Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Showdown Feedback

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ammo should just respawn. It seems the game type needs something to drive confrontation anyways. Increasing ammo caps is a terrible idea, that will just promote more defensive play from spam.

    This is one of the things that also killed TAM for me. Maxing out ammo caps allowed people to just lob whatever from one spawn to the other, hoping for a lucky frag to tip the scale early. In DM a degree of spam is expected, and you at least know that to do so a player usually has to be out scooping up ammo to do it. In TAM, and some other team games, that's not the case.
    Originally posted by Mysterial
    An instant hit, accurate, instant kill weapon is overpowered. There's no skill ceiling. It's limited only by the shooter's accuracy. It also severely impairs the defensive side of the game - ignoring ping, it is nearly irrelevant what your opponent does - click the right pixel and you win. Even non-instant kill instant hit weapons are often problematic - the Shock Rifle example is obvious before even getting to other games.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by -AEnubis- View Post
      Ammo should just respawn. It seems the game type needs something to drive confrontation anyways.
      Does it though?
      Each round has 2 minutes. Overcharge spawns at 50 seconds.
      Each player starts his round deciding whether they collect more items or get to their allies faster. Whenever you choose to collect items, you're risking your allies health, because you're effectively out of combat. (Example: DM-Temple, Stinger-Spawn. You can spend ~10-20 seconds on stacking armour, vials and ammo at your spawn.. meanwhile, your teammates almost certainly have fought over AMP, Shield and Jump Boots).

      My point being: TSD seems to have an inherent way of driving confrontration, because
      • whenever you choose NOT to fight, you LOSE advantage. (can go into detail about this one, if need be)
      • The early phase where Damage Amp, Shield Belt, Jump Boots and 100-Armour are still up has the most action, and usually it's not over before 1:30 or even 1:20, considering that Damage Amp lasts 15 seconds, guaranteeing another 15 seconds of action.
      • In this phase, people WILL lose health and stack and armour, so here's another decision to make: will they re-stack health and ammo or will they stay at their allies side, camp together and risk losing all the pickups to the enemy team. Will they move as a team, making them more predictable and slower (sounds awfully theoretical, but I think it's just a fact)
      • Maybe then there's ~20 seconds until Overcharge spawns. In those it's possible to have few action going on due to one team being at a huge disadvantage, making it more the better strategy to run&hide and try to secure good positioning towards Overcharge.


      Sorry. I simply feel like those so called 'confrontation drivers' are mostly just a fancy design concept that sounds plausible, but kind of disregards the reality of TSD? I have never felt any lack of confrontation or incentives for action, playing TSD. That's why I try to sum up, theoretically, why I think that this has never been the case.


      About the ammo: yea it can get scarce and maybe respawning ammo could somehow change that. I think in the end it's not difficult to strike a good balance there, though. First steps towards this have been made, and I like the ammo situation as it is right now.
      Last edited by rawlph; 02-07-2016, 06:48 AM.

      Comment


      • Alright, I like the idea of re-spawning ammo, cause right now, lack of ammo is my major upset with this game mode.
        http://www.speedtest.net/result/5025355936.png
        My Gaming Setup;
        i7-4770K @3.5Ghz (original clock speed) 12gig RAM. nVidea GTX 760 (192-Bit) - Windows 10 64 Bit
        Razor DeathAdder Chroma(Mouse), Razor Vespula (Mousepad), Razor Kraken Pro (headset), Acer 19.5' Monitor, LG 120 Hrz 4K 49' TV
        Total Build Cost; $3,610 CDN, w/ 5 year extended warranty on all parts.

        Comment


        • It's not a reality of TSD, but of games in general. I haven't played it enough to give even a subjective view of it, I'm just going by what I'm reading, and what I could guess from the design on paper.

