Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Assault

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

    #16
    Originally posted by FrostbyteGR View Post
    If a team managed to get to a certain checkpoint and then the time ran out, the other team has to complete one checkpoint further to win.
    This is not completly correct. When a team first defends and they prevent the attacking team to finish the map, the defending team succeeded in its objective. If the attacking team can't finish a map => getting the final objective we speak of a full defence. Next the defending team will attack. It doesn't matter to what objective they get if they also don't finish it the map will be a tie, nobody wins. For every map it is all or nothing, if both teams fail to finish the map there is no team the winner of this map. All the objectives these teams have to achieve in a consecutive order lead to the final objective. No final objective (again) no win.


    Originally posted by FrostbyteGR View Post
    The gamemode blueprint should then handle the scoring logic as well. If a team completed the last checkpoint inside our array, then end the round and measure how much time has elapsed. Or, if the round timelimit got exhausted, check at which checkpoint the team managed to get to (or complete). Consequently, for the next round, swap the defenders and the attackers and: set the timelimit to the elapsed time in which the attacking team managed to complete the assault, previous round. Or keep the default round time limit, and have the checkpoint progression be the deciding factor for the win (if the new attackers advance one checkpoint further than the previous team did last round)
    Again, with the previous comment I gave I think this isn't 100% correct.

    Overall I got to say you got a pretty good grasp on the mechanics. It's great to see people thinking about Assault its gameplay.

    Keep up the good work!



    Now for Wail

    Originally posted by Wail View Post
    I haven't investigated this thoroughly at all, but it seems feasible to have each team have a 'spawn room' with a teleporter (or teleporters) that access other areas of the map. Again, dirty way to work around existing limitations, but it should work.
    Although this is a more simple workaround for existing limitations, it is not the best solution. We have some maps in UT99 assault that use this option and although they create various defending options when you can choose a teleporter for your location to go to. Some forced spawns for attack/defence after a certain objective is gone can have a real fun and challenging change of pace in a map. It would be a big plus if the UT4 team could look into this and what it's possibilities are. Big teleport rooms often create confusion and make it difficult to orientate where you are and where those places are on the map. Offcourse you can learn this but in general it is not a player's most favorite thing on a map.

    EDIT: thank you for further looking into this.

    Originally posted by Wail View Post
    One thing that might be worth considering is applying a time penalty to a team based on their deaths.

    (This was kind of done with 2k4's respawning system, but indirectly.)

    Then you have an incentive to do the objectives fast but also to not just dive right in suicidally. Maybe those can counterbalance each other.
    I don't see why you should implement this in Assault. It would be the only gamemode to have this, if you look at ctf and dom, at the basics, you could argue that they could maybe use this too. Would that be a good idea? No in my opinion, the same goes for assault. It shouldn't be looked upon as a suicide run. The fact that you die on the attacking team is a punishment on its own. You die, meaning you have to go from your start point, meaning you just lost time again to get that final objective. And that is what its all about. The longer you take, the longer the other team has to beat your time in their attack. Speed is key and the same goes for tactics.
    In all fariness, well for me atleast, we play UT because it is a fast paced shooter. You respawn and go straight back into the action. Something games don't really offer these days. Changing this mechanic implies a big change towards the basic core of UT.
    But then again this is how I feel about it.


    Originally posted by FrostbyteGR View Post
    I understand what you're trying to say, however I think we need to dial-in the basic functionality first and get something which works and is solid, before we try to see how we can spice up the gameplay.
    I can only agree with you here.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by smantz0rZ View Post
      Promote deep strategy? Assault matches in UT99 continue to have deep and all-encompassing tactics and teamwork. Any 'deeper' and you don't have a game anymore, but a chess match. Part of what makes UT99 AS so deep and thorough is the ability for teams to rocket launch one another. It turns the game from a 2D "time-based, run at the enemy until you win or draw" game into "outsmart, outcoordinate, outplay" and focuses more on execution as a team rather than ones' ability to run in a straight line, like UT2k4 did.
      I guess its all a matter of opinion, Im not going to disagree that UT99s Assault mode has been the best of all the UT games. I think your anology to chess is incorrect, chess is actually a knowledge based game and thats what Im trying to avoid here, I think coordination and intellect need to play a part but Im not blind to the faults of past UT games. I get that people liked UT99 but it was the first game and it was made a long time ago, I would like to think we can learn from mistakes and improve on the formula without completely breaking it as some might argue 2k4 did.

