I dislike carrier strike for one reason. The flag is very hard to grab cleanly.
In my opinion, the funnest maps for your player base are med to large maps with vehicles and medium sized bases(not confusing but big enough to not be raped easily), where the flags are in the open for fast grabs.
This is why katabatic is such a good map (AND OVERPLAYED). pretty much symetrical.. good distance between flags, to where you kinda have to "work" for the cap, but it has a clear flag stand to where you can make fast grabs, and the bases are not confusing, they can be attacked and defended pretty easily. And yea it has vehicles
In carrier strike you HAVE to get the flag, stop, then try to jump away, there is no way to skii through it because of the way the two buildings are set up. Get rid of the building the flag is in maybe, and it would be a good map.
I am big into flag play. I think the more grabs, stops, and returns... the more exciting a game becomes. It disappoints me when ctf becomes siege.
edit: Leifis.... RiverDance imo is one of the funnest maps around.... I have had more good games on that map than anyother map
I dislike carrier strike for one reason. The flag is very hard to grab cleanly.
edit: Leifis.... RiverDance imo is one of the funnest maps around.... I have had more good games on that map than anyother map
The reason I like carrier strike: Cloaking is actually somewhat useful here. Solid ground with lots of corners to hide around. Zip up in a grav bike, beacon it, lance the heavy flag stander and make like hell to your bike before you get pounded. Cloaker maps are hard to come by. Between footprints on natural ground and no suitable hiding places in most bases, cloaking is such a underplayed element of CTF. Broadside and Katabatic are two of the few that cloaking can be utilized on for more than just the "Ambush a guy and die yourself 'strategy'"
Redeye, the reasoning I dislike riverdance is that the bases play far too much of a role in the game. One side is built into the hill making it easy for heavies to ski right into your base or blast your flag. I don't really require maps to be symmetrical, but when a map gives one side a healthy advantage, it sucks. If base placement were altered, it wouldn't be so bad then.
A lot of people seem to prefer the flag to be almost totally exposed (ala Magmatic, Rollercoaster, Sandstorm, Dangerous Crossing) where it takes almost no effort to ski in and grab the flag.
Personally I think the flag should require a bit of teamwork to get at. Broadside and Blastside are pretty good. I got 4 caps in a row on one of those two (the one with the turrets) by sneaking in with a cloak pack just last week.
I think the ideal rotation would have a mixture of maps that have easily accessible flags, and maps that have more easily defended flags.
Some of my feelings on maps:
Desert of Death: No inventories and waiting around in endless lines to get the ONE energy pack makes for a boring match.
Archipelago: A lot of guys don't like this one but I think it's a nice change from maps like DX or rollercoaster where the entire game is suit up, ski to enemy base in 30 seconds, mortar spam (or grab flag), ski back. Rinse and repeat. Keeps the rotation fresh by requiring a different style of play for effective offense and defense. I spent the entire match running into the enemy base from behind with a satchel charge and deployable cameras. I'd place the satchel and camera, run out and hide in the water and then watch through the camera for someone to come by the inventory I had booby-trapped. When they did, it was beepbeepbeepKABOOM!
Thin Ice: Love this map, again because it's a different style of play. Long distances between bases and that flat plain means heavies can't just hold the spacebar to zoom across the map. You're better off getting some teammates to ferry you over in a havoc. Indoor flags can be a pain to get to, but a coordinated offense can knock out that base fairly easily. Requires teamwork to win, which is what this game is all about.
Magmatic: Open flags mean the defense has to work together to keep cappers from zooming through and making a grab. Having a couple of bombers in the air really helps with this one. Good map. It caters to almost all styles of play (cloaking not so much).
Dangerous Crossing: Ugh. Gee, how can we make a map with the most mortar spam possible?
http://goonhaven.org now has forums for discussion of Goon Haven servers. There isn't much there yet, but soon that will be the best (and only) place to make comments, suggestions, requests, and complaints.
Desert of Death: No inventories and waiting around in endless lines to get the ONE energy pack makes for a boring match.
