Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Duel GameMode

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

  • replied
    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    If Double Damage is so situational, then we don't lose anything by adding it in or using it.
    Solving a problem* by adding something that doesn't really address the problem is an unusual way of going forward

    Also my reply was really slanted towards the out of control player - what happens when the in control player gets their hands on it? My example lacks the whole "the in control player is in your face trying to kill you while you are trying to line up times". Your example of amp one one side and armor on the other seems to address this problem, but then it becomes automatically stacked guy on one side vs guy with nothing and amp on the other and when it drains they are left with nothing? Address the problem of armor stacking rather than trying to add other things to address the existing problem. Its not difficult to fix really

    *if there is a problem with landslide games and very difficult come backs. Assuming that is why the amp is on.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by joellll View Post
    In order for it to be useful you have to know the time of the amp and the time of the jacket/belt/keg. Then you have to line up/delay the amp so there is overlap on another item spawning, at the minimum the jacket. To me this seems a little excessive. It gives uncontensted map control true, but if nothing is available for pickup during that time it is not overly useful and when it expires you are left where you started.

    Of course this is not required, much like making sure the jacket and belt won't clash timing wise, or the red and mega in ql don't clash. However unlike those scenarios the amp carrier is left with nothing when it expires, rather than extra armor or health when the in control player accidently lines up two major pick ups.

    Finally it takes time, much like your rebuff of chumb0s assessment of how to duel. In fact it takes more time that his suggestion because the playing trying to use the amp needs the amp time plus the belt/jacket/mega time then they have to delay one pickup so it is available when one of the previously mentioned items is spawning.
    Which sounds perfect! If Double Damage is so situational, then we don't lose anything by adding it in or using it. If anything, it could serve as a temptation! Of course, if positioned correctly.

    As for other things being better – well, there could be, but I'd rather not break up DM maps into duel and regular DM. And banning powerups in regular DM would be silly. Better to make them work well in duel instead.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    The only thing that accomplishes, then, is to allow for a brief moment of uncontested map control. Which, as far as I can see, would be a really good thing if well balanced.
    It indeed adds an option however it is heavily tied to timing.

    In order for it to be useful you have to know the time of the amp and the time of the jacket/belt/keg. Then you have to line up/delay the amp so there is overlap on another item spawning, at the minimum the jacket. To me this seems a little excessive. It gives uncontensted map control true, but if nothing is available for pickup during that time it is not overly useful and when it expires you are left where you started.

    Of course this is not required, much like making sure the jacket and belt won't clash timing wise, or the red and mega in ql don't clash. However unlike those scenarios the amp carrier is left with nothing when it expires, rather than extra armor or health when the in control player accidently lines up two major pick ups.

    Finally it takes time, much like your rebuff of chumb0s assessment of how to duel. In fact it takes more time that his suggestion because the playing trying to use the amp needs the amp time plus the belt/jacket/mega time then they have to delay one pickup so it is available when one of the previously mentioned items is spawning.

    The post here looks at it in a little more depth

    Edit: Not for or against the inclusion of amp, but there are better avenues to pursue that help with out of control play before adding a mechanic that is so borderline.
    Last edited by joellll; 10-14-2014, 01:00 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by chumb0 View Post
    During an evenly matched game though that's not the case. A player out of control with be cautious and do damage on items, sneakily steal armours and fire around corners with shock combos to the point they're predicted their enemy will be. Should they believe they've done enough damage, they'll turn the cautious play into an attack (preferably at a positional advantage on the next major item) This element of tactical play will be removed when people can reset the match freely with a redeemer..
    But the cautious play strategy takes time, which you don't have a whole lot of. I can see how the losing person could distract the winning one and then grab the Shield Belt if they're good, but that will only happen if the two players are really close in their abilities both to control the map and to shoot the opponent. Otherwise you get snowballing and that no longer is interesting.

    As for the Redeemer, it's a pickup, what stops the winning player from controlling it too? Having it respawn slower would make it even easier to control.

