Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Showdown Feedback

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

  • #16
    Originally there was going to be a powerup spawned at 1 minute (with warning and pre-visible location) that would include x-ray vision and possibly some more standard buff. However, there was some resistance in here and I was also worried that the powerup-averse duelers would be even less likely to give the gametype a chance if we forced in a powerup that wasn't even part of the map.

    Another option that has been discussed is to change the scoring so that wins by kill are 3 points and wins by timelimit are 2 and 1, so there's more reward attached to being offensive... but I'm skeptical that would have a substantial impact and a little worried about making the scoring unintuitive. +1s are easy to understand right away.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Stolid View Post
      I'm not sure a control point kind of mechanic would work well either, at least in a duel gametype. I imagine it would look similar to the 5-10 seconds before the belt spawns in normal duel. It's often quite defensive with people trying to either (1) defend and ambush, (2) get it when they know the other player isn't near or (3) rush the player near it if they know the other player is on very low health. I don't think this would create particularly exciting games.
      I think the difference though is that when battling for the belt, you can decide to disengage and runaway because you don't really lose the whole match if you lose the belt, but when you sit on the capture point you would be forcing your opponent to come after you, because they have to engage or the match will be over. It would also give the player on the point a good opportunity to use the pickups he has grabbed to his advantage, since you could go for the shock (or other defensive weapon), knowing that you'll head to the point instead of going for other weapons. This would force your opponent to stop picking up stuff and attack, otherwise he loses. I think it's pretty interesting at least.

      Either way, I don't think the idea should be written off without testing.
      Last edited by Gooba; 08-07-2015, 05:35 PM.
      Dm-Sand | Idea to Concept Thread

      Comment


      • #18
        The reason I personally DO enjoy Showdown as opposed to Duel is for the lack of respawning pickups. So hope that doesn't change (too drastically anyway). ^^

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by RPGWiZ4RD View Post
          especially since I don't like the whole map control/timing point of view of duel which is the most important aspect of duel.
          Hm... Timing isn't really the most important aspect of duel, but map control is, and I'd say it's just as important and showdown as it's in duel. Perhaps even more.
          DM-1on1-Deck8 | DM-1on1-BirdCage | DM-Complexo (GoldenEye Redesign) | DM-ShootThemMalcomsGood | DM-1on1-Toxicity

          Designer at Candango Games. Check my Gamasutra Blog.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Gooba View Post
            I think the difference though is that when battling for the belt, you can decide to disengage and runaway because you don't really lose the whole match if you lose the belt, but when you sit on the capture point you would be forcing your opponent to come after you, because they have to engage or the match will be over. It would also give the player on the point a good opportunity to use the pickups he has grabbed to his advantage, since you could go for the shock (or other defensive weapon), knowing that you'll head to the point instead of going for other weapons. This would force your opponent to stop picking up stuff and attack, otherwise he loses. I think it's pretty interesting at least.

            Either way, I don't think the idea should be written off without testing.
            Why would you want to force your opponent to come after you though? It's a good idea if you can use it to ambush them or when you know they can't make it to the point in time. If the point isn't easy to defend or if the opponent is near then it's probably more of a risk than it is an advantage. If it is easy to defend it's probably OP.

            IMO the problem isn't so much that you can't force the other player to become aggressive, it's that it isn't encouraged by default. It's not either player's responsibility to force the game to be more aggressive/entertaining, the gametype design should take care of that.

            Having said that, the instagib approaching properties of some weapons have moved the game into very defensive play anyway. Aggression is both so powerful and so risky in normal duel now that one or both of the players just seem to avoid it whenever possible.

            I wouldn't be against testing some version of it.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by luauDesign View Post
              Hm... Timing isn't really the most important aspect of duel, but map control is, and I'd say it's just as important and showdown as it's in duel. Perhaps even more.
              But the big difference is, in Showdown you RUSH the pickups in the beginning (no need for timing since they are instantly just 'there') and then that aspect is over and then you start focusing on the opponent's whereabouts meanwhile in duel, your movement/routes are more ongoing based on the pickup spawning like Hypno showed so well in a UT3 duel on Deck with commentary I saw in some other thread.