Archipelago: A lot of guys don't like this one but I think it's a nice change from maps like DX or rollercoaster where the entire game is suit up, ski to enemy base in 30 seconds, mortar spam (or grab flag), ski back. Rinse and repeat. Keeps the rotation fresh by requiring a different style of play for effective offense and defense. I spent the entire match running into the enemy base from behind with a satchel charge and deployable cameras. I'd place the satchel and camera, run out and hide in the water and then watch through the camera for someone to come by the inventory I had booby-trapped. When they did, it was beepbeepbeepKABOOM!
Thin Ice: Love this map, again because it's a different style of play. Long distances between bases and that flat plain means heavies can't just hold the spacebar to zoom across the map. You're better off getting some teammates to ferry you over in a havoc. Indoor flags can be a pain to get to, but a coordinated offense can knock out that base fairly easily. Requires teamwork to win, which is what this game is all about.
Magmatic: Open flags mean the defense has to work together to keep cappers from zooming through and making a grab. Having a couple of bombers in the air really helps with this one. Good map. It caters to almost all styles of play (cloaking not so much).
Dangerous Crossing: Ugh. Gee, how can we make a map with the most mortar spam possible?
A lot of people seem to prefer the flag to be almost totally exposed (ala Magmatic, Rollercoaster, Sandstorm, Dangerous Crossing) where it takes almost no effort to ski in and grab the flag.
Personally I think the flag should require a bit of teamwork to get at. Broadside and Blastside are pretty good. I got 4 caps in a row on one of those two (the one with the turrets) by sneaking in with a cloak pack just last week.
I think the ideal rotation would have a mixture of maps that have easily accessible flags, and maps that have more easily defended flags.
Some of my feelings on maps:
Desert of Death: No inventories and waiting around in endless lines to get the ONE energy pack makes for a boring match.
Archipelago: A lot of guys don't like this one but I think it's a nice change from maps like DX or rollercoaster where the entire game is suit up, ski to enemy base in 30 seconds, mortar spam (or grab flag), ski back. Rinse and repeat. Keeps the rotation fresh by requiring a different style of play for effective offense and defense. I spent the entire match running into the enemy base from behind with a satchel charge and deployable cameras. I'd place the satchel and camera, run out and hide in the water and then watch through the camera for someone to come by the inventory I had booby-trapped. When they did, it was beepbeepbeepKABOOM!
Thin Ice: Love this map, again because it's a different style of play. Long distances between bases and that flat plain means heavies can't just hold the spacebar to zoom across the map. You're better off getting some teammates to ferry you over in a havoc. Indoor flags can be a pain to get to, but a coordinated offense can knock out that base fairly easily. Requires teamwork to win, which is what this game is all about.
Magmatic: Open flags mean the defense has to work together to keep cappers from zooming through and making a grab. Having a couple of bombers in the air really helps with this one. Good map. It caters to almost all styles of play (cloaking not so much).
Dangerous Crossing: Ugh. Gee, how can we make a map with the most mortar spam possible?
ugh, don't listen to people like this at all. open flagstands provide balance to offense/defense and ultimately make the pubs better.
A lot of people seem to prefer the flag to be almost totally exposed (ala Magmatic, Rollercoaster, Sandstorm, Dangerous Crossing) where it takes almost no effort to ski in and grab the flag.
Personally I think the flag should require a bit of teamwork to get at. Broadside and Blastside are pretty good. I got 4 caps in a row on one of those two (the one with the turrets) by sneaking in with a cloak pack just last week.
I think the ideal rotation would have a mixture of maps that have easily accessible flags, and maps that have more easily defended flags.
Some of my feelings on maps:
Desert of Death: No inventories and waiting around in endless lines to get the ONE energy pack makes for a boring match.
