'Feelers Poll' - Random Crits or No Random Crits

What do you think the testing server default should be in terms of random crits?

  • I want the server default to have random crits ON

    Votes: 27 39.1%
  • I want the server default to have random crits OFF

    Votes: 27 39.1%
  • I am impartial, and don't frankly care whether they are off or on.

    Votes: 15 21.7%

  • Total voters
    69
  • Poll closed .

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,775
7,669
Report is here, GOOD NEWS. We can have author-controlled TF2M-only no-action-by-staff* crit choice. I actually went to test a different idea than I am posting, but as I was writing it out I realized a flaw in the method and so I am posting a similar but better solution.
*(required once, not every map an author wants changed)

Step 1: Our server config (which is ran every mapchange) is modified to include tf_weapon_criticals 1.

Step 2: A config named tf2mnocrits.cfg is placed on our server. It contains tf_weapon_criticals 0.

Step 3: Any author who wishes for crits to be turn off during testing on our servers needs only to use a logic_auto OnMapSpawn to tell a point_servercommand to exec tf2mnocrits and then the config that turns them off will be ran when their map runs.

This way people who want crits off can easily do so but have to make the effort themselves, and don't need to bug nor rely on any staff or test hosts remembering or having the ability to do it.
 

Fruity Snacks

Creator of blackholes & memes. Destroyer of forums
aa
Sep 5, 2010
6,394
5,571
Report is here, GOOD NEWS. We can have author-controlled TF2M-only no-action-by-staff* crit choice. I actually went to test a different idea than I am posting, but as I was writing it out I realized a flaw in the method and so I am posting a similar but better solution.
*(required once, not every map an author wants changed)

Step 1: Our server config (which is ran every mapchange) is modified to include tf_weapon_criticals 1.

Step 2: A config named tf2mnocrits.cfg is placed on our server. It contains tf_weapon_criticals 0.

Step 3: Any author who wishes for crits to be turn off during testing on our servers needs only to use a logic_auto OnMapSpawn to tell a point_servercommand to exec tf2mnocrits and then the config that turns them off will be ran when their map runs.

This way people who want crits off can easily do so but have to make the effort themselves, and don't need to bug nor rely on any staff or test hosts remembering or having the ability to do it.

commuity, respond to this.
 

seth

aa
May 31, 2013
1,019
851
If we were to do that, we'd have to make it clear somehow that that's how it works. You have to setup a logic_auto and do all that. I think it's reasonable, my hate for random crits is strong however and I just hate them on at all. But it gives the mapmakers, the people who should be making the choice, the choice. So that's fine with me as long as it is clear to the mapmakers that disabling random crits is an option.
 

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,775
7,669
You have to setup a logic_auto and do all that.
It is literally two entities and a single output. Any mapper should be more than capable, but it could still be provided as a prefab to drop-and-go.


Also, as the poll, and the other thread, and every poll and thread before has proven, this will always and forever be a divisive issue with no consensus and someone will always be unhappy. At least by doing this our existing policy (it can be changed if the author wants, nobody has ever said that SHOULDNT be allowed) is made vastly easier for people to use without having to rely on anyone else to do anything.
 

seth

aa
May 31, 2013
1,019
851
It is literally two entities and a single output. Any mapper should be more than capable, but it could still be provided as a prefab to drop-and-go.

No no, you misunderstand me. I was just referring to what you said as what should be explained to them, I'm not saying it'd be difficult for anyone to do.
 

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
This is the best option. Can we have that config echo to the chat that the current map has turned off crits? Is that possible?
 

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,775
7,669
I like that idea! While we're at it, can we put the command to turn fullbright off in there too? Every so often a fullbright map turns up and it's a pain in the neck to get rid of it.
mat_fullbright is a client side cheat. It cannot be altered without cheats enabled, and putting it in the server config won't have any bearing on the client's rendering settings.

