|
Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The patch looks fine except that the CVAR name sv_limitnumvotes IMO doesn't make sense anymore. We should rename it to something more appropriate to what it does, e.g. sv_newvoteinterval. |
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps sv_votecooldown? Names should be intuitive enough to be easily guessed without looking it up imo. |
|
|
|
|
|
I agree and a couple of people I asked also agreed it is intuitive. |
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say sv_votecooldowntime , to give it more meaning. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why are the times doubled? 1 ends up 2 minutes, 4 ends up being 8 minutes? |
|
|
|
|
|
Because of the way the voting is coded. The constant values are basically 5 and 10 for the flood protections. That's why I left the default value at 5 so that people won't notice any difference from the current behavior. Setting a low value like 1 or still has some sort of wait. If you set the cvar to 2, you have to wait 4 minutes to recall that specific vote, but you can call any other type of vote after 2 minutes. |
|
|
|
|
The svar works EXCEPT that sv_limitnumvotes 0 does not override the time. So if I set sv_votecooldown to > 0 and sv_limitnumvotes 0, I still have to wait. sv_limitcommands 0 still works
That scaling system is not user friendly and I agree with Strikerman that it should just be set to minutes like timelimit and stuff are. However you told me that requires work and effort so so be it I guess. |
|
|
|
|
sv_limitnumvotes is renamed to sv_votecooldown, so Zan is reading your ini when you are trying to use the former.
|
|
|
|
|
|
thanks zdoom for pretending that fake svars in my ini are real. no way to even tell. everything worked then on this ticket |
|