Archipelago: A lot of guys don't like this one but I think it's a nice change from maps like DX or rollercoaster where the entire game is suit up, ski to enemy base in 30 seconds, mortar spam (or grab flag), ski back. Rinse and repeat. Keeps the rotation fresh by requiring a different style of play for effective offense and defense. I spent the entire match running into the enemy base from behind with a satchel charge and deployable cameras. I'd place the satchel and camera, run out and hide in the water and then watch through the camera for someone to come by the inventory I had booby-trapped. When they did, it was beepbeepbeepKABOOM!
Thin Ice: Love this map, again because it's a different style of play. Long distances between bases and that flat plain means heavies can't just hold the spacebar to zoom across the map. You're better off getting some teammates to ferry you over in a havoc. Indoor flags can be a pain to get to, but a coordinated offense can knock out that base fairly easily. Requires teamwork to win, which is what this game is all about.
Magmatic: Open flags mean the defense has to work together to keep cappers from zooming through and making a grab. Having a couple of bombers in the air really helps with this one. Good map. It caters to almost all styles of play (cloaking not so much).
Dangerous Crossing: Ugh. Gee, how can we make a map with the most mortar spam possible?
ugh, don't listen to people like this at all. open flagstands provide balance to offense/defense and ultimately make the pubs better.
Projectile, I think the key is a good mix of both and na85 says that after his second paragraph. Though I know maps that require base rape sometimes require more than a chaotic pub, and if there is a pickup group of 3-4 people they can usually roll everyone, but that's inherent in ANY online game (esp. FPS ones). We'll find a happy medium.
If you keep a mixture of maps you will create chaos.
I would suggest maps like Thin Ice where there are more built up bases and no exposure of the flag would be suitable for your 64 Man Server. Whereas open and exposed flags will be a better momentum of game play, field play, and possibly set on your 32 Man Server. It would be a great idea to keep the styles seperated imo.
If you try to mix the different styles which can be drastically different from map to map, the influx of players which will drift in and out will create an undesirable play environment.
My guess would be, even casual players will most likely want to increase their skills too. Choosing and rotating maps which will inflict this behavior is in everyones best interest.
And wouldn't a homogeneous rotation of maps create boredom?
Look I totally understand what you're saying... but name a single -successful- online game that succeeded by catering to one playstyle over and over and over. I also don't want to cater to the person that will only EVER play light-offensive 300kph capper. That guy needs to learn how to support his team from time to time, or make a strategic base rape, or be a tailgunner once in a while. I think some people are scared to switch it up and are content with just doing the same thing over and over and over again (see: World of Warcraft). Of course on the other hand, WoW offers different playstyles. I just meant the overall content doesn't change much (before you pull a "gotcha" with my "name a successful game" ).
Many of these complaints/concerns will probably be moot once the tournament plan is laid out and we have regularly scheduled, BALANCED maps in a CONTROLLED environment.
See the problem I see with having one style of map on the 64-man and another style on the 32-man is that if you want to switch styles, you have to leave one server and go join a different one. Oh sure that's probably a question of laziness, but the point is it's still fracturing the players by map style, not counting the fact that one server has half the capacity.
I noticed a few of the "testing" maps from the 32-man sneak their way into the 64-man last night, and it was actually quite awesome (except for that one that had vpads but no invos at all). Playing with 32 per side then was actually quite good.
Oh, and I don't ever want to have to grind in Tribes. I like being able to load up a scout, ski my way towards the enemy base, and halfway there decide whether I want to run for the flag, snipe, or suicide and try defense instead. Switching roles on the fly, while possibly detrimental to very tight teamwork (I'm not going to go "oh, I'm done bombardiering" in the middle of a run), is part of what makes Tribes so much fun for me.
Doing one style of map over and over would get boring; just look at the map votes. While it's true that votes for new gametypes like Hunters or Siege get shot down (new types create variety) in favor of good old CTF, even some of the CTF maps get shot down at different times depending on what map is up. If we're playing a map that has no vpads and someone votes for another map with no vpads, I've noticed it gets a good handful of nays right off the bat. I can tell we prefer vehicles a little more on the basis that the same process doesn't always apply if we're on a map with vpads and someone votes for another vpad map.
