Posts from Major update.

In this thread, I would like to present several suggestions at once. Perhaps each of them is not too difficult to implement, but the point is that many such suggestions have accumulated. Also, I will add a poll here, since it has become customary in this section.
1. The first suggestions concern search functionality. I propose fixing the search in sections with disabled counters so that it works correctly, instead of how it currently functions:

Sorry, no matches found. Please try different topics.

2. Another problem with search is short words. Yes, I understand why one- and two-letter words are excluded from the search; the number of matches would be simply enormous. But can't the forum handle the load from searching for three-letter words? Moreover, some three-letter combinations are quite rare, while others could simply display something like "Sorry, too many matches," if technically necessary.

3. There is a lack of advanced search by topic rather than by section. It’s a small thing, but annoying. To use advanced search by topic, you have to select the entire subforum containing that topic. And frankly speaking, the functionality of advanced search leaves much to be desired... Can operators even be used in it? Apparently, initially it searches for a match with at least one of the listed keywords – why not all of them together? Or why can't we configure it to search for messages that contain all the specified keywords? If possible, it would be good to describe this in detail, preferably not just in the help section, but directly in the search form itself.
In general, I would briefly describe this point as "increasing the capabilities of advanced search on the forum."

4. Another thing that, in my opinion, deserves modernization is embedded videos. Currently, to embed a video on a page, you have to use old YouTube tags, and manually copy and enter everything because automatic generation of such tags has long been removed from YouTube itself.Example.
It looks like this:

And the modern standard, generally speaking, is something like this (I slightly "messed it up" here; otherwise, even under the HTML tag, the forum censors it mercilessly...):

< iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LMzOHfOSRl0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

But it is perceived by the forum engine as malicious code:

[An attempt to use malicious tags has been detected. Please notify moderators!]

A separate headache is that the old code requires Flash to work, while the new one uses html5.
In general, I suggest adding support for the new code.

5. Now about signatures. I don't know how demanding they are on forum resources, but if there are enough resources, I think it’s time to ease the restrictions on signatures. For starters, make it more obvious – text. How much does a single printed character weigh? A byte? Then why is there a limit of 500 characters in a signature? Yes, I understand that reading huge walls of text in signatures would not be very pleasant, but various tags also count as characters. And isn't 500 characters too little? It's roughly six lines. I believe you could allow even more. My suggestion is to increase the limit to 1000 characters (or so. Something like 800 should also be sufficient, but here the question is, what unnecessary limitations should we add?).

6. Images in signatures. Here, I cannot refer to their tiny weight, but still, if the load from them allows, then the restrictions should also be reduced. This especially applies to the area of images. The following points are particularly strange:

A user's signature cannot contain more than two large images if there are no small images.

Images with an area larger than 500x140 are not allowed.

As a result, to insert a large image (larger than 500x140), you have to cut it into two and insert them this way. Very strange. Why not just set a limit on the total area of images in a signature and make it not too strict? Unless you want to limit the width so that signatures don’t inadvertently "stretch" the image on the screen, as happens with large pictures. So, in conclusion:
-limit the total area of images (something like 500x500 pixels would be more than enough, in my opinion).
-limit the width (I won't say how)
-limit the total number of images (otherwise they will put a million animated emoticons; we know this)
-possibly limit the total weight of images to reduce the load on the forum. Well, if necessary.

That's all. Here I should note that I do not know exactly about the technical possibilities of implementing one or another point. Also, I am not insisting on precisely such changes; perhaps something needs to be reformulated. But I believe that such "innovations" would be useful for the forum.

Extra

7, 8, 9, 10. Drakkosha's suggestions. In particular, about slightly increasing the size of avatars and adding spoilers. Separately about spoilers: Shaman has already managed to implement something like this. And then we discussed it with him and further improved it.

11. Old-school reputation system. Personally, I am more against it if the implementation corresponds to what was described to me (I didn’t experience this myself). But taking the best moments from there, such as the ability to see pluses and minuses for a post, would probably be good.

12. About attachments. It really makes sense to do something similar, that is, add the ability to upload other types of archives. And you could also increase the maximum size of archive attachments.

load from images

Images are uploaded directly by the user from the server where they are stored, aren't they?

Changes

From a technical standpoint, the forum is very outdated, not to mention that its functionality only decreases over time (first it was ranks, then limited search was introduced, the inability to upload files for unregistered users, etc.). If HeroesWorld needs anything, it is a full-scale modernization and a more powerful server, but for this, funding and an active administration are required.

Images are uploaded directly by the user from the server on which they are stored, aren't they?

Yes, I didn't think of that. In that case, it only makes sense to talk about the load on the users' internet.

If HeroesWorld needs anything, it's a full-scale modernization

That would be nice, but it's clearly not something that can be done in a relatively short time. I think it would be worth starting with something, at least ;)

Yes, I didn't think about that. Then it makes sense to talk only about the load on internet users.

Just a reminder that today is 2016. But if the internet connection speed of individual users does not meet today's standards, then you should remember an ancient remedy:

It would be nice, but this is clearly not something that can be provided in a relatively short time.

This is just a matter of money and desire.

Just a reminder that today is 2016.

Veg, isn't he from Kamchatka? Let him tell us how his internet was in 2016. I heard it was bad.

It's important to remember the ancient remedy.