    Originally posted by Castle View Post
    The main issue with adding power ups like Double damage is that it causes the other player to hide. nobody in their right mind is going to attempt offensive play when a tiny bit of splash damage is like taking a rocket to the chest. I wont be adding power ups of any kind to any of the 1v1 maps I create.
    All right, so it makes the opponent hide. Which... means it's useless as it won't hit the opponent, hence it doesn't matter if it's included in the map? The only thing that accomplishes, then, is to allow for a brief moment of uncontested map control. Which, as far as I can see, would be a really good thing if well balanced. For instance, have all armour powerups on one side of the map, and the Double Damage on the other. It takes too long to control both; hence the losing player can take it and then disrupt the winning player's pattern.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    The main issue with adding power ups like Double damage is that it causes the other player to hide. nobody in their right mind is going to attempt offensive play when a tiny bit of splash damage is like taking a rocket to the chest. I wont be adding power ups of any kind to any of the 1v1 maps I create.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Hmm, but while you're chipping away at your opponent, the opponent will be free to mop the floor with you by virtue of controlling the map. Now if you do manage to regain control, then the sides are switched and you get to mop the floor with your opponent, but this sounds neither very exciting not really fair (if you make a small mistake at the beginning of the game, or even got spawned in an unfortunate place, you can have the opponent dominate the whole length of the match). Having an element of randomness allows for making sure that it wasn't a fluke and the winning person can compete for control well, not just keep it indefinitely.
    During an evenly matched game though that's not the case. A player out of control with be cautious and do damage on items, sneakily steal armours and fire around corners with shock combos to the point they're predicted their enemy will be. Should they believe they've done enough damage, they'll turn the cautious play into an attack (preferably at a positional advantage on the next major item) This element of tactical play will be removed when people can reset the match freely with a redeemer..

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by chumb0 View Post
    Having something like a one-shot redeemer in a duel can really disrupt gameplay. The reason for this is that you can literally suicide on an opponent destroying the map control that they have worked for. If you've lose map control during a duel, the best way to regain it is playing smart, slowly chipping away at your opponents stack when they go for items, having a one - shot gun in the game kinda kills this mechanic. It's also very much the reason why powerups aren't considered to be in duel games also.
    Hmm, but while you're chipping away at your opponent, the opponent will be free to mop the floor with you by virtue of controlling the map. Now if you do manage to regain control, then the sides are switched and you get to mop the floor with your opponent, but this sounds neither very exciting not really fair (if you make a small mistake at the beginning of the game, or even got spawned in an unfortunate place, you can have the opponent dominate the whole length of the match). Having an element of randomness allows for making sure that it wasn't a fluke and the winning person can compete for control well, not just keep it indefinitely.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Hmm, the whole "ban all powerups" thing in dueling has been really odd for me ever since I learned that people actually do that (I'm neither a duel player nor used to spectate duels). I get that powerups, on top of armour, can indeed lead to snowballing. However, if you do it the other way round... No armour, only powerups, and they have time of expiry, then everyone has an equal footing to grab it when it comes to contesting it. If there are multiple powerups (Double Damage on one side, Berserk on the other) then you can have interesting asymmetric duel situations as well. Of course, the downside being that whoever has a powerup forces the other person to go into hiding in a manner of speaking, which may not be ideal (albeit it's similar when one person is armour stacked).

    Then also the Redeemer... Why is it banned, again? It doesn't sound like it would be that easy to get kills with, without also getting the operator killed in the process, since the projectile is slow and loud and can be shot down. Meanwhile firing at your feet when the enemy is close is a good way to reset both players to equal footing.

    So yea, pardon my ignorance, but I just don't get what the problem is that people ban those things.
    Hey GreatEmerald,

    Having something like a one-shot redeemer in a duel can really disrupt gameplay. The reason for this is that you can literally suicide on an opponent destroying the map control that they have worked for. If you've lose map control during a duel, the best way to regain it is playing smart, slowly chipping away at your opponents stack when they go for items, having a one - shot gun in the game kinda kills this mechanic. It's also very much the reason why powerups aren't considered to be in duel games also.