Lets not ignore the types of maps we have to work with. Or where the direction of new maps can go.
Magmatic is a good example of a map which can be on both 32 and 64. While still small, has the size to support a good play style. Also caters to vehicles, while the more experienced players will probably never take one, those who like - have them available.
Harvester is a good map for 32, but far too small for 64.
Not everyone will get to play their maps of choice.
And wouldn't a homogeneous rotation of maps create boredom?
Look I totally understand what you're saying... but name a single -successful- online game that succeeded by catering to one playstyle over and over and over. I also don't want to cater to the person that will only EVER play light-offensive 300kph capper. That guy needs to learn how to support his team from time to time, or make a strategic base rape, or be a tailgunner once in a while. I think some people are scared to switch it up and are content with just doing the same thing over and over and over again (see: World of Warcraft). Of course on the other hand, WoW offers different playstyles. I just meant the overall content doesn't change much (before you pull a "gotcha" with my "name a successful game" ).
Many of these complaints/concerns will probably be moot once the tournament plan is laid out and we have regularly scheduled, BALANCED maps in a CONTROLLED environment.
I agree, only those who are skilled in just one role usually only want to play one type of map. Let's keep the game-play fresh and cycle through a large number of maps with varying map types.
I agree that variety is good, and that's why I think instead of setting up a map rotation we should also set up a mod rotation. For example, imagine playing classic ctf for one map, and then the next map it randomly becomes war2003 mod. You'd go from using one spinfusor, to a dozen--all of which will be mounted up on your shoulders and shoot 10x as fast. It's this sort of variety that strays from the path of the traditional, and we really need to embrace this sort of change. I mean, just imagine the possibilities. I, personally, would love to play a grueling game of Katabatic and next map find myself on flatlands building a giant erect penis out of blast walls and elongated pillars.
Good for you. However, I've yet to play on a Construction server, as I prefer the exhilaration of successfully getting an enemy flag and running for my life towards the general area of home base. Randomly switching mods between missions also sounds to me like an impossible feat, as I recall that mods are loaded with the server at runtime, not after with the scripts. In addition, completely changing the gameplay is a form of mental whiplash that, while not all too uncharacteristic with the on-the-fly strategy changes Tribes demands, I believe would be detrimental to a public server. Imagine, you're on a team where no one's played your mod choice before except you, and now you have 31 other people with supercharged weapons (splash damage and TD enabled) that don't do what they thought they did, leading to complete and absolute chaos. Chaos of the Bad kind.
An interesting idea, certainly, but I don't think that's what we want going here.
Is my idea crazy? Yes. It sounds crazier to me than it does to you. It probably even makes you cringe.
No, it concerns me for the stability of the playerbase if newcomers have to not only come to grips with the already precipitous learning curve of base or classic Tribes, but to also instantaneously learn a completely new mod that may not even have its own server in the master list.
That's how the players who have been playing Tribes2 for years now, when watching you guys discuss the pro's of Thin Ice feel. We cringe, but worst of all, we're embarrassed for you and everyone around you confirming your distorted perspective on this fantastic game.
Well I'm sorry that some of us came late to the party and can't play it exactly your way. We're finding ways to have fun regardless, and isn't that what a game is for?
haha my post was deleted. if you were seriously offended by that wow
you also took away from my post count which i am rly angry about yo
If you continue to post in this thread, you're doomed to being a Nugget the rest of your TribesNext life. The man with the meinkampf look, sir beaz, is here to slay your blasphemous commentary. He may act professional, but he's really just holding back his primal instinct to go nuclear.
Nail on the head ::). Other than the one gibberish post the only others I'm deleting are yours Anarchy. Anarchy, the same guy I keep saying "Please get out of this thread" to instead of getting into a constant flamewar. But yes, I must be the asshole. Constructive criticism is welcome... elitist bullshit nonsense is not. Also your statement of how I have a primal instinct to go nuclear is funny considering you did your whole admin impersonation stunt just so you could talk shit and boot someone who votekicked you from the server. I haven't kicked anyone that didn't blatantly break any rules yet. It's really too bad that you had to be suck a dick.