Anyway, it's not very nice to completely ignore resource usage. For example, when I'm on the forum with my phone, I sometimes have a bad internet connection, but I still want the forum to look normal. Besides, to change the options, you have to go into the control panel every time, which is not very convenient on a phone.
Although I agree that in 2016, you can generally worry less about saving traffic, but it's better to stay within some reasonable limits.

The interests of the majority should not be sacrificed for the interests of the minority.

We're not talking about a sacrifice, but about a reasonable compromise... I don't understand what we're arguing about, to be honest. I wouldn't even want to load a page with a bunch of huge GIFs, 100 MB each, for example, even with my current internet connection (which is more than good). Obviously, there's some kind of reasonable upper limit here. On the other hand, the point of my suggestions is to reduce the number of restrictions, not increase them. That is, they should primarily be dictated by the need to keep the forum concise and readable, and concern for things like traffic should be secondary and within reasonable limits. And in general, we can leave it entirely up to the users' discretion, as such absurd excesses are usually rare.

In this thread, I would like to post many suggestions at once.

However, no one will actually do that.

Why not? The creator sometimes implements small fixes to the forum, such as the relatively recent removal of the minimum message length requirement.

I had a brief chat with user KindShaman about iframe tags and security. Of course, it was pointed out to me that the forum doesn't fear this tag for no reason and that various nasty things can be done through it. However, loading any arbitrary third-party iframe onto forum pages is not necessary for this task; it is sufficient to check via a mask that the frame is specifically a YouTube video. Since the service generates the embed code itself, it is extremely predictable and easily fits within the framework of a regular expression something like this:

(I tested it with the code higher up on the page, and it worked)
(if you copy this code, it's better to take it from the message "code," because it is displayed slightly differently on the forum page).
In other words, everything is strict — one step left or right and you're shot. Nothing foreign will get through. But I am, of course, not aware of the implementation details; simply if security needs to be combined with new YouTube videos, I would suggest something like this.

If we're talking about priorities, items 1 and 5 would be the most desired.

Who was it that was looking for someone with a bad internet connection back in 2016? In Asia, I'm consistently unlucky with it. However, I'll soon be moving to a location with a good internet connection, but if ever a lot of "Asians" show up on HeroesWorld, the large file size of images could become their problem.

1.

I don't use the search, but why not.

2.

See point 1.

3.

See point 1.

4.

For my part, I'll say that it's not just YouTube with this nonsense; some other sites also act up periodically. On one hand, there are decent sites to bypass the problem, but on the other, not everyone knows about these sites, and using a third party for embedding code isn't exactly cool. In any case, it's worth thinking about; maybe we really can filter iFrames by YouTube if possible, or automatically rewrite malicious tags into less malicious ones (like that generator, only built into the forum).
If a tag is automatically replaced due to a forum quirk, then I think replacing it with another tag would be technically not much harder.

5.

Usually, the limit is enough for me; there's little joy in seeing signatures longer than the messages themselves, but on the other hand, it's not that terribly unbearable. Moreover, people sometimes post links to their threads, posts in factions/expansions, etc., in their signatures, and the plus from such a solution outweighs the minuses of mile-long signatures. So I'm for it.

6.

See previous point. For width, I think about 800 pixels is enough; anyway, in 2016 few weirdos are sitting with 640x480, although phone users might find it inconvenient. It's also better to introduce a height limit, otherwise some smart-aleck will post a "longcat" in their signature and that'll be fun. As for calculating the total area, I don't know; if it checks one image by area, then maybe it can sum them up, so perhaps it's a good idea, but then the limit could be larger.
As for file size, who knows—the image isn't loaded into the signature itself, it just sits on some random hosting, and I think few smart-alecks will try to pull a ten-gig monster (though I can't imagine an img tag processing a 10-gig image that is 500x500 pixels).

I'll add from myself:
7. Increase avatar size to 180x180, for example. A small thing, but it's nice.
8. Bring back ranks! Did I flood a hundred-and-fifty posts in the factions and expansions for nothing?
9. BRING BACK THE CHAT. Not that I miss our conference, and perhaps the tournament players have their own conference with utopias and fairies, but a general forum chat could be set up to more easily lure newcomers into your sections. And who knows if our factions will come back to life.
10. By the way, regarding white letters, add tags and

. The first one works via HTML, but HTML is disabled in some forum sections, and clicking a button is easier than constantly switching layouts. And the second is convenient for hiding large chunks of text to make scrolling pages easier or for all sorts of sarcastic flood comments.

Yes, by the way, finding a way to use spoilers would be a truly useful improvement.

Yes, by the way, finding a way to use spoilers would be a truly useful improvement.

No need to search.

replacing harmful tags with less harmful ones

By the way, I didn't mention this, but among other things, Shaman tested how safe the object tags are, which are not filtered on the forum, unlike iframes. It turned out that they are roughly the same. Well, plus or minus.

Yes, by the way, finding a way to use spoilers would be the most useful improvement possible.

By the way, regarding the white letters, adding and

.

tags.

How did I forget to mention this? :( I absolutely agree about spoilers and the strikethrough tag. Especially about the former.

Increase the size of avatars to 180x180, for example. It's a small thing, but it would be nice.

In principle, our forum has fairly large avatars, but why not?

Bring back ranks!

BRING BACK THE CHAT.

Of course, I also support this, although it's no longer a small fix... However, regarding the chat, during his tests, Shaman showed that at least attaching an external chat to the forum is not difficult. With some caveats, of course, but these details are no longer up to me.)

You don't even need to look for it.

Wow! I didn't have anything like that working when I was experimenting... Thanks, Shaman!