PDA

View Full Version : Voting System & Mission Stat Log Script



SoW Reddog
Dec-04-2013, 14:18
This script is designed to be used to allow players on a server running a "Clod Commander" type program to vote to finish a map earlier than it's slated time and thereby move to the next one in the rotation. It also records in a MissionLogFile.txt document a simple stat of how many wins by side and draws have happened, and displays it to players as they join the server. In the log file it also records the last 10 iterations of the mission, the start & end times, as well as the numbers of players voting to skip it, and the result of the vote.

Ideally this would be added to all missions on the server, and thereby allow players to skip to the mission they want to play, and allow server admin to review the mission balance and also remove from the rotation missions that are habitually being skipped.

All a player has to do is type !VoteSkip into the chatbar to register their vote. Voting twice doesn't do anything, and leaving the server removes your vote.

Please have a look and see if it makes sense. Obviously the ticktime criteria is for testing purposes, I'd suggest polling the current votes every 5 minutes just to keep any overhead to a minimum but it's probably not that onerous. There's examples for Red Win, Blue Win, Draw and the live code for Vote mission ends.

There's just one thing that I don't think is working correctly which is the code for TotalPlayers. It doesn't seem to be picking up player numbers when I host but I don't know if that's down to my setup or not so if someone could test it as well that'd be good.


using System.Text;
using System;
using System.Collections;
using maddox.game;
using maddox.game.world;
using maddox.GP;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel;
using System.Threading;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.IO;
using part;
using System.Runtime.InteropServices;
using System.Globalization;


//$reference parts/core/gamePlay.dll


public class Mission : AMission
{
#region variables for mission stats
//Do NOT Change Variables
public int RedWins = 0;
public int BlueWins = 0;
public int Draws = 0;
public DateTime DateTimeStarted = DateTime.Now;
public static string MissionLogFile = Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolde r.MyDocuments) + @"\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover - mod\missions\MissionFramework-Voting\MissionLog.txt"; //This is the temp mission filename that will be created
public DateTime DateTimeFinished = DateTime.Now;
public int NoVoted = 0;
public string VoteResult = "Not Skipped";
public int BlueObjectiveCount = 0;
public Dictionary<string,int> PlayersVoted = new Dictionary<string, int>();
//Changeable Variables
public int MinVotes = 0; //Minimum number of players voted to count the vote as valid. Suggest 5 as a base start.
public double PercVotes = 0.8; //Percentage of players to vote yes to carry the vote.
#endregion
#region voting specific functions inc chat reader
public void WriteLogFile(int ReadWrite) //1 = read, 2=write
{
if (File.Exists(MissionLogFile))
{
string LogFile = System.IO.File.ReadAllText(MissionLogFile);
if (ReadWrite == 1)
{

string line = LogFile.Substring(7, LogFile.IndexOf(';', 8) - 7);
string[] wins = line.Split(',');
RedWins = Convert.ToInt32(wins[0]);
BlueWins = Convert.ToInt32(wins[1]);
Draws = Convert.ToInt32(wins[2]);
}
LogFile = LogFile.Substring(LogFile.IndexOf("[Missions]")+11, LogFile.Length - (LogFile.IndexOf("[Missions]")+11));

string[] missions = LogFile.Split(new char[] {'\n'},StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

if (ReadWrite == 2)
{
File.Delete(MissionLogFile);
using (StreamWriter sw = File.CreateText(MissionLogFile))
{
sw.WriteLine("[Wins] " + RedWins + "," + BlueWins + "," + Draws + ";");
sw.WriteLine("[Missions]");
sw.WriteLine("1," + DateTimeStarted + "," + DateTimeFinished + "," + NoVoted + "," + VoteResult);
foreach(string linemission in missions)
{
string[] missionsdata = linemission.Split(',');
if (Convert.ToInt32(missionsdata[0]) == 9)
{
break;
}


sw.WriteLine(Convert.ToInt32(missionsdata[0]) + 1 + "," + missionsdata[1] + "," + missionsdata[2] + "," + missionsdata[3] + "," + missionsdata[4]);
}
}
}
}
else
{
if (ReadWrite == 2)
{
using (StreamWriter sw = File.CreateText(MissionLogFile))
{
sw.WriteLine("[Wins] " + RedWins + "," + BlueWins + "," + Draws + ";");
sw.WriteLine("[Missions]");
sw.WriteLine("1," + DateTimeStarted + "," + DateTimeFinished + "," + NoVoted + "," + VoteResult);
}
}
}
}
public override void OnBattleInit()
{

base.OnBattleInit();
if (GamePlay is GameDef)
{
(GamePlay as GameDef).EventChat += new GameDef.Chat(Mission_EventChat);
}
}
public void Mission_EventChat(IPlayer from, string msg)
{
if (msg.StartsWith("!VoteSkip"))
{
PlayersVoted.Remove(from.Name());
PlayersVoted.Add(from.Name(), 1);
GamePlay.gpLogServer(null, from.Name() + " voted to skip the map", new object[] { });

}

}
public void Chat(string line, IPlayer to)
{
if (GamePlay is GameDef)
{
(GamePlay as GameDef).gameInterface.CmdExec("chat " + line + " TO " + to.Name());
}
}
#endregion
#region "normal" functions
public override void OnBattleStarted()
{
base.OnBattleStarted();
if (File.Exists(MissionLogFile))
{
WriteLogFile(1);
}
}

public override void OnPlaceEnter(Player player, AiActor actor, int placeIndex)
{
base.OnPlaceEnter(player, actor, placeIndex);
WriteLogFile(1);
string enterText=string.Format("Current Mission Record: Red {0}: Blue {1}: Drawn {2}",RedWins,BlueWins,Draws);
GamePlay.gpHUDLogCenter(new Player[] { player }, enterText);

