ender516 wrote:The site could put "P1:", "P2:", etc. in front of the player names on the game page. It wouldn't take much to convince people that using the numbers was shorter than typing "red" or "blue". Better yet, a button next to the players name to inject "@name" into the chat box would be very handy.
That is something that could be a solution. I wouldn't have much of a problem with that. But, people would need to know not to use colors and there would still be some confusion, because you would have to look over at the side (or bottom) to match up the player number with the appropriate color, because you can't tell that just from the map.
ender516 wrote:The site could put "P1:", "P2:", etc. in front of the player names on the game page. It wouldn't take much to convince people that using the numbers was shorter than typing "red" or "blue". Better yet, a button next to the players name to inject "@name" into the chat box would be very handy.
That is something that could be a solution. I wouldn't have much of a problem with that. But, people would need to know not to use colors and there would still be some confusion, because you would have to look over at the side (or bottom) to match up the player number with the appropriate color, because you can't tell that just from the map.
Well, the colour codes feature could be modified to give the option of prepending player numbers rather than colours: instead of "r12" and "g3", you could see "1:12" and "2:3". Or to keep it short, use upper case alphabetics: "A12" and "B3", although this might not serve well with a Battle Royal of more than 26 players.
ender516 wrote:The site could put "P1:", "P2:", etc. in front of the player names on the game page. It wouldn't take much to convince people that using the numbers was shorter than typing "red" or "blue". Better yet, a button next to the players name to inject "@name" into the chat box would be very handy.
That is something that could be a solution. I wouldn't have much of a problem with that. But, people would need to know not to use colors and there would still be some confusion, because you would have to look over at the side (or bottom) to match up the player number with the appropriate color, because you can't tell that just from the map.
Well, the colour codes feature could be modified to give the option of prepending player numbers rather than colours: instead of "r12" and "g3", you could see "1:12" and "2:3". Or to keep it short, use upper case alphabetics: "A12" and "B3", although this might not serve well with a Battle Royal of more than 26 players.
Damn, BRs presenting another problem. We have to be careful that we don't start heading in the direction of catering too much to the minority here. I don't mean to be dismissive, but generally it's a better system to make the minority (the one with color-blindness) do the extra work of matching up the chat entries to the color referred to than to make the majority have to associate people with some sort of identifying code.
I kind of liked the idea earlier thrown out about just letting the game creator pick their color. That seems to be a reasonable accommodation. I would go one further and say that the next person to join could also pick their color. That would open up quite a few games to people with color blindness.
HOWEVER, the major problem I see with these solutions is that most all of us have gotten used to certain colors being on the same team in the games that we like to play. I know this would definitely make it harder for me to play team games. I already get confused keeping track of which team yellow is on in my games.
I still think that the best option for this is to allow players to join the color slot they wish to play, much like the site does for team games. It would be the simplest option to implement and IMHO the one that would cause the least amount of confusion.
-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:I still think that the best option for this is to allow players to join the color slot they wish to play, much like the site does for team games. It would be the simplest option to implement and IMHO the one that would cause the least amount of confusion.
-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:I still think that the best option for this is to allow players to join the color slot they wish to play, much like the site does for team games. It would be the simplest option to implement and IMHO the one that would cause the least amount of confusion.
Doh! That seems so obvious now that you say it.
You know, if you reread the first post, that may be pretty much what was proposed. All that would be need to be added to what was said (separate Join a Game links for each slot in a game) would be the choice of slot for the creator of the game.
Yeah right ... next thing you're going to tell me that the Classic map is wrong or something ...
What? LOL, you're completely right. I think that's what it says, too. I wonder when in this 13 page convo this thing derailed.
I just randomly went back to page 9 and saw this:
TheForgivenOne wrote:
Commander62890 wrote:Don't do this. It would totally f*ck with my head in team games. I am so used to dubs being R+G vs B+Y, trips being R,G,B vs Y,P,C, and quads being R,G,B,Y vs P,C,O,S.
If all the colors were mixed up... I'm serious, this could have an effect on my gameplay (if I was rushing). At the very least, it would be confusing... all this so you can have your favorite color? I love blue, but there's no way I want this to happen and affect the game like this.
Honestly, I'm totally fine with this being implemented in every other type of game, but you can't make this mandatory for team games. An option, maybe. But this can't go through and affect team games.
That was already thrown out the door Commander. The way we have it now, is that players join what slot they want. So in a Quads game, it would still be R+G+B+Y vs +P+C+O+S. Instead you'd have something like this
[Player A] Join as Green Join as Blue Join as Yellow vs Join as Pink Join as Cyan Join as Orange Join as Slate
It looks like a mod edited the OP without noting what they had done. And the regular posters must not have got the message. I'm gonna change the title to reflect this. Maybe help head off some of the confusion.
-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:I still think that the best option for this is to allow players to join the color slot they wish to play, much like the site does for team games. It would be the simplest option to implement and IMHO the one that would cause the least amount of confusion.
Doh! That seems so obvious now that you say it.
You know, if you reread the first post, that may be pretty much what was proposed. All that would be need to be added to what was said (separate Join a Game links for each slot in a game) would be the choice of slot for the creator of the game.
I thought this was what was decided looooong ago for this suggestion after much discussion. It just makes the most amount of sense. It's a small detail that some may appreciate and others may not care about, but at least it shouldn't take much to change the code of the site for it.