          TAM had the same problem. In beta testing, a lot of the people who played it found their own incentive to be aggressive. Their play styles were friendly to the game type. As the game grew in popularity, it attracted more and more different play styles, and some of it's flaws were discovered very late in it's development, which was unfortunate because by then fixes to these flaws were met with resistance.
          Last edited by -AEnubis-; 02-07-2016, 04:23 PM.
          Originally posted by Mysterial
          An instant hit, accurate, instant kill weapon is overpowered. There's no skill ceiling. It's limited only by the shooter's accuracy. It also severely impairs the defensive side of the game - ignoring ping, it is nearly irrelevant what your opponent does - click the right pixel and you win. Even non-instant kill instant hit weapons are often problematic - the Shock Rifle example is obvious before even getting to other games.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by -AEnubis- View Post
            It's not a reality of TSD, but of games in general. I haven't played it enough to give even a subjective view of it, I'm just going by what I'm reading, and what I could guess from the design on paper.

            TAM had the same problem. In beta testing, a lot of the people who played it found their own incentive to be aggressive. There play styles were friendly to the game type. As the game grew in popularity, it attracted more and more different play styles, and some of it's flaws were discovered very late in it's development, which was unfortunate because by then fixes to these flaws were met with resistance.
            Good point. Can only hypothesize about the future.. I can only tell from a mix of experience and theoretical analysis of the game mode, that I can't see that happening. But of course, only time would tell. I'd also like to emphasize that in my opinion it's often a bad thing to trust theories and analyses too much in that regard. Maybe it's a better development-approach to attend to that kind of stuff after the problem has come up.. rather than before :P.

            Comment


            • Problem with that is people get used to, and attracted to aspects of how it was, so change becomes difficult. Even your dog in this race seems that you like something about the game type in it's current state that you don't want to see change.

              Ultimately though good design is being able to foresee these things and not develop in a reactive fashion.
              Originally posted by Mysterial
              An instant hit, accurate, instant kill weapon is overpowered. There's no skill ceiling. It's limited only by the shooter's accuracy. It also severely impairs the defensive side of the game - ignoring ping, it is nearly irrelevant what your opponent does - click the right pixel and you win. Even non-instant kill instant hit weapons are often problematic - the Shock Rifle example is obvious before even getting to other games.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by -AEnubis- View Post
                Problem with that is people get used to, and attracted to aspects of how it was, so change becomes difficult. Even your dog in this race seems that you like something about the game type in it's current state that you don't want to see change.

                Ultimately though good design is being able to foresee these things and not develop in a reactive fashion.
                True. But if people get used to stuff and like it, is it really still a problem?
                Also.. what you're saying about good design is something that should be known not to be true. Yes, to some extent you can foresee what's gonna be successful. But the rest should be designed for adaptation. Mostly because people's desires change.

                In reality it's always a mix. It's always gonna be a back&forth, it's always gonna be iteration after iteration. So I think the ultimate design is rather some sort of "flexible programme" than a fixed goal at a certain point.

                Comment


                • People like problems all the time. In this case, people liking it is actually what makes it a problem. If no one liked play in ways that made the game un-fun for others, then you wouldn't need game rules. Everyone would engage cordially, and there would be no problems.

                  You don't need a game type to be "flexible." If you want something different, that's what multiple game types are for. Ultimately, too much flexibility is problematic, as too much freedom will eventually allow for players to play in ways that don't have good counter play, which should be your main goal in any multiplayer game mechanic, to maintain good counter play.

                  As an example, in TAM we offered an option to adjust starting ammo. The purpose of course, was to accommodate different "opinions" on weapon balance, since our ammo limitations were seconding as a balancing mechanism for 2kx. What ended up happening was servers started to accommodate players who "just wanted to spam" which also facilitated defensive play, and it got to a point where it was expected that any server gave you all the shock ammo you could per round. Needless to say for "balance" and player preference, LtG, Rox, and Flak weren't far behind. Spawning fully loaded meant there was little "cost" to spamming off half your silo blindly, because you'd still have the other half to actually aim at a target.

                  In retrospect, if I were to pick TAM up for UT4, it would have a lot less options. Game play would be far more standardized, even if it meant it being less popular, solely for the integrity of the game.
                  Originally posted by Mysterial
                  An instant hit, accurate, instant kill weapon is overpowered. There's no skill ceiling. It's limited only by the shooter's accuracy. It also severely impairs the defensive side of the game - ignoring ping, it is nearly irrelevant what your opponent does - click the right pixel and you win. Even non-instant kill instant hit weapons are often problematic - the Shock Rifle example is obvious before even getting to other games.