              That's the BIG difference for me. I enjoy more focusing on the opponent (make decisions based on his whereabouts) than the pickups. :P
              Last edited by RPGWiZ4RD; 08-07-2015, 06:34 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Why would you want to force your opponent to come after you though?
                When I know I have the advantage, I would force my opponent to come after me instead of letting them play defensive and possibly regain control. It would really depend on how fast the point capped though, like if my opponent could still pick up another item before attacking or had to rush over right away.

                It could also give the player with the advantage even more advantage by gimping the other players ability to pickup stuff, letting him win easily. Its too hard to tell though without testing. I think it could make for some really interesting mindgames/movement strats...

                IMO the problem isn't so much that you can't force the other player to become aggressive, it's that it isn't encouraged by default. It's not either player's responsibility to force the game to be more aggressive/entertaining, the gametype design should take care of that.
                I think those two issues are really the same thing. And I don't think it's a bad thing to let players dictate the flow of the game (to a certain level), it's a lot more interesting to me than the game restricting it.

                I agree about the weapons favoring defensive play though... haven't thought about that enough to have a firm opinion yet.
                Dm-Sand | Idea to Concept Thread

                Comment


                • #23
                  The problem with this gametype and it's passivity is something that happens as time passes though. If you add a control point so you can force someone to leave a pickup in their rush you are still dealing with the early stage of the game. I doubt it would usually limit the round to that stage only. Once those pickups are all gone is when the issue shows. There is nothing much to pick up anymore and no real way to regain control. If you have the advantage you want to play defensively at that point, it leaves the opponent with almost no options. The only difference a control point would make at that point is that the player with the advantage could not only play defensively, but also use the control point as bait and ambush the other player. There's a real possibility it would make the problem worse, though knowing for sure would indeed require testing.

                  It's not so much that the gametype should force a certain way, it should allow for more options and encourage activity, interaction and offensive play instead of (often) punishing those like is the case at the moment. If anything the current design of it restricts flow by rewarding defensive play so much, partly because there is nothing to do after a certain point. I'm not sure a control point would add any flow back though, despite there in theory being something to do now.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    It may make a lot of sense in a 1v1 scenario which is all we have right now, but how do those decisions scale to 2v2? 3v3? 4v4? IMO they don't really.

                    Watching Showdown is actually fun, it's a bit more engaging than Duel ever was. I really think Showdown has some potential to be "the" gametype of UT4. But it definitely needs some tweaking to shorten the round length right now. One way to accomplish that is to make a second objective after some period of time that is an alternative path to winning the round. Another method would be having a somewhat OP powerup appear that is hugely advantageous to whoever collects it.

                    I wouldn't look at what current duelers will allow in Showdown. In order for it to become "the" gametype in UT4 it needs to scale well and have a reasonable learning curve and short-ish round lengths. This isn't Duel for a reason.

                    I personally like the powerup idea and, as I said in the other thread, I also kind of like the idea of having "randomly" spawning powerups that don't run out. If a UDamage pops up, you want to get that otherwise your opponent has UDamage the rest of the round. Same with Berserk and really a number of other powerups could be added. The point should be to get the round to a resolution as quickly as possible.
                    HABOUJI! Ouboudah! Batai d'va!
                    BeyondUnreal - Liandri Archives [An extensive repository of Unreal lore.] - Join us on IRC [irc.utchat.com - #beyondunreal]

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      IMO, make kills be the only way to score points, and in timeouts no one scores. This should make the player with the biggest stack and weapon advantage to attack. Mechanics that make the weaker player attack and the stronger player defend are broken. Same would work for the team mode: the team with more people alive should attack, not the other way around, so elimination should be the only way to score.

