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=7954 Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:29:36 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=7954 <![CDATA[Damagetext size]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=7246 Mon, 06 Mar 2017 10:50:02 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=7246
For the record, I think that especially the minimum is too small and unreadable which looks too unpolished for Xon's standards and that the defaults should suit as many people as possible. If it turns out the majority likes the current values, I promise i will shut up about it Wink

I like graphs, so....

[Image: T7jwcRm.png]

AB is my original code
AC is Mario's suggestion
AD (the current value) is our compromise (which I apparently didn't think through)
EF is an example of what I think might be reasonable just to show that I only want a tiny change and not something huge

Note that the damage players will do most often is between 0 and 80 so the larger values are only for quad or other special cases.]]>
For the record, I think that especially the minimum is too small and unreadable which looks too unpolished for Xon's standards and that the defaults should suit as many people as possible. If it turns out the majority likes the current values, I promise i will shut up about it Wink

I like graphs, so....

[Image: T7jwcRm.png]

AB is my original code
AC is Mario's suggestion
AD (the current value) is our compromise (which I apparently didn't think through)
EF is an example of what I think might be reasonable just to show that I only want a tiny change and not something huge

Note that the damage players will do most often is between 0 and 80 so the larger values are only for quad or other special cases.]]> <![CDATA[Lightspeed map poll]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=5254 Mon, 19 Jan 2015 15:51:32 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=5254
I believe it is time to hide or remove this map from the default map pool, for the following reasons:

Gameplay with vanilla weapons isn't great, becomes either a shotgun or crylink fest
Visuals aren't very appealing. On default settings, the brightness of the white walls is almost blinding... Even on optimized settings, it is difficult to see enemies
The map layout is very basic and unimpressive compared to the other stock maps

Possible reasons to keep this map include:

Keeping the overly bright and simple facility114 texture set available to mappers (The textures would become part of the Lightspeed pk3 if no other maps use this texture set yet, otherwise it could be made available in a server package)
Allowing very small CTF matches (most vanilla maps are balanced for at least 6 players, while Lightspeed can work with as little as 2)

Gameplay with vanilla weapons isn't great, becomes either a shotgun or crylink fest
Visuals aren't very appealing. On default settings, the brightness of the white walls is almost blinding... Even on optimized settings, it is difficult to see enemies
The map layout is very basic and unimpressive compared to the other stock maps

Possible reasons to keep this map include:

Keeping the overly bright and simple facility114 texture set available to mappers (The textures would become part of the Lightspeed pk3 if no other maps use this texture set yet, otherwise it could be made available in a server package)
Allowing very small CTF matches (most vanilla maps are balanced for at least 6 players, while Lightspeed can work with as little as 2)

Once this map is out, it can be replaced with a similarly small map with better design, gameplay and visuals.

Lightspeed is currently only really played (and somewhat rarely) on the LX Overkill server according to stats, for which a custom .pk3 could be created to keep the map available.]]> <![CDATA[Default balance]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=5163 Fri, 14 Nov 2014 00:23:03 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=5163
XPM settings will be phased out in favour of reversion tourney, as they are basically the same, but reversion includes tweaks by the community.

After multiple discussions on IRC and in-game, I feel a merge of vanilla and reversion tourney settings would work best, as reversion tourney settings are highly favoured by all.
Reversion balance has been tested a lot and in duels and some public matches, and would speed up vanilla games, helping keep players interested.
The health pickup caps would limit stacking even more, making it not such a drag to kill someone.

The winning result of this poll will be applied to the weapons system branch, and soon to master.]]>
XPM settings will be phased out in favour of reversion tourney, as they are basically the same, but reversion includes tweaks by the community.

After multiple discussions on IRC and in-game, I feel a merge of vanilla and reversion tourney settings would work best, as reversion tourney settings are highly favoured by all.
Reversion balance has been tested a lot and in duels and some public matches, and would speed up vanilla games, helping keep players interested.
The health pickup caps would limit stacking even more, making it not such a drag to kill someone.

