Platinum3cp has been tried with standin and it was dumb. Backcaps would be absolutely devastating and it would promote gunboating paintrainers trying to backcap. If the point takes forever to cap...why not just introduce more koth maps into the rotation? Koth is an exciting game mode, and koth_ashville is infinitely more fun/interesting than cp_ashville. Why can we only have one koth map? It adds variety, has shorter games, a lot of constant action. There's no need to break 5cp map that are the staple of tf2, simply introduce more fun maps over time without being limited in scope of playstyle. Over time, the maps will weed themselves out like they have been.
I think two 20 minute halves instead of two 30 minute halves would encourage more pushes as soon as you get uber rather than trying to suicide to force the other team and kind of speed up the pace. However, as we saw in europe, time based games come down to who can play more passively and force the other person to make the mistake rather than going in and taking your win by force.
Try not to have your opinion influenced by the fact your team was SHIT at standin
[quote=Platinum]3cp has been tried with standin and it was dumb. Backcaps would be absolutely devastating and it would promote gunboating paintrainers trying to backcap. If the point takes forever to cap...why not just introduce more koth maps into the rotation? Koth is an exciting game mode, and koth_ashville is infinitely more fun/interesting than cp_ashville. Why can we only have one koth map? It adds variety, has shorter games, a lot of constant action. There's no need to break 5cp map that are the staple of tf2, simply introduce more fun maps over time without being limited in scope of playstyle. Over time, the maps will weed themselves out like they have been.
I think two 20 minute halves instead of two 30 minute halves would encourage more pushes as soon as you get uber rather than trying to suicide to force the other team and kind of speed up the pace. However, as we saw in europe, time based games come down to who can play more passively and force the other person to make the mistake rather than going in and taking your win by force.[/quote]
Try not to have your opinion influenced by the fact your team was SHIT at standin
Why not just upload your VODS as map halves (ie: max 30 minutes) instead of as 1 hour-long map?
Why not just upload your VODS as map halves (ie: max 30 minutes) instead of as 1 hour-long map?
I play competitive TF2. But I hardly watch streams/cast, unless I am utterly bored, or when I'm at school. Not to say they aren't bad or anything, just that I don't want to spend like an hour of practice to watch a game where I can just easily look up the scores.
There are exceptions for me though. LG vs MixUp on Process was a great game to watch. Or when Wow Wow Kapow beat Xensity on Snakewater. For me, the games have to be close, 5-0 5-1 5-2 rolls are boring. 5-3 is a maybe moment for me.
I do like this 3 CP map idea, might try to work on one and see how that goes.
Also, I know payload is a "mess" But Payload is such an easy game to understand for the newer players. It's like 3 major variables
Build a solid defense
Prevent Cart from being pushed
Kill everyone
In pubs it's played with those 3 things in mind, and if one of them is not there, you're bound to lose. I don't know if 6's would want to play this, but watching them play it would be fun, and funny.
I play competitive TF2. But I hardly watch streams/cast, unless I am utterly bored, or when I'm at school. Not to say they aren't bad or anything, just that I don't want to spend like an hour of practice to watch a game where I can just easily look up the scores.
There are exceptions for me though. LG vs MixUp on Process was a great game to watch. Or when Wow Wow Kapow beat Xensity on Snakewater. For me, the games have to be close, 5-0 5-1 5-2 rolls are boring. 5-3 is a maybe moment for me.
I do like this 3 CP map idea, might try to work on one and see how that goes.
Also, I know payload is a "mess" But Payload is such an easy game to understand for the newer players. It's like 3 major variables
Build a solid defense
Prevent Cart from being pushed
Kill everyone
In pubs it's played with those 3 things in mind, and if one of them is not there, you're bound to lose. I don't know if 6's would want to play this, but watching them play it would be fun, and funny.
I have a really huge criticism sal (jk not that huge).
We don't have eligible 3CP maps. It's fine to say something like "oh, water mechanics are underutilized in comp tf2, lets make maps with water" but the actual process (lol pun) of making a solid competitive map seems hard and somewhat luck based. If we had prominent map makers make like 5-10 3CP maps and we play tested all of them we might find one that is good to play on. I think we should get maps first if you want to advocate 3CP.
IMO, advocating for a better spectator eSport has nothing to do with 3CP. Having a smaller map =/= less time for games. Even then, less time is not necessarily better. Maybe a 20 minute match is ideal and we can shoot for that in the future as far as spectating goes. I think the solutions lie in making 6v6 accessible to new players and having casters teach more as they call/cast a match. Other solutions are things like tournaments, special events, and frag videos (I think this is a huge one).
I have a really huge criticism sal (jk not that huge).