    You're correct with the snowballing issue also, whoever has maplock, having additional items such as powerups on the map can simply aid that player to continue their dominance. But it would be nice to see another mechanic to give the losing player the ability to make a comeback somehow..

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Hmm, the whole "ban all powerups" thing in dueling has been really odd for me ever since I learned that people actually do that (I'm neither a duel player nor used to spectate duels). I get that powerups, on top of armour, can indeed lead to snowballing. However, if you do it the other way round... No armour, only powerups, and they have time of expiry, then everyone has an equal footing to grab it when it comes to contesting it. If there are multiple powerups (Double Damage on one side, Berserk on the other) then you can have interesting asymmetric duel situations as well. Of course, the downside being that whoever has a powerup forces the other person to go into hiding in a manner of speaking, which may not be ideal (albeit it's similar when one person is armour stacked).

    Then also the Redeemer... Why is it banned, again? It doesn't sound like it would be that easy to get kills with, without also getting the operator killed in the process, since the projectile is slow and loud and can be shot down. Meanwhile firing at your feet when the enemy is close is a good way to reset both players to equal footing.

    So yea, pardon my ignorance, but I just don't get what the problem is that people ban those things.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by chumb0 View Post
    Hi nvz, I'm agreed with you and I'm not in favour of amp or any type of powerup in a duel. My point is that the current duel game-mode has powerups set at 10s expiry with the intention of them being tested by us and provide feedback. That feedback is likely to result in the powerup being removed. However we shouldn't not try it just because of our initial thoughts. The duel gamemode (and all modes duing the pre-alpha) will see instances of the powerups taken out, and likely replaced without other ideas, some maybe completely crazy. Our job is to try them all out and give feedback. One may be perfect and be groundbreaking in the duel gamemode?! who knows. We'll see. The likely outcome is vanilla duelmode, though.

    My point is simply that use it and test it whilst it's in the gametype. Current feedback is showing it's not recommended in duel, that's fine. So be it. Remove it, tweak it, try other things. Hope you get my point .
    Amen good point

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Recoil View Post
    After playing duel at a high level in every UT game I find it hard to comprehend the spectator or player benefit from having the amp as a useable power up. I'm imagining an equal player skill level of hit for hit in this next paragraph.
    The first belt won on deck normally leads to a battle or easy take of the next 100a, and by the time thats resolved the belt player should have an advantage to take the amp, which leaves the other player to get 100a. This would then give the amp + belt player an advantage over the next belt. During this I would imagine that a competitive player would play very passively and try to dent the belt + amp player with out taking to many 80 shock primary hits. If you repeat this situation for the rest of the map then this would leave the game in two situations a white wash or cat and mouse city. Obviously I'm only taking Deck in to account, but thats all we have to test this example with.
    The person in control can also offset the amp taking if possible so that the following amp wont co-inside with the next belt.
    I would like to imagine that we can come up with something better than just allowing amp to make duel more dynamic and spec friendly.
    Shootmania's duel game type I actually quite enjoyed, it had two bases limited ammo and was based on a factor of just pure speed, movement, predication and aim. The point I'm making is that it had very easy visible objectives that had a major impact on the game, I'm still trying to think of something similar that could be applied to ut duel, and trust me as soon as I think I have a solution I will suggest it.
    Good points recoil, and I agree with the situation that you've highlighted, I've been there on many occasions

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by chumb0 View Post
    Actually, deck seems to lack armor on one side which can unbalance things. There's no thigh pads in the current version of deck and armor stacking allows the player in control to stack a belt with a 100a to give 200a. Pair that with some vials and you've a pretty **** stacked in control player.

    Out of control, you have head armor only on the weaker portion of the map, but a fair amount of vails to go by. The amp there allows a player to camp it out and take some frags back. However this is kind of map specific, lets try and talk about the game mode as opposed to individual maps.

