From what I am getting from what you are saying is IRC is difficult to use. If they can't use irc what makes you think they know how to enter mumble info or use the console command to connect to the game. You may say it is easier but if people can take the time to learn how to use mumble they can take the time to learn how to use irc or the simplified version (atf2.org) which is far more easier.
New matchmaking site similar to Tf2lobby
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
From what I am getting from what you are saying is IRC is difficult to use. If they can't use irc what makes you think they know how to enter mumble info or use the console command to connect to the game. You may say it is easier but if people can take the time to learn how to use mumble they can take the time to learn how to use irc or the simplified version (atf2.org) which is far more easier.
why are you calling atf2.org "simplified IRC"? All it is is another IRC client, and even when you use that instead of something like mirc, the fact still remains that it's a chat system being used as a command line, and given how most people were really confused about command changes when coming from pug.na to tf2mix, it's not a perfect interface and mainly works well because it's well-learned by the people that use it.
it's not the right tool for the job; yes, command lines are sexy and all that, but with how much people keep using commands to check up on the status of the game setup, don't you think it can easily be done better even for the people that use it? You could make a website that hooks into tf2mix and tracks the bot's status and displays players per team and class in columns off on the side, you could even make a graphical interface for the channel itself that still lets you chat in it, and that would be a vast improvement.
at that point, why do you even need to have the backend be an IRC bot? it works, but do you really have to do it, why can't you move the abstraction out of that? you could make a proper API for interacting with the match, fully seperating the chat and game setup. you can have a main chatroom and then match chatroom seperate from eachother like tf2lobby already does.
you cut down on chatroom clutter and make it easier to newbs to use the given interface at the same time, and the best part is, you could even make a client for this system that puts everything into a command line and mimicks the current hackish IRC bot setup, so people who don't want to change how they do things don't have to.
why are you calling atf2.org "simplified IRC"? All it is is another IRC client, and even when you use that instead of something like mirc, the fact still remains that it's a chat system being used as a command line, and given how most people were really confused about command changes when coming from pug.na to tf2mix, it's not a perfect interface and mainly works well because it's well-learned by the people that use it.
it's not the right tool for the job; yes, command lines are sexy and all that, but with how much people keep using commands to check up on the status of the game setup, don't you think it can easily be done better even for the people that use it? You could make a website that hooks into tf2mix and tracks the bot's status and displays players per team and class in columns off on the side, you could even make a graphical interface for the channel itself that still lets you chat in it, and that would be a vast improvement.
at that point, why do you even need to have the backend be an IRC bot? it works, but do you really have to do it, why can't you move the abstraction out of that? you could make a proper API for interacting with the match, fully seperating the chat and game setup. you can have a main chatroom and then match chatroom seperate from eachother like tf2lobby already does.
you cut down on chatroom clutter and make it easier to newbs to use the given interface at the same time, and the best part is, you could even make a client for this system that puts everything into a command line and mimicks the current hackish IRC bot setup, so people who don't want to change how they do things don't have to.
it's not the right tool for the job; yes, command lines are sexy and all that, but with how much people keep using commands to check up on the status of the game setup, don't you think it can easily be done better even for the people that use it? You could make a website that hooks into tf2mix and tracks the bot's status and displays players per team and class in columns off on the side, you could even make a graphical interface for the channel itself that still lets you chat in it, and that would be a vast improvement.
at that point, why do you even need to have the backend be an IRC bot? it works, but do you really have to do it, why can't you move the abstraction out of that? you could make a proper API for interacting with the match, fully seperating the chat and game setup. you can have a main chatroom and then match chatroom seperate from eachother like tf2lobby already does.
you cut down on chatroom clutter and make it easier to newbs to use the given interface at the same time, and the best part is, you could even make a client for this system that puts everything into a command line and mimicks the current hackish IRC bot setup, so people who don't want to change how they do things don't have to.