We don't have eligible 3CP maps. It's fine to say something like "oh, water mechanics are underutilized in comp tf2, lets make maps with water" but the actual process (lol pun) of making a solid competitive map seems hard and somewhat luck based. If we had prominent map makers make like 5-10 3CP maps and we play tested all of them we might find one that is good to play on. I think we should get maps first if you want to advocate 3CP.
IMO, advocating for a better spectator eSport has nothing to do with 3CP. Having a smaller map =/= less time for games. Even then, less time is not necessarily better. Maybe a 20 minute match is ideal and we can shoot for that in the future as far as spectating goes. I think the solutions lie in making 6v6 accessible to new players and having casters teach more as they call/cast a match. Other solutions are things like tournaments, special events, and frag videos (I think this is a huge one).
There have been 3CP push maps that didn't play well before, though I doubt anyone from comp treated them seriously.
If you really want new maps and ideas, try partnering with the people that make them and not crushing them with feedback like "it's a shit map that no one has fun on" and instead give them something useful to work with. Learn to play indev maps too--it's a lot easier to make huge changes and do it faster when a map is just dev textures.
There have been 3CP push maps that didn't play well before, though I doubt anyone from comp treated them seriously.
If you really want new maps and ideas, try partnering with the people that make them and not crushing them with feedback like "it's a shit map that no one has fun on" and instead give them something useful to work with. Learn to play indev maps too--it's a lot easier to make huge changes and do it faster when a map is just dev textures.
I'd definitely be interested in creating a 3 cp map if there's some support from the community - I just fear investing a lot of time into something that might get completely overlooked. Even getting a very standard 5 CP map playtested is arduous, why would people want to try out a 3 cp one?
I'd definitely be interested in creating a 3 cp map if there's some support from the community - I just fear investing a lot of time into something that might get completely overlooked. Even getting a very standard 5 CP map playtested is arduous, why would people want to try out a 3 cp one?
This doesn't fit into the 3 CP thing, but hopefully fits into the "faster map" thing. I'm getting close to an early version for a reverse ctf map based on torch2 from tfc, but it is not a mirrored base map. I've tried to design it from the ground up to play well with TF2's mechanics, so it is not a faithful port except for the main capture area which is pretty darn close.
One team is on offense for a ~ 10 minute round, whereafter teams are switched. Most caps at the end of both rounds wins. Caps are not a sure thing just because you get it close to the point (the ideal cap is to drop perfectly into the 'pot' on a jump). If you are killed short of the pot it may require a wipe of the enemy team to get it in and it becomes easier for the defense to hold it. There's going to be some wrinkles to success on the map that are probably different than CP...I'll just say I'm optimistic that this could bring something different to the table. Demoman or soldier are likely to be your main 'flag' runners. Quickfix might even be viable on offense for a few reasons.
There's certain choke points which I really need to see how they play out to know if it needs some tweaks or added routes. Also...respawn balancing may need larger tweaks since I'm kind of making a first stab at the timing and where I think teams will hold and most often clash.
Hoping to roll it out for playtests in a week or two.... "so excited!"
This doesn't fit into the 3 CP thing, but hopefully fits into the "faster map" thing. I'm getting close to an early version for a reverse ctf map based on torch2 from tfc, but it is not a mirrored base map. I've tried to design it from the ground up to play well with TF2's mechanics, so it is not a faithful port except for the main capture area which is pretty darn close.
One team is on offense for a ~ 10 minute round, whereafter teams are switched. Most caps at the end of both rounds wins. Caps are not a sure thing just because you get it close to the point (the ideal cap is to drop perfectly into the 'pot' on a jump). If you are killed short of the pot it may require a wipe of the enemy team to get it in and it becomes easier for the defense to hold it. There's going to be some wrinkles to success on the map that are probably different than CP...I'll just say I'm optimistic that this could bring something different to the table. Demoman or soldier are likely to be your main 'flag' runners. Quickfix might even be viable on offense for a few reasons.
There's certain choke points which I really need to see how they play out to know if it needs some tweaks or added routes. Also...respawn balancing may need larger tweaks since I'm kind of making a first stab at the timing and where I think teams will hold and most often clash.
Hoping to roll it out for playtests in a week or two.... "so excited!"
I have posted an early early alpha of the map I'm talking about above here: http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?p=276594
Note that the game mode is not functioning as I ultimately want it to on that posted version because the community that is going to playtest it doesn't like mappers messing with the flag captures per round variable. I'm just doing early testing though so I should still be able to get a feel of whether I need massive changes in spawn times, chokes, etc.
I have posted an early early alpha of the map I'm talking about above here: http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?p=276594
Note that the game mode is not functioning as I ultimately want it to on that posted version because the community that is going to playtest it doesn't like mappers messing with the flag captures per round variable. I'm just doing early testing though so I should still be able to get a feel of whether I need massive changes in spawn times, chokes, etc.