      Originally posted by smantz0rZ View Post
      As for other objectives, I really like the idea of adding domination points into AS objectives, perhaps one team controlling two objectives at once, which gives the defending team the opportunity to reverse some of it and contest. Ultimately the mapmakers are going to have a lot of say in stuff like that, so ban willhaven from coming near UT4's AS and all's well.
      Yeah I think its important to get map makers involved in the discussion early as they will be the one primarily using this code not other programmers, its all well and good to make an awesome system but if it plays like **** based on preconceptions of how Assault should be done then map makers wont support it. This is my major concern and I dont want to see Assault break back down into race maps like it has done in the past, especially with 2k4. I just dont see why Assault maps need to be time limited, I certainly get some objectives could have time restrictions, like stop vehicle X from getting to the gate but endurance could be part of it as well if a team is playing on defense.

      If the scoring system is designed well enough it will actually make it so you can judge teams performance on their score rather than just defaulting to time, though as I said speed can still be relevant is a map maker desires that, I just think its a mistake to make it the first dot point and core
      Upon release, Unreal Tournament 2004 was met with widespread critical acclaim. Several critics praised the unique, fast-paced, fun and challenging nature of the game as its main selling points, while fans touted the post-release support and extensive modding capabilities.

      Comment


        #18
        Assault Needs to be teamorientated.

        I. g. you need 2 or 3 players working/helping together to reach an objective using a special path/route. The rest of the team have to cover this or distract the enemy.

        That will take out the race-problem best and make it fun playing as a team.

        Important are the mappers. I agree!


        For the coding part:

        Anyone knows If it's possible to code triggers and destroyable objektives ? That are the 2 most important actions imo.
        Last edited by fatJeff; 05-18-2015, 08:59 AM.
        UT4 ASSAULT - Server Admin | Community Admin
        UT4ASSAULT.COM

        Forum Thread | UTA Discord | UTA Facebook
        UTA Steam Group | Email me

        Comment


          #19
          Great start for assault, I will think and try to draw some simple pictures to show how the maps and spawns are build up during the map construcion!
          Online nickname: Ba]V[sE or iBamzz
          [*.se] Starsofsweden
          Oldschool UT99 Player Since the beginning!

          You Tube Channel: UT 4 Gameplay HD 60 FPS

          Adrenaline - UT4 Fragmovie, 2015-06-26 2:07min NEW!!!

          Comment


            #20
            I think most of you saw this video, but anyway i decided to left it here

            Comment


              #21
              Nice video e1vp

              I recommend for everyone that is involved in creating a game type of assault for UT4 to also consider watching the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDCBDq6hwIM

              This is a video of a common UT99 Assault PUG match played by the Assault Community.
              Video commentary is also available in the film.
              It shows considerable importance of time factor as well as the various types of objectives/triggers mixed with team tactics and spawns moving throughout the map as the game advances.
              Video can be used as a strong reference for further analysis of the assault game concept.
              Last edited by -ATD-; 05-18-2015, 11:52 AM.

              Comment


                #22
                Hmm, a reflection: UT99's assault game mode really benefitted(still do) from the possibilities that opened up through launching. It really opens a new dimension, as some has mentioned, in the game play. Players and teams can try and outsmart the opponent through launches and hammerjumps (sacrificing raw attackpower, and time, on the next objective to get a chance at another route with a potentially very rewarding leap in terms of attack progress). Without it, i'm afraid that the game will feel very linear and just a DM-fest with objectives (Or some sort of high speed Battlefield, which will just be plain...). Any1 know what im talking about? I can not think of any assault map at all that would benefit from no launching. (Even the spammiest maps can be opened up through a succesful wallhammerjump thingy. If defences are rock solid in any location, the attacking team can try to launch past that point, or fake a launch attempt to force the defenders to spread out etc etc)

                Another thing that i believe made the game so addictively fun was that it wasnt trying to box in the players by implementing artificial barriers. It was more of "let the players find the best way to solve the problem" rather than "we have to stop the players from taking any unintended route". Again..any1 know what im talking about? If theres only one way to solve the problem (e.g run through corridor A or B to get to C) then i believe the game will quite quickly stall (as opposed to continually develop because of players new tactics, exploring new ideas on how to tackle the defences on a map.)