                      There's the +1/+3 option, but maybe +0/+1 could simply work better. Not because of complexity, that can be solved by simply showing a message "Round Victory By Elimination! +3 Points!", but actually because scoring +1 is still good enough if a player/team is already far ahead in the scoreboard, just needing 1 or 2 points to win, while the other is still a lot behind. That'd just force the weaker player/team to play on the offensive again, and cause all the same issues.

                      Don't like ties, well, that's why players will try to force fights. Having the advantage and not scoring is worse than just scoring +1, specially in situations you just need +1 to end the game...

                      Anyway, something else:if rounds ends and noone is dead, why not just respawn everything at once as the countdown reaches zero (you don't even have to "time" things)? In that case, up the score-worth of the round cumulatively. Noone got the +1 from the round? Respawn everything, and now the round is worth +2. Noone dies yet? Respawn everything, and now it's worth +3... +4... (there's a bit of a similarity with betrayal gametype here, for those who didn't notice) This whole thing would work better with 1min rounds, this way there's less down time.

                      Also, in that case, make it so suicides grant the same points to the other player as if (s)he killed you, plus subtract one from the suicidal player. That's because, if you're trapped and very weak as time is counting down, players could try to suicide to grant just +2 instead of +3. The other options to die, is to go for the fight, which might be interesting if the other players tries to not kill you until the round restarts, which is a gamble that could go very wrong for him (other guy escapes, or kills him, or just deals a lot of damage and puts him behind for the starting round).
                      Last edited by luauDesign; 08-07-2015, 09:25 PM.
                      DM-1on1-Deck8 | DM-1on1-BirdCage | DM-Complexo (GoldenEye Redesign) | DM-ShootThemMalcomsGood | DM-1on1-Toxicity

                      Designer at Candango Games. Check my Gamasutra Blog.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Draws wouldn't make the game more offensive at all. The threshold for having enough of an advantage that a player is afraid to lose it on a draw reset is roughly the same at which they'd attack anyway because they have high confidence of winning.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I would like to see a 2v2 and 4v4 version of this game mode. This would bring the duel perspective, conservative and collaborative to co-operative level.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Mysterial View Post
                            Draws wouldn't make the game more offensive at all. The threshold for having enough of an advantage that a player is afraid to lose it on a draw reset is roughly the same at which they'd attack anyway because they have high confidence of winning.
                            But then, if they gain +1 or simply win by health or damage dealt, would that be the same draw in practice, with the only difference that the player gained something from the draw? Isn't then it better to make so they don't gain anything from the draw so they try to win instead?
                            DM-1on1-Deck8 | DM-1on1-BirdCage | DM-Complexo (GoldenEye Redesign) | DM-ShootThemMalcomsGood | DM-1on1-Toxicity

                            Designer at Candango Games. Check my Gamasutra Blog.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I think a capture point could definitely limit defensive play. After all of the powerups have been taken, the game picks a power up that both players are closest too and sets a control point in its place. The point would need to be held for ~15-20 seconds to score.

                              I guess the problem with the idea is that it totally changes the dynamics of the gametype and makes it a bit more complicated.

                              Or maybe make the area surrounding the control point a safe zone, and turn the rest of the map into a damage volume. Forcing both players into the same room to fight to the death and be crowned emperor of the nakthi planet.
                              Last edited by cafe; 08-08-2015, 09:39 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by cafe View Post
                                I think a capture point could definitely limit defensive play. After all of the powerups have been taken, the game picks a power up that both players are closest too and sets a control point in its place. The point would need to be held for ~15-20 seconds to score.

                                I guess the problem with the idea is that it totally changes the dynamics of the gametype and makes it a bit more complicated.

                                Or maybe make the area surrounding the control point a safe zone, and turn the rest of the map into a damage volume. Forcing both players into the same room to fight to the death and be crowned emperor of the nakthi planet.
                                Speaking of crabs, where is my CrabFist?
                                HABOUJI! Ouboudah! Batai d'va!
                                BeyondUnreal - Liandri Archives [An extensive repository of Unreal lore.] - Join us on IRC [irc.utchat.com - #beyondunreal]

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X