If you do not have anything to say in relation to the Goon server. Do not say it. This is just for information on the Goon server. All other information will be removed.
Okay--I just got back from testing out Thin Ice on my personal server and I feel I gave the map a terrible knock that it doesn't deserve. I feel that it's simply misinterpreted, it's by far one of the greatest maps I've played in a while. I never really gave it a chance until now, and I'm quite surprised how well it plays. The random bunches of water in the middle of the map really make it difficult for the heavies to cross, which I feel is a plus because that extra obstacle is certainly something that could present a welcome challenge to old and new players alike. A++ I recommend this map in the server's rotation!
I'll be testing out other map's and giving my new, fresh perspective on them as I see fit. I'm only beginning to realize how wrong I may have been before in judging these maps. Next up on the test list, air support 2! =D
Okay--I just got back from testing out Thin Ice on my personal server and I feel I gave the map a terrible knock that it doesn't deserve. I feel that it's simply misinterpreted, it's by far one of the greatest maps I've played in a while. I never really gave it a chance until now, and I'm quite surprised how well it plays. The random bunches of water in the middle of the map really make it difficult for the heavies to cross, which I feel is a plus because that extra obstacle is certainly something that could present a welcome challenge to old and new players alike. A++ I recommend this map in the server's rotation!
I'll be testing out other map's and giving my new, fresh perspective on them as I see fit. I'm only beginning to realize how wrong I may have been before in judging these maps. Next up on the test list, air support 2! =D
Right on bro, I have always enjoyed Thin Ice. Also, I'm impressed by the way you have corrected yourself and admitted you were wrong. It takes a man to admit when they're wrong.
Let us know what you come up with as far as your favorite maps! I'm excited to hear what you have to say.
Okay--I just got back from testing out Thin Ice on my personal server and I feel I gave the map a terrible knock that it doesn't deserve. I feel that it's simply misinterpreted, it's by far one of the greatest maps I've played in a while. I never really gave it a chance until now, and I'm quite surprised how well it plays. The random bunches of water in the middle of the map really make it difficult for the heavies to cross, which I feel is a plus because that extra obstacle is certainly something that could present a welcome challenge to old and new players alike. A++ I recommend this map in the server's rotation!
I'll be testing out other map's and giving my new, fresh perspective on them as I see fit. I'm only beginning to realize how wrong I may have been before in judging these maps. Next up on the test list, air support 2! =D
Right on bro, I have always enjoyed Thin Ice. Also, I'm impressed by the way you have corrected yourself and admitted you were wrong. It takes a man to admit when they're wrong.
Let us know what you come up with as far as your favorite maps! I'm excited to hear what you have to say.
Thanks I hope I'm wrong more in the future, because I'm really starting to love admitting when I am.
Hmm from what I can tell of AnarchyAO's responses by reading where other people have quoted him, pretty much everything he's saying is right. Also, Abstract has to be the most naive person I have ever seen on the internet.
Edit: Anyway, like I said in another thread, most of the player on Goon Haven aren't capable of taking advantage of the horrible design flaws of maps like Thin Ice and Archipelago, so they might actually be good choices for Goon Haven. You have to remember that the gameplay changes drastically when you go from a server where people are below average in skill to a server where people are above average in skill. It's been so long, I forgot about the times when we were all new enough to have fun on maps like those. TribesNext has brought that time around again for many people, so I figure we should just let them play it out until they get better. At least they are playing Classic.
Hmm from what I can tell of AnarchyAO's responses by reading where other people have quoted him, pretty much everything he's saying is right. Also, Abstract has to be the most naive person I have ever seen on the internet.
Much of his "flame talk" was completely deleted. And while I'm not going to get into the objective/subjective argument with you, when not playing COMPETITIVELY, maps can be whatever. No need to argue over complete balance over a mostly dead game. Argue balance on Left4Dead forums... that's always fun. Let's please move on.
