Feature #110
Timeout
| Status: | New | Start: | 14/03/2008 | |
| Priority: | Normal | Due date: | ||
| Assigned to: | - | % Done: | 0% |
|
| Category: | Game Options | |||
| Target version: | - | |||
Description
A story that inspired me on submitting this feature request:
I've been watching a live broadcast of a Q3 match, the game was tied and it went into overtime. But what happened? Rules said clearly overtime should be 3 minutes, but the server was set to sudden death - players simply forgot to adjust overtime settings before the match. Holy f**k? Maybe in QW.
But they solved it easily - they voted for timeout, in the timeout they changed the overtime settings, timeout expired and the game could carry on without any problems!
In QW if you forget to set proper overtime settings you are fucked. If something disturbs you, bad luck. Ofc sometimes some lame player can call timeout in some unnecessary unexpected moment just to piss you off .. but hey, it's still better than simple pause (which is disabled by default everywhere) and it's good to at least have the option for timeout (if they don't like it, they can turn it off)
(I'll submit extra feature request for changing game settings during the match)
How should timeout work:
Player can raise only limited number of timeouts per match (1 by default), timeout is on immediately (no voting or anything), once the timeout is on, automatically an countdown will start, (30 seconds by default), then the game will continue. Timeout will technically appear as a pause (should solve demos, gameclocks and everything else client-side hopefully).
If you want to play with it, you can have also "voted timeout" - such timeout will not decrease the "allowed timeouts count" for any player. But the basic variant should be simple timeout which is called immediately (no voting).
Maybe bind timeout to the "pause" command itself. Let's face it - pause is not so great idea and the time in the online gaming showed that timeout (as I've just described) is better than simple "pause".