                  Comment


                  • Having fun with TSD. One thing that bothers me at the moment is how powerful the overcharge is, +100 health, doubledamage, speedboost, wallhack and +ammo, are you kidding me? I feel like this makes the late-round very flimsy and often it feels like what lead up to the late-round did not matter once a player got the overcharge. Having a comeback mechanic is good and all but if it too often feels like the picking phase and early strategy excecutions dont decide rounds then that take away a lot from the game mode in my opinion.

                    Comment


                    • Edit: Okay so I've already had someone point this out to me so here's my massive disclaimer. I INTENTIONALLY talk about DM-Tuba here, since it's a bad map for TSD. It's a great map to talk about, since it highlights flaws of TSD more than other maps. I'm not talking about DM-Tuba because I think it's a great TSD map, quite the contrary. Understand that before you read anything else to eliminate confusion please. Thank you!

                      Whoo - okay so I've had a chance to play some Team Showdown and even regular Showdown games.

                      The gametype appears to differ drastically according to map and spawn locations. In other words, certain maps are better for TSD, and some maps are quite horrible for it.

                      Powerups:

                      I really believe that powerups such as double damage and invisibility should spawn either 15 seconds into the match, or 30 seconds into the match. Reason being - On certain maps (such as Tuba), choosing the right spawn will cause a chain reaction. Grab shock, grab boots, grab sniper. grab DD, grab Invis, etc etc. This is the most logical thing to do if you grab the shock. Now, players who do not pick shock have absolutely no chance at grabbing the boots pickup and no chance at grabbing DD. In TSD, players are less likely to do a rocket jump since health is extremely critical. You can rule out rocket jumps almost entirely as a strategic move in TSD due to the limited health and armor. Players can still do rocket jumps and impact hammer jumps, but they certainly won't be in the right mindset by doing so, since that is almost completely hindering their efforts. Adding a spawn delay to powerups is critical for this gametype to succeed, imo.


                      Spawn Locations:

                      I see 2 potential options to improving spawn locations in TSD. First is the manual approach. You can choose spawn locations that take into consideration TSD. This isn't good since mappers are still new to TSD and won't choose the best spawns. You don't want to put 2 or 3 spawns next to a rocket launcher since team mates and enemies can pick those spawns and try to race for the weapon. Removing those extra spawns is work for the map author and is quite frankly, the wrong decision to do. Also, simply shrugging this off and saying, "pick a better spawn then" is also the wrong thing to do. Players *WILL* pick inefficient spawns, either on purpose or by accident. Which leads me to my suggestion:

                      Spawn Denial Radius Whenever a player picks a spawn, (for instance, the rocket launcher spawn on DM-Tuba), then a big red circle will appear over the player's chosen spawn location. If there are any other spawn locations within this red circle, those spawns will be denied to anyone else trying to spawn there. In other words, if you pick the rocket launcher spawn, you prevent others from picking the other rocket launcher spawn. If you pick the biorifle spawn, you prevent others from choosing the biorifle spawn.

                      If you're worried about this big red circle confusing people, then you can make this denial radius a "behind the scenes" feature. Put red "X"s over the nearby spawns indicating that a player cannot choose that spawn. Players understand what a big red X is very easily. They can easily infer why a red X is there simply by thinking logically - "Oh, it's because another player chose the spawn right next to it".


                      Other spawn related problems:

                      If you're playing DM-Tuba, and you choose the Stinger spawn. You can leap for the flak cannon and deny the flak to the player spawning near flak. This is actually *really* bad! Because if you have 3 players b-lining for flak, and only 1 of them gets it, then it becomes a slaughter for the player with Flak. This is really really bad! LOL So, the "Spawn Denial Radius" must be large enough to encompass those spawns. Either that, or the map spawn locations need improvement!

                      In order for TSD to work, the spawn related issues need to be resolved. These things are absolutely critical for its success.

                      One last suggestion.