It automatically connects to the channels. Easy to see compared to mIRC. A lot more neater in my opinion but usually nothing goes on other than adding up removing status listing players and checking logs
It automatically connects to the channels. Easy to see compared to mIRC. A lot more neater in my opinion but usually nothing goes on other than adding up removing status listing players and checking logs
yeah, I guess that's all right, but using the chatroom for chat is still pretty important to a lot of people, and separating that from the match setup would make it a lot less intimidating for a lot of people, which you can't do while staying in the IRC bot thing. there's a lot of improvement that you can make by moving off the IRC based system; however easy it is or isn't to get into the channel matters but it's only a small part of the situation.
yeah, I guess that's all right, but using the chatroom for chat is still pretty important to a lot of people, and separating that from the match setup would make it a lot less intimidating for a lot of people, which you can't do while staying in the IRC bot thing. there's a lot of improvement that you can make by moving off the IRC based system; however easy it is or isn't to get into the channel matters but it's only a small part of the situation.
I'm going to have to agree with wareya about atf2.org. It's just a qwebirc installation that auto-joins a few relevant channels. In fact, I'd consider it worse than traditional IRC clients, because connectivity issues become more of a nuisance with qwebirc.
Also, irssi master race.
I'm going to have to agree with wareya about atf2.org. It's just a qwebirc installation that auto-joins a few relevant channels. In fact, I'd consider it worse than traditional IRC clients, because connectivity issues become more of a nuisance with qwebirc.
Also, irssi master race.
Also, irssi master race.
atf2.org is what it is right now because that's how much work I was able to do on it. The real goal is (and always was) to have a point and click interface that has different options depending on which channel you are looking at.
It's never been my style to talk about ideas of projects I plan to do because having ideas is easy. The hardest part is completing these toughs into something that is functional.
atf2.org is what it is right now because that's how much work I was able to do on it. The real goal is (and always was) to have a point and click interface that has different options depending on which channel you are looking at.
It's never been my style to talk about ideas of projects I plan to do because having ideas is easy. The hardest part is completing these toughs into something that is functional.
It's never been my style to talk about ideas of projects I plan to do because having ideas is easy. The hardest part is completing these toughs into something that is functional.
cinqatf2.org is what it is right now because that's how much work I was able to do on it. The real goal is (and always was) to have a point and click interface that has different options depending on which channel you are looking at.
It's never been my style to talk about ideas of projects I plan to do because having ideas is easy. The hardest part is completing these toughs into something that is functional.
This is definitely a cool concept. That said, I think the implementation can make a world of difference.
It would be great to have this implemented using a client-server architecture. Move the majority of the bot's functionality into a separate backend and give it a clean HTTP-based API. Then, you can allow various clients to connect to it, the most obvious of which would be the web-based point-and-click interface, as well as an IRC bot that simply utilises the aforementioned API. This would also allow for much more creative clients, if anybody chooses to create one, given that the API is open.
I think this is a much cleaner solution than the more obvious option of building a graphical interface as a layer on top of the IRC connection. Of course, this is easier said than done, as it creates a decent amount of additional work.
All this brainstorming aside, thank you for all of your work on this front. I'm sure atf2, even in its current state, has helped a lot of people uncomfortable with IRC.
[quote=cinq]atf2.org is what it is right now because that's how much work I was able to do on it. The real goal is (and always was) to have a point and click interface that has different options depending on which channel you are looking at.
It's never been my style to talk about ideas of projects I plan to do because having ideas is easy. The hardest part is completing these toughs into something that is functional.[/quote]
This is definitely a cool concept. That said, I think the implementation can make a world of difference.
It would be great to have this implemented using a client-server architecture. Move the majority of the bot's functionality into a separate backend and give it a clean HTTP-based API. Then, you can allow various clients to connect to it, the most obvious of which would be the web-based point-and-click interface, as well as an IRC bot that simply utilises the aforementioned API. This would also allow for much more creative clients, if anybody chooses to create one, given that the API is open.
I think this is a much cleaner solution than the more obvious option of building a graphical interface as a layer on top of the IRC connection. Of course, this is easier said than done, as it creates a decent amount of additional work.
All this brainstorming aside, thank you for all of your work on this front. I'm sure atf2, even in its current state, has helped a lot of people uncomfortable with IRC.
It's never been my style to talk about ideas of projects I plan to do because having ideas is easy. The hardest part is completing these toughs into something that is functional.[/quote]
This is definitely a cool concept. That said, I think the implementation can make a world of difference.
