I think teamplay in Nexuiz should be done otherwise, but not by slowing down everyone (on the other hand, I don't think the slowdown in havoc physics is too harsh - it still feels right to me).

An idea might be however to make maps with more possible teamplay elements. Sniper posts (NOT TOO MANY OF THEM) are just one of many things mappers can do to improve teamplay. Switch-controlled doors can also help a lot (but not like on mikeeusa maps where the door opens slowly and the switch is close to the door - I rather think of a switch easily accessible to people inside the base, and having additional switches outside it that also can open the door. Of course, in such cases, alternate ways must be provided to enter the base, so a single player can do it TOO - but that way should really not be the fastest one. I think the map "switches" is very extreme, but shows some things that can be done to improve teamplay. Imagine for example four pathways between the bases, of which only two can be open at a time, and "control panels" (in fact, sniper towers) that can shoot a switch for a pathway, and that one will open and another one will automatically close. Then a cooperative team can always prepare the right pathways for the escaping flag carrier, and close the door behind him, but also hinder the enemy from running away.

I think Nexuiz' current teamplay is Tribes teamplay, in that it more or less works on large open-ish maps but not small closed in maps, do to the movement speed. And this is why you see alot of big open CTF maps on CTF servers. Unfortunately there are currently none of these shipping with the game (Reborn doesn't have a CTF tag?), which makes teamplay natively broken in Nexuiz.

Instead in official CTF maps what you have is "fog of war teamplay", where everyone does his own thing until he sees a flag or flag carrier. There isn't enough time for coordination, only intuitive situational cooperation. This isn't terrible, but I think there is room for more teamplay.


So over a year ago I came up with the idea of a "Character Class" Mutator for Nexuiz, in which each of the character classes would have its own weapon, health/armor level, and movement physics settings. On average, these classes would be slower than default Nexuiz movement, but also the fastest classes would be vulnerable enough to damage that it'd stop the constant one-man flag stealing. I thought this could be to CTF what the Insta and Minsta mutators are to DM in terms of popularity and gameplay alteration. Unfortunately, without any knowledge of code, I didn't have a way of implementing this. . .

But then a few months ago I saw Psychcf had already been creating the framework to do this and was getting close to having something ready. So I signed up for these forums and started working on player models, first and foremost with this character class mutator in mind. I have been making them strikingly different so that they can be easily distinguished even at a distance, which is a little visual technique used alot in RTS games.

I am certain such a Mutator can fix the speed/teamplay issue while also working as a balanced Mutator in FFAs, without upsetting default Nexuiz (since it is a Mutator, like Minsta is).

Nexuiz shouldn't change in order to suit custom Q3A CTF maps, instead the focus of teamplay needs to shifted to another game-mode.

The premier team game-mode of Nexuiz is not CTF nor Onslaught, it is Keyhunt.

Keyhunt distills the core aspects of CTF, with the addition of strategy, while maintaining exception flexibility in map design.

But new players don't know KH, while they are likely to know CTF.

Consider Keyhunt as the showcase game-mode for Nexuiz, similar to Onslaught for UT2004, and Capture for Sauerbraten.

It is not popular enough among Nexuiz players for that, although it should be.

I love KH, but no "good" players seem to play it... Ronan used to, right?
I started playing nex on 2.3 with KH; it seemed to be quite popular (no idea what server I played on), and it was very fun and noob-friendly as well.

I used to play keyhunt with toolbox alot, I quite like it, but not enough people bother to play it.

I like keyhunt too.

The keyhunt matches in the campain were fun, so I imagine that it would be better with skilled people to play with.

Keyhunt is top notch innovation that is extremely underappreciated (also Domination, Onslaught and Assault are the same situation.) I don't think there is a clear way on how to make it more popular though, except for more servers to host keyhunt games (with bots).

But either way, CTF isn't going anywhere in its popularity, it is still going to be about a third of the game, with DM making up most of the other solid third. So improving it is still important to Nexuiz.


So why not try giving Reborn a CTF tag and see what happens? Just put the flags where the generators are. Bigger, open-er maps should be similar to a speed decrease in their effect on teamplay right? Most CTF servers are already running big open CTF maps right?

i loved kh 2 ! i remember playing with ronan and xeno, playing wacka-wacka and penthouse there! (sigh ...nostalgia mode) and was top fun! i just dont get why ppl dont play it anymore, its a very nice tdm combination mode, with the luck factor strong there, and allows for very very fast hunting, making almost all quite large nexuizz maps compatible with it. dunno what it would take to persuade ppl to give it again another chance. it seems to be currently dead : (

Actually, the luck factor in KH is very small if you have team mates that know how to play it... it then is almost like a CTF cross capture.