    I agree with your max stack suggestion of 150.
    Looking at how armor stacks is probably some low hanging fruit. They talked about it at the playtest, and it has been on the forum. However, I yet to see a thorough proposal about how it should work. If done right it could make it easier for the player behind to build up armor, and harder for the player ahead to maintain it.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    After playing duel at a high level in every UT game I find it hard to comprehend the spectator or player benefit from having the amp as a useable power up. I'm imagining an equal player skill level of hit for hit in this next paragraph.
    The first belt won on deck normally leads to a battle or easy take of the next 100a, and by the time thats resolved the belt player should have an advantage to take the amp, which leaves the other player to get 100a. This would then give the amp + belt player an advantage over the next belt. During this I would imagine that a competitive player would play very passively and try to dent the belt + amp player with out taking to many 80 shock primary hits. If you repeat this situation for the rest of the map then this would leave the game in two situations a white wash or cat and mouse city. Obviously I'm only taking Deck in to account, but thats all we have to test this example with.
    The person in control can also offset the amp taking if possible so that the following amp wont co-inside with the next belt.
    I would like to imagine that we can come up with something better than just allowing amp to make duel more dynamic and spec friendly.
    Shootmania's duel game type I actually quite enjoyed, it had two bases limited ammo and was based on a factor of just pure speed, movement, predication and aim. The point I'm making is that it had very easy visible objectives that had a major impact on the game, I'm still trying to think of something similar that could be applied to ut duel, and trust me as soon as I think I have a solution I will suggest it.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I'd also like to put an * (asterisk) on this subject, and make a conjecture that one of the reasons 1v1's with these rules in place are decent is due to the current state of the weapons and to a lesser degree, the mouse input and net code issues.

    I'm not sure what the data accrued could be good, particularly in regards to the uncertain variables related to the above, but I suppose any data is good data none-the-less and serve as a starting baseline. "The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step"

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by nvz View Post
    Hey chumb0,

    I appreciate your feedback. I imagine everybody here appreciates any kind of feedback. Amp(UDamage/Double Damage/etc.) has always been overpowered in duel, the reason it has always been removed from the Duel game type. I will have to agree with you on it flowing well with DM-Deck, but I don't think it would play out so well on smaller maps. It does give the losing player more options to come back and take the lead, but it also makes the game a lot more offensive. This would take away a lot of defensive strategies that Deck has to offer, but it also may implement some new ones. I think once the weapons are balanced out in the end we will not need amp, so I am unfavorable of it.
    Hi nvz, I'm agreed with you and I'm not in favour of amp or any type of powerup in a duel. My point is that the current duel game-mode has powerups set at 10s expiry with the intention of them being tested by us and provide feedback. That feedback is likely to result in the powerup being removed. However we shouldn't not try it just because of our initial thoughts. The duel gamemode (and all modes duing the pre-alpha) will see instances of the powerups taken out, and likely replaced without other ideas, some maybe completely crazy. Our job is to try them all out and give feedback. One may be perfect and be groundbreaking in the duel gamemode?! who knows. We'll see. The likely outcome is vanilla duelmode, though.

    My point is simply that use it and test it whilst it's in the gametype. Current feedback is showing it's not recommended in duel, that's fine. So be it. Remove it, tweak it, try other things. Hope you get my point

    Originally posted by CC- View Post
    Someone may have posted this already, but I haven't read the whole thread. Powerups are used in dueling traditionally, just not necessarily damage amplifiers / quad damage / double damage or whatever you want to call it. However UT2003 used amp considering how over-powered the shield-stacking system was and the addition of the shield gun.

    It's a pre-alpha, and it's a play test. Chumb0 has played a large amount of UT4 and has the experience necessary to say that it flows pretty well with amp on. It might not end up that way, especially if we can move past playing Deck16 for 16 straight years. The balance and flow of the game will surely change between now and any real competition, so it doesn't hurt to try anything.
    Glad at least you understood the point of the thread CC!. But yeah, the amp simply plays well in deck right now simply because it's set to expire after 10s and you can hide pretty easily. That doesn't make it formidable to be in the game on all maps, though which we all know. And I agree, I'd love to see Deck out of the mappool finally.. Roll on the new maps.
    Last edited by chumb0; 09-30-2014, 07:21 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X