}

public override void OnTickGame()
{

if (Time.tickCounter() == ((32 * 60) * 1))// check for voting criteria
{
//Player[] players = GamePlay.gpRemotePlayers();
int TotalPlayers = GamePlay.gpRemotePlayers().Length;
//TotalPlayers = players.GetUpperBound(0) + 1;
GamePlay.gpLogServer(null, Convert.ToString(TotalPlayers), new object[] { });

if ((PlayersVoted.Count / TotalPlayers) >= PercVotes && PlayersVoted.Count >= MinVotes)
{//Voting Criteria Passed so end mission and draw, add to log file
NoVoted = PlayersVoted.Count;
VoteResult = "Skipped";
DateTimeFinished = DateTime.Now;
WriteLogFile(2);
}
}

//Red Victory Code
//NoVoted = PlayersVoted.Count;
//VoteResult = "Not Skipped";
//DateTimeFinished = DateTime.Now;
//RedWins++;
//WriteLogFile(2);

//Blue Victory Code
//NoVoted = PlayersVoted.Count;
//VoteResult = "Not Skipped";
//DateTimeFinished = DateTime.Now;
//BlueWins++;
//WriteLogFile(2);

//Draw Code
//NoVoted = PlayersVoted.Count;
//VoteResult = "Not Skipped";
//DateTimeFinished = DateTime.Now;
//Draws++;
//WriteLogFile(2);
}


public override void OnPlayerDisconnected(Player player, string diagnostic)
{
PlayersVoted.Remove(player.Name());
}
#endregion
}

SoW Reddog
Dec-05-2013, 11:55
Bit surprised there's been no replies. Either no one understands what I'm on about or no one cares? :recon:

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-05-2013, 12:06
I understand the voting system can be usefull, but in the end its not to the mission builder to decide to apply it, but for the server administrator to decide if he wants it or not.

Dont get me wrong, but i really think it should be a Server decision. Of course having the tool to do it leaves that option open.

- as many have stated and argued, some think 6 hours mission is too long, others think its "decent" time. One of the reasons presented to be 6 hours long is because of the go and come back trips of bombers, they take over 1 hour (or more) to reach target and another hour to come back. If all missions were sucessfull the bomber can make 3 runs during a mission time. Isnt that long is it?

- Leaving the optiont to "vote" during a bomb run i easily imagine its very annoying, by taking over a hour to reach a target and someone proposes a voting to switch mission.

In the end i finish as i started, should be a Server side decision.

EG14_Marcast
Dec-05-2013, 12:34
I completely agree with the voting system. My suggestion anyway is to make it possible after a certain time from the map start, let's say one hour. This is why some maps maybe look boring at the beginning, but they can get better after a time. What Lolsav says it's right, it wouldn't be nice to see your long flight interrupted by a poll. It can happen, but I can't think to any solution for this.

Kling
Dec-05-2013, 15:46
Whoa I missed this this thread!! Very good idea Reddog and a very needed feature!!! Hope you can get it working on all then maps!! ;)

Kling
Dec-05-2013, 15:50
I completely agree with the voting system. My suggestion anyway is to make it possible after a certain time from the map start, let's say one hour. This is why some maps maybe look boring at the beginning, but they can get better after a time. What Lolsav says it's right, it wouldn't be nice to see your long flight interrupted by a poll. It can happen, but I can't think to any solution for this.

As true as that is, easily 90% of the players DONT fly bombers, and it wouldnt make sense either to skip a voting system only to keep the remaining 10%, bomber pilots happy.

I was wondering as well, why the bomber pilots cant have airspawn? Spawn them at 4000m or something. It would make their missions a lot shorter and less tiresome.

9./JG52_J-HAT
Dec-05-2013, 16:21
If you get shot down it ends the same. If someone bombs the target before you can reach it, it ends the same too.

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-05-2013, 16:48
Hope you can get it working on all then maps!! ;)

I hope not.


If you get shot down it ends the same. If someone bombs the target before you can reach it, it ends the same too.

Err, but thats working for a common purpose or else why would even have that nasty thing called "objectives"?

9./JG52_J-HAT
Dec-05-2013, 16:52
Hehe yeah, but it ends as abruptly. And is not uncommon.

The most fun sorties I've had as a bomber pilot have been attacking the last target, when you have to have separate waves just minutes apart because you get shot down.

Kling
Dec-05-2013, 17:06
I hope not

Why wouldnt you want people to be able to vote a new map? If the majority dont like a certain map, why should people play it?
Think winter map, getting way too dark, with purple sky etc and another 4h to go. In this situation the vote function is superb to have.

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-05-2013, 17:22
Why wouldnt you want people to be able to vote a new map? If the majority dont like a certain map, why should people play it?
Think winter map, getting way too dark, with purple sky etc and another 4h to go. In this situation the vote function is superb to have.

In that particular situation its a question of adjusting the time to avoid the situation.

As i stated before i believe it should be a Server decision, not enforced by the map.

9./JG52 Jamz Dackel
Dec-05-2013, 17:22
Why wouldnt you want people to be able to vote a new map? If the majority dont like a certain map, why should people play it?
Think winter map, getting way too dark, with purple sky etc and another 4h to go. In this situation the vote function is superb to have.

Agreed..

Some missions do need this option imo

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-05-2013, 17:31
Agreed..

Some missions do need this option imo

We cannot have a selfish mindset. Some like more of some missions, some not. About missions, the more, the merrier. I dont like all missions, but i try to find something i like to do on those. I find option a bit unfair actually. And please make no mistake, its not about democracy. Its about of having respect for those who spend countless hours trying to make something to evryones enjoyment. Its about of giving a opportunitie to those who like something diffrent (that is not the of majority taste) to have a chance to fly the mission. Some leave, some enter, but in the end we cannot please evryone at same time, isnt it?

Now eat your vegetables :P

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-05-2013, 17:38
As true as that is, easily 90% of the players DONT fly bombers, and it wouldnt make sense either to skip a voting system only to keep the remaining 10%, bomber pilots happy.

I was wondering as well, why the bomber pilots cant have airspawn? Spawn them at 4000m or something. It would make their missions a lot shorter and less tiresome.

I skipped this statement! Thats a awfull and horrendus idea behind that argument. Hey we are 90% "normal" people, so to hell with handicaps ones. The majority is not always right. Hitler was elected by a vast majority and see what happened!

