10-10-2007, 06:03 PM | #1 |
D&A Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts Rated Helpful 13 Times
|
Couple map ideas
Since I'll never make a map myself, I figured I'd toss these couple ideas for anyone else who might think they could work. (*note numbers are suplimented in just for examples obviously balancing and tweaking would play a role too)
On a normal CTF map start both teams off at 100 points each. Use a set incriment timer (anywhere from 1-10 minutes), for every incriment minus a certain number of points (5-10 probably) Make it so if you made atleast 1 touch on the enemy flag during the current incriment, no points will be lost. This might encourage (I say might here because who knows really) more offense for that map. Since a team is not going to want to see their score slowly dropping, they'll make more attempts at the flag. We could also make it so if a team ever reached 0 the round would be over. This could prevent the strategy of turtling, where if a team got ahead in points then went all D to prevent caps, they'll slowly loose points, while the other team while atleast making flag touches isn't loosing points. The round otherwise would end after a set timelimit. Idea #2 Design a map that has your team spawn in a room that has no doors. Just two teleporters. One to sends you to your base resupply, and the other sends you to just past the center of the map (a yard or something). But past the other teams's offensive spawning point. So you won't ever run into the other team's O on your first run. Small visual (if you were to look at the map from overhead) 1 - Red Flag 2 - Red D spawn 3 - Red Yard 4 - Neutral yard 5 - Blue O spawn 6 - Neutral yard 5 - Red O spawn 4 - Neutral yard 3 - Blue Yard 2 - Blue D spawn 1 - Blue Flag This would make it so that more often than not, you'll spawn already behind the enemy's O, still have to run into the enemy's base, get the flag out and run it all the way back (still allowing the defense to defend the flag in the neutral center yard) So whaddya think? Think either of these ideas could work? Cheers, Hammock |
|
10-10-2007, 07:16 PM | #2 |
get off my lawn
Join Date: Mar 2007
Class/Position: O scout / demo Gametype: killing Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
you're missing the point. The teleporters will allow the offence to move more directly towards the objective, they still have to move in, grab flag, and get out, but it might save em a conc or some time.
I like the idea, because sneaky Defense can tele down too then reverse course to take out enemy O exiting resupply.
__________________
That means that either you are an American, or you are NOT an American. There is no hyphenated exception. -Iggy |
|
10-10-2007, 07:20 PM | #3 |
D&A Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts Rated Helpful 13 Times
|
It's not quite the same as invade/defend style
The teleporter's are just there to by pass the oncomming O. You're not being teleported right to the flag, you're being teleported just to the neutral center yard past the enemy O. I'd say the suggestion works more along the lines of a map I played where the offense when spawning goes out the offense window and has a clear run to the enemy base, while the enemy's O are doing the same thing in their own symetrical tunnel on their side. The only difference is that instead of segregated tunnels, everyone will still be playing together, and if the flags reached the middle you'd still have clashes from people running into eachother. The reason I didn't suggest the idea stated exactly up above, is because I don't like the idea of completely removing any interaction at all between all players. Atleast this way the majority of the time you're not running into them, but from time to time you will. We don't need to continuously prove that we can cross a neutral ground to get to the enemy base, instead the focus would be one of just trying to break into the base and then out of. Picture Aardvark in the sense that the O would no longer need to run to the boost arrows so much as start 10 feet away from it. No real infiltration has been needed to get to that point and if both enemy teams are starting off in at their respective boost pads, the only time the O would clash is if the flag landed in the yard. Invade/Defend maps seem more cutthroat too often it seems to be the case that you get one good attempt (usually a conc) onto the cap point, a failure most often results in a flag returning. Two sets of teleporters wouldn't be needed either really. You could have that room spawn in the base, and the D have the choice to run out the doors, and the O have the choice of taking the teleporter. Since there's rarely a time where there's more than 5 O I don't see the teleporter being bogged down. Now right away I can instantly spot one problem already, and that would be the fact the slower classes by taking a teleporter negates the penalty of their speed, and can spawn and get to the enemy base faster than they would have normally. That might be able to be corrected by making it a "light" teleporter, where it'll only work for classes with less armor (ie: not the HW/Solly/Demo) I can accept the fact that this idea may not be feasible. But this one was my 2nd idea. How about the first though, any problems with that? I'd be more keen on seeing a map with that implimented than my 2nd idea. Hell you wouldn't even need to design a whole new map, just take an existing map change the starting scores and code in the extra timer crap. Would be good field test, and boy if that idea actually worked and tested well, it could be the "revolutionary" change to CTF maps to encourage more offense. Cheers, Hammock |
|
10-10-2007, 08:15 PM | #4 | ||
D&A Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts Rated Helpful 13 Times
|
I didn't rework what I was saying to get around anything you said. I tried to clear it up a bit so you could understand what I'm trying to elminate with the teleporters.