The winning result of this poll will be applied to the weapons system branch, and soon to master.]]> <![CDATA[Official CTF maps poll #2]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=5013 Tue, 15 Jul 2014 18:05:35 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=5013
Xonotic needs more official maps and especially CTF maps.
Debugger and I were thinking about which CTF maps we would include as official maps. The maps have got some proper gameplay and most of them are already popular in public servers.
Now we are creating this poll to get community feedback, which maps YOU want to see in further releases.

Edit: Aurora, Catharsis and Vorix are almost done and XoylentCTF is just waiting to get merged into master.

You can vote as many maps as you like to.
After this we will start working on the top voted, respectively the easier ones that need not so much work.

We appreciate any help in polishing the maps! Tongue

Download URLs are included in the poll, screenshots here: http://imgur.com/a/Eoygl]]>
Xonotic needs more official maps and especially CTF maps.
Debugger and I were thinking about which CTF maps we would include as official maps. The maps have got some proper gameplay and most of them are already popular in public servers.
Now we are creating this poll to get community feedback, which maps YOU want to see in further releases.

Edit: Aurora, Catharsis and Vorix are almost done and XoylentCTF is just waiting to get merged into master.

You can vote as many maps as you like to.
After this we will start working on the top voted, respectively the easier ones that need not so much work.

We appreciate any help in polishing the maps! Tongue

Download URLs are included in the poll, screenshots here: http://imgur.com/a/Eoygl]]> <![CDATA[Need help deciding on layout for profile tab]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=4730 Sun, 26 Jan 2014 18:38:58 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=4730 http://imgur.com/a/crdV9

Note that eventually i'd like to replace the playermodel display with something far more desirable (real 3D render of the model, and perhaps model customization if we ever proceed with my playermodel ideas.) Additionally, I already plan to replace the advanced text/symbol box underneath the names with a new font set, and we should be able to reduce the size of that section... So keep that in mind with your suggestions.

Oh, and ignore the fact that the country list currently is actually the language list. Smile

That'll be fixed soon.]]> http://imgur.com/a/crdV9

Note that eventually i'd like to replace the playermodel display with something far more desirable (real 3D render of the model, and perhaps model customization if we ever proceed with my playermodel ideas.) Additionally, I already plan to replace the advanced text/symbol box underneath the names with a new font set, and we should be able to reduce the size of that section... So keep that in mind with your suggestions.

Oh, and ignore the fact that the country list currently is actually the language list. Smile

That'll be fixed soon.]]> <![CDATA[Development Funding and Sponsorship]]> https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=4307 Tue, 16 Jul 2013 07:02:43 +0000 https://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=4307
Intro

We've got a rather tricky question on our hands right now... and it provokes a rather moral question that I think needs to be discussed and sorted out with the community and development team openly. Specifically I am referring to monetization, donations, sponsorship, and the use of funding to drive development...

Firstly I would like to clarify, no one owns Xonotic in the traditional sense, Xonotic will ALWAYS remain a GPL/opensource game entirely with no closed content, Xonotic will never require a fee for you to play, Xonotic will never give someone a more powerful weapon because they gave one of the developers a blowjob (sorry Mirio), and Xonotic will never tell your children that it's coming to the ball game but then never show up. What I want to argue for here is setting up open donations and sponsorship which allows the Xonotic development team to use that funding to purchase software, tools, publishing utilities, server hosting, advertisement or promotions, or even development talent to flesh out tasks which we simply cannot get accomplished otherwise. Without further adieu, let me get on with describing the problem while giving some examples both for and against this motion.