But strategies for it need to be still developed. Until now it only has been played "strategyless".

And what about that scoreboard item that i recommended a while ago, that displays your current status in the scoreboard near your name? Like when you press the "attacking" bind on the numpad your status is set into ATT, when you press defending DEF etc, this is a much easier way to organize a team, since you can see who is doing what, so you can send instructions like "XY you see everyone is attacking, stay back in the base with me to defend", you both press the defend bind and there you go, the roles are layed out, and can be dynamically and fast changed throughout the whole game. And its not only working in CTF mode Ohh yeah and for newbies who wouldnt know about this bind it would bu just a --- mark by default when you havent set it.

I was thinking about something like this:

FraNcoTirAdoR wrote:And what about that scoreboard item that i recommended a while ago, that displays your current status in the scoreboard near your name? Like when you press the "attacking" bind on the numpad your status is set into ATT, when you press defending DEF etc, this is a much easier way to organize a team, since you can see who is doing what, so you can send instructions like "XY you see everyone is attacking, stay back in the base with me to defend", you both press the defend bind and there you go, the roles are layed out, and can be dynamically and fast changed throughout the whole game. And its not only working in CTF mode Ohh yeah and for newbies who wouldnt know about this bind it would bu just a --- mark by default when you havent set it.

I was thinking about something like this:

[largeimage]

Well, LordHavoc and I were discussing this earlier actually. Except this wouldn't be shown in the scoreboard in such a way, I don't think it's a good idea to abbreviate this though, as new players wouldn't know what it is (Not that the scoreboard is very understandable to new people anyway.) What we were thinking of is having a small (smaller than normal size) waypoint for each player that depicts his role. Also, roles would be assigned automatically if someone doesn't have one or if someone changes roles (Or at the beginning of a match, etc etc). Your role would be displayed for you *somewhere* on your screen, and this may help teamplay a lot as quite a few people would obey that role imo. Anyway, the idea is hard to implement cleanly, especially for smaller teams. But this is a good idea.

How about this- your role is automatically updated depending on where you are on the map.

If you are near your base, it lists you as defending, if you are near the enemy base it lists you as attacking, if you are between the two it lists you as mid-fielding or such.

If you are carrying the flag, you are listed as a flag carrier.


It maybe should also list your health/armor and arsenal if possible. Some people are snipers, some people are skirmishers, some people are wounded, some people are ready to rush into a fight. If there was room for this information at all, it would of course need to be in short hand. Like hitpoints till dead as opposed to listing someone's health and armor values separately.

Another nice feature for teamplay, that might be alot more work though, is team vision, wherein any enemy, enemy flag or enemy flag carrier that a friendly can see, shows up on every team member's mini-map. So everyone knows where the fight is, and where they are needed.

divVerent wrote:... But strategies for it need to be still developed. Until now it only has been played "strategyless" ...

Since Keyhunt's inception, Xeno & I have always used the strategy of shifting alliances.

Always target the team with the highest score, be prepared to work with the third team, but also be ready for alliances to shift whenever the scores increases.

That's not really a strategy, but obvious. I always did that too, or, when the other team (as usual) does not cooperate, when yellow has higher score, running away from red and attacking yellow.

Flying Steel wrote:How about this- your role is automatically updated depending on where you are on the map.

If you are near your base, it lists you as defending, if you are near the enemy base it lists you as attacking, if you are between the two it lists you as mid-fielding or such.

If you are carrying the flag, you are listed as a flag carrier.


It maybe should also list your health/armor and arsenal if possible. Some people are snipers, some people are skirmishers, some people are wounded, some people are ready to rush into a fight. If there was room for this information at all, it would of course need to be in short hand. Like hitpoints till dead as opposed to listing someone's health and armor values separately.

Another nice feature for teamplay, that might be alot more work though, is team vision, wherein any enemy, enemy flag or enemy flag carrier that a friendly can see, shows up on every team member's mini-map. So everyone knows where the fight is, and where they are needed.