It would be great to have this implemented using a client-server architecture. Move the majority of the bot's functionality into a separate backend and give it a clean HTTP-based API. Then, you can allow various clients to connect to it, the most obvious of which would be the web-based point-and-click interface, as well as an IRC bot that simply utilises the aforementioned API. This would also allow for much more creative clients, if anybody chooses to create one, given that the API is open.
I think this is a much cleaner solution than the more obvious option of building a graphical interface as a layer on top of the IRC connection. Of course, this is easier said than done, as it creates a decent amount of additional work.
All this brainstorming aside, thank you for all of your work on this front. I'm sure atf2, even in its current state, has helped a lot of people uncomfortable with IRC.
I don't think using HTTP is a good idea, because it's a fire and forget protocol in terms of connection rather than a live one. This isn't an aggregation app, here. You need a kept-alive connection on one level or another to manage live statements sent from the server to the client, rather than routinely polling the server for updates.
I don't think using HTTP is a good idea, because it's a fire and forget protocol in terms of connection rather than a live one. This isn't an aggregation app, here. You need a kept-alive connection on one level or another to manage live statements sent from the server to the client, rather than routinely polling the server for updates.
wareyaI don't think using HTTP is a good idea, because it's a fire and forget protocol in terms of connection rather than a live one. This isn't an aggregation app, here. You need a kept-alive connection on one level or another to manage live statements sent from the server to the client, rather than routinely polling the server for updates.
I do see the point you are making.
I still think HTTP can work, though. Due to the nature of the project, not many requests/responses are necessary, so I think a polling system would work fine. It's also possible to implement an HTTP push mechanism. I personally like the idea of not requiring a persistent connection.
I don't think the protocol is too important right now, as I'm not sure if this idea will even be implemented. Even then, it should be easy to play around and see what works best; maybe even support more than one protocol.
[quote=wareya]I don't think using HTTP is a good idea, because it's a fire and forget protocol in terms of connection rather than a live one. This isn't an aggregation app, here. You need a kept-alive connection on one level or another to manage live statements sent from the server to the client, rather than routinely polling the server for updates.[/quote]
I do see the point you are making.
I still think HTTP can work, though. Due to the nature of the project, not many requests/responses are necessary, so I think a polling system would work fine. It's also possible to implement an HTTP push mechanism. I personally like the idea of not requiring a persistent connection.
I don't think the protocol is too important right now, as I'm not sure if this idea will even be implemented. Even then, it should be easy to play around and see what works best; maybe even support more than one protocol.
I do see the point you are making.
I still think HTTP can work, though. Due to the nature of the project, not many requests/responses are necessary, so I think a polling system would work fine. It's also possible to implement an HTTP push mechanism. I personally like the idea of not requiring a persistent connection.
I don't think the protocol is too important right now, as I'm not sure if this idea will even be implemented. Even then, it should be easy to play around and see what works best; maybe even support more than one protocol.
wareyaoh lookie another IRC client
this new way to interact with the existing text interface is going to redefine the newb's pickup game standards
totally
i'm a huge proponent of IRC and that's so severe that I go as far as to use a terminal based IRC client, but really, however much the interactive bot interface works for people who care for it, it's meaningless to all the people who are legitimately put off by it. it's not part of the game, pushing it on people as the only legitimate way to take part in pickup games is making a viral ideology.
because tf2lobby is integrated into the game as well.
atf2 is an irc client but its also preset with all necessary channels to start competitive tf2. most ppl are put off by irc because they have to install and set it up.
[quote=wareya]oh lookie another IRC client
this new way to interact with the existing text interface is going to redefine the newb's pickup game standards
totally
i'm a huge proponent of IRC and that's so severe that I go as far as to use a terminal based IRC client, but really, however much the interactive bot interface works for people who care for it, it's meaningless to all the people who are legitimately put off by it. it's not part of the game, pushing it on people as the only legitimate way to take part in pickup games is making a viral ideology.[/quote]
because tf2lobby is integrated into the game as well.
atf2 is an irc client but its also preset with all necessary channels to start competitive tf2. most ppl are put off by irc because they have to install and set it up.