                My take: If you want to make the assault game mode then make the assault game mode.

                And a question: Isnt it possible to code dynamic spawns in maps? Either spawns that are themselves moved to a new location when a certain trigger happenes, or spawns that themselves despawn while new spawns spawn in another location? (Or cant someone just look at an old assault map in the editor and see how it was made there?)
                Last edited by Gurkburken; 05-20-2015, 04:56 PM.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by Gurkburken View Post
                  And a question: Isnt it possible to code dynamic spawns in maps? Either spawns that are themselves moved to a new location when a certain trigger happenes, or spawns that themselves despawn while new spawns spawn in another location? (Or cant someone just look at an old assault map in the editor and see how it was made there?)
                  Yup

                  In fact, I think this is the only way to do it. You just create an actor that acts as a placeholder for the new spawn's location. Once you trigger an objective, you despawn (i.e. destroy) the active spawns and respawn new ones at the locations of your actors. Since spawns are static, I don't believe there's an actual way to change their location (i.e. vector) mid-match. You'll have to remove them and respawn them.

                  I did it for my version of this, which is basically assault with a flag and and not random objectives. It works flawlessly (as long as the mapper places everything correctly). I'll be throwing this gametype up on the forums soon, so if anyone's interested in seeing how it's done, the blueprints will be available (maybe by this weekend )



                  EDIT: Another thing to add. By taking this approach, you'll also want to create arrays for the locations & rotations of the default spawns, so that you can reset them to their original locations at the start of each round (by the same method of removing & respawning).
                  Last edited by LeMNaDe xD; 05-20-2015, 08:08 PM.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    *breathes in*
                    *breathes out*
                    *intensifies Assault hype*


                    Let's do this.

                    I was exactly thinking of a good way to facilitate AS mapmaking a while ago, and put all ideas on a document, waiting for the right moment to make it real, or just share it with someone that can atually make it real. (I have next to zero experience with UE4, so it would take very long to pull this off by myself)

                    Primary and Secondary Objectives

                    -Objectives are separated into primary and secondary ones.
                    -Primary objectives are always completed in a straight line.
                    -Each primary objective has a optional set of secondary ones.
                    -Secondary objectives are mostly optional and can only be completed when their respective primary is "active".

                    Checkpoints (which are triggered by objectives)
                    -FrostbyteGR
                    In my vision, the primary objectives would be the checkpoints.

                    Ability to trigger the end of the game if a certain event has happened. (We can trigger the end of the round inside the blueprints, because well, that's where we define the round behavior and create the rounds itselves. But we cannot trigger the end of the game if at round #2 the other team completed the objectives faster. So this is something that Epic has to provide through blueprints for us)
                    -FrostbyteGR
                    In Assault, there's a couple of different ends for each round
                    Round 1
                    -The timer reaches zero
                    -The attackers complete all objectives
                    Round 2
                    -The attackers complete more objectives than the previous ones. (Second Attackers win)
                    -The attackers complete all the objectives faster than the previous ones. (Second Attackers win)
                    -The attackers fail to do any of the above (First attackers win)

                    But a question rises: What if both teams reach the time limit during the same primary objective? The answer is, make score from secondary ones count too.