                      Recommended Maps Appear at the Top of the Map Vote

                      Some maps are better for TSD and some maps are worse. That's just how it's going to be at the end of the day. You can't change this. You can't make every map ideal for TSD, the same way you can't make every map ideal for DM, Duel or TDM. Why not shunt recommended maps to the top of the map vote, so that players are more likely to choose maps that work better for the chosen gametype. I absolutely do *NOT* recommend removing maps from the map list. That's why I choose "Custom" when starting a duel. I don't agree with the spoon-fed map list. If I want to pick a garbage duel/dm/tdm map, that's my prerogative. If I'm playing seriously, I'll pick a *non* garbage duel duel/dm/tdm map. Simply organizing the map list to show popular, or maps that work better with the chosen gametype at the Top of the list is a much better approach imo.



                      You could organize it like this:

                      Recommended & Popular Maps for Team Showdown:

                      DM-Temple, DM-Chill, etc etc.

                      All other Team Showdown Maps:

                      DM-Column, etc etc.



                      Thanks!
                      -Neil (CaptainMigraine)
                      Last edited by CaptainMigraine; 02-14-2016, 10:33 PM.
                      Contact me: (Steam: Neillithan) (E-mail: neilvmoore@gmail.com)

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by rawlph View Post
                        About the ammo: yea it can get scarce and maybe respawning ammo could somehow change that. I think in the end it's not difficult to strike a good balance there, though. First steps towards this have been made, and I like the ammo situation as it is right now.
                        Respawn the ammo in place of weapons and do not respawn the normal ammo pickups. This gives less "points" to contest and players are more likely to fight over each ammo spawn as a result. It also leads to more meaningful denial (fight over the enemy weapon ammo if your team still has plenty) rather than having to pacman three pickups (times however many weapons) across the map.

                        Epic seems fairly keen on ammo management here and doing something else with it would make sense.

                        --

                        I don't like overcharge, would rather something less drastic that builds up over the course of a round.
                        Posts are about duel unless otherwise specified. ut duel shortcomings | What is timing? | dm-twentyseven

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Fjaru View Post
                          Having fun with TSD. One thing that bothers me at the moment is how powerful the overcharge is, +100 health, doubledamage, speedboost, wallhack and +ammo, are you kidding me? I feel like this makes the late-round very flimsy and often it feels like what lead up to the late-round did not matter once a player got the overcharge. Having a comeback mechanic is good and all but if it too often feels like the picking phase and early strategy excecutions dont decide rounds then that take away a lot from the game mode in my opinion.
                          There's been some discussion of splitting the effects into multiple powerups that spawn on 30/60/90 or something like that. There's some value in having something that appears later as a temporary focus, but I don't want to lose the plays and strategy that come out of the existing powerups being there right away. Alsp, like I mention below, we don't want it to turn into another gametype where timing powerups is the most important aspect of the game. Showdown has some support from players who don't like Duel in part because of the absence of that.


                          Originally posted by CaptainMigraine View Post
                          I really believe that powerups such as double damage and invisibility should spawn either 15 seconds into the match, or 30 seconds into the match. Reason being - On certain maps (such as Tuba), choosing the right spawn will cause a chain reaction. Grab shock, grab boots, grab sniper. grab DD, grab Invis, etc etc. This is the most logical thing to do if you grab the shock. Now, players who do not pick shock have absolutely no chance at grabbing the boots pickup and no chance at grabbing DD. In TSD, players are less likely to do a rocket jump since health is extremely critical. You can rule out rocket jumps almost entirely as a strategic move in TSD due to the limited health and armor. Players can still do rocket jumps and impact hammer jumps, but they certainly won't be in the right mindset by doing so, since that is almost completely hindering their efforts. Adding a spawn delay to powerups is critical for this gametype to succeed, imo.
                          If you let the player who spawned on shock jump up to the sniper and then the UDamage unchallenged you lost the round because you were bad. Both minigun and rocket can easily be in position to fight; minigun actually can hammer jump up there the fastest if you want to go for it all, but somebody will probably pick you off on the hop up to the platform. Speaking of hammer jumps, people do them all the time (common on Chill in particular). Rocket jumps less so, but I don't really have a problem with more risk there.

                          The idea of an opening gambit and planned powerup races are something that make the gametype unique; if you want to grab a weapon or two then camp the powerups until the timer runs out you can play every other gametype we have.


