tChr wrote:Allow any map for 1on1 as long as _both_ player agree to play it. I'm not sure how to do this in the interface, but I'll thinnk about it.

GreEn`mArine wrote:I'm not sure either how to realise that ...

How about making the challange into a 'handshake' (man i should never have read about network protocols )

Player A starts a challange by choosing Player B and his own map as now,
Player B can accept by choosing an other map, *
Player A has to confirm the challange. *

* here both player know what maps will be played and that they are ok with them. tChr is maybe right that then we might accept all maps, if its then bad to play blame the players that accepted them

esteel wrote:

tChr wrote:Allow any map for 1on1 as long as _both_ player agree to play it. I'm not sure how to do this in the interface, but I'll thinnk about it.

GreEn`mArine wrote:I'm not sure either how to realise that ...

How about making the challange into a 'handshake' (man i should never have read about network protocols )

Player A starts a challange by choosing Player B and his own map as now,
Player B can accept by choosing an other map, *
Player A has to confirm the challange. *

This is to simple, a form of nack, and rechallenge method is needed

The simpler way it tor the players to agree beforehand, and have an "other" option in the pulldown.

--
tChr

tChr wrote:The simpler way it tor the players to agree beforehand, and have an "other" option in the pulldown.

And how do you want this 'before' to work? Both players have to enter their maps and the first can only know and accept player-bs choise if you can see the map and tell he is fine with it.
You man both players talk (irc, pm what ever) player a enters both maps and player b does accept?

esteel wrote:

tChr wrote:The simpler way it tor the players to agree beforehand, and have an "other" option in the pulldown.

And how do you want this 'before' to work? Both players have to enter their maps and the first can only know and accept player-bs choise if you can see the map and tell he is fine with it.
You man both players talk (irc, pm what ever) player a enters both maps and player b does accept?

I menat that the players talk beforehand (this is done quite often anyways), player a selects "other map", and player B might also select "Other map" if both maps players want are not in the list,. This way very little adaption is needed in the system. We would not have games with "other" maps without the players agreeing on it beforaheand anyways. The general matches should be the regular map pool, the "other" option is just for familiar players nonetheless

Aditionally this might allow for third party maps, but the latter is another discussion.

Just "other map" is bad.. You know how some people are, if its not written down they change their mind, can't remember and dispute over the maps to play. It might work to enter the name of the map..

I also think my idea is good because right now Player A is in a bad situation. Player B can refuse the challange based on the map A choose but A is unable to do so with B's map. And its just one extra step which should be easy to implement.

esteel wrote:Just "other map" is bad.. You know how some people are, if its not written down they change their mind, can't remember and dispute over the maps to play. I also like my idea because right now Player A is in a bad situation. Player B can refuse the challange based on the map A choose but A is unable to do so with B's map. And its just one extra step which should be easy to implement.

Yes.. anpther way os that the "other" field is followed by a free-text-field where the exacpt map has to be stated.

Howver, can you with your awesome powers move this detailed discussion into a separate thread? Leving greens explanation less tainted

tChr wrote:Yes.. anpther way os that the "other" field is followed by a free-text-field where the exacpt map has to be stated.

Yes thats an good idea but it just solves the map problem not the Player A can not refuse player Bs map. But It worked well sofar. Maybe Green has too much sparetime

tChr wrote:Howver, can you with your awesome powers move this detailed discussion into a separate thread? Leving greens explanation less tainted

Uhh.. you feel sick or anything?

esteel wrote:

tChr wrote:Yes.. anpther way os that the "other" field is followed by a free-text-field where the exacpt map has to be stated.

Yes thats an good idea but it just solves the map problem not the Player A can not refuse player Bs map. But It worked well sofar. Maybe Green has too much sparetime

I dont think the challenger should be able to refuce the challenged map selection. In a duel you knwo the challenged would be able to pick weaopn.

If Kojak decides to challenge me, I should at least have the upper hand by being able to select a map without mortar

Hmm ok, guess you are right, but if all maps would be allowed that would be bad then

all this introduces quite a lot of work and a lot of thinking, too

I also thought about it and I can't find a intelligent way to solve that either

Example: Three-Way Challenge (atm it's two way challenge: player a challenges and takes a map, player b accepts or declines and choses a map, done)

three way would mean that player a choses his map he has the challenge-page like that:
[Radio-Box]Ladder maps [Dropdown of all official ladder maps, like it's now]
[Radio-Box]other maps [Dropdown of all other Nexuiz maps that are not in the ladder mappool, that would require to create a new mappool, change database, change backend etc, thing I am not really "keen to do"]

The first radio box is checked by default (when using radio boxes you can only chose one of them anyway).