Advantages of Development Funding

Currently, it is VERY difficult to find artists who both have the motivation and skill to complete artistic tasks for the game. We have been trying for many years to replace the weapon models in the game, however have found little success, as modelers usually only have time to do 1 or 2 models every year or so, leaving our weapon model set to be very inconsistent in style and quality. We have the opportunity to hire some artists to complete this work with development fund money, which honestly will never get done otherwise.
Same story for many other pickup items, excluding perhaps powerups and some others which actually do have artists willing to complete the work.
Similar story for player models, where I think we can develop a far better player set with funding supplied to Morphed- who has already done a vast portion of models in the history of Nexuiz and Xonotic BTW, he is very talented, just lacking time to complete these tasks without compensation or such. I won't get into details now, but there are a lot of very good ideas circulating on what we can do with the player models to make them better... Although I will later talk about one possible feature of them in this post.
Additionally, tasks which are otherwise rather unlikely to happen may be accomplished, such as completion of the dedicated map repository for all Xonotic maps- perhaps even linking into the game so that clients can automatically download them to their user directories.... although we'll need a way to sign the downloads and authenticate them inside the dlcache directory to prevent hacking or such. The fact is, some times motivated talent does not exist for such tasks without an influence.
Prize money for tournaments, competitions, etc etc... (if sponsorship does not provide such a substitution itself-- see below.)
We could afford to send select developers to conferences or local events so that they can promote the game after 1.0, i.e. for PAX or GDC or other such events.
We could easily pay fees such as Steam Greenlight submission charges ($100), allowing us to submit the game through the Steam Greenlight process. (Although, we might not do this as it might be a waste of money anyway... But please don't worry about that in this thread, that's another discussion for elsewhere)
We could pay the expenses to officially register as a non-profit organization, acquiring the ability to accept open donations.
We can purchase high-end skybox software and hire someone to complete a vast set of perfectly on-theme and high quality skyboxes for the use of all mappers.
We can hire someone to port a more powerful map editor to support Xonotic mapping...
... Or someone to finish proper implementation of ODE physics library and ragdolls.
... Or someone who has 3D tracking hardware to create new player animations along with Morphed's playermodels.
... etc etc etc, there are quite many things which were infeasible previously yet can be reached with a development fund.

Advantages of Sponsorship

We get free stuff. No, seriously, that's it. We trade promotion of their service or company in exchange for services given back to us. An example would be prizes supplied by Sapphire for a mapping competition, with proper sponsorship we can do far more events like that where we exchange billboard spots on maps for prizes or services we need to either generate community interest in events or provide services such as a new map repository server host.
Mutual promotion, i.e. gaming communities can sponsor us and advertise our game while we mutually promote them and send our players to their communities as well.

Disadvantages of Development Funding

Potential jealousy. This one is quite blunt and obvious, if one person is getting paid for their work, why is another person not getting paid? Why should I work for free when the other person gets paid to do it? Is their work superior to mine? The answer to this is a very clear NO. Let me explain: Personally, I consider donations to be of many different forms. The work that I or anyone else on the dev team currently submits is a donation of its own, we donate our time and effort, effectively draining our own resources to provide for the game. I see monetary donations under a similar light, although the developers who contribute are doing the work for free, they're the same as monetary contributors. They would distribute their resources to the project with the same sacrifice. For the record, I will not be accepting any money from donations or such, I just want to get some features and goodies which we simply will not be able to get otherwise. To summarize, all donations are still donations, the only difference is that if you contribute directly to the project via code you're bypassing the middle-man through donating money. If you work for free, you're simply being EXACTLY as noble and generous as the people who donate money to the project to pay other developers for work which otherwise would not be done. I would like to take this moment to point out that we do have additional solutions to this problem, which I will explain later in the "method" section of this post.
Who holds the pot of gold? Another blunt and obvious question is, where does the money go? It is impossible to split the money up properly via services such as PayPal, and there are unfortunately no other suitable services for what we need. (believe me, we have looked) Generally the core team has agreed that we will appoint someone trustworthy and well mannered to handle the development fund accounts. Obviously this means I will not be handling any of the money, I get into heated arguments more often than a bigoted New Yorker on a bad day in a bar who just crossed paths with a black homosexual Steelers fan who just hit on his wife AND insulted the Yankees at the same time.... Anyway, I nominate Antibody for such a responsibility, as he is a very trustworthy and reasonable individual who I think would be suitable for such a task.