this new way to interact with the existing text interface is going to redefine the newb's pickup game standards
totally
i'm a huge proponent of IRC and that's so severe that I go as far as to use a terminal based IRC client, but really, however much the interactive bot interface works for people who care for it, it's meaningless to all the people who are legitimately put off by it. it's not part of the game, pushing it on people as the only legitimate way to take part in pickup games is making a viral ideology.[/quote]
because tf2lobby is integrated into the game as well.
atf2 is an irc client but its also preset with all necessary channels to start competitive tf2. most ppl are put off by irc because they have to install and set it up.
that post doesn't miss half a page of conversation or anything
that post doesn't miss half a page of conversation or anything
You can actually write a Mumble bot and skip IRC entirely. http://gitorious.org/mumble-scripts/mumo
You can actually write a Mumble bot and skip IRC entirely. http://gitorious.org/mumble-scripts/mumo
Hope this is still being worked on, I really don't want this to end up like PubComp :C
Hope this is still being worked on, I really don't want this to end up like PubComp :C
Sounds pretty interesting. let us know when its up so we can check it out :)
Sounds pretty interesting. let us know when its up so we can check it out :)
Sounds pretty interesting. let us know when its up so we can check it out :)
Sounds pretty interesting. let us know when its up so we can check it out :)
It would be nice if you'd include a pug matchmaking system as well, therefore Mumble servers too. They are much better than tf2 lobbies if you want something serious. Customization is also an important factor which tf2lobby doesn't have: from the experience of the players which can play, to allowing the logs to be uploaded @logs.tf or even the background of the lobby page (so people won't need the CSS injection like on tf2lobby). Good luck with your project and please include the pug system in it as most of the European ones are now dead.
It would be nice if you'd include a pug matchmaking system as well, therefore Mumble servers too. They are much better than tf2 lobbies if you want something serious. Customization is also an important factor which tf2lobby doesn't have: from the experience of the players which can play, to allowing the logs to be uploaded @logs.tf or even the background of the lobby page (so people won't need the CSS injection like on tf2lobby). Good luck with your project and please include the pug system in it as most of the European ones are now dead.
Look to tf2pickup.net rather than tf2lobby for your inspiration.
Look to tf2pickup.net rather than tf2lobby for your inspiration.
Really loving the idea for right now (on tf2center.com), can't wait for more! Hope tf2center wont go down as much as tf2lobby does. Anyways, loving the idea.
Really loving the idea for right now (on tf2center.com), can't wait for more! Hope tf2center wont go down as much as tf2lobby does. Anyways, loving the idea.
TCFailReally loving the idea for right now (on tf2center.com), can't wait for more! Hope tf2center wont go down as much as tf2lobby does. Anyways, loving the idea.
Please do not bump old threads just to say something like this. Something this old needs an informative reason to get posted in again.
[quote=TCFail]Really loving the idea for right now (on tf2center.com), can't wait for more! Hope tf2center wont go down as much as tf2lobby does. Anyways, loving the idea.[/quote]
Please do not bump old threads just to say something like this. Something this old needs an informative reason to get posted in again.
Please do not bump old threads just to say something like this. Something this old needs an informative reason to get posted in again.
Disregard people saying ELO integration is a bad idea for beginners. It isn't. It's a great start although I am not quite sure about a) making it public and b) allowing users to discriminate on it. Ranks are okay though. I've played enough multiplayer to know that ranks are a great driving force for people to encourage them to get better. Start at the bottom, head to the top.
And with a good ELO system you can allow automatic PUGs to occur with two volunteer "leaders" who will coach their team around and so on.
Maybe a practice matchmaking system, which will not effect your ELO and supports drop in and drop out per game as handled by a bot that detects an opening and places a searching player into it. I think drop in and drop out would be a HUGE feature because it would be the first step into integrating highlander and 6v6 into a pub scenario.
The competitive matchmaking system will differ in that leaving a game can hurt your rank and maybe restrict you from competitive games for a period of time. You can also introduce some other features, such as separate ranks depending on the class played and a global rank to take place in lobbies. Then these same ranks can be used for automatic tournaments, with some builtin stv that users can easily access.