I don't know how else to explain it even when you yourself typed exactly what I meant. Quote:
Quote:
Picture this (now don't pick this apart because it's going to hopefully just be a simple example) On crossover2, in the center yard hovering directly above the water in the center will be a cubby. Two exits will face out, one will point towards the blue sniper deck, the other the red sniper deck. a blue offensive medic takes his teleporter (that's still back in his respawn) and it immediately teleports him to our new cubby. His exit will point towards the red base (and vice versa for a red medic) Once he drops into the water, he will continue on towards the red base. Completely avoiding any red offense. Once he enters red's yard, he's going to have to deal with the red guys that have chosen D, and are still in their base to defend the flag. If the blue medic gets the flag, he's still going to have to work it all the way up, out and even fight for it still in the neutral yard in the center if it's ever dropped there. The red offense are doing the same thing. The reason for the teleporter is because I still want to give people a choice for O and D. If everyone spawns in the cubby, the defense would have to run back to their base, that doesn't make much sense. And I don't want to force particular classes only to spawn in the center because then I'd be telling people what classes are allowed on D and what are for O. If you made a teleporter's exit point hover above the ground a bit so they fall once they're through then you wouldn't have people spawning on eachother. You could even have them land in a pool of water to ensure no fall damage either. Am I explaining this wrong someone? I'm trying to be clear as possible, that this suggestion is in efforts to elminate offense vs offense from occuring as commonly as it does, but I guess I'm not doing a good job. If the idea is stupid I can accept that, but I don't think the idea is being clearly understood. Cheers, Hammock ps. still like my first idea better Last edited by Hammock; 10-10-2007 at 08:27 PM. |
||
|
10-10-2007, 09:25 PM | #5 |
get off my lawn
Join Date: Mar 2007
Class/Position: O scout / demo Gametype: killing Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
i'm getting it 100%, hammock.
and there are ways to prevent telefragging/sticking, such as a cooldown timer or multiple teleport entrance/exit sections. as far as points for flag touches / attempts, wouldnt it just be the same to add a point for every flag touch, with a 30 second cooldown? seems taking a team down slowly from 110 would be the same as moving the other team up slowly from 100, and i think that would be easier lua coding. Although I guess the psycological effect of losing points due to inactivity might mean more than the other team getting points for their efforts.
__________________
That means that either you are an American, or you are NOT an American. There is no hyphenated exception. -Iggy |
|
10-10-2007, 10:11 PM | #6 | |
D&A Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts Rated Helpful 13 Times
|
Quote:
I don't think it would destroy a game, because if you're atleast getting flag touches (flag returns won't be more detrimental or anything) then you're not loosing points. So if you had two teams 11 on each. Only 2 O per team, and 9 defenders and neither team is getting anywhere near the flag. I see a couple outcomes. 1. It might make some people rethink what they want to do, and force more to run O (for either team) 2. End the round earlier because both teams will reach 0 points before the map timer. Reseting the map and teams which might make a better game for the next round. Who knows in time people might get tired of shorter games because of points running out first before the timelimit, and start running O more often because they know they can prevent this. The biggest difference for this idea (and pretty much the main reason I suggested it) is to combat the imfamous "Turtling" strategy. One team goes out makes a couple caps then sits back with a full 11 man defensive line up. Well if the other team is atlesat touching their flag they won't loose points, but the turtling team might loose enough points to loose the lead since they're not even getting touches. Cheers, Hammock |
|
|
10-11-2007, 07:37 AM | #7 |
Nutcracker
|
That sounds like a map that would only be played on public servers. Why not make a OvD CTF map instead, where one team only attacks and one only defends, but instead of command points like in dustbowl, the point would be to capture a flag as many times as possible? OvD maps seem to work better than normal CTF maps on pubs, because people will know when joining "Defenders" that they are supposed to defend and attack when joining "Attackers".
|
|
10-11-2007, 02:45 PM | #8 | |
D&A Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts Rated Helpful 13 Times
|
Quote:
When I came up with the idea, I had pubs completely in mind. How many league matches have you played already? Since pick up's are more organized it wouldn't work well there either. But the idea was to some how give random pubbers a greater sense of urgency to go after the flag. Cheers, Hammock |
|
|
10-11-2007, 03:12 PM | #9 |
Holy shit, thats kerrigan!
D&A Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Class/Position: D, whatever the team needs, usually engy Gametype: AvD Affiliations: None Posts Rated Helpful 1 Times
|
someone make this map, and make it offical.
|
|
10-11-2007, 03:33 PM | #10 |
Nutcracker
|
Community maps won't become official, but they will be listed on the web site when they have time to upgrade it.
|
|
10-11-2007, 04:27 PM | #11 |
Holy shit, thats kerrigan!
D&A Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Class/Position: D, whatever the team needs, usually engy Gametype: AvD Affiliations: None Posts Rated Helpful 1 Times
|
well, if they are really popular, and everyone likes them, there is a possiblylity it can become offical, like in Natural Selction
half of their maps are made by the community. |
|
10-11-2007, 05:14 PM | #12 |
Nutcracker
|
Yeah but I was just quoting the devs, can't remember where they said that.
|
|
10-21-2007, 08:04 PM | #14 | |
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts Rated Helpful 5 Times
|
Quote:
ff_2morforever |
|
|
10-22-2007, 10:24 AM | #15 |
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
vctf!!!! vehicle ctf fast in and out, but easy to hit
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|