                    But then it raises another question: What if the first attackers rushed the early primaries so much that they end their round lacking in secondaries, allowing the second attackers to focus on secondaries to reach their score easier? It's also unfair considering that if the first team completed the final primary but lacked in raw score, the second is able to surpass the raw score only through completing secondaries.
                    My solution to this is the following: when a primary is completed, the attackers' score jumps to what it'd be if all secondaries were completed. For example, the current attackers score is 4, and the current primary has 4 secondaries. Once this primary is completed, the score always goes to 9 (4(previous)+1(primary)+4(secondaries))

                    Final tie-break: What if both teams end their rounds in the same primary, with the same number of completed secondaries in that primary? Easy, use the time the last secondary was completed in each round. The team whose last completed secondary was the earliest wins.

                    Assignments

                    After watching some GTA Heists gameplays, I grew fonded to this game mode, and thought of how a similar gameplay could work inside Assault. That's when I thought of Assignments.

                    -A really malleable concept that can determine the role a player plays in the match, or help the round advance.
                    -Each one is a collection of spawnpoints and starting weapons exclusive to either attackers of defenders. (Think UT3's WAR and vCTF spawn system, where you already spawn with some weapons)
                    -Assignments can also be used to spawn already in a vehicle.
                    -They can be “closed” or “opened” depending on triggers placed in the map or objectives completed.
                    -As long as a certain assignment is open, any players of the team it was bound to can spawn on it.
                    -If a team doesn’t have any assignments open, dead players won’t respawn after each cycle’s end. (Yes, I'm thinking UT2004's respawn system here, but it'd also apply to UT99's free respawning)
                    -When a team that can’t respawn loses all players, at the end of a cycle the other team is declared winner of the round with full score.
                    -Some assignments can be declared as “urgent” so that when they open, you get 5 seconds to choose whether you want to teleport to one of its spawnpoints keeping your weapons and health.
                    -If there's more than one assignment open for a team, players can choose the one they'll use to respawn. ("Frontline" and "Sniper Tower" assignments, anyone?)

                    Ability to include spawnpoints in groups and ways for the gamemode/blueprint to control how spawning is happening. For example in specific groups that we choose, at a given time, whilst ignoring all the other spawn locations/groups.
                    -FrostbyteGR
                    Here it is. The groups ignored are the closed ones.

                    Objective Types

                    The following list is a collection of existing objectives in AS maps and some suggestions.

                    -Action: A certain action from the map (push a button, lower a lever, etc.)
                    -Destroy: Destroy a certain object with x health.
                    -Reach: Enter an area. Can be set up to include or exclude players on vehicles.
                    -Stay: Stay within an area for x seconds.
                    -Stand: Same as Stay, but objective completion runs back when there are no attackers within the area.
                    -Control: A modified Domination Control Point that can only be captured by the attackers, but the defenders can make the point neutral again. Each control point has an individual “control time”, the time length the attackers must hold the point to capture it.
                    (EDIT: Stay- and Stand-type objectives should have the option to have a "visible control point" attached to it that gives visual feedback on objective completion in the map, like a Control-type)
                    -Transport Item: Take an item that spawns somewhere to a certain area.
                    -Transport Vehicle: Take a vehicle (armor can be modified in the settings) to a certain area. Only allowed to be used as a secondary objective if the respective primary is also a Transport Vehicle one, automatically using the last completed secondary's spawnpoint as a checkpoint for the objective vehicle.
                    -Parallel: Turns all of its secondary ones into “parallel primary objectives”, and all of them must be completed to get to the next primary. Can't be used as secondary.
                    -Exterminate: Deactivates all of the defenders’ assignments when it’s activated, turning the attackers’ objective into killing every defender. All assignments return to normal when the next objective is activated. Can't be used as secondary.
                    -Escort: See below.

                    Round Phases

                    Partly inspired by TF2's multi-phase maps, but something already existing in UT (AS-Mothership), but the difference I suggest here is to have short intervals like CTF's half-times.

                    Each phase would have its own "line" of primaries and assignments.