About airstart... why not to make it all airstart? Cmon, is this a full real server or not? Bombers like immersion feeling too.

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-05-2013, 17:42
I have to agree with Lolsav. Missions on the ATAG server are put there by the server admins to mix things up a bit so that it's not always the exact same situation. The whole purpose behind ATAG was to provide a server that everyone could enjoy at the same time; by adding a voting system you'd be adding choice into the mix and that will only serve to divide the people that are flying on the server.

If there's a mission you don't like, create a post on the forums about it. My fear is that the majority of "fighter jocks" will trump the minority of bomber pilots and objectives based players who need/want targets to destroy.

So tell me then, what mission would come up that you guys would want to skip? What are your reasons for wanting to do this?

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-05-2013, 17:44
As true as that is, easily 90% of the players DONT fly bombers, and it wouldnt make sense either to skip a voting system only to keep the remaining 10%, bomber pilots happy.

I was wondering as well, why the bomber pilots cant have airspawn? Spawn them at 4000m or something. It would make their missions a lot shorter and less tiresome.


Wow really Kling? For those of us that don't have a 10 minute attention span; taking off, climbing up, finding our target, hitting the target, and returning home is what makes this sim so enjoyable.

Sounds like you guys just want to play War Thunder.

Kling
Dec-05-2013, 17:51
I skipped this statement! Thats a awfull and horrendus idea behind that argument. Hey we are 90% "normal" people, so to hell with handicaps ones. The majority is not always right. Hitler was elected by a vast majority and see what happened!

About airstart... why not to make it all airstart? Cmon, is this a full real server or not? Bombers like immersion feeling too.

Now, dont be rediculous Lolsav. Dont take it too far! This is a computer gam not real life nazism.
All that im saying is that it makes sense to please the majority of the players. Othereise they will leave jjst so a few % of players can spend 1h climbing to altutude and head for targets.

ATAG is far from full real. After all the germans did not invade England and take the airfield at littlestone.
In real life there were no constant low alt furballs at Hawkinge.
In real life human flown bombers did no come 1 at the time but in formation.

If bomber pilots dont want to fly long missions, give them the option to airspawn just like the AI bombers do. Then you cal always choose whether you want to fly spend one hour to get to the target by climbing up to altitude or if you want to spawn at alt and head straight for the target.

For me it makes complete sense to have a vote function. We had it on the Warclouds server in il21946 and it was very well used and was very appreciated!

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-05-2013, 17:56
Sorry Kling, but on that reply you still left out the 10%, as you named them. I think we are getting to a point where we "agree to disagree". If you dont want to understand my point of view why should i understand yours?

My point: Dont be selfish and let others fly diffrent maps.

In my opinion it should be a Server decision.

Kling
Dec-06-2013, 04:20
Well idealy Lolsav, fighter pilots would be dependant on bomber pilots! As it is now, most players would not even noticed if there were no bomber pilots on a map as long as there are AI bombers.
However, if we were dependant on bomber pilots, it would maybe be different.
Say bomber pilots would attack aircraft factories and destroying that factory would reduce the other sides capability to produce fighter planes.
In this case we would be desperate to have bomber pilots.

Example: Destroy the Spit1a100oct factory and there will be no Spit1a100oct for the next 60mins.

Destroy the 109E4 factory and the blue side has only 109E3s.

Give each side 4 fuel factories.
Destroy a fuel factory and that side can only take 100%/ 75%/50%/25%/0%fuel per factory for 30min

This would also affect the game play as if one side can only can take max25% fuel, they will not be able to go offensive.
This way the same map can always becomve very different an never the same.

Anyway im just dreaming here...

EG14_Marcast
Dec-06-2013, 04:38
So tell me then, what mission would come up that you guys would want to skip? What are your reasons for wanting to do this?

I must say that I'm mainly a bomber pilot, but I play all missions. The only missions I would like to skip are the ones that have no possible solution before the end: this happens sometimes i.e. in the tanks' map, when nobody can find the last target, or others when there aren't enough players. The same maps can anyway be enjoying in other situations.

SoW Reddog
Dec-06-2013, 04:39
When I posted yesterday I didn't expect this. Should have kept my mouth shut.

The forums are full of people complaining about missions being too long, boring, lacking variety, map you want to play not coinciding with the timeslot you fly, too dark/wrong time etc. What's been done about it? Nothing. I offered a solution. Now I wish I'd not bothered. Lesson learned.

EG14_Marcast
Dec-06-2013, 05:03
If there's a mission you don't like, create a post on the forums about it. My fear is that the majority of "fighter jocks" will trump the minority of bomber pilots and objectives based players who need/want targets to destroy.


That's the real point. There are two kinds of ATAG players: dogfight fans who like quick, pure action missions (they are the vast majority), and bomber pilots who love to fly also long missions from take off to landing, taking pleasure from choosing the better tactics, the right route and approach...I'm one of these. Honestly, sometimes I'm in a "dogfighter mood" too, but I wouldn't like to fly only quick maps.

I see a possible solution: to make uneffective a negative poll on a map if there are anyway enough players who want to go on with that map. If there are 50 players and 20 want to go on, let the map stay. If there are 20 and only 6 want to go on, let's change the map. I know that this is going against the democracy principle, but I think is the only way to meet the tastes of all of us.

SoW Reddog
Dec-06-2013, 05:27
That's the real point. There are two kinds of ATAG players: dogfight fans who like quick, pure action missions (they are the vast majority), and bomber pilots who love to fly also long missions from take off to landing, taking pleasure from choosing the better tactics, the right route and approach...I'm one of these. Honestly, sometimes I'm in a "dogfighter mood" too, but I wouldn't like to fly only quick maps.

I see a possible solution: to make uneffective a negative poll on a map if there are anyway enough players who want to go on with that map. If there are 50 players and 20 want to go on, let the map stay. If there are 20 and only 6 want to go on, let's change the map. I know that this is going against the democracy principle, but I think is the only way to meet the tastes of all of us.

Reading this now, I wonder if it's possible that people haven't understood how the script works. You ONLY vote if you want to skip. there's no "No" vote, you just don't vote.