                          Whenever a player picks a spawn, (for instance, the rocket launcher spawn on DM-Tuba), then a big red circle will appear over the player's chosen spawn location. If there are any other spawn locations within this red circle, those spawns will be denied to anyone else trying to spawn there. In other words, if you pick the rocket launcher spawn, you prevent others from picking the other rocket launcher spawn. If you pick the biorifle spawn, you prevent others from choosing the biorifle spawn.

                          If you're worried about this big red circle confusing people, then you can make this denial radius a "behind the scenes" feature. Put red "X"s over the nearby spawns indicating that a player cannot choose that spawn. Players understand what a big red X is very easily. They can easily infer why a red X is there simply by thinking logically - "Oh, it's because another player chose the spawn right next to it".
                          We already tried it. It doesn't work. The correct radius is just as map dependent as the spawn positions themselves. Might as well just do better placement. "Level designers don't know the gametype" isn't a good reason to do anything. They need to learn it and make the appropriate adjustments or their map won't work very well. No different than the legions of bad maps for every other gametype, or the maps that are great for FFA and terrible for TDM, etc.

                          If you're playing DM-Tuba, and you choose the Stinger spawn. You can leap for the flak cannon and deny the flak to the player spawning near flak. This is actually *really* bad! Because if you have 3 players b-lining for flak, and only 1 of them gets it, then it becomes a slaughter for the player with Flak. This is really really bad! LOL So, the "Spawn Denial Radius" must be large enough to encompass those spawns. Either that, or the map spawn locations need improvement!
                          I don't have a problem with a player deferring on their "expected" weapon choice to try to surprise an opponent for a quick win. It's not really any different then rushing a powerup and getting combo'ed into oblivion by the player that was expecting it. At least in this case you can pull out the hammer and try to make a run for it if you lost.

                          There is a case to be made for just giving players the closest weapon, however.
                          1) Notwithstanding the above, there are some maps with multiple spawns equidistant from the closest weapon (we explicitly excluded the case from Tuba, but there are others). That stops being in any way skillful or strategic and just turns into a reaction time and lag check. Both players are going to do the same thing and someone is basically going to win on a coin flip. We could try to exclude them all, but the difference in which side of a room to start in can be significant and we'd be removing that just to stop a pair of players from creating a bad situation.
                          2) This is the only gametype that is flat out unplayable with too many players. You put 16 people in a small CTF map and it becomes a brainless spamfest, but you still get to jump around and blow people up with a variety of weapons. The good players still somehow manage to win most of the time. And there have been enough full 32 player servers over the years to know there's a segment of the population that actually prefers it that way. But you put even 8 players in Showdown on most maps and the game is broken; half the players get to play with the Enforcer while everybody else has weapon(s). It's not even close to fun. I think it's good that 3v3 is the optimal player count, but it needs to at least be functional with more. If everybody just gets the closest weapon, then at least they've all got something to work with.

                          So we'll probably try it.
                          Last edited by Mysterial; 02-15-2016, 01:40 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Thanks for the response!

                            Originally posted by Mysterial
                            If you let the player who spawned on shock jump up to the sniper and then the UDamage unchallenged you lost the round because you were bad. Both minigun and rocket can easily be in position to fight; minigun actually can hammer jump up there the fastest if you want to go for it all, but somebody will probably pick you off on the hop up to the platform. Speaking of hammer jumps, people do them all the time (common on Chill in particular). Rocket jumps less so, but I don't really have a problem with more risk there.
                            I will say this, that player with shock and boots is inherently very threatening. A player with stinger will keep distance from a shock player since combos essentially wreck people. I can say that I tried a variety of different methods for grabbing shock > boots > sniper > dd and more often than not, I was challenged and I almost always got DD. I only died occasionally. It's not a 100% fool proof strat to do that chain, but the odds are definitely in your favor. I don't buy the idea that allowing a player to reach DD unchallenged makes you bad. If you pick shock and another player doesn't pick stinger, then shock player grabbing DD is essentially guaranteed. If a player picks stinger, that doesn't guarantee denying the DD either since shock player is very threatening and stands a much better chance at defeating player with stinger. Unfortunately, balancing Tuba for TSD is going to be a challenge and it's more likely the community will avoid playing it seriously for TSD imo. I could be wrong.