We used top play Arena Ravine when it first came out. 5v5 no medics. It was suprisingly good.
Along with that we played 6v6 medics on Ravine, but no ubers, not allowed to use uber.
We used top play Arena Ravine when it first came out. 5v5 no medics. It was suprisingly good.
Along with that we played 6v6 medics on Ravine, but no ubers, not allowed to use uber.
I think A/D arena might work. Like the shootmania map style where you have 45 seconds before the point opens and 2-3 minutes total to push before the round ends, win by 2.
I think A/D arena might work. Like the shootmania map style where you have 45 seconds before the point opens and 2-3 minutes total to push before the round ends, win by 2.
Sal, I think you're actually arguing two different points here without realizing it.
The first and most important thing you're trying to do is increase viewership by reducing the time it takes to watch a TF2 game. The second thing is that you're trying to speed up 6v6 gamesplay. What you've done is raised an interesting problem, and then followed it with a rather controversial solution.
So, to touch upon the first point: Yes, I think that more people would be interested in watching the game if it didn't take as long. However, I think there are simple ways to prevent this in post-production: as you said before, you can speed up the playback during boring parts of the game; in Starcraft, this is during the "build order" phase, but in TF2, this is when two teams are sitting on opposite points building uber and watching flank, before trying to make a play or grabbing a kill.
I think there's a better solution though: rather than always putting up entire games, why not pick out a high quality round or two, that showcase the better parts of playing TF2? We sort of have an advantage here, because in a game like DotA2, sure you could just fast forward through the farming phase of the game, but it doesn't really last long enough to make up for the other 40 minutes. What we can do is take out rounds that have 5 failed last pushes, and instead watch a round where a team has a successful mid, a successful push into second, and then takes the round with another successful push into last. There's always action, and there's still TF2 you can show off without having to drastically change the game.
Now, for your idea on 3-CP maps; could they be balanced to work with TF2? Sure they could, but I don't think they could be balanced for 6v6 play. There are a lot of inherent issues with it that are solved with the "in-between" points. In this game, there are a lot of stalemates for sure, but this is because a successful uber push typically means you gained ground and captured a point, while failing a push results in either a) losing the previous point or b) having to regroup and hold the previous point. In your example, the previous points in question could be the deciding points of the round, which would mean almost no teams would ever push out of last.
To combat this, you could take several routes; reduce spawn times, increase relative map size (ie. distance between points), increase the number of rounds needed to win. Say we reduce spawn times; now, there's much less incentive to push after one or even two player picks, because they will respawn in time to rejoin the current fight; thus, a player's life becomes much less valuable. Okay, let's also make the point distance a bit bigger so that teams have a chance to cover ground after winning/losing a fight; sure, that helps, but now the game still has the problem of there only being one chance to defend your ground (akin to DotA having one or two less lanes/towers), so a lot of turtling will happen. If you did manage to break the turtling problem, now your rounds go by much quickerl so much so, in fact, that it becomes difficult to justify winning a game in just 5 rounds (which is why CS games have like 11 or something); to solve that, we up the number of rounds it takes to win, and in doing so, bring the total time a match takes back up to relatively the same point.
It's a really hard subject to touch, and I'm sure one that Valve already looked at a lot before settling on 5-CP maps (notice how TC maps have fallen completely out of existence). Instead of changing the game, we need to change outside circumstances; players get up to 15 minutes after the scheduled match time to actually play the game, which leads to a lot of live viewers losing interest. Because of how buggy the game is, there are often several pauses during a match due to disconnects/rendering bugs/computer crashes/etc. The only other thing that reduces interest is simply not understanding why stalemates happen.
Sal, I think you're actually arguing two different points here without realizing it.
The first and most important thing you're trying to do is increase viewership by reducing the time it takes to watch a TF2 game. The second thing is that you're trying to speed up 6v6 gamesplay. What you've done is raised an interesting problem, and then followed it with a rather controversial solution.
So, to touch upon the first point: Yes, I think that more people would be interested in watching the game if it didn't take as long. However, I think there are simple ways to prevent this in post-production: as you said before, you can speed up the playback during boring parts of the game; in Starcraft, this is during the "build order" phase, but in TF2, this is when two teams are sitting on opposite points building uber and watching flank, before trying to make a play or grabbing a kill.
I think there's a better solution though: rather than always putting up entire games, why not pick out a high quality round or two, that showcase the better parts of playing TF2? We sort of have an advantage here, because in a game like DotA2, sure you could just fast forward through the farming phase of the game, but it doesn't really last long enough to make up for the other 40 minutes. What we can do is take out rounds that have 5 failed last pushes, and instead watch a round where a team has a successful mid, a successful push into second, and then takes the round with another successful push into last. There's always action, and there's still TF2 you can show off without having to drastically change the game.
