Poll

When you make a kill or are killed what should or shouldn't be displayed on the screen (HUD)?

Show who you just killed.
57 (17.9%)
Don't show who you just killed.
15 (4.7%)
Only show who you killed if you killed a friendly (team kill).
30 (9.4%)
Add delay before your kill is confirmed.
18 (5.6%)
Show the person who killed you.
59 (18.5%)
Do not show who killed you.
16 (5%)
Show who just killed you for frienldy fire (team kill) only.
20 (6.3%)
Show which specific weapon (K98, Lee Enfield MK III, ....) you were killed with.
47 (14.7%)
Show general type of weapon (tank, airplane, handheld, ...) you were killed with.
16 (5%)
Don't show weapon that killed you at all.
17 (5.3%)
Show weapon that killed you if you were killed by friendly fire (team kill) only.
13 (4.1%)
Add delay before you are shown who or what killed you
11 (3.4%)

Total Members Voted: 96

Author Topic: Kill messages: Your stance  (Read 6537 times)

Offline Hockeywarrior

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1.062
  • One of the superior 5-digit numbers
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #60 on: 14-04-2009, 06:04:13 »
Looking at all the thoughts put down in this thread, I think that if any change was done at all, if it would be one where most people were at least ameniable, then it would have to be thus:
Tanke the current system and just add a delay of about 20-30 seconds onto it.  And maybe make teamkills in bold text.
I agree the number of people posting just goes to show how many people would be pissed off if it was changed. No matter how you'd change it, you'd be pleasing a few while irritating everyone else.

Check out my Red Orchestra, FH2, and shooting videos!
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQK9lbdAEi9mAM5iGfHoeyA

Offline Niam

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #61 on: 14-04-2009, 15:04:09 »
I don't think that a kill message delay is a good idea. It will confuse new players (and there will be many new players with the Normandy release) and is generally counter-intuitive. Just imagine how strange it would be, if you respawn and still see some kill messages pop up from your previous round. Although I prefer to keep the current system (but decluttered by showing only your personal kills and deaths) I'd rather have the messages comletely removed then having a somehow unwieldy system with delayed messages.

Offline Schneider

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.694
  • Ofw.Josef_Schneider
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #62 on: 14-04-2009, 15:04:06 »
I think so too - either no messages or kill messages without delay. No compromises!

Offline Slayer

  • Freeze Veteran
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.080
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #63 on: 14-04-2009, 18:04:33 »
I like:

- killmessages, but only my own or my squadmates'
- messages which are meant for immersion: I only noticed yesterday that at some point on Sidi Rezegh, the server tells you that the "Germans have taken control over British reinforcements". I think messages like that are cool and should stay.

I don't like:

- spam in the topleft corner: commander is on duty can go, as can all other killmessages from teammates way too far off (thus leaving only my own and my squadmates').
- same spam in the lower left corner. I'm not stupid, I can read my kill and then move on, I don't need to read it twice.
- killmessage delay. Like others before me have stated, I think this will make things worse while it tries improving things.

In short: I'd keep it as it is, or change it into internal killmessages only, like natty proposed.

Offline Admiral Donutz

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 901
  • Betatester
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #64 on: 14-04-2009, 18:04:41 »
The commander on duty spam can't be fixed, it's a BF2 thing that can not be fixed/tuned.

Offline Slayer

  • Freeze Veteran
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.080
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #65 on: 14-04-2009, 18:04:41 »
I only said what I didn't like  ;)

Seriously: it's a pity that such useles spam (because it is shown EVERY friggin' time the commander goes out of his seat and then enters it again  >:( >:( >:() can't be removed.

Offline Ciupita

  • Gay Lord
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1.581
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #66 on: 14-04-2009, 18:04:06 »
IMO the current system is good.

Offline Safe-Keeper

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #67 on: 15-04-2009, 17:04:10 »
Quote
I agree the number of people posting just goes to show how many people would be pissed off if it was changed.
On the contrary, it actually doesn't mean anything, as people can quite easily hate an idea in theory and love it once it's implemented. When Empire Earth came out, I was astonished to find that all airplanes had limited fuel - they'd take off from airbases, fly as usual until out of fuel, and then automatically return to the airbase they'd been assigned. Once they'd landed, they'd instantly be fully refuelled and would then slowly repair their damage until fully repaired, in which case they'd be ready for take-off or just fly to their assigned rally point. I loved this feature, which was an eye-opener to me because I know that if this feature had been suggested to me before I saw it in action, I'd utterly hate it and fight it with all my might, as would very likely lots of other people. And just think back to the 1942 days - how would you feel if someone told you they wanted a system in which any player could, at will, declare himself a mobile spawn point? The first reply would be "OMG that idea sux youd have people enter the enemy base and have people spawn on them and theyd dominate the map!". Lots of ideas sound utterly horrible on paper and end up working great once implemented.

My take: if a feature is implemented and played for a good while, enough for users to understand it, and people still hate it, listen. But theoretical discussions? Sure, votes are still good for their purposes, but arguments count more, in my opinion.

Quote
The commander on duty spam can't be fixed, it's a BF2 thing that can not be fixed/tuned.
Can't you even remove the string from the strings.csv file?
« Last Edit: 15-04-2009, 17:04:23 by Safe-Keeper »

Offline Niam

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #68 on: 15-04-2009, 18:04:19 »
On the contrary, it actually doesn't mean anything, as people can quite easily hate an idea in theory and love it once it's implemented.

Besides FH2 I'm playing also the HL2-mod Insurgency, where the settings of the kill-messages are changeable by server-admins (AFAIK). So there are servers which show kill-messages and servers which don't. So I actually know how it is without them and I don't like it. I guess some people here played PR, which afaik hasn't any messages either. People allready experienced both sides.   

Offline LordKhaine

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • I sing the body electric...
    • View Profile
Re: Kill messages: Your stance
« Reply #69 on: 15-04-2009, 23:04:11 »
Over the many years I've played realism mods for games... I've seen this brought up many many times. I think Red Orchestra covered it best. In RO you have two options, the default is as FH2 now. All death messages. But the server could be set to disable kill messages. In this mode all kill messages except for tk's were disabled, while people's personal death messages would still left intact allowing people to see who killed them. Players could then join a server running the option they want. Best of both worlds really...

The only issue is which would you default to? RO defaults to displaying kill messages... and thus almost all servers run with them enabled. And in my experience the majority of players would prefer to retain kill messages, though I personally like to have kill messages removed most often.
~LordKhaine~/~Arachidamia~