This is the best option. Can we have that config echo to the chat that the current map has turned off crits? Is that possible?
Yeah, the config could use any of the sourcemod text features (or even just the console say command) to report the event. Due to the nature of TF2's entity handling, the logic_auto will re-fire upon the start of every round thereby printing out any message put into the config.

add one for cap crits
That's already a map setting. tf_gamerules input SetCTFCaptureBonusTime <seconds>
 

Turbo Lover

Fight me under Glasgow Central Station
aa
Feb 15, 2011
333
344
This is just an automated version of the system we have in place; authors ask imp hosts to disable crits and unless the imp host simply doesn't know how, they get them turned off. This is just cutting out the middleman.

It's a very convenient system, I think we should definitely set something like this up for our servers, but let's not all forget that we're discussing the DEFAULT server crit setting.

We can either have crits off by default, and turn them on with a point_servercommand, or vice versa; have them on by default and turn them off with a point_servercommand.

That's what the issue is, to turn crits on or off by default, don't all get distracted from that discussion just because Boojum came up with a good way of switching between them.
 

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
Isn't that irrelevant if we all start using this new system?

If everyone sets their preference in their maps, everyone gets what they want for their own testing data. The opinions of everyone else playing is irrelevant.
 

Geit

&#128156; I probably broke it &#128156;
aa
May 28, 2009
598
1,161
Personally I'd encourage against the use of point_servercommand in any situation. As a server hoster I'd view point_servecommand as akin to packaging malware with the map, it's just too easy for it to be abused if it's allowed (it's banned by our own gameday rules).

A more graceful solution would be to re-purpose an unused keyvalue on another common entity and have a server-side plugin scan for that, or to pack a "cfg/ctf_mapname.cfg" file within the BSP (though I'm not sure if the engine will execute packed config files).
 

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,775
7,669
That's what the issue is, to turn crits on or off by default, don't all get distracted from that discussion just because Boojum came up with a good way of switching between them.
Yes, I agree, I wasn't trying to derail it... but... the discussion isn't going to go anywhere. We've had this discussion. Again and again and again. There are people who REALLY want them and people who REALLY hate them. Neither side will be happy with a decision for the other, and some people claim they will leave if their preference is not chosen.

You mention the 20% that don't care and what the default will be in that case, but the poll does not quantify the time spent per voter. The vote of an author who puts out maps very often will have more server-time "weight" than one who rarely tests their map but plays all the time.
Even ignoring that, having the server "set to preference" 80% of the time is better majority than most politics require.

I voted no preference. Technically, I dislike crits, but I also believe they are a part of the game and should be on. With that bias on the table, if only 20% of the time will be default I don't see why falling back to "default to default" or the appeal to authority fallacy (Valve does it) is really that bad.
Do you have a suggestion for how to decide what the default is? This will never end democratically.
 

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,775
7,669
Personally I'd encourage against the use of point_servercommand in any situation. As a server hoster I'd view point_servecommand as akin to packaging malware with the map, it's just too easy for it to be abused if it's allowed (it's banned by our own gameday rules).

A more graceful solution would be to re-purpose an unused keyvalue on another common entity and have a server-side plugin scan for that, or to pack a "cfg/ctf_mapname.cfg" file within the BSP (though I'm not sure if the engine will execute packed config files).
My original idea was to include a packed config (which does work), but that both requires more explaining for people who don't know how as well as what I see as a higher chance of malicious behavior. "I am writing this file and the server will do everything I tell it to" vs "I am telling the server to set my preference".

I don't know if that would really be any more graceful. Anything a p_sc can do a config can do as well. Short of having specialized security plugins you can't really stop a map from doing something malicious.
(and I'm pretty sure I remember there being legitimate uses for p_sc, our rule isn't against the entity, but about doing certain things with it [as least it was, I created that rule way back when, dunno if staff opinion has changed])
 

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
Adding a keyvalue to tf_gamerules that a server plugin picks up seems like a better solution, infinitely less abusable.