No, it cannot switch automatically based on location. This would mean teamplay doesn't change at all really.. The whole point of it is to have better teamplay. There would always need to be a good balance for the teams, so changing automatically wouldn't work well. Basically, LordHavoc and I think a good balance would be 30% defending, 50% midfielder, and 20% attacking. Defenders job is to stay at the base at all times... Midfielders job is to kill enemy flag carriers, and "escort" the attacker. Attackers job, of course, is to get the enemy flag.

I do think we could benefit from teammate death notifications though. As in, if a team mate is killed by an enemy, a little icon is spawned where he was to demonstrate that there is danger there. Maybe even have a notification show when a teammate is taking damage/near trouble... Although that's pushing it a little.

Samual wrote:No, it cannot switch automatically based on location. This would mean teamplay doesn't change at all really.. The whole point of it is to have better teamplay. There would always need to be a good balance for the teams, so changing automatically wouldn't work well.

I think you are missing the point, you just need to see who is doing what, not who is assigned to what. That way you can tell where you are needed at that moment.

Basically, LordHavoc and I think a good balance would be 30% defending, 50% midfielder, and 20% attacking. Defenders job is to stay at the base at all times... Midfielders job is to kill enemy flag carriers, and "escort" the attacker. Attackers job, of course, is to get the enemy flag.

Sometimes jobs change with the game. I'm normally a midfielder, but if I sense that the enemy defenses have thinned, now I'm an attacker. But then I die and respawn at base, and no one is alive there at the moment, now I'm a defender.

So what I am is whatever I am doing at the moment, not what I was assigned to. This game is just too fast for such a rigid system in alot of cases.

What'd help me independently allocate myself to where I am needed more effectively though, is if I could see where everyone else is at that time, to see the thin spots and then fill them with myself.

I do think we could benefit from teammate death notifications though. As in, if a team mate is killed by an enemy, a little icon is spawned where he was to demonstrate that there is danger there. Maybe even have a notification show when a teammate is taking damage/near trouble... Although that's pushing it a little.

Not at all, they have this in RTS games on the mini-map, just do the same. There's no reason why this'd be a problem if it was made subtle enough to not be a distraction in a larger battle.

What about seeing enemies on the mini-map that you can't see directly but that a teamate can see? Like a team shared line of sight radar system? Such a sense of the larger battlefield might help teamplay alot.

divVerent wrote:That's not really a strategy

If strategy is interpreted as distinct methods to accomplish one objective, then Keyhunt also meets this requirement.

For example, a simple dropped key requires extensive consideration, you may be providing the two keys to a player waiting in ambush, who may have purposely dropped the key.

Purposely dropping the key also has certain advantages, your location can no longer be determined, but it increases the risk that the winning team's keycarrier will manage to capture because of the consolidation.

You can also wait until 2 parties have worn themselves out, and then finish off the victor and snatch the keys.

Flying Steel wrote:Not at all, they have this in RTS games on the mini-map, just do the same. There's no reason why this'd be a problem if it was made subtle enough to not be a distraction in a larger battle.

This is an FPS, not an RTS. It's two totally different game types, just because it works in RTS doesn't mean it automatically works in FPS.
Even if subtle, in larger battles it will get distracting. The only way to make it fitting would be to display it only in the minimap. However, minimaps are not even on by default and not all maps have those. Even if maps have those, maps with several levels would make it confusing.

ai wrote:

Flying Steel wrote:Not at all, they have this in RTS games on the mini-map, just do the same. There's no reason why this'd be a problem if it was made subtle enough to not be a distraction in a larger battle.

This is an FPS, not an RTS.

Really? I thought it was an RPG.

The only way to make it fitting would be to display it only in the minimap.

Hey that's a great idea, I wish I had thought of it.

However, minimaps are not even on by default and not all maps have those. Even if maps have those, maps with several levels would make it confusing.

How seeing one of the red circles blink every now and then when it takes damage is more confusing than the circles always being solid is beyond me. How maps with more than one level are relevant to such a GUI feature you will also have to clarify for me.

Minimaps were on by default, I'm not sure why that was changed, turning them off doesn't help the teamplay issues, since then it is harder to tell where the rest of the team is.