A lot of the back and forth is unneeded on a PUB. Pubs are designed to be fresh and different from time to time. As I've said, I'm working on the details of the organized tournament with my admins. We will ensure that those maps are properly balanced (and more than likely TWL branded).
Hmm from what I can tell of AnarchyAO's responses by reading where other people have quoted him, pretty much everything he's saying is right. Also, Abstract has to be the most naive person I have ever seen on the internet.
I'm not naive. I'm actually quite formulaic. There is a reason I respond the way I do on message boards and it benefits players like yourself the most. You have quite a bit of technical skill. This is your strong point. Other members may respect you for that. Your weak point is your poor attitude.
We have MANY new players coming to the game and some of them may begin posting on this forum thinking it's cool to belittle other members.
You're also EXTREMELY knowledgeable about the game. This is why it can be so detrimental for the noobs to start behaving the way you do, toward each other. One thing that hurt Tribes 2 the most(and continues to) is the rivalry of gametypes, mods, players and so on... This can quickly ruin the Tribes 2 experience for someone new. This is why I urge people not to lance vehicles that take to long on the pad, could be someone who doesn't know any better yet.
Act as more of a mentor and less as a villain Kryand. You have the capability to lead teams to victory with you knowledge or stand alone with your poor attitude. Trust me.
Hmm from what I can tell of AnarchyAO's responses by reading where other people have quoted him, pretty much everything he's saying is right. Also, Abstract has to be the most naive person I have ever seen on the internet.
I'm not naive. I'm actually quite formulaic. There is a reason I respond the way I do on message boards and it benefits players like yourself the most. You have quite a bit of technical skill. This is your strong point. Other members may respect you for that. Your weak point is your poor attitude.
We have MANY new players coming to the game and some of them may begin posting on this forum thinking it's cool to belittle other members.
You're also EXTREMELY knowledgeable about the game. This is why it can be so detrimental for the noobs to start behaving the way you do, toward each other. One thing that hurt Tribes 2 the most(and continues to) is the rivalry of gametypes, mods, players and so on... This can quickly ruin the Tribes 2 experience for someone new. This is why I urge people not to lance vehicles that take to long on the pad, could be someone who doesn't know any better yet.
Act as more of a mentor and less as a villain Kryand. You have the capability to lead teams to victory with you knowledge or stand alone with your poor attitude. Trust me.
Exactly. This is a bit unrelated (sorry!) but that's what I've been doing in Arena mod lately. I know a lot of new people play, so when I see someone like Roe Wolf trying to kill me (and he's trying oh so hard) I simply stop and run into the kitchen to grab a snack. By the time I get back, there's no other than Roe Wolf himself standing over my corpse with a big grin on his face as he spams the global chat with "Woohoo!" voice binds.
I think arguing balance when concerning an FPS such as Tribes 2 is pretty self defeating. The reason why T2 shines so much is because the lack of balance. Now I know you might be scratching your heads here, wondering what I'm talking about....
Played some of the newer FPS games? Halo 2 anyone? The skill level caps off pretty damned fast. The balance between skilled and unskilled players is reletively even. We don't see this in Tribes 2, player skill completely unbalances the game, and that's a good thing.
Many developers take player skill into consideration when balancing games today. You'll see patches coming out that will "fix" things that have become a community feature that the more skilled players use. Imagine if Tribes 1 had just come out last year, I guarantee they would have "fixed" skiing instead of embracing it. Tribes 2's shocklance would be nerfed. The tank's shields would be cut back, as well as the Jericho MPB's. They'd consider certain aspects of the game that the skilled players can utilize to improve their gameplay a balancing issue, and they'd fix it.
Tribes 2 doesn't hold newbies' hands when they start the game. It throws them into the meat grinder, and the tougher guys make it out alive, while everyone else heads back to Halo. This is why we love the game, because you can always become better at it. The tactics involved doesn't stop at finding the shotgun or sniper rifle, or learning where all the health powerups are. Tribes 2's tactics are extremely deep, and can change on the fly when you face a different player.