Disadvantages of Sponsorship

Advertisements. Yes, this would mean we have to place advertisements into maps on billboards or screens or such in order to successfully promote our sponsors. However, we WILL not place random ads on maps, they would be distributed via our own system and automatically loaded onto maps which support them. The ads we would show would include sponsorship badges/logos (with some kind of link opening support if you wish to visit via browser) for companies such as MaverickGaming, or any other various hosting or community sponsors we have, as well as community announcements (read more about this below). Any server would be able to disable them, and any client would be able to disable them, so they are by no-means necessary and we will not force them onto people who do not want them. Generally though, it would go a long way in acquiring sponsors, and it would be a great system for us to do announcements or community advertisements for events or competitions or such. Imagine us being able to push non-intrusive/passive notifications/sponsorships onto maps where you otherwise see a bland Xonotic logo or such. Another factor to this is that we will be putting sponsorship badges onto startup screen (possibly), gameplay video intros (possibly), and website (certainly) to help promote them there as well.
Another potential problem to some people means that we will be promoting sponsored events publicly, but won't necessarily be able to promote all external community events quite as well without going through i.e. Mirio or such ahead of time so we can properly give the same promotion. To clarify, we don't mind promoting most events, it's just that if you go the independent route instead of working with us that we might not have time to promote your event. (I didn't describe this well, I bet some people will be angry here for no good reason)

Donation Methods and Details

Currently we are considering 4 methods of donation...

Direct/Open Donation: Funding received via PayPal or some other service directly into the Xonotic account openly (allowing anyone to contribute freely). This requires us to register as a non-profit organization in order to properly handle taxes and the establishment of our ability to receive donations directly/openly.
Kickstarter: Funding received via a campaign on Kickstarter or some other crowd funding method, allowing us to list specific features that people may want and acquire the proper funding to supply the entire development process of those features. (Of course, using any left over to deposit directly into the main development account fund for any other things we may need.)

Future possibilities:
Distribution: Funding received via commercial sales of the game, such as selling of a Xonotic DVD containing the game. Note: This is entirely supported by the GPL, we'd essentially be selling just a DVD (and possibly a case) for those who are interested in having a special copy of the game. You can absolutely just as easily produce your own version of this, and you're absolutely not needed to buy this, but it would be another way to acquire revenue for a development fund and it might be something that people want to buy.
Commodity: Funding received via sales of Xonotic branded swag.... Essentially the same thing as above, but with t-shirts, mugs, hats, flash drives, etc etc. Again, not necessary, but possibly something nice to have?

Other details:

Donators will all be properly attributed in the credits and on the website/forums, unless they choose to opt-out of this by remaining anonymous or such.
Donated amounts will be kept private except to the core team, this is not a thing we want people competing and arguing about.
Development fund distribution will additionally be left only to the core team, we do not want people getting jealous with the classic "why was he paid more than me" jibber jabber... and private management is really the only way to do that effectively. Unless you guys disagree and claim we should keep it entirely open... but this really creates a lot of problems for management, so please understand where i'm coming from when I say it's better to keep monetary distributions blind between the people receiving them, this way we don't have in-fighting about payments.
Just because you donate DOES NOT mean you get a special say in how the design plays out. I will not add a stupid gun by default which harms the rest of the game just because you contribute $1,000. We will not remove a map for money, we will not ADD a map for money, we will not do any features which do not otherwise fit our standards.
If development ceases for Xonotic, or some other event comes up at which point we no longer require the money from the development fund, or we simply have more money than we need-- by rule we shall direct it to a charity we see fit. I would even throw around the idea of distributing 10% of all donations directly to another charity, perhaps as an incentive for other people to donate to us as well.

Additional Options Worth Discussing...