Examples based on min 5 and 80%.

Example 1. 20 players on the server. 2 players vote to skip. Nothing happens. 3 more vote to skip, we're now over the threshold of 5 minimum votes, but there's still only 25% of the players wanting to skip, so again, nothing happens. Only when 16 or more players have voted to skip, will the map actually move.

Example 2. 5 players on the server, 1 vote's to skip, waits 5 minutes and then leaves. a new player joins, and 3 players vote to skip. The initial players vote does NOT count as he's left the server, so there's still only 60% voting to skip.

I very much doubt that many missions will be skipped, that's the whole point. However, on the missions that there have been considerable drop off in server numbers, then we'll be able to track the votes and number of skips, and take that mission out of the rotation or tweak it to solve the reason it's being skipped.

I honestly don't understand how giving players choice can be a bad thing. I do agree it needs to be a server initiative though, and implemented on all missions otherwise it's a bit redundant.

Kling
Dec-06-2013, 05:52
Completely agree with you Reddog!!

EG14_Marcast
Dec-06-2013, 06:10
Examples based on min 5 and 80%.

Example 1. 20 players on the server. 2 players vote to skip. Nothing happens. 3 more vote to skip, we're now over the threshold of 5 minimum votes, but there's still only 25% of the players wanting to skip, so again, nothing happens. Only when 16 or more players have voted to skip, will the map actually move.

Example 2. 5 players on the server, 1 vote's to skip, waits 5 minutes and then leaves. a new player joins, and 3 players vote to skip. The initial players vote does NOT count as he's left the server, so there's still only 60% voting to skip.



This is perfect for me :thumbsup:

Mysticpuma
Dec-06-2013, 06:27
Have to agree with Kling on this. When it was used on Warclouds there were bomber and fighter pilots and some large maps with lots of targets. Bomber crews often flew high and got into formation before attacking targets with Fighters in high and low cover. It was rare for a map.to.be rotated, but it happened mainly when a map with an unpopular plane set turned up or one in which it was known to be easily closed (completed).

The thing is, if you did run a vote system, maybe it would be worth a couple of further additions?

Once the map.rotates, the first 3 minutes it is active, players can poll for a map change. That way if an unpopular map (look it's not every mission/map that everyone likes) rotates into gameplay, then there is a chance to skip it before everyone gets going. It would also be possible then for Server admin to remove the leased played/most rotated maps?

Secondly, once the map.is running (after the first 3 minutes) it can't be rotated for at-least 2-hours. If a vote is called after that time and passed, the map wont rotate for a further 20-minutes. This should at-least give airborne bombers a chance to make the bomb run?

The thing is, with server stats the way they are, there is no reason to RTB as they score for hitting the target?

I agree with Kling and like the idea Reddog.

Cheers, MP

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-06-2013, 07:17
@Reddog: I have nothing against your work, in fact you can produce more scripts like these, im sure they will be welcomed. Im discussing the principle, not the script. For me, map rotation its a Server decision.

@Mystic: You kinda disapoint me with this sentence Mystic


The thing is, with server stats the way they are, there is no reason to RTB as they score for hitting the target?

Not evryone live for stats. Fullfilling the mission and getting back to base it is important to many players.

@Kling and Marc: I will accept any decision that admins will have to make towards implementing or not this script. But untill then i will argue its value and defend a opposite side. The "i dont like this map" its a weak argument for me, and as i stated i find it selfish. I might not enjoy map A, but what about the others who do? I dont really appreciate the tyrany of majority. Never did, never will.

SoW Reddog
Dec-06-2013, 08:50
@Reddog: I have nothing against your work, in fact you can produce more scripts like these, im sure they will be welcomed. Im discussing the principle, not the script. For me, map rotation its a Server decision.

@Mystic: You kinda disapoint me with this sentence Mystic



Not evryone live for stats. Fullfilling the mission and getting back to base it is important to many players.

@Kling and Marc: I will accept any decision that admins will have to make towards implementing or not this script. But untill then i will argue its value and defend a opposite side. The "i dont like this map" its a weak argument for me, and as i stated i find it selfish. I might not enjoy map A, but what about the others who do? I dont really appreciate the tyrany of majority. Never did, never will.

Lolsav, get off your high horse. If you can't see the value in the principle then quite frankly i can't be bothered discussing it with you anymore.

"You can please some of the people some of the time" .......unless on ATAG where you seemingly can please no one most of the time.

AKA_Recon
Dec-06-2013, 10:03
I'm 100% for a vote feature - hope it gets added to ATAG soon!

Nice work !

9./JG52_J-HAT
Dec-06-2013, 10:05
Reddog, I 'm with you there regarding the voting system.

AKA_Recon
Dec-06-2013, 10:07
We cannot have a selfish mindset. Some like more of some missions, some not. About missions, the more, the merrier. I dont like all missions, but i try to find something i like to do on those. I find option a bit unfair actually. And please make no mistake, its not about democracy. Its about of having respect for those who spend countless hours trying to make something to evryones enjoyment. Its about of giving a opportunitie to those who like something diffrent (that is not the of majority taste) to have a chance to fly the mission. Some leave, some enter, but in the end we cannot please evryone at same time, isnt it?

Now eat your vegetables :P

Let's face it - your a saint :)

As far as me, I haven't flown in 2 weeks, I am so fed up with the current map rotation I've found other things to do (unfortunately).

Every time I show up to fly it's the same map - and there aren't any other good options.

Let's face it - this map vote is basically giving the community a chance to decided vs. a server admin.

As far as the map makers, perhaps it's a good way to get their maps vetted... not every painting is a work of art.

9./JG52_J-HAT
Dec-06-2013, 10:58
Thanks for the input, Recon. I thought me and the guy from Siberia were the only ones getting this problem.

I was thinking about talking to my boss about changing my work schedule, so I could get to fly different maps during the week.