Now, for your idea on 3-CP maps; could they be balanced to work with TF2? Sure they could, but I don't think they could be balanced for 6v6 play. There are a lot of inherent issues with it that are solved with the "in-between" points. In this game, there are a lot of stalemates for sure, but this is because a successful uber push typically means you gained ground and captured a point, while failing a push results in either a) losing the previous point or b) having to regroup and hold the previous point. In your example, the previous points in question could be the deciding points of the round, which would mean almost no teams would ever push out of last.
To combat this, you could take several routes; reduce spawn times, increase relative map size (ie. distance between points), increase the number of rounds needed to win. Say we reduce spawn times; now, there's much less incentive to push after one or even two player picks, because they will respawn in time to rejoin the current fight; thus, a player's life becomes much less valuable. Okay, let's also make the point distance a bit bigger so that teams have a chance to cover ground after winning/losing a fight; sure, that helps, but now the game still has the problem of there only being one chance to defend your ground (akin to DotA having one or two less lanes/towers), so a lot of turtling will happen. If you did manage to break the turtling problem, now your rounds go by much quickerl so much so, in fact, that it becomes difficult to justify winning a game in just 5 rounds (which is why CS games have like 11 or something); to solve that, we up the number of rounds it takes to win, and in doing so, bring the total time a match takes back up to relatively the same point.
It's a really hard subject to touch, and I'm sure one that Valve already looked at a lot before settling on 5-CP maps (notice how TC maps have fallen completely out of existence). Instead of changing the game, we need to change outside circumstances; players get up to 15 minutes after the scheduled match time to actually play the game, which leads to a lot of live viewers losing interest. Because of how buggy the game is, there are often several pauses during a match due to disconnects/rendering bugs/computer crashes/etc. The only other thing that reduces interest is simply not understanding why stalemates happen.
phifeI know that it'd probably never happen (especially given a community like ours) but I actually think it would be really interesting to see how forcing both medics to run kritz 24/7 would change the game - it could speed things up and make it more enjoyable from a spectator's standpoint.
Also this. A couple seasons back, I was talking about a scrim I played where both teams ended up running kritz for the entire duration, and it was probably the most fun I've ever had playing this game. As I said in my gigantic post above, and others have mentioned, waiting for ubers and a good time to use them is what really slows the game down. If team's options excluded the standard medigun, then quick fix vs kritz play could arise, and we'd see less stalemating in chokes.
The biggest problem I see with that is that uber is such a game changing element, it would be a very different game to play without that option. However, it would put less important on the medic and more importance about being aggressive and forcing the enemy team into a bad position to be able to use their kritz/be kritz on.
[quote=phife]I know that it'd probably never happen (especially given a community like ours) but I actually think it would be really interesting to see how forcing both medics to run kritz 24/7 would change the game - it could speed things up and make it more enjoyable from a spectator's standpoint.[/quote]
Also this. A couple seasons back, I was talking about a scrim I played where both teams ended up running kritz for the entire duration, and it was probably the most fun I've ever had playing this game. As I said in my gigantic post above, and others have mentioned, waiting for ubers and a good time to use them is what really slows the game down. If team's options excluded the standard medigun, then quick fix vs kritz play could arise, and we'd see less stalemating in chokes.
The biggest problem I see with that is that uber is such a game changing element, it would be a very different game to play without that option. However, it would put less important on the medic and more importance about being aggressive and forcing the enemy team into a bad position to be able to use their kritz/be kritz on.
if anyone that is around today wants to playtest my map it's going to be playtested sometime between 12-2pm pacific time today: http://www.reddit.com/r/truetf2/comments/12mc6u/bored_today_help_the_tf2mapsnet_community_test/
Specific timeslot should be shown on the forum link on that post once it's settled.
If you could upvote the truetf2 post it will also help all of the other folks testing their maps, so thanks!
if anyone that is around today wants to playtest my map it's going to be playtested sometime between 12-2pm pacific time today: http://www.reddit.com/r/truetf2/comments/12mc6u/bored_today_help_the_tf2mapsnet_community_test/
Specific timeslot should be shown on the forum link on that post once it's settled.
If you could upvote the truetf2 post it will also help all of the other folks testing their maps, so thanks!
We don't need any more changes, we have to keep with the system we have right now and just keep on getting players one by one.
We don't need any more changes, we have to keep with the system we have right now and just keep on getting players one by one.
How the hell would 3cp even work? Do you lock mid until the lasts are capped?
How the hell would 3cp even work? Do you lock mid until the lasts are capped?
DrPloxoHow the hell would 3cp even work? Do you lock mid until the lasts are capped?
Wut? It'd work the same as 5cp without the second points...?
[quote=DrPloxo]How the hell would 3cp even work? Do you lock mid until the lasts are capped?[/quote]
Wut? It'd work the same as 5cp without the second points...?