Mapposition-dependant status is a NO vote for me too, because you are NOT defending when you are preparing for the attack on your base. You are not trying to control the midfield when you go to a weapon in the middle of the map that helps defending. This creates fake roles for some seconds while people cant do what they chose to be their role all the time. When I see a player "attacking" in our base i know he is prepering, but when i see him with "def" mark and he is running up and down i cant tell for sure wtf is he doing. Also it would need to remake every single CTF map to work, at least the way i think...

@Flying Steel:
You're just being spiteful. This kind of attitude is not going to fly. Just because I sincerely disagree with some of your ideas does not mean I do it just for the heck of it or that I dislike you.
Don't make it personal.

Case closed.

FraNcoTirAdoR wrote:Mapposition-dependant status is a NO vote for me too, because you are NOT defending when you are preparing for the attack on your base. You are not trying to control the midfield when you go to a weapon in the middle of the map that helps defending. This creates fake roles for some seconds while people cant do what they chose to be their role all the time. When I see a player "attacking" in our base i know he is prepering, but when i see him with "def" mark and he is running up and down i cant tell for sure wtf is he doing.

Well I don't think people would spend that much time doing those things, but I see what you are saying. Maybe just knowing the position of where your team is between the bases would be better without it marking roles.

But the problem I have with the assignment system is I don't think many players will notice or use it, outside of maybe clan CTF. I think part of this will be because there isn't alot of time for communication since things unfold fast, so passive communication can be important.

Also it would need to remake every single CTF map to work, at least the way i think...

I don't think so, it'd just look at the relative distance of a player between his base and the enemy base. A CTF map would have to be a really wild maze to make that not work.

ai wrote:@Flying Steel:
You're just being spiteful. This kind of attitude is not going to fly. Just because I sincerely disagree with some of your ideas does not mean I do it just for the heck of it or that I dislike you. Don't make it personal.

No, I'm just starting to get annoyed, and I was highlighting things you have been doing since somewhat recently that are annoying. It seems like every other time you post it's just a short condescending response to a suggestion I brought up somewhere, which also takes things off topic.

No, I don't want to play Call of Duty.
No, I don't want to start another Darkplaces project.
No, I don't think Nexuiz is an RTS.

I guess rocket launcher these days is more properly called a long-range high-speed guideable minigrenade launcher. Why is rocket launcher made into a bad joke of a weapon while weapons such as electro and fireball are becoming more and more rocket launcher-like? You evidently want a rocket launcher in the game but for some reason you don't want to call it a rocket launcher? What is going on?

Flying Steel wrote:I don't think so, it'd just look at the relative distance of a player between his base and the enemy base. A CTF map would have to be a really wild maze to make that not work.

Thats not working on TONS of the maps, like the very good mikectf3 (iirc that is the one where the flags are near eachother and you need to get around the whole base because they are separated by wall or gate).

I would join to parastis' statement, electro is more like a rocketlauncher than the rocketlauncher itself with the current settings. Also crylink lost its "around corner" ability because of the superslow reload you cant spam blind around corners where you expect the enemy is.

FraNcoTirAdoR wrote:

Flying Steel wrote:I don't think so, it'd just look at the relative distance of a player between his base and the enemy base. A CTF map would have to be a really wild maze to make that not work.

Thats not working on TONS of the maps, like the very good mikectf3 (iirc that is the one where the flags are near eachother and you need to get around the whole base because they are separated by wall or gate).

Hmm, well then maybe it could tap into the bot waypoint system to determine your practical distance from one base and another.

I would join to parastis' statement, electro is more like a rocketlauncher than the rocketlauncher itself with the current settings. Also crylink lost its "around corner" ability because of the superslow reload you cant spam blind around corners where you expect the enemy is.

Yeah, how about setting rocket launcher speed at 1500 instead of 2000 for the test server?

Flying Steel wrote:Hmm, well then maybe it could tap into the bot waypoint system to determine your practical distance from one base and another.

Not all maps have waypoints, so that wouldn't be possible.

ai wrote:Not all maps have waypoints, so that wouldn't be possible.

Not all maps have mini-maps either though, but mini-maps are both possible and implemented. And this wouldn't require something maps shouldn't already include. Plus, if there are no waypoints, it could default to raw distances between bases. So it'd only not work on maps with an unusual design plus no waypoints.

Anyway it sounds like the assignment system might already be under early development, so I guess we'll see if it useful and used 'in the field' when it's ready for testing.