CTF

[divVerent]

The major difference is that this 1 point won't be taken away until 4 returns have been made. I.e. if a team loses the flag 3 times and leads with 1 point, they still are the leading team. Once the 4th time the flag is lost then the other team will gain 1 point (or the leading team will lose 1 point, don't care) and the score will be even.

This is at least better than no system. Give me a break here div0. It seems you're just against 'cap' only system totally, no matter what people are saying and trying to do.

I am actually not against the system you proposed, except that I see no difference between your idea and the following system:

+20 for flag capture
-5 to the last flag carrier for a flag return (will add an option to do this)
Fraglimit: 20*caps - 15

It is MATHEMATICALLY EQUIVALENT. It IS a point system, and I have nothing against it (it actually does just what i want it to do - give points for frags and returns, anything else is not that important). It just is not caps only, which you claim it to be.

http://svn.icculus.org/nexuiz/trunk/dat ... iew=markup

Just added a way to penalize the last one who had carried the flag on return, instead of rewarding the one who returned it. Now your system is totally possible in the points system.

[ai]

Yeah, I know that mathematically it is equivalent to the current system. I never denied that. However, if other so called 'cap' only people would agree to this kind of system then everything would be fine.
Of course calling it though 'cap only' would be wrong.

And to you Alien: If you do not like the hidden flag returns, then there could be a place to display how many returns have been made so far by each team if you'd like that.

I'm still for a true cap only system more than anything, but at least this return penalty thing is a start. I won't budge more than this. I basically want a CTF game that's based solely on the fate of the flags.
But as I said, the other cap only people have to step up and express their opinion.

[divVerent]

Even the "middle" system is based just on the fate of flags. But yes, I do not care if shooting the FC gives points or not. Caps and Returns are the only IMPORTANT things for me that should count.

I also do not care whether the returner gets points or the other team loses. No difference.

[Ed]

+20 for flag capture
-5 to the last flag carrier for a flag return (will add an option to do this)
Fraglimit: 20*caps - 15

I quite like the penalty thing but why not have a static fraglimit? Surely that means no one at the beginning knows when the game will finish?

I am all for separating individual scores from the team score.

[Alien]

Hidden flag returns seems not very competitive and brings randomness that's why I am against it. Btw, I was never against caps only system (check what I replied to morfar's post in another thread), I am against BOOST REDUCTION, which solves nothing -> it does not make people play in teams, but makes it so that you can't get victory for your spammy & campy teammates. Your fate is decided if you get into team, which does not care about $#*^.

To div:
Not sure, how you count this:

Code: Select all

Fraglimit: 20*caps - 15

What does it mean? If you have capped 1 time, the frag limit is 5?

[ai]

Hidden flag returns seems not very competitive and brings randomness that's why I am against it.

I did suggest that the number of returns could be displayed per team. Something like 'Team flag returns' and underneath that the number would show. The numbers would be something like 0-3. Meaning if you returned a flag 4 times it would reset back to 0.
It doesn't have to be hidden.

Btw, I was never against caps only system (check what I replied to morfar's post in another thread)

Good to know that you're not against cap only system. Which thread do you refer to?

[Alien]

http://forums.alientrap.local/viewtopic.php?p=44819#44819

I agree with ai and morfar. Oldschool ctf Wink. Now you lose because your teammates are fragged > 100 times by camping and spamming team of your opponents. There is no incentive to attack while you can WIN defending. If you go to minus with unsuccessful attacks, that's even worse. It's better lose trying to attack then win without trying.

But no speed reduction. I would like both modes, but speed limiting makes you sad when you don't have a team. When you don't have a team even 30% boost reduction for enemies won't help cause they (my team) can't defend anyway.

[RoKenn]

Do people actually KNOW what they are voting for?

No, we don't.

Indeed I was just wondering if the poll shouldn't take place after this discussion. I realized I'm still making up my mind and I voted already.

One more remark:

Aren't you trying to solve a social problem with technical means?

How do the following types of CTF games compare:

a) FFA CTF
b) private CTF (with experienced players)
c) clan matches, in which teams organize themselves before the match

?

FFA CTF will always have problems. Make the scoring system perfect, you'll have enough people who don't care or don't understand.