EG14_Marcast
Dec-06-2013, 11:10
@Kling and Marc: I will accept any decision that admins will have to make towards implementing or not this script. But untill then i will argue its value and defend a opposite side. The "i dont like this map" its a weak argument for me, and as i stated i find it selfish. I might not enjoy map A, but what about the others who do? I dont really appreciate the tyrany of majority. Never did, never will.

Lolsav, I understand your point and I'd agree with you if we were talking about a 50%+1 majority, but here we are prospecting a 80%....that would be a minority tyrany, which is even worse I think. I agree with Reddog, in this case very few maps would be skipped as I've never heard such a number of players saying they didn't like a map running on. So, this could be a way to skip only those maps that really cannot be closed before time expiration. And making everybody happy is quite easy indeed: it's enough that also in the longest duration maps, even a possible Le Havre - Southampton fight, spawn points for fighters at Hawkinge and Wissant will be provided, to be used by those who want just quick dogfight.

9./JG52 Ziegler
Dec-06-2013, 11:29
I'm with Recon on this one.
I don't see what the problem would be?

9./JG52 Jamz Dackel
Dec-06-2013, 11:53
2 hours in a week says it all for me

Bear Pilot
Dec-06-2013, 12:55
Besides voting to skip maps that people don't like, I also see a potential to skip maps that come up regularly at certain times.

I remember a period this past August where I flew nothing but the presumably early BoB Tonbridge Wells, Redhill Bomber, Lewes train station, Staplehurst armor concentration mission and it was always followed by the Dunkirk mission. My flying time was in the evenings between 8 or 9 until 12 or 1 in the evenings EST. After one week it got very old, after two I couldn't take it anymore and so I took a long hiatus.

I've noticed the mission rotation tends to get onto a timed schedule unintentionally. I'm sure this is for a number of reasons. One of the main reasons, I believe, is a lack of player bombers to end a mission so maps just time expire, especially in lesser played timezones.

It's not too hard to believe. Say there's five missions all with 6 hour time limits. Two of them are completed, on average, three hours in. The other three end in a draw after time expires. Thus the rough 24 hour clock.

I think the ability to skip missions can have a place but I would think it would certainly need to be an overwhelming majority.

However, in the case I described above, the real value would be in players having some control over mission variety within the server rotation. No matter how much you may enjoy a map it will eventually get old and so I think for that reason if, no other, the ability to skip a map is at the very least a viable option.

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-06-2013, 13:50
I get the feeling that you guys are against the early BOB missions because of the lack of E4s and IIas. I happen to enjoy these earlier missions more because the available planesets are much more evenly balanced. Once the late planes come in it makes most the earlier planes obsolete and not worth using.

9./JG52 Jamz Dackel
Dec-06-2013, 13:51
Its a vote isn't it where a overwhelming majority vote on a map to be changed and its changed...I don't understand what the issue is

Of course you upset some people, you upset some people with rotations, deaths, just lifted and the map ends, getting shot down etc etc, it happens

Its not like we are leaving it to one person to change a map to his liking, its a voting system where people vote lol

9./JG52_J-HAT
Dec-06-2013, 14:17
I get the feeling that you guys are against the early BOB missions because of the lack of E4s and IIas. I happen to enjoy these earlier missions more because the available planesets are much more evenly balanced. Once the late planes come in it makes most the earlier planes obsolete and not worth using.


What makes you say this? I see only one post mentioning the early bob mission and the main point is variety (read not having to fly the same map everytime), not if it's this or that map.

Bear Pilot
Dec-06-2013, 15:01
I get the feeling that you guys are against the early BOB missions because of the lack of E4s and IIas. I happen to enjoy these earlier missions more because the available planesets are much more evenly balanced. Once the late planes come in it makes most the earlier planes obsolete and not worth using.

If you're referring to my post, it's not about the early BoB planeset. Like J-HAT said it's about mission variety. Flying the same missions over and over again at the same time every night quickly becomes very monotonous to say the least. I don't think any of us would dispute that.

Honestly, if it was the same mission with E-4/N's and IIa's the mission would have become unbearable even faster. I personally don't have any issue with an E-4 vs. Ia 100 oct. To me each has its advantages at different altitudes (I say that knowing the 100 oct has an overheating issue and is being improved as we speak so it will be correct).

I greatly enjoy the earlier missions as well but Recon and I have both stated, eventually the same same same over and over again drove us away for a time. That being said, I realize that at the time I took a break, TF 4.0 was the top priority and that's the way it should have been.

My point is, in the future, maybe this skip ability can prevent some repetitiveness. That's all.

AKA_Recon
Dec-07-2013, 08:55
I get the feeling that you guys are against the early BOB missions because of the lack of E4s and IIas. I happen to enjoy these earlier missions more because the available planesets are much more evenly balanced. Once the late planes come in it makes most the earlier planes obsolete and not worth using.

Nothing to do with the planesets for me.

I love the variety - (if anything I love the early planesets!)

AKA_Recon
Dec-07-2013, 08:58
Can I suggest, if not already - that the voting require a certain majority of voters, and a reasonable amount of time in which a vote could be cast

Meaning, if I'm in some dogfight, I need more time to cast a vote than what you see in some FPS games! And a reminder every so often that a vote is in progress

(A vote not casts should be a 'no' as well)

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-07-2013, 09:59
I've been combing this thread for reasons that people would want to vote to change a map and I must say that I still haven't heard any really good excuse for doing so.

Below is what I've taken from this thread:


If the majority dont like a certain map, why should people play it?
Think winter map, getting way too dark, with purple sky etc and another 4h to go. In this situation the vote function is superb to have.

This is the best reason I can find and the only one I'd agree with, but you do realize that the "getting way too dark" is not intended; it was a side effect of switching the mission to the winter map. It would be better to call attention to this and have the server admin adjust the time the mission runs so that it doesn't get dark at all or until the very end.


Agreed..

Some missions do need this option imo

This just sounds like you don't like the mission, so which mission is it and why don't you like it?


ATAG is far from full real. After all the germans did not invade England and take the airfield at littlestone.
In real life there were no constant low alt furballs at Hawkinge.
In real life human flown bombers did no come 1 at the time but in formation.