Some other points
-Encouraging medic play somehow
-Having enough regular users to sport a decent ELO consistency
-Only allowing one account per IP to ensure one guy isn't fucking everyone over
-Encouraging users to use mumble, which will be a feat in itself if done
-Integrating some guide system would be a powerful tool.
-Around release, come around tf.tv and give out captain passes for people who volunteer (and then paying them with whatever spoils you get from the tournament system or w/e)
-Integrating some team matchmaking system too would be cool
-Make sure you only focus on the beginners, period. Once you reach the highest ranking (which shouldn't be hard if it's like UGC steel level) there should be some sort of nice post on how to get into the tf.tv thing and begin doing #tf2mix or finding an esea team or somethin.
-Work with some sort of solution to help with newbie mixes as well if it is at all possible.
Good work gents!
Disregard people saying ELO integration is a bad idea for beginners. It isn't. It's a great start although I am not quite sure about a) making it public and b) allowing users to discriminate on it. Ranks are okay though. I've played enough multiplayer to know that ranks are a great driving force for people to encourage them to get better. Start at the bottom, head to the top.
And with a good ELO system you can allow automatic PUGs to occur with two volunteer "leaders" who will coach their team around and so on.
Maybe a practice matchmaking system, which will not effect your ELO and supports drop in and drop out per game as handled by a bot that detects an opening and places a searching player into it. I think drop in and drop out would be a HUGE feature because it would be the first step into integrating highlander and 6v6 into a pub scenario.
The competitive matchmaking system will differ in that leaving a game can hurt your rank and maybe restrict you from competitive games for a period of time. You can also introduce some other features, such as separate ranks depending on the class played and a global rank to take place in lobbies. Then these same ranks can be used for automatic tournaments, with some builtin stv that users can easily access.
Some other points
-Encouraging medic play somehow
-Having enough regular users to sport a decent ELO consistency
-Only allowing one account per IP to ensure one guy isn't fucking everyone over
-Encouraging users to use mumble, which will be a feat in itself if done
-Integrating some guide system would be a powerful tool.
-Around release, come around tf.tv and give out captain passes for people who volunteer (and then paying them with whatever spoils you get from the tournament system or w/e)
-Integrating some team matchmaking system too would be cool
-Make sure you only focus on the beginners, period. Once you reach the highest ranking (which shouldn't be hard if it's like UGC steel level) there should be some sort of nice post on how to get into the tf.tv thing and begin doing #tf2mix or finding an esea team or somethin.
-Work with some sort of solution to help with newbie mixes as well if it is at all possible.
Good work gents!
And with a good ELO system you can allow automatic PUGs to occur with two volunteer "leaders" who will coach their team around and so on.
Maybe a practice matchmaking system, which will not effect your ELO and supports drop in and drop out per game as handled by a bot that detects an opening and places a searching player into it. I think drop in and drop out would be a HUGE feature because it would be the first step into integrating highlander and 6v6 into a pub scenario.
The competitive matchmaking system will differ in that leaving a game can hurt your rank and maybe restrict you from competitive games for a period of time. You can also introduce some other features, such as separate ranks depending on the class played and a global rank to take place in lobbies. Then these same ranks can be used for automatic tournaments, with some builtin stv that users can easily access.
Some other points
-Encouraging medic play somehow
-Having enough regular users to sport a decent ELO consistency
-Only allowing one account per IP to ensure one guy isn't fucking everyone over
-Encouraging users to use mumble, which will be a feat in itself if done
-Integrating some guide system would be a powerful tool.
-Around release, come around tf.tv and give out captain passes for people who volunteer (and then paying them with whatever spoils you get from the tournament system or w/e)
-Integrating some team matchmaking system too would be cool
-Make sure you only focus on the beginners, period. Once you reach the highest ranking (which shouldn't be hard if it's like UGC steel level) there should be some sort of nice post on how to get into the tf.tv thing and begin doing #tf2mix or finding an esea team or somethin.
-Work with some sort of solution to help with newbie mixes as well if it is at all possible.
Good work gents!
