Hostile messages not displaying the player name

[Relapse]

Since the introduction of the disguise system hostile messages don't always contain the player name, it is just blank instead.

[InMyDarkestHours]

I think these messages are generated from the @ command to dislike everyone.

It might be better just to turn them off entirely as they have been spamming.

[Arawn]

I think these messages are generated from the @ command to dislike everyone.

It might be better just to turn them off entirely as they have been spamming.

Can't, unfortunately. Otherwise it could be used to exploit around the OOC warning that's the point of the hostile message in the first place. I'll try and figure out why the name isn't displaying.

[Legion XXI]

I kind of liked that there was a way to tell when someone had used the hostile all function.  As someone who occasionally has to do this, it's nice that people can tell so you're not spammed with tells when there's 80+ players on.  If it's going to be set to display the name, is there any way it could be set to show that they hostiled everyone?

[SardineTheAncestor]

I thought it was intentional and that it was pretty neat.

Would it be bad if the hostile all message just said "Name has set themselves up as enemies with all players." or something like that, to avoid the tell spam? I usually respond to the tells just to be nice but I think people get the wrong idea.

[Leezil]

I thought it was intentional and that it was pretty neat.

Would it be bad if the hostile all message just said "Name has set themselves up as enemies with all players." or something like that, to avoid the tell spam? I usually respond to the tells just to be nice but I think people get the wrong idea.

+1

[Relapse]

I thought it was intentional and that it was pretty neat.

Would it be bad if the hostile all message just said "Name has set themselves up as enemies with all players." or something like that, to avoid the tell spam? I usually respond to the tells just to be nice but I think people get the wrong idea.

+1

+2

[Arawn]

Can't, unfortunately. Otherwise it could be used to exploit around the OOC warning that's the point of the hostile message in the first place. I'll try and figure out why the name isn't displaying.

[ladylena]

I thought it was intentional too... Also did not know about the @ command to dislike everyone. Do we have a sticky of those commands?

Maybe there could be something added to the messege noting that it's a hostile all?

[Arawn]

I thought it was intentional too... Also did not know about the @ command to dislike everyone. Do we have a sticky of those commands?

Maybe there could be something added to the messege noting that it's a hostile all?

As I said before, distinguishing the message in any way from the ordinary message will mark it as something most players will believe they can safely ignore (i.e. not a real hostile). In this way it will be easy for anyone who does not want to give the OOC warning we mandate in our rules to simply use @server hostile before attacking. It should be no more or less spammy than it was when people did it manually. For these reasons, either the command stays as it was designed, or we remove it entirely.

[EO]

This should now be fixed.