Ok, so you don't like the "Sealion" alternate reality mission; why don't you like it though?


The only missions I would like to skip are the ones that have no possible solution before the end: this happens sometimes i.e. in the tanks' map, when nobody can find the last target, or others when there aren't enough players. The same maps can anyway be enjoying in other situations.

This just sounds like "I just joined the server and the other team has spent hours trying to win the mission, we're too far behind now so I want to change the map before we lose." That's hardly fair to the people that have spent hours working on the objectives. It is possible to find the last target, it's difficult but it can be done; keep trying.




Every time I show up to fly it's the same map - and there aren't any other good options.

Let's face it - this map vote is basically giving the community a chance to decided vs. a server admin.

As far as the map makers, perhaps it's a good way to get their maps vetted... not every painting is a work of art.

So there are maps that you really don't like on the server; which ones are they and why don't you like them??? I'm not buying this "it's always the same map", I played on the server every night from Nov 17 - Nov 30 and I don't think it was ever the same mission two nights in a row.


So, this could be a way to skip only those maps that really cannot be closed before time expiration.

If the mission can't be closed before time expiration then there can't be much time left in it anyway.


Like J-HAT said it's about mission variety. Flying the same missions over and over again at the same time every night quickly becomes very monotonous to say the least. I don't think any of us would dispute that.


If we reduce the number of missions on the server to omit the ones some people don't like it's only going to make the few missions that are left get boring for you.

The thing I don't understand is, if most of you are fighter jocks and ATAG missions give you an airfield, an airplane, and open sky to go find a dogfight; what do the objectives matter to you? The objectives, the season, and the time of day are the only things that are going to change with a new mission, so what does it matter which mission is currently running? People have mentioned dogfights low over Hawkinge as being a sore point, but it's the players doing that, not the mission.

I have to be honest with you, I'm getting sick of the players in this game; not the missions. Just last night 3 spits were attacking AI German bombers and myself and Rall went over to intercept. We show up and start to attack the spits but they didn't seem to care one bit, they just kept attacking the bombers and ignored us completely; it's all about the stats page for some.

The ATAG missions have been designed by only a handful of people with limited time to create them, if you think you can do better then create and submit some of your own. Bliss, Salmo, Wolf, and Reddog can tell you that it's impossible to make a mission that everyone will like, but they're doing great work that some will love and some won't. Some missions take time to fully appreciate and you won't develop your appreciation unless you play them. We have this benefit of playing missions over and over again that the real BOB pilots didn't have, use that to your advantage. If you're sick of low level furballs over Hawkinge, don't go there. The map we play on is huge and though it may seem that way, not all players are over Hawkinge low. I spend most nights that I'm in a fighter at 7000m over England looking for high altitude Spits and Hurricanes to engage with, I do this because that's where I find the best pilots to fight with since those that are low over friendly territory have either just taken off, or have no appreciation for a good 1 on 1 dogfight. All the best fights on the ATAG server happen at +3000m.

If you do the same thing in every mission it's going to get boring no matter what. I've extended my enjoyment of this game by learning new aircraft and techniques, if all you do it fly Spits and 109s then it's going to burn you out. Learn the Blennie if you don't want to fly Blue; if you do fly Blue, learn the bombers. Very few people have a diverse planeset to choose from, so no wonder it's boring. Level bombing adds a whole new aspect to this sim and you're denying yourself a challenge and a lot of fun if you just fly fighters and fighters only.

EG14_Marcast
Dec-07-2013, 10:32
This just sounds like "I just joined the server and the other team has spent hours trying to win the mission, we're too far behind now so I want to change the map before we lose." That's hardly fair to the people that have spent hours working on the objectives. It is possible to find the last target, it's difficult but it can be done; keep trying.

Keller, I can tell you that the stats or even winning a map is not my main interest in this game. I enjoy it when I make a good mission, hit the target and get back to the base, the better if flying with some mate. If we win it's good,if we lose it will be for the next time. One night I was flying a Blenheim in the Convoys map, the only bomber pilot and there were only 3 other players on Red figthers, no one on TS. The Blues had only 5 players, all on 109s. The only target left for Reds were the Ju88s at Oye-Plage that were impossible to hit as some 109s stayed there. Impossible to get escort as the Red fighters didn't even listen to the chat. The Blues had no bomber pilots to finish their targets. It was already dark with more than one hour still to play. This is what I mean when I talk about maps impossible to close.

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-07-2013, 10:35
Ok, well that's a problem with the mission and someone needs to call attention to it. It's not intended to get dark like that.

AKA_Recon
Dec-07-2013, 11:55
Keller, plain and simple: changing undesirable maps.

1.

Think winter map, getting way too dark, with purple sky etc and another 4h to go. In this situation the vote function is superb to have.

2.

So there are maps that you really don't like on the server; which ones are they and why don't you like them???

As far as drawing attention - it's been done. I've PM, I've been PM'd when I've brought it up. I quit flying because of the same map on every night I come to fly. My entire squadron is not interested in the Littlestone invasion 'quake map' - driving tanks into hangers to kill people - it's silly. Secondly, the nighttime map. Which I believe I brought up in other section of forum and I am certain the comment was 'leave nighttime mission for offline players'.

Here is the problem as I understand it:

And with Bliss away for so long, the reason was 'he isn't here to fix the rotation'. That is a bottleneck, the server shouldn't depend on one person being around to change the map. Basically these undesirable missions were put in with TF 4.0. They have issues. Then Bliss is gone, it can't be fixed. It's a problem.

This is a proactive step enabling the people on the server to change the map. There are not any ulterior motives.

If it was my dream world, we'd have multiple servers running with different setups for different people - but we don't have the numbers (at least in my timezone).

The numbers after TF 4 were high even EST, then we had these undesirable conditions and maps were brought in, and it's been killjoy on a great 4.0 release as far as I'm concerned.

AKA_Recon
Dec-07-2013, 12:01
ie.
http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6970

ie.
http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6866

Both maps become a 'vulchfest' as there are not any bombers to be found. If I wish to help the Red team win the map my options
are to either stay low over Hawk/Lympne or go low over the enemy airfields. Those are the only options to winning either of those
maps.