Can there be a limit of how many lobby are open? Often times in Lobby there are lile 5 HL lobbies and each one of them have 13/18 full or so, it's annoying since you have to wait so long for the lobby to filled up. I suggest 3-4 Lobby open at a time (so there can be like 3 HL lobby and 3 6s lobby)
Can there be a limit of how many lobby are open? Often times in Lobby there are lile 5 HL lobbies and each one of them have 13/18 full or so, it's annoying since you have to wait so long for the lobby to filled up. I suggest 3-4 Lobby open at a time (so there can be like 3 HL lobby and 3 6s lobby)
Im from Brazil will i ever play a game in tf2center will you guys have Game servers for SA or only NA and EU?
Im from Brazil will i ever play a game in tf2center will you guys have Game servers for SA or only NA and EU?
I've always been really jealous of the setup tf2pickup.net has and why we don't have an NA equivalent. It has all the advantages of an IRC based pickup system minus the possible intimidating factor that joining an IRC channel with a bunch of people you don't know comes from.
However, tf2pickup.net works so well because the active playerbase that uses it is a small consistent group of people. I think if you combined elements of both of these pug sites it would be fantastic. The ability to click on a player-hosted map like lobby allows, but have the tf2pickup setup of simply choosing a class instead of choosing a team so you have less opportunity to stack.
To be completely honest though, I think the only thing holding back TF2lobby is the fact that FLOOR_MASTER doesn't have the time to constantly (or ever) update the website and has seemingly little interest or time for TF2. Because tf2lobby has no active moderators or people maintaining the site, the site can be down for days at a time (it was down for around 3-4 days just recently) and no one to look over player reports, making report player and karma system useless. It's amazing that FLOOR_MASTER even keeps the site up, and I really appreciate it. But having an actively maintained website would be refreshing.
I've always been really jealous of the setup tf2pickup.net has and why we don't have an NA equivalent. It has all the advantages of an IRC based pickup system minus the possible intimidating factor that joining an IRC channel with a bunch of people you don't know comes from.
However, tf2pickup.net works so well because the active playerbase that uses it is a small consistent group of people. I think if you combined elements of both of these pug sites it would be fantastic. The ability to click on a player-hosted map like lobby allows, but have the tf2pickup setup of simply choosing a class instead of choosing a team so you have less opportunity to stack.
To be completely honest though, I think the only thing holding back TF2lobby is the fact that FLOOR_MASTER doesn't have the time to constantly (or ever) update the website and has seemingly little interest or time for TF2. Because tf2lobby has no active moderators or people maintaining the site, the site can be down for days at a time (it was down for around 3-4 days just recently) and no one to look over player reports, making report player and karma system useless. It's amazing that FLOOR_MASTER even keeps the site up, and I really appreciate it. But having an actively maintained website would be refreshing.
However, tf2pickup.net works so well because the active playerbase that uses it is a small consistent group of people. I think if you combined elements of both of these pug sites it would be fantastic. The ability to click on a player-hosted map like lobby allows, but have the tf2pickup setup of simply choosing a class instead of choosing a team so you have less opportunity to stack.
To be completely honest though, I think the only thing holding back TF2lobby is the fact that FLOOR_MASTER doesn't have the time to constantly (or ever) update the website and has seemingly little interest or time for TF2. Because tf2lobby has no active moderators or people maintaining the site, the site can be down for days at a time (it was down for around 3-4 days just recently) and no one to look over player reports, making report player and karma system useless. It's amazing that FLOOR_MASTER even keeps the site up, and I really appreciate it. But having an actively maintained website would be refreshing.
talk to lange about this
maybe we can fuse tf2central with tf.tv and make a competitive tf2 behemoth
talk to lange about this
maybe we can fuse tf2central with tf.tv and make a competitive tf2 behemoth
maybe we can fuse tf2central with tf.tv and make a competitive tf2 behemoth
Like to see this finish or atleast a demo version. Hope this doesn't turn into another pubcomp or lobbypy where developer just abandoned the project half way through.
Like to see this finish or atleast a demo version. Hope this doesn't turn into another pubcomp or lobbypy where developer just abandoned the project half way through.
please make the server use ESEA config, because the tf2lobby one isnt really a config, its just every weapon allowed and a 6v6/9v9 clock/timer/wins
please make the server use ESEA config, because the tf2lobby one isnt really a config, its just every weapon allowed and a 6v6/9v9 clock/timer/wins
This thread has been locked.