                    Some proofs of concept

                    I really like the idea of adding domination points into AS objectives, perhaps one team controlling two objectives at once, which gives the defending team the opportunity to reverse some of it and contest.
                    -smantz0rZ
                    -Primary objective is a Parallel-type, and its secondaries are a couple of Control-type ones

                    Majority of UT99 Assault maps

                    -Last objective is the primary, and every other is its secondary

                    AS-OceanFloor

                    -Primary objective is a Parallel-type, and its secondaries are 4 Destroy-type ones

                    UT2004's teleport-to-checkpoint system

                    -Simply open an urgent assignment when the next primary is activated

                    AS-Junkyard

                    First primary: Transport Item-type (no secondaries)
                    Second primary: Transport Vehicle-type
                    -Objective vehicle is a Hellbender with modified armor
                    -Action-type secondaries: "Lower the Bridge" and "Open the Checkpoint Gate"
                    -Transport Vehicle-type secondaries: The Hellbender's checkpoints

                    AS-Overlord

                    -The defenders' assignments include the sniper towers and each section of the base
                    -Every time the attackers infiltrate a new zone, open an urgent assignment at the main sections and close after 5 seconds
                    First primary: Destroy-type (Main Gun Control)
                    -Secondaries: All of them, Reach-type
                    Last edited by Thiago_YH; 05-28-2015, 04:48 PM.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by LeMNaDe xD View Post
                      Yup

                      In fact, I think this is the only way to do it. You just create an actor that acts as a placeholder for the new spawn's location. Once you trigger an objective, you despawn (i.e. destroy) the active spawns and respawn new ones at the locations of your actors. Since spawns are static, I don't believe there's an actual way to change their location (i.e. vector) mid-match. You'll have to remove them and respawn them.

                      I did it for my version of this, which is basically assault with a flag and and not random objectives. It works flawlessly (as long as the mapper places everything correctly). I'll be throwing this gametype up on the forums soon, so if anyone's interested in seeing how it's done, the blueprints will be available (maybe by this weekend )



                      EDIT: Another thing to add. By taking this approach, you'll also want to create arrays for the locations & rotations of the default spawns, so that you can reset them to their original locations at the start of each round (by the same method of removing & respawning).
                      I'm interested in those blueprints, I have a rough logic on how to tackle Assault on blueprint, but these will certainly help me polish the group spawning system. Shoot me with a private download link so I can study them.

                      When I find time and mood, I will start doing the first iterations on blueprint. Although map-wise the only thing I can promise is rooms with generic buttons and spawnpoints, to help test if the gamemode's flow is valid.
                      Most likelly, however, I think I can nail down the format/properties/specifications and define the standards of the whole system, so mappers can start creating content accordingly.

                      Originally posted by PrimeIcarian View Post
                      *breathes in*
                      *breathes out*
                      *intensifies Assault hype*


                      Let's do this.

                      *snip*
                      Great bundle of suggestions, I will take them into account when it's time to tackle the gamemode on blueprint.
                      I believe I'm going to try an alternative take on the tie-breakers (believe me I have thought of that too, I just didn't want to go into too much detail from the get-go). Secondary objectives that will give perks to the attackers/defenders, however, is a very interesting concept; but of course this will rely heavilly on the map-makers and how they utilize their level-blueprints.
                      > FreezeTag [Blueprint]
                      > Reimagining of Greed [BluePrint]
                      > Avarice, a DM-variant of Greed [BluePrint]

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Wish these UT99 maps be remade
                        AS-Ballistic!!!
                        AS-AutoRip
                        AS-Desertstorm
                        AS-Bridge
                        AS-GolgothaAL!!!
                        AS-TheDungeon]l[AL!!!
                        AS-Riverbed]l[AL
                        AS-Desolate][
                        AS-Golgotha][AL!!!
                        AS-AsthenosphereSE
                        AS-Siege][!!!
                        AS-TheScarabSE
                        AS-Frigate

                        btw UT99 have alot of interesting custom assault maps (espesially league maps). They are much better in quality and design then ut2k4 as maps

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by FrostbyteGR View Post
                          Great bundle of suggestions, I will take them into account when it's time to tackle the gamemode on blueprint.
                          I believe I'm going to try an alternative take on the tie-breakers (believe me I have thought of that too, I just didn't want to go into too much detail from the get-go). Secondary objectives that will give perks to the attackers/defenders, however, is a very interesting concept; but of course this will rely heavilly on the map-makers and how they utilize their level-blueprints.
                          The secondary objectives were originally thought as a way to achieve both optional objectives (Like AS-Convoy's "Open the Panel") and parallel objectives (Like AS-OceanFloor, of whom I actually did a proof of concept using a Parallel-type primary and Destroy-type secondaries), but then I thought it would also be cool for long-term extra advantages for attackers. Think about it, some early secondary objective that ends up being a big game-changer at the late game.