Now, I mentioned Steam earlier, and although I won't get into too much detail-- It is simply not viable for Steam to add our game unless we adapt to the free2play mentality, where we supply a "free to play" game which charges for some extra service, thus providing a way for us to supply Steam with income (and making our game a viable possibility for Valve to adopt to their catelog). Personally, I hate most implementations of this, and I will never stand for someone to gain advantages over another by paying $30 for that special sword you can't get anywhere else. I do however have a compromise to suggest, and it goes along with the design idea for the playermodels by Morphed. Generally, we could provide special armor (like a backpack or special spikes on playermodel arms, or even a special skin background color displayed by default) that has no gameplay implications, but merely shows that this person has contributed to the game development in quite a helpful way. This would provide a certain incentive for donation WITHOUT causing any unfairness- because I don't think anyone will REALLY care that much if someone has a slightly special coloring on their playermodel by default. Again, this is optional, but it is worth considering and it would give us an additional way to support ourselves. Of course, we could also do special forum badges or Xonstat badges or whatever, that's all up to you guys.

Closing

I absolutely understand concerns that people may have here, honestly I have many of the same concerns... However, I think that donations and a certain amount of monetization can provide for us many desirable things which outweigh the disadvantages and problems presented.

Please give me all the feedback you can here, we want to do only what is morally and reasonably acceptable with the community/project. I do have another question for you though... If we had donations open, how much would YOU donate? Would you buy commodities or distributions? Any other ways you would be compelled to contribute? It would be nice to have an estimate of how much we could generate.

Note: If I forgot something in this post, please bear with me, I wrote this at 2:50am after being awake for ~18 hours. I will update later if there are more relevant advantages/disadvantages/etc that I have not covered here.]]>
Intro

Currently, it is VERY difficult to find artists who both have the motivation and skill to complete artistic tasks for the game. We have been trying for many years to replace the weapon models in the game, however have found little success, as modelers usually only have time to do 1 or 2 models every year or so, leaving our weapon model set to be very inconsistent in style and quality. We have the opportunity to hire some artists to complete this work with development fund money, which honestly will never get done otherwise.
Same story for many other pickup items, excluding perhaps powerups and some others which actually do have artists willing to complete the work.
Similar story for player models, where I think we can develop a far better player set with funding supplied to Morphed- who has already done a vast portion of models in the history of Nexuiz and Xonotic BTW, he is very talented, just lacking time to complete these tasks without compensation or such. I won't get into details now, but there are a lot of very good ideas circulating on what we can do with the player models to make them better... Although I will later talk about one possible feature of them in this post.
Additionally, tasks which are otherwise rather unlikely to happen may be accomplished, such as completion of the dedicated map repository for all Xonotic maps- perhaps even linking into the game so that clients can automatically download them to their user directories.... although we'll need a way to sign the downloads and authenticate them inside the dlcache directory to prevent hacking or such. The fact is, some times motivated talent does not exist for such tasks without an influence.
Prize money for tournaments, competitions, etc etc... (if sponsorship does not provide such a substitution itself-- see below.)
We could afford to send select developers to conferences or local events so that they can promote the game after 1.0, i.e. for PAX or GDC or other such events.
We could easily pay fees such as Steam Greenlight submission charges ($100), allowing us to submit the game through the Steam Greenlight process. (Although, we might not do this as it might be a waste of money anyway... But please don't worry about that in this thread, that's another discussion for elsewhere)
We could pay the expenses to officially register as a non-profit organization, acquiring the ability to accept open donations.
We can purchase high-end skybox software and hire someone to complete a vast set of perfectly on-theme and high quality skyboxes for the use of all mappers.
We can hire someone to port a more powerful map editor to support Xonotic mapping...
... Or someone to finish proper implementation of ODE physics library and ragdolls.
... Or someone who has 3D tracking hardware to create new player animations along with Morphed's playermodels.
... etc etc etc, there are quite many things which were infeasible previously yet can be reached with a development fund.