Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

aCTF - Assault/Asymmetrical CTF

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

  • replied
    This could use some more thought, but I like where this is going.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by conX5 View Post
    RTCW style
    did i hear goldrush?

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Personally I could live with this coexisting in the CTF gametype. I think a lot of purists don't like the idea of asymmetrical maps, but with a halftime the balance seems fair for both teams. Overall I'd like to avoid gametype bloat though and if we have a good enough map voting / server admin tools we can allow asymmetrical maps + halftime + time-pressure rulesets to coexist with symmetrical maps + played to winning caps.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Wormbo View Post
    You do, because in conventional CTF you are stuck on one side for the entire match. With a half-time as implemented now, you'd play half the match on the side with the slight advantage and one half on the side with the slight disadvantage.
    Making asymmetric maps is not about giving one team a clear advantage, but about varying gameplay.
    Well, if we are talking about maps like CTF-November, then I can live with that, both having half-time and being a little asymmetrical. I actually enjoyed this map a lot. (For maps like CTF-Dreary I could go without half-time).

    Btw...Giving one team a clear advantage (I know, you did not say this) would be more assaultish than CTFish, no?

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I feel like the logical end to this is going to be modifying Assault maps/objectives to be more interesting rather than creating a new version of CTF. Maybe you can scale things down more RTCW style and maybe some maps can include objectives that are CTF-like, but ultimately you're going to essentially have de facto alternating attacker/defender rounds so you might as well design it from the ground up that way.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Wormbo View Post
    The "assault-ish" idea was that half-time might not just be defined by the actual time, but alternatively also by a goal score. In the latter case, the first team's time to reach the score would become the second half's time limit.

    I dont know if thats a good idea, I think both teams should get the same shot at proving who the better team is. Dunno.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by ZenMaster View Post
    For CTF, I prefer completely symmetrical maps.
    You do, because in conventional CTF you are stuck on one side for the entire match. With a half-time as implemented now, you'd play half the match on the side with the slight advantage and one half on the side with the slight disadvantage.
    Making asymmetric maps is not about giving one team a clear advantage, but about varying gameplay.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    The idea that immediately came to everyone's mind was: why not make it a separate gametype? That way all aCTF maps would be asymmetrical and without the red/blue divide of regular CTF, so that switching sides is easier. Those who like playing symmetrical maps could then stick with the regular CTF.
    If this comes to reality, it should definitely be a separate gametype.
    For CTF, I prefer completely symmetrical maps.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    splitting up the community
    requires even more maps
    halftime solves this for ctf
    + there is assault

    id rather change ctf than have another mod, even though im totally oldschool. just do not add even more weight. either evolve or have things the way they are. what i do think though is, that for spectators to like the game they see.. you should not have 20 minute matches, nor halftime, have it like assault.
    if you play a best of 3.. you easily end up 1hr+ for one matchup. please don't go there

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    The "assault-ish" idea was that half-time might not just be defined by the actual time, but alternatively also by a goal score. In the latter case, the first team's time to reach the score would become the second half's time limit.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I think its a very great idea.
    I wouldnt focus too much on the term "assault", it should be more like normal CTF but with the difference that one team gets a base that has a clear advantage over the other. At halftime teams switch.
    This would actually make halftime a really, really useful thing and would also make UT much more strategic in terms of difficulty of capturing a flag and defending your own.

    I also played with the thought of including longer respawn times the longer the game goes. Im not talking about 10second respawns, but about 3-5 seconds(in the end), that would make dying much more unforgiving and forces careful strategic thinking(and skill, for sure). But this would need to be discussed.
    In terms of esports purposes we need something that is not just shooting and action. The people that watch want to see clutches, finesse and strategic dominance.

    I love the idea!

    Leave a comment:


  • started a topic aCTF - Assault/Asymmetrical CTF

    aCTF - Assault/Asymmetrical CTF

    This was mentioned during the last stream, and I figured that it deserves a dedicated topic to discuss. There are ideas to make CTF more similar to Assault where after half-time sides are switched and the goal is rather to beat what the enemy team managed to do, rather than to win in absolute terms.

    On IRC people seemed to think that a very interesting idea, but a bit clashing with the original CTF. The idea that immediately came to everyone's mind was: why not make it a separate gametype? That way all aCTF maps would be asymmetrical and without the red/blue divide of regular CTF, so that switching sides is easier. Those who like playing symmetrical maps could then stick with the regular CTF.
Working...
X