|
Notes |
|
|
(0024469)
|
|
Kaminsky
|
2025-04-18 16:39
(edited on: 2025-04-18 16:40) |
|
|
|
|
|
Nice work. Before marking this as resolved, I want your feedback on 2 issues that popped up:
* The "points", "frags" and "wins" is missing proper grammar treatment in some circumstances. Instead of "1 point", it's "1 points". However, it still displays proper "1 point" when multiple teams tie. See the attached screenshots.
* If more than 2 teams exist, it will not tie them, but let everyone win. Maybe it should be changed from "teams that won with" to "teams that tied with/at" to make it consistent with "sv_maxteams 2"? See the attached screenshot.
Does "tied at" sound better and more right to you than "tied with"? Maybe the latter sounds more natural. I'm not sure which is the most proper. |
|
|
|
|
|
I amended the commit to fix the improper grammar treatment you mentioned and rephrased the "teams that won with" statement to "teams that tied at". I don't think it's wrong to use either "tied at" or "tied with" in this context, but somehow, the former sounds better to me. Though, it could be that these messages have always been phrased this way and I've become accustomed to it. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks, that seems to work and look better.
Just one more final thing: If 3 teams are tied for the lead, there's an additional comma after the 2nd team. This does not happen if only 2 teams are tied. Would it be better to remove the comma, or leave it as is? Maybe it would look a bit cleaner without the comma there. See the attached screenshot. |
|
|
|
|
Quote from unknownna
Just one more final thing: If 3 teams are tied for the lead, there's an additional comma after the 2nd team. This does not happen if only 2 teams are tied. Would it be better to remove the comma, or leave it as is? Maybe it would look a bit cleaner without the comma there.
Since there's no standard rule on whether the serial/oxford comma should be included or omitted from a list, I think it's okay to leave it as is (I also think the oxford comma is used in other lists in Zandronum too). Personally, I use them when listing items in writing, but I can understand if others don't, since using them or not has both advantages and disadvantages. |
|
|
|
|
Quote from Kaminsky
Since there's no standard rule on whether the serial/oxford comma should be included or omitted from a list, I think it's okay to leave it as is (I also think the oxford comma is used in other lists in Zandronum too). Personally, I use them when listing items in writing, but I can understand if others don't, since using them or not has both advantages and disadvantages.
You know, I think I'll make a separate suggestion for this, since I believe it would make "sv_maxteams 4" games look a bit less cluttered when the score changes fast between 2- and 3-team ties. IIRC, I remember noticing this issue way back on Skulltag many years ago when participating in multi-team DM games.
While we're at it, looking at the text on the scoreboard and large frag messages some more, when multiple teams are tied mid-game, it says "teams leading with x:", yet when all teams are tied, it says "teams are tied at x:".
Shouldn't it perhaps be changed from "teams leading with x:" to "teams tied at x:" to make it consistent with the string when all teams are tied? Even though 2+ teams might have a higher score than the other teams, if they're technically tied, they're not really in the lead, right?
What are your thoughts on this? I know I'm starting to get very technical here, but I just want to look over this thoroughly with you so it's cleared up before moving on. |
|
|
|
|
|
I'll split the issue into its own ticket. |
|
Screenshot_Doom_20250418_173623.png (24,094) 2025-04-18 15:49