I thought we were trying to change this behavior.

This is just my opinion, but taking away the AI bomber groups has turned this into a 'quake' server and it's quite disappointing.


ie.
http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7274

Everytime I get on-line I get strictly into the snow and frost. And it is so dark there that my eyes are been breaking

Then we have other map setups that are encouraged and people want - ie. Operation Homeplate, London Raids v2 (http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6627&page=5)

Then we have interesting missions being created like here: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7149

Maybe I am missing the obvious, but people come to forum and talk positive about some, others negative - it isn't hard to see the pattern from the posts.

Let's not say 'bring up what you don't like' - my response would be 'read what is already being requested!'

AKA_Recon
Dec-07-2013, 12:03
Ok, well that's a problem with the mission and someone needs to call attention to it. It's not intended to get dark like that.

Yes, and a simple fix as well when this happens is to enable a way to let the guys on the server make a map switch :)

There can be many reasons, and it takes a majority I assume, it's not like guys are going to switch the map at will.

AKA_Recon
Dec-07-2013, 12:11
The thing I don't understand is, if most of you are fighter jocks and ATAG missions give you an airfield, an airplane, and open sky to go find a dogfight; what do the objectives matter to you? The objectives, the season, and the time of day are the only things that are going to change with a new mission, so what does it matter which mission is currently running? People have mentioned dogfights low over Hawkinge as being a sore point, but it's the players doing that, not the mission.

I have to be honest with you, I'm getting sick of the players in this game; not the missions. Just last night 3 spits were attacking AI German bombers and myself and Rall went over to intercept. We show up and start to attack the spits but they didn't seem to care one bit, they just kept attacking the bombers and ignored us completely; it's all about the stats page for some.

Second paragraph - mission bad design then. Battle of Britain involved killing bombers attacking England. If Allies are to ignore this and let England get blasted, while there is a set of 3 hangers deep in England that determines the setup (which , last night, AKA defended and prevented Axis from destroying this target - yep...)

Your impression is we are ignoring you - my impression is 'Axis don't get that protecting their bombers matter, all they care about is vulching Hawkinge'.

Many ideas have been brought forth to encourage doing missions, most are shot down.

See, I see the reverse here, people here like me want to see better mission design and we don't want the maps that don't encourage it.

When I went to German comms during operation homeplate, all the Axis left and didn't defend me in a He111, they let me get vulched in France. They complained.

Sorry you are sick of the players. If at least you have a good playable map, those that enjoy accomplishing the missions will. Those that won't - they won't. But least make the missions fun to fly in.

ie. you know I fly Blenheim . Making me fly to a base in England to destroy tanks by making suicide missions for 3 hours is just complete killjoy.

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-07-2013, 13:54
My entire squadron is not interested in the Littlestone invasion 'quake map' - driving tanks into hangers to kill people - it's silly.

Why is this silly and why does your squad not like the mission?

Tanks and vehicles are being utilized for the first time in a mission, this is a great new step for Cliffs of Dover! Vehicles move at ~30km/h, planes move at 400-500km/h, not sure how vehicles could be a big problem for you guys. If there's a vehicle at a friendly airbase, spawn elsewhere and go get him. You guys have killed me many times while I was holding one of your bases, that has to be satisfying for you? Since it takes about 30 minutes for a vehicle to get to the closest enemy airbase it's not like it really becomes a big issue. I happen to really enjoy the Operation Sealion mission, in fact I think I've flown a plane on that mission about 2 times; I much prefer the vehicle element.

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-07-2013, 13:59
Keller, I can tell you that the stats or even winning a map is not my main interest in this game. I enjoy it when I make a good mission, hit the target and get back to the base, the better if flying with some mate. If we win it's good,if we lose it will be for the next time. One night I was flying a Blenheim in the Convoys map, the only bomber pilot and there were only 3 other players on Red figthers, no one on TS. The Blues had only 5 players, all on 109s. The only target left for Reds were the Ju88s at Oye-Plage that were impossible to hit as some 109s stayed there. Impossible to get escort as the Red fighters didn't even listen to the chat. The Blues had no bomber pilots to finish their targets. It was already dark with more than one hour still to play. This is what I mean when I talk about maps impossible to close.

Again, this is an issue with players not missions. What makes you think that if the mission flips players will suddenly be interested in escorting bombers and taking out objectives? Everytime the mission rotates the server loses a percentage of it's population; and since we all want players on the server, the less often a mission rotates the better.

Marmus
Dec-07-2013, 14:01
I think ALL types of scripts should be explored....it all makes the game better for someone. Arguements against or for a script should be set aside.

Just saying.....

Kling
Dec-07-2013, 14:13
Right now for example its the littlestone map. Its getting dark and there is another 5h to go... Constant low furballs over the field. Reds cant take off. Blues cant take off.
Guess its better to do something else a saturday night...

Edit: I struggle to get two friends to join tonight as long as this map is on.. :(

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-07-2013, 14:15
Lolsav, get off your high horse. If you can't see the value in the principle then quite frankly i can't be bothered discussing it with you anymore.

I have been a big supporter of your missions. Nothing to do with your work, wich i greatfully thank you, personnaly and in public. But with that sentence it feels like the input you have request us to give its bollocks. If i dont agree with it i should "get off my high horse"? What is that for? Or you want or you dont want evryones input, make up your mind.

I had hopes your request for input would be true. Im sorry if i disagree with you on this principle, but i trully do. For me it should be a Server decision. I feel like someone as decided to cook a real nice fish, but forgot to ask if i enjoy eating fish. Well, i dont. It can be the most precious meal ever, but i still dont like the taste of it, while others will cry for more.

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-07-2013, 14:16
Right now for example its the littlestone map. Its getting dark and there is another 5h to go... Constant low furballs over the field. Reds cant take off. Blues cant take off.
Guess its better to do something else a saturday night...

Its a winter map problem, not a mission problem. And if ppl work for the map objectives they will close it.

