Suggestion Alliance Colours

[Lazuli73]

For a while now alliances have had a default setting, blue is your friend, red is your enemy. Well, I don't care for this. Currently there are three active alliances: Vanguard, Argus, and whatever Dwem's alliance is called. For the longest time I thought it was just the Vanguard and Argus because all players not in my alliance showed as red on my tab list. I suggest that each alliance get their own tab list alliance colour. Let's say Vanguard is purple, Argus is orange, and alliance (insert real name here) is blue. This way we can more easily determine who we are actually at war with and who is just in another alliance.

 

[MasterAegon]

The number of colors are limited of there's the potential of new alliances in the future.

I would be more receptive to see color coded statuses rather than each alliance having it. Blue for allies, red for if an alliance has been named an enemy (perhaps with the war function already in place for wild towns), and then a neutral color for..well, neutral alliances.

If you're 'allied' with another alliance then it defeats the purpose of being two different ones unless we start calling these divisions something to simulate countries made up of city states who then ally with one another. That's a level of detail that may not be necessary.

I say be in an alliance together, be enemies, or do your best not to have war declared on you in neutrality.

 

[Cryptite]

I agree with Master here. I do agree it's not too great that you're at war with everybody by default, so we will probably implement Neutral Alliances and then let alliances declare war on each other. As for multiple colors, though, I can see there being a huge fight over who gets what color, and I'm not sure that's really something we want right now. What we'll probably stick with is blue for friendlies, gray for neutral alliance members, red for enemies, and white for wild towns/nomads/wanderers.

f we get to a point where distinguishing between lots of alliance becomes an issue, we have some ideas for how to handle that. Presently though, don't see that it's too problematic.

 

[Lazuli73]

Instead of colour coding it, what about this. We have extra lists in the tab menu, like a town. Argus would have one list, Vanguard, ect. I understand that colour coding it might not be the best way, but I still think that we need a better was to distinguish alliances in the tab list.

 

[Cryptite]

I no longer have the ability to manually define lists in the tab menu like we used to in 1.7. Unfortunately, colors are the only way to really separate things out in the tablist at present.

 

[Artagan]

As for multiple colors, though, I can see there being a huge fight over who gets what color

If you implemented this, I imagine it'd have to be first come first serve.

Just in case, I call blue for Vanguard.

I imagine Argus would want red and Avarice would want purple.

EDIT: If possible, light blue.

 

[Ronshaud]

If you implemented this, I imagine it'd have to be first come first serve.

Just in case, I call blue for Vanguard.

I imagine Argus would want red and Avarice would want purple.

EDIT: If possible, light blue.

To avoid confusion between a town and an alliance (for others not in that alliance) if vanguard is going to be blue, it has to be different kind of blue to discriminate the alliance blue from the vanguard blue.

 

[mopb3]

If you implemented this, I imagine it'd have to be first come first serve.

Just in case, I call blue for Vanguard.

I imagine Argus would want red and Avarice would want purple.

EDIT: If possible, light blue.

In that case we have dibs on one shade darker blue

 

[MasterAegon]

If anything, I would say it will be a system that allows alliances to set colors so they can differentiate as per their liking. That way, each alliance can pick any color they see fit to classify the other ones.

 

[Leasaur]

To avoid confusion between a town and an alliance (for others not in that alliance) if vanguard is going to be blue, it has to be different kind of blue to discriminate the alliance blue from the vanguard blue.

What?

 

[Ronshaud]

What?

I meant: if vanguard is going to be blue, the it has to be a different kind of blue. Because alliance blue is light blue. By alliance blue, I mean people in your alliance names' are light blue

 

[Leasaur]

I meant: if vanguard is going to be blue, the it has to be a different kind of blue. Because alliance blue is light blue. By alliance blue, I mean people in your alliance names' are light blue

But wouldn't that change the names in tab to anyone who is in your alliance is your alliance's colour?

 

[Lazuli73]

If anything, I would say it will be a system that allows alliances to set colors so they can differentiate as per their liking. That way, each alliance can pick any color they see fit to classify the other ones.

I thought about mentioning custom setting for colours per player but I thought that would be too time consuming. I get it that Crypt is a coding wizzard, but he does have a life I'm sure.

 

[MasterAegon]

I thought about mentioning custom setting for colours per player but I thought that would be too time consuming. I get it that Crypt is a coding wizzard, but he does have a life I'm sure.

Absolutely. It would probably be alliance specific, and the lead town would set the colors according to what everyone wants. That way there is no conflict over who gets what color and your alliance could match color-to-alliance easily.

You are right though, it's all a matter of what Crypt has time for and what he decides on in the end.

 

[Grubul]

IMAGE is only for example of a TAB system, not to advertise the server in the image.

couldnt we somehow have something like this?

 

[MasterAegon]

Is that a 1.8 server though?

 

[Cryptite]

That looks like a 1.8 server indeed. You can tell because 1.8 allows both a header and a footer on the tablist. Perhaps somebody's finally figured out tab formatting.