                          EDIT: Oh, you said perks for defenders too? I guess it could be achieved too, with buttons, levers and normal control points (Not the control-type objectives). For example, a control point that when controlled by any team, gives that team exclusive access to an armory room.

                          EDIT2: I actually have ideas for almost all gametypes that haven't been officially included, and some concepts that could make the creation of interactive maps even more of a thing, like player-filter/configurable visibility force fields, and independent control points that can be placed for every team gametype, and activate stuff when controlled by a certain team. As they are simpler concepts that an Assault or Onslaught of sorts, I'll try to achieve them by myself first, and if I fail, I guess I can count on the community to make it real.
                          Last edited by Thiago_YH; 05-21-2015, 09:55 AM.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            At the "Proposing new game types for UT4" thread, OP suggested Payload as a new gametype, but it looks so much like Assault that I thought it could be included as one of the Objective Types from my huge reply above.

                            Escort-Type:
                            -The attacking team must stay close to an indestructible unmanned HellBender (Or whatever jeep-like vehicle included in UT4) to make it move at a trajectory defined by certain points placed at the map.
                            -Some points can be chosen to be checkpoints that trigger events when reached (like opening an assignment, deactivating a force field, etc)
                            -The vehicle will automatically stop if faced against a anti-attacker force field.
                            -The defenders can act as “counter-weight”, slowing the vehicle down.
                            -After some time without moving (except when stopped by a force-field with attackers still around), it starts moving back to the last checkpoint.
                            -The objective is completed when the vehicle reaches the final point.
                            -Can't be used as secondary.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by PrimeIcarian View Post
                              At the "Proposing new game types for UT4" thread, OP suggested Payload as a new gametype, but it looks so much like Assault that I thought it could be included as one of the Objective Types from my huge reply above.

                              Escort-Type:
                              -The attacking team must stay close to an indestructible unmanned HellBender (Or whatever jeep-like vehicle included in UT4) to make it move at a trajectory defined by certain points placed at the map.
                              -Some points can be chosen to be checkpoints that trigger events when reached (like opening an assignment, deactivating a force field, etc)
                              -The vehicle will automatically stop if faced against a anti-attacker force field.
                              -The defenders can act as “counter-weight”, slowing the vehicle down.
                              -After some time without moving (except when stopped by a force-field with attackers still around), it starts moving back to the last checkpoint.
                              -The objective is completed when the vehicle reaches the final point.
                              -Can't be used as secondary.
                              Oi Thiago manu

                              This isn't a bad idea and could be fun in a different setting, but it forces attackers into only one route and one thing so it's not ideal for Assault. The amount of effort needed to implement this in a way which ultimately opens the map up and creates a dynamic and fast-paced environment is almost absurd. Maybe this is a project for two or three years down the road, but maybe not worth looking at yet.
                              Purveyor of Unreal Tournament.

                              <khxmz> thanksgiving is about being thankful for what you have nvz, not asking your favorite game developer for more hats

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by smantz0rZ View Post
                                Oi Thiago manu

                                This isn't a bad idea and could be fun in a different setting, but it forces attackers into only one route and one thing so it's not ideal for Assault. The amount of effort needed to implement this in a way which ultimately opens the map up and creates a dynamic and fast-paced environment is almost absurd. Maybe this is a project for two or three years down the road, but maybe not worth looking at yet.
                                Yeah, staying close to a slow vehicle isn't much of what you can expect from UT's pace. Welp, maybe what already works (no unmanned vehicles) is the only thing that works, like WAR-TankCrossing, AS-Junkyard or AS-Glacier.

                                Actually, Tank Crossing just gave me the idea of being able to use some Objective Types in Onslaught. Transport Vehicle type is already one that'd work.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X