Player b receives the challenge. If player a chose a custom map he will have a checkbox that says "accept custom map" (or similar). he will then chose his map, he has the same radioboxes and drop-down fields like the challenger (so he can either chose one of the the official maps or a custom map). however, this is depending on whether he clicked the "allow custom map" checkbox. why should player b be allowed to chose a custom map in he didn't allow player a to take one ? you see the argument ?

we got several options now
- if player a selected a custom map and player b didn't select the "allow custom map" checkbox, the script won't allow him to chose a custom map either (but a normal ladder map). the challenge is now in state 2 and the challenger gets notificated. he has to select a official ladder map now
- if player a selected a usual ladder map but player b wants to play a custom map, the player a has to confirm that, too, with a checkbox. if he doesn't, the player b has to take a usual ladder map (four-way-challenge in that case)
- if player a selected a custom map and player b clicked the "allow custom map" checkbox, player b is allowed to chose a ladder or custom map without re-asking the challenger again

This is the only concept I can think of atm, however I'm not going to code that myself

Whoever really wants that system, jsut ask me, you'll get the most current ladder source-code. have fun then

Another idea:

A challenges B and can choose any map.
B can either accept the map or choose any map from the pool.

That way, to play on a map which is not in the pool, both players have to agree.

your idea makes about 0% sense

this would mean that player a can chose 2 non-ladder maps and what is player b then supposed to do ? be able to decide that he doesn't like both other maps and choses other maps !?

No.

Assuming nexdm01 is not in the pool and nexdmextra1 is. Then the following will happen:

A to B: I want to play against you on nexdm01.

B now has the choice to accept nexdm01 or choose any map in the pool. Which means, A must always be prepared to play on any pool map instead.

Then you have to explain more in detail, cause the way I read it, only one map can be selected

I assume you mean player a gives two alternatives, one random map and one from the pool. The challenged can then choose weither to chose the any map, or the pool one.

Hopw should it then be possible for the challenged to choose a map not in the pool as his/her map?

the way i read divVerent sugestion:

challanger proposes one or two maps, in the pool or not.

challanged eigther accepts this(e) map(s) or is limites to choosing ((a map)||(maps)) that is in the pool.

a good idea imo.

I "think" I understood it now

Player A MUST select a ladder-map, but can also additionally select a non-ladder map (for the map 1 choice) as alternative
Player B can now chose whether map 1 will be the ladder map or the custom map.

but then there are two options:
a)
depending on whether player B allowed the custom map, he is also allowed to select a custom map or not (which means that he can only select a ladder map if he disagreed to take the custom map). This would be fair, and wouldn't require a 3-way-challenge
b)
player B selects whether ladder or custom map will be taken for map 1 choice but is also able to chose ladder AND custom map himself (no matter whether he disagreed to the custom map of the challenger). If it is a ladder map, the challenge is completed (accepted), if it's a custom map the challenger has to to the same like player B, either accept the custom map or take the ladder map

tChr wrote:Then you have to explain more in detail, cause the way I read it, only one map can be selected

I assume you mean player a gives two alternatives, one random map and one from the pool. The challenged can then choose weither to chose the any map, or the pool one.

Hopw should it then be possible for the challenged to choose a map not in the pool as his/her map?

No. The challenger just chooses one map, which may or may not be in the pool. The challenged can accept the choice or - which does give him some great advantage - choose ANY map from the pool.

Of course, if the challenger choosed a map in the pool, the challenged is not bound by it in any way. It does not matter at all which map the challenger chose, apart from that the challenged knows which maps the challenger wanted.

But the other interpretations of my post aren't that bad either...

divVerent wrote:

tChr wrote:Then you have to explain more in detail, cause the way I read it, only one map can be selected

I assume you mean player a gives two alternatives, one random map and one from the pool. The challenged can then choose weither to chose the any map, or the pool one.

Hopw should it then be possible for the challenged to choose a map not in the pool as his/her map?

No. The challenger just chooses one map, which may or may not be in the pool. The challenged can accept the choice or - which does give him some great advantage - choose ANY map from the pool.

Of course, if the challenger choosed a map in the pool, the challenged is not bound by it in any way. It does not matter at all which map the challenger chose, apart from that the challenged knows which maps the challenger wanted.

But the other interpretations of my post aren't that bad either...

Ok.. I'm with you here.. But how is the challenged supplosed to be able to pick a map not from hte pool as his map.choise, without haveing to bother player A again?