Army of GOD wrote:Do we have pick your own color yet?
Not yet, though it should be an easy enough code change to make, so hopefully it's something bigwham will consider implementing in the not so distant future.
What if the player with the highest rank picks a color out of a list of standard CC colors and then they are slowly drawn. Or perhaps in the other direction in which cooks pick first?
EmperorTigerstar wrote:What if the player with the highest rank picks a color out of a list of standard CC colors and then they are slowly drawn. Or perhaps in the other direction in which cooks pick first?
this would have to go to my "color preference" suggestion, cause picking 12 colors one at a time would take too long. but if we did a ranking thing (not sure why?) I'd say high ranks pick first to avoid intentionally going after a lower rank in hopes of a bad play.
How would this work? One of the reasons I tend to start games is I like red. So am I guaranteed to keep red or am I going to get pissed of if I end up getting blue or green?
koontz1973 wrote:How would this work? One of the reasons I tend to start games is I like red. So am I guaranteed to keep red or am I going to get pissed of if I end up getting blue or green?
I think people get the color preference in the order they join. So, you start games, you get first choice.
koontz1973 wrote:How would this work? One of the reasons I tend to start games is I like red. So am I guaranteed to keep red or am I going to get pissed of if I end up getting blue or green?
I think people get the color preference in the order they join. So, you start games, you get first choice.
I like this then. Every player has superstitions and this panders to that.
koontz1973 wrote:How would this work? One of the reasons I tend to start games is I like red. So am I guaranteed to keep red or am I going to get pissed of if I end up getting blue or green?
I think people get the color preference in the order they join. So, you start games, you get first choice.
If you're referring to my suggestion, I was saying that color preference should be an internal thing. As a game starts, the engine reads your color preferences and assigns you a color then.
koontz1973 wrote:How would this work? One of the reasons I tend to start games is I like red. So am I guaranteed to keep red or am I going to get pissed of if I end up getting blue or green?
I think people get the color preference in the order they join. So, you start games, you get first choice.
If you're referring to my suggestion, I was saying that color preference should be an internal thing. As a game starts, the engine reads your color preferences and assigns you a color then.
Right, but what if we both have the exact same choices? What's the tiebreak? I'm saying it's order of join.
koontz1973 wrote:How would this work? One of the reasons I tend to start games is I like red. So am I guaranteed to keep red or am I going to get pissed of if I end up getting blue or green?
I think people get the color preference in the order they join. So, you start games, you get first choice.
If you're referring to my suggestion, I was saying that color preference should be an internal thing. As a game starts, the engine reads your color preferences and assigns you a color then.
Right, but what if we both have the exact same choices? What's the tiebreak? I'm saying it's order of join.
The tiebreak is the rest of the colors. There'd be an algorithm to give everyone he highest one possible. Example,
Me - red, blue, green. Chap - blue, green, red. Koontz - red, green, blue.
In this situation, chap would get blue. Since blue is my #2, I would get red, and koontz would get green. Something like that. It wouldn't be possible to give everyone their favorite, so some will have to settle for their second choice, and honestly most people would be okay with that.
koontz1973 wrote:How would this work? One of the reasons I tend to start games is I like red. So am I guaranteed to keep red or am I going to get pissed of if I end up getting blue or green?
I think people get the color preference in the order they join. So, you start games, you get first choice.
If you're referring to my suggestion, I was saying that color preference should be an internal thing. As a game starts, the engine reads your color preferences and assigns you a color then.
Right, but what if we both have the exact same choices? What's the tiebreak? I'm saying it's order of join.
The tiebreak is the rest of the colors. There'd be an algorithm to give everyone he highest one possible. Example,
Me - red, blue, green. Chap - blue, green, red. Koontz - red, green, blue.
In this situation, chap would get blue. Since blue is my #2, I would get red, and koontz would get green. Something like that. It wouldn't be possible to give everyone their favorite, so some will have to settle for their second choice, and honestly most people would be okay with that.
Those aren't the exact same choices and maybe complicated to code too. What is it if we all pick red, green, blue?
koontz1973 wrote:How would this work? One of the reasons I tend to start games is I like red. So am I guaranteed to keep red or am I going to get pissed of if I end up getting blue or green?
I think people get the color preference in the order they join. So, you start games, you get first choice.
If you're referring to my suggestion, I was saying that color preference should be an internal thing. As a game starts, the engine reads your color preferences and assigns you a color then.
Right, but what if we both have the exact same choices? What's the tiebreak? I'm saying it's order of join.
The tiebreak is the rest of the colors. There'd be an algorithm to give everyone he highest one possible. Example,
Me - red, blue, green. Chap - blue, green, red. Koontz - red, green, blue.
In this situation, chap would get blue. Since blue is my #2, I would get red, and koontz would get green. Something like that. It wouldn't be possible to give everyone their favorite, so some will have to settle for their second choice, and honestly most people would be okay with that.
Those aren't the exact same choices and maybe complicated to code too. What is it if we all pick red, green, blue?
All the same choice would be a different story. Join order as you said could work, or randomly would be a good option too.
What? LOL, you're completely right. I think that's what it says, too. I wonder when in this 13 page convo this thing derailed.