                            I really stand by the idea that DD and invis should have a delayed spawn. Possibly even belt.

                            Originally posted by Mysterial
                            I don't have a problem with a player deferring on their "expected" weapon choice to try to surprise an opponent for a quick win. It's not really any different then rushing a powerup and getting combo'ed into oblivion by the player that was expecting it. At least in this case you can pull out the hammer and try to make a run for it if you lost.
                            Sounds good in theory, but isn't in actual practice. I recommend playing a TSD game on Tuba, then have people try to choose the spawns near flak. Everyone try to rush for it. Whoever gets flak, try to go on a killing spree. Whoever fails to get flak, try to run for your life. It'll be hilarious if you're playing for fun and not being serious. However, if you're playing competitively/seriously, players might be a little bit smarter about their choices, tho it isn't guaranteed.


                            Originally posted by Mysterial
                            We already tried it. It doesn't work. The correct radius is just as map dependent as the spawn positions themselves. Might as well just do better placement. "Level designers don't know the gametype" isn't a good reason to do anything. They need to learn it and make the appropriate adjustments or their map won't work very well. No different than the legions of bad maps for every other gametype, or the maps that are great for FFA and terrible for TDM, etc.
                            Bummer. I suppose you've got a valid point. I was hopeful that the denial radius would allow more maps to be playable, or at least make it easier for mappers to make maps that work with TSD with less effort. Guess that's a fairy tale.

                            Originally posted by Mysterial
                            If everybody just gets the closest weapon, then at least they've all got something to work with.

                            So we'll probably try it.
                            If the spawn denial radius isn't an option, then I'm totally in favor of moving spawn points closer to the weapons, or trying to eliminate duplicate (mirror) spawns (unless someone comes up with a better solution).



                            Also, I had a chance to play Cannon tonight with 3v3 TSD. It was severely problematic at times. Confusing spawns located around the shock rifle. Many redundant spawns near rocket launcher. It was just a bad experience overall, unfortunately. DM-Temple was good tho! (Aside from the mirror spawn at rocket launcher).

                            I'm staying optimistic, and will continue to refine TSD strats.

                            Really appreciate the response, tho!

                            -Neil (CaptainMigraine)
                            Last edited by CaptainMigraine; 02-15-2016, 02:23 AM.
                            Contact me: (Steam: Neillithan) (E-mail: neilvmoore@gmail.com)

                            Comment


                            • There's a few interesting points I'd like to share my opinion about:

                              a) Mirror Spawns:
                              I've mentioned earlier that I think it's the #1 thing to avoid when it comes to mapping for TSD.
                              Though I'd also like to draw your attention to DM-Focus, where there's a mirror spawn at the shock rifle which definitely leads to interesting situations.
                              Another idea to solve that would be to make semi-mirrored spawns. Meaning that one of the spawns will always be a little bit farther away from the weapon. This would have 2 effects: no more coin flip situations (or lag battles, when 2 people choose the mirror spawns). And also you'd still keep other strategic possibilities up. (For example: on DM-Temple if 2 players choose the rocket spawn, one will obviously get the rocket launcher. He could then try to jump down to the boots and up to the DD. The second player could try to distract him by merely spawning there and shooting at him with the enforcer.) So by completely removing mirror spawns or semi-mirror spawns, you'd also remove some strategies.. even if they're rather weak ones and rarely chosen.

                              b) Redundant Spawns
                              Having redundant spawns caters to competitive players, because the completely useless spawns are getting eliminated anyway, and because it's always good and fun to have "more possibilities" your strategies can evolve around. I think we can agree on that.
                              I also think that it's a bad trade though. Because even if competitive players (might) gain a small amount of fun from having abundant and even redundant spawns, it's definitely gonna be a huge killjoy for newer players. So my opinion here is to eliminate many but not all (seemingly?) redundant spawns.