Bear Pilot
Dec-07-2013, 14:54
If we reduce the number of missions on the server to omit the ones some people don't like it's only going to make the few missions that are left get boring for you.



I think you're missing my point. It's not a matter of reducing missions. It's about being able to skip missions that have a tendency to come up during the same times in some timezones within the server rotation. I see this as a useful option to avoid bugging server admins, especially when they are unavailable.

9./JG52_J-HAT
Dec-07-2013, 15:44
Keller,

As far as the lack of variety due to the same maps being on during an specific time in a specific timezone, and our inputs not being credible because you had a different experience, there is an easy solutions. I am sure the server has some kind of log which logs mission starts, missions ends and what mission is being loaded. With time and date stamps. It would just be a matter of going through these logs and looking for a determined time period (say, 2 months), and looking how often an specific map or a same set of maps come up at a given time (say, 1800-2400 for EST, GMT or whatever). Than if one is willing, just change the order of rotation so other maps come up at different times.

But if we are not interested in questioning the status quo, or trying to change it for that matter, no need to even consider discussing changes to the server. Changes which could be improvements if some of them were tested.

Maybe a solution would be to make missions last 7 or 5 hours. It doesn't fit within 24 hours, like a duration of 6 or 3, which would make the missions seem more random (consider the winning times for the maps stay the same when it does happen), I'd say.

I already stated my opinion agout the voting and I won't discuss it any further.

SoW Reddog
Dec-07-2013, 15:48
Bliss has pm'd me to discuss this. He has thought he had fixed the timing issue on the winter maps. Is it the case that people are still experiencing problems or are we relating prior problems?

For my part I'm sorry for suggesting this, as it's proving to be a divisive issue.

@Lolsav. I simply meant you didn't need to keep belabouring the suggestion anyone was forcing something on you. I agree with your stance that it should be a server decision. Did it occur to you that I might have already solicited that avenue's opinion? I apologise for any offence you may have taken at my comments.

ATAG_Lolsav
Dec-07-2013, 15:50
I apologise for any offence you may have taken at my comments.

Apologies accepted, now give me a kiss :D

AKA_Recon
Dec-07-2013, 16:50
Why is this silly and why does your squad not like the mission?

Tanks and vehicles are being utilized for the first time in a mission, this is a great new step for Cliffs of Dover! Vehicles move at ~30km/h, planes move at 400-500km/h, not sure how vehicles could be a big problem for you guys. If there's a vehicle at a friendly airbase, spawn elsewhere and go get him. You guys have killed me many times while I was holding one of your bases, that has to be satisfying for you? Since it takes about 30 minutes for a vehicle to get to the closest enemy airbase it's not like it really becomes a big issue. I happen to really enjoy the Operation Sealion mission, in fact I think I've flown a plane on that mission about 2 times; I much prefer the vehicle element.

If I wanted to drive a tank around I'd play a tank sim. I'm not here to play Battlefield or whatever the latest 'spawn and die' games :)

At least if you want tanks put it on France soil and have some separation between bases. The bases are right next to each other, it's a vulcher map, drive a tank in a hanger map - take off and try to die as soon as you can.

It's simple, I just leave when the map is on and go have fun doing something else - there is nothing about the mission that I find interesting at all.

If you want tank battles, create an imaginary front line and put the bases further back and we can fly other and wave to them while we shoot down the enemy aircraft.

Again, great patch, bad mission - take it out and let us get back to having fun missions - there are great one available, but everytime I goto fly in EST, I have to sit through this 6 hour mission...

AKA_Recon
Dec-07-2013, 16:52
Bliss has pm'd me to discuss this. He has thought he had fixed the timing issue on the winter maps. Is it the case that people are still experiencing problems or are we relating prior problems?

For my part I'm sorry for suggesting this, as it's proving to be a divisive issue.

@Lolsav. I simply meant you didn't need to keep belabouring the suggestion anyone was forcing something on you. I agree with your stance that it should be a server decision. Did it occur to you that I might have already solicited that avenue's opinion? I apologise for any offence you may have taken at my comments.

Don't be sorry. I see two people that don't want it - and quite a few that do.

EG14_Marcast
Dec-07-2013, 16:56
...What makes you think that if the mission flips players will suddenly be interested in escorting bombers and taking out objectives?

Nothing, of course. But at least you get new missions and new targets.

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-07-2013, 17:54
If I wanted to drive a tank around I'd play a tank sim. I'm not here to play Battlefield or whatever the latest 'spawn and die' games :)

At least if you want tanks put it on France soil and have some separation between bases. The bases are right next to each other, it's a vulcher map, drive a tank in a hanger map - take off and try to die as soon as you can...


Lympne is not the only RAF airport available in this mission.

III./ZG76_Keller
Dec-07-2013, 18:03
Keller, I can tell you that the stats or even winning a map is not my main interest in this game. I enjoy it when I make a good mission, hit the target and get back to the base, the better if flying with some mate. If we win it's good,if we lose it will be for the next time. One night I was flying a Blenheim in the Convoys map, the only bomber pilot and there were only 3 other players on Red figthers, no one on TS. The Blues had only 5 players, all on 109s. The only target left for Reds were the Ju88s at Oye-Plage that were impossible to hit as some 109s stayed there. Impossible to get escort as the Red fighters didn't even listen to the chat. The Blues had no bomber pilots to finish their targets. It was already dark with more than one hour still to play. This is what I mean when I talk about maps impossible to close.


What makes you think that if the mission flips players will suddenly be interested in escorting bombers and taking out objectives?


Nothing, of course. But at least you get new missions and new targets.

So there are targets left but you have been unsuccessful in attacking them because of Blue's defensive efforts; so you want to change the map so you have new targets instead of trying harder to complete the last objective and win the mission?

So basically you would want to change the mission because the other team is frustrating you with their teamwork and efforts on the current one?

ATAG_Striker
Dec-07-2013, 18:39
okays guy so what ive read here so far is the griping that pilots dont like missions . let face it all this does is cause more fuel to the fire guys .
on the second note that we lack mission builders. 3rd note is that the ATAG staff will sort this out. thread is now locked :salute: