Auto captain feature?...

[Useless]

Would it be a good idea to implement some sort of auto-chooser in the pug which picks captains automatically if no-one volunteers after about 3 minutes or so? Since pugs apparently take two or three epochs to set up these days, purely because nobody caps, it would be a time-saver and would prevent people from chickening out and waiting for someone else to captain. As far as I can see from the few pugs I've played it doesn't make much difference who captains, unless that person doesn't know what players to pick to make even teams. Even if the auto-chosen captain has no TS or speaks bad English, it's still only a game and the puggers are generally intelligent and skilled enough to think for themselves and their team anyway.

It could maybe be based on picking at random from the last 4 or 5 signed players who spoke in the channel, so that it would be picking from players who are paying attention to the channel, and are therefore more likely to be ready to pick players.

And please don't or me for this post, I'm just trying to make a suggestion to make pugs get arranged faster

 

[Maxiz!]

A captain who doesn't captain sort of defeats the whole purpose of the PuG though doesn't it? Sure, skill-wise it might be higher then on pubs but a team without a captain is never fun :/

 

[sneez]

There already is an option to put the captain mode to random instead of volunteer.
Maybe just make a rule that after 3-5minutes of no captaining somebody puts on the auto captain mode ? (A player gets randomly picked then..)

 

[Dj_AL]

i agree with sneez that after 6 min or so a captains should be choosen automaticly to avoid all "re-sign" and new letter all time, This also leads to less stolen spots if theres a new pug ppl might sign even if previous pug was 12 players....


AND i think the captain could chose any player withing the team to make tacs for whole team =)

 

[Torp]

Would take too much to impliment.

Already this pugbot does not do what the Naat pug bot did (ability to be used when a command is changed during the setup) If something currently changes after 12 players (or player load is reached) then nothing can change, including signed players and captain mode. So this has to be sorted first and foremost.

Secondly, whenever random captain is used, more often than not someone who REALLY didn't want to be captain gets the job. Thus he ends up picking stupid players and random maps to sabotage said Pug.

On the other hand. Having the exact same captains all the time is not really fun adding to this you get the same old whingers saying "can sum1 captain already" "cap up fs I havent got all day" yet they themsevles NEVER captain anyway, so really should keep their gobs well and truly shut. You dont need a captain to do tactics. Tactics are easy and I dont know why someone doesnt just volunteer to do tactics. Its a couple of lines of text at the start of a map. It doesnt take a fookin mastermind to do that does it?

 

[uZi]

You can't change the captain mode once it's reached captain mode.

If you wanna implement this feature, then you'd better script it yourself.

 

[Useless]

On the other hand. Having the exact same captains all the time is not really fun adding to this you get the same old whingers saying "can sum1 captain already" "cap up fs I havent got all day" yet they themsevles NEVER captain anyway, so really should keep their gobs well and truly shut. You dont need a captain to do tactics. Tactics are easy and I dont know why someone doesnt just volunteer to do tactics. Its a couple of lines of text at the start of a map. It doesnt take a fookin mastermind to do that does it?

Yeah, this is all true. I tried capping before because I know how long it can take otherwise, yet this didn't really work. My first pick was Shaggy (I think) and I immediately got comments along the lines of 'way to ruin the pug' from Mc. Well 'way to encourage new people to captain' right back atcha. This sort of thing doesn't help at all. I don't see why I should get criticised for a) capping because no-one else will or b) picking someone who is a good friend, clanmate and good player above someone who would have been first pick by, for example, Mc. Mc would have picked killerdude first? Fine. I don't care. I'll pick Shaggy first.

It seems that unless new players conform exactly to rules that exist only in certain diehard puggers' heads then they get grief for it; as if doing anything other than picking the same 10ish maps and the precise order of the players that are 'usually' picked' will completely ruin the pug forever. Fucking relax. If pug is supposed to revitalise UTA (and I think it has) then people need to get their heads out of their arses. It's not the league, it's a one-off, never-to-be-remembered-afterwards pug. Who cares if teams are unbalanced? Doesn't stop anyone playing, does it?

 

[Bossk]

Just an idea but what about standard tactics for pugs via UT-Tacticviewer?
Seeing most ppl cba to give tacs this wud mbe help.

 

[brajan]

All we can do is to write brand new pugbot. We don't have a source for current bot so no changes can be made.
I fully support this idea but no matter how much you moan about it nothing can change it.

 

[Torp]

Maybe this is far-fetched... Is there a way an admin can automatically select captains, or would this be too much to script? After say 5minutes its up to admins discretion to then pick 2 captains they deem fit for it. If the admins want to or are around of course...

If this is also possible then bloody force the people to be captain who moan for sum1 to cap but dont themselves!

 

[brajan]

With new bot all your suggestions would be possible.
With current - big fat nothing.


Btw.
Me and Timo did some coding long time ago but never finished it due to lack of time (rl, job, etc.) so if there is anyone with very good knowledge of PHP and would like to finish it i think we could share our progress with such person.

 

[killerdude]

for example, Mc. Mc would have picked killerdude first? Fine. I don't care. I'll pick Shaggy first.

keep me out of this

Random cap can be a good idea, but only with Even teams.

BTW Dunno if there is a big diff between uta and naat pug bot, but with the naat pug bot, we could :
-change our name before captains were decide (with 12/12 ppl alrdy sign in) = good when ppl laggout so we don't need to reset or when some1 wanted to give his spot to another player all he had to do was to rename his name.
-change the team size (i.e a 8 ppl sign for a 4v4 if more ppl wanted to join afterward then all we had to do was to change team size 10 or 12l).

but mb some ppl should try to be captain for a change instead of telling others ppl to cap...

 

[endgegner]

All we can do is to write brand new pugbot. We don't have a source for current bot so no changes can be made.
I fully support this idea but no matter how much you moan about it nothing can change it.

Who originally coded the pugbot? What happened to it? How come you can't extract the code from the bot?

 

[endgegner]

With new bot all your suggestions would be possible.
With current - big fat nothing.


Btw.
Me and Timo did some coding long time ago but never finished it due to lack of time (rl, job, etc.) so if there is anyone with very good knowledge of PHP and would like to finish it i think we could share our progress with such person.

ask ~viper~ aka ice_cream on IRC... he's started working on one already as of a couple weeks ago.

 

[HUEY]

Would take too much to impliment.

Already this pugbot does not do what the Naat pug bot did (ability to be used when a command is changed during the setup) If something currently changes after 12 players (or player load is reached) then nothing can change, including signed players and captain mode. So this has to be sorted first and foremost.

Secondly, whenever random captain is used, more often than not someone who REALLY didn't want to be captain gets the job. Thus he ends up picking stupid players and random maps to sabotage said Pug.

Who you calling st00pid???

 

[html]

I once asked for the #naat pugbot code to sid or batt or someone else.... and then he asked if it was for euros, so i said yes, and I got banned from #naat, true story.

Im one of the top 10 UTApugers (in the terms of maps played not skill ofc -_-) and I can tell you that from my personal experience random mode had a failure rate of at least 75% if not more.

Why?, people that were appointed were afkand pug was STILL DELAYED 5+ minutes or even reseted..... or appointed people really didnt want to captain, some even getting pissed and picking shit teams/maps because of that... or refusing to do tactics at all ingame.

And also im a bit against the captain giving the tactics job to someone else, I know for one that when I captain I do the tactics, and if im in a pug not as a captain and my captain asks me to do tactics I will refuse...... maybe thats just me but eh.

 

[Useless]

if im in a pug not as a captain and my captain asks me to do tactics I will refuse...... maybe thats just me but eh.

Do you mean you refuse to follow, or you refuse to be the one giving the tactics?

 

[brajan]

I once asked for the #naat pugbot code to sid or batt or someone else.... and then he asked if it was for euros, so i said yes, and I got banned from #naat, true story.

I'm not surprised. Batt was stupid enough and made himself permanently banned in UTA. Don't know about Sid.
utapug has been succesfully running without their bot and it will remain that way for much longer while naat is long time dead.

 

[Snee]

I'm not surprised. Batt was stupid enough and made himself permanently banned in UTA. Don't know about Sid.
utapug has been succesfully running without their bot and it will remain that way for much longer while naat is long time dead.

true story

 

[McNeill]

They don't have the code AFAIK, CrashCourse Develeoped it and if you type !credits in utapug displays the authors.

As I was in DV with him on NA back in the time he upgraded the bot for us. The version of naat is his original old one and I very much doubt they have the code.