[ai]

http://forums.alientrap.local/viewtopic.php?p=44819#44819

I agree with ai and morfar. Oldschool ctf Wink. Now you lose because your teammates are fragged > 100 times by camping and spamming team of your opponents. There is no incentive to attack while you can WIN defending. If you go to minus with unsuccessful attacks, that's even worse. It's better lose trying to attack then win without trying.

But no speed reduction. I would like both modes, but speed limiting makes you sad when you don't have a team. When you don't have a team even 30% boost reduction for enemies won't help cause they (my team) can't defend anyway.

I'm sorry to have judged you by that then. There's too many CTF discussion threads and I apparently got them mixed them up along with the people. Good thing this one is a sticky now.

I also kinda agree with having a vote till after the discussions so people can make up their minds. Something that morf said, having the top 3-4 winners of this poll. That of course means more rambling on with this but I suppose it might be worth it.

[TVR]

Suggestion: Reduced flag carrier speed, no flag returns - flags remains at drop location for a period of time, frags count [each frag hampers the opposing team], wave respawn.

Hell no!

A denouncement requires an explanation.

It forces a more offensive strategy which is exactly what we're trying to diffuse to emphasize teamwork.

Automatic timed flag returns require greater offencive and defencive play in total, the team flag requires defending with the difficulty proportional to distance from base, while the enemy flag requires transportation with difficulty proportional to distance from enemy base.

_____________________________________

Also, the general consensus for scoring is flag captures.

The value of a quantitative poll is incomparably low to value of a qualitative poll [requires the usage of text votes]

_____________________________________

Suggestion: Reduced flag carrier speed, no flag returns - flags remains at drop location for a period of time, frags count [each frag hampers the opposing team], wave respawn.

... E.g. enemy drops flag in his base. How should we make it timeout and return to our base? ...

If the flag has already reached the opposing base, it is the opposing team's imperative to have an advantage in retaining flag so they can score.

_____________________________________

... (time difference) is bad too.

That is subjective assessment, wave respawn rewards the elimination of defenders before stealing the flag [A 'proper' sequence of attack].

_____________________________________

#3 is BROKEN ... Nexuiz's problem is that this actually works - which is CAUSED by the high speed. ...

It's is not about the absolute velocity, but rather the relative velocity between the flag carrier & pursuers.

If the acceleration, and therefore distance between the flag carrier and pursuer remains uniform, whatever lead the flag carrier has will be maintained, along with all other advantages from leading. [First to pickups, weapon fire by pursuer accelerates flag carrier, while weapon fire by flag carrier decelerates pursuer, projectiles reach pursuer quicker than vice-versa, path of pursuer is predictable, while vice-versa isn't, etc.]

All current CTF maps are linear, are and defended by preventing the opposing team from scoring by holding the opposing flag.

Trying to defend the base is less rewarding than attempting to retrieve the flag, as once the flag is returned, as long as the flag carrier has any lead on the opposing team respawn point, the flag carrier will be able to score before the opposing team can retake the flag due to the maintained lead from constant velocity.

Therefore, handicapping the flag carrier's acceleration is the simplest, and most effective method of balancing CTF across all maps with the exception of MojoCTF, the only existing balanced map [The opposing team is ALREADY able to retake the flag before the flag carrier can score] relying on player propulsion.

_____________________________________

... Reducing the speed is obviously not an option ... just look at the vote results ...

This poll is defective by design, text votes should have been used to garner explanations, and allow reconsideration of vote.

_____________________________________

... To compensate ... the current scoring rewards flag returns. Rewarding mere fragging is indeed questionable ...

The distinction between the two is made with sequence, combat engagement before or after the enemy steal the flag.

The design flaw lies with a greater reward for permitting the enemy to steal the flag before an engagement, rather than greater combat efficiency by engagement with the enemy as soon as possible.

Therefore, automatic timed flag returns reward the elimination of the enemy as soon as possible, as a delay will only permit the enemy to move the flag away.

_____________________________________

Suggestion: Reduced flag carrier speed, no flag returns - flags remains at drop location for a period of time, frags count [each frag hampers the opposing team], wave respawn.

This suggestion has now been explained thoroughly.