                              b) Item Layout
                              We barely even scratched the surface of TSD's possibilities when it comes to spawns, item layout, various blueprint gadgets.
                              It shows, that maps which work well for TDM also work well for TSD in most cases. So my gut feeling is, that whenever a map has sufficiently good item layout for TDM, it's also "somehow" gonna work for TSD. Good item layout in TSD meaning that there are lots of valid opening strategies and very few or NO optimal spawns at all. (For example: The stinger spawn is an optimal spawn on DM-Cannon, because you are granted either Stinger+Shield or Stinger+Sniper, and vials on top of that.) I'm not quite sure on the topic of item layout tho.

                              c) DM-Tuba
                              We've played some rounds on DM-Tuba and everybody seemed to agree that in it's current state, it's not really enjoyable in 3vs3 TSD. If I remember correctly, criticism revolved around having too few weapons and, as Neil already said, a few pretty powerful and imbalanced spawns. Maybe you can elaborate a bit on what exactly you see in this map which we seem to fail to see? (@Mysterial)
                              The reason I'm genuinely interested in that is, because it's valuable information that allows us to peek into the developer's insight into this game mode.
                              Maybe you see things in it that most of the players haven't even noticed yet? Maybe, reversely, you are missing strengths and weaknesses in design that the players have already discovered. Either way I think it'd be good idea to communicate that, if it's the case.




                              d) The idea of optimal routes (going straight for a weapon and subsequent powerup) is actually less dominant than most people think.
                              I could post hundreds of in detail examples for the following maps: DM-Temple, DM-Focus, DM-Chill, DM-Deck, DM-Rankin, DM-Erase, DM-Sand
                              But because this is tiresome, I will just say: please try playing TSD seriously. Play it 3vs3, in separate Teamspeak-Channels, try to make up strategies and counter your opponent. If you just randomly choose spawns and "go for it" it takes away a huge part of the appeal of TSD.
                              I think for every seemingly optimal route you've "discovered", I could tell you how it would be countered in a more-or-less serious TSD game. Sounds cocky as hell, but I'm fairly convinced that most of the time there's no such thing as an optimal route.
                              Last edited by rawlph; 02-15-2016, 03:17 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by rawlph View Post
                                Mirror Spawns:Another idea to solve that would be to make semi-mirrored spawns. Meaning that one of the spawns will always be a little bit farther away from the weapon. This would have 2 effects: no more coin flip situations (or lag battles, when 2 people choose the mirror spawns). And also you'd still keep other strategic possibilities up. (For example: on DM-Temple if 2 players choose the rocket spawn, one will obviously get the rocket launcher. He could then try to jump down to the boots and up to the DD. The second player could try to distract him by merely spawning there and shooting at him with the enforcer.) So by completely removing mirror spawns or semi-mirror spawns, you'd also remove some strategies.. even if they're rather weak ones and rarely chosen.
                                Totally down for this. These coin toss spawns are really the root of the problem. If one spawn was offset from another, it would eliminate coin toss situations, which seem to happen for silly reasons, either players being silly, or players not thinking when choosing their spawn, or hell, maybe there's a strategic reason that we just haven't considered yet? Seems unlikely. But no matter what way you look at it, removing coin toss situations from the equation will have mostly positive outcomes.

                                Originally posted by rawlph
                                I will just say: please try playing TSD seriously. Play it 3vs3, in separate Teamspeak-Channels, try to make up strategies and counter your opponent. If you just randomly choose spawns and "go for it" it takes away a huge part of the appeal of TSD.
                                I think for every seemingly optimal route you've "discovered", I could tell you how it would be countered in a more-or-less serious TSD game. Sounds cocky as hell, but I'm fairly convinced that most of the time there's no such thing as an optimal route.
                                Not cocky at all and as you witnessed tonight on TS, I'm all up for playing serious games of TSD. Convincing my peers is a bit of a challenge, since most of us seem to play the game for dumb fun right now. I want to get a lot more experience playing TSD so that I can feel more confident about my suggestions / opinions. Right now, I just don't have enough to go on. We really need to get more people to play. I bet by mid to late march, we'll have a big playerbase again. Fingers crossed.
                                Contact me: (Steam: Neillithan) (E-mail: neilvmoore@gmail.com)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X