No, Tribes 2 isn't a balanced game, it never has been, and never will be. Good players will always own mediocre players.
I don't think anyone is talking about that kind of balance. What I meant in my post was assuming that everyone was at the same level in one game. If everyone is bad, then the gameplay and balance thereof is going to be drastically different than if everyone is good. A bunch of good players on Thin Ice would be a terrible experience. But, a bunch of bad players? That could still be fun for them. It doesn't change the fact than Thin Ice is a bad map; it just makes that fact irrelevant.
Comments
In my opinion, the funnest maps for your player base are med to large maps with vehicles and medium sized bases(not confusing but big enough to not be raped easily), where the flags are in the open for fast grabs.
This is why katabatic is such a good map (AND OVERPLAYED). pretty much symetrical.. good distance between flags, to where you kinda have to "work" for the cap, but it has a clear flag stand to where you can make fast grabs, and the bases are not confusing, they can be attacked and defended pretty easily. And yea it has vehicles
In carrier strike you HAVE to get the flag, stop, then try to jump away, there is no way to skii through it because of the way the two buildings are set up. Get rid of the building the flag is in maybe, and it would be a good map.
I am big into flag play. I think the more grabs, stops, and returns... the more exciting a game becomes. It disappoints me when ctf becomes siege.
edit: Leifis.... RiverDance imo is one of the funnest maps around.... I have had more good games on that map than anyother map
The reason I like carrier strike: Cloaking is actually somewhat useful here. Solid ground with lots of corners to hide around. Zip up in a grav bike, beacon it, lance the heavy flag stander and make like hell to your bike before you get pounded. Cloaker maps are hard to come by. Between footprints on natural ground and no suitable hiding places in most bases, cloaking is such a underplayed element of CTF. Broadside and Katabatic are two of the few that cloaking can be utilized on for more than just the "Ambush a guy and die yourself 'strategy'"
Redeye, the reasoning I dislike riverdance is that the bases play far too much of a role in the game. One side is built into the hill making it easy for heavies to ski right into your base or blast your flag. I don't really require maps to be symmetrical, but when a map gives one side a healthy advantage, it sucks. If base placement were altered, it wouldn't be so bad then.
Personally I think the flag should require a bit of teamwork to get at. Broadside and Blastside are pretty good. I got 4 caps in a row on one of those two (the one with the turrets) by sneaking in with a cloak pack just last week.
I think the ideal rotation would have a mixture of maps that have easily accessible flags, and maps that have more easily defended flags.
Some of my feelings on maps:
Desert of Death: No inventories and waiting around in endless lines to get the ONE energy pack makes for a boring match.
Archipelago: A lot of guys don't like this one but I think it's a nice change from maps like DX or rollercoaster where the entire game is suit up, ski to enemy base in 30 seconds, mortar spam (or grab flag), ski back. Rinse and repeat. Keeps the rotation fresh by requiring a different style of play for effective offense and defense. I spent the entire match running into the enemy base from behind with a satchel charge and deployable cameras. I'd place the satchel and camera, run out and hide in the water and then watch through the camera for someone to come by the inventory I had booby-trapped. When they did, it was beepbeepbeepKABOOM!
Thin Ice: Love this map, again because it's a different style of play. Long distances between bases and that flat plain means heavies can't just hold the spacebar to zoom across the map. You're better off getting some teammates to ferry you over in a havoc. Indoor flags can be a pain to get to, but a coordinated offense can knock out that base fairly easily. Requires teamwork to win, which is what this game is all about.
Magmatic: Open flags mean the defense has to work together to keep cappers from zooming through and making a grab. Having a couple of bombers in the air really helps with this one. Good map. It caters to almost all styles of play (cloaking not so much).
Dangerous Crossing: Ugh. Gee, how can we make a map with the most mortar spam possible?
I totally agree with you !!!
Your life must be boring to spend your time to annoy people on the web. ;D
Projectile, I think the key is a good mix of both and na85 says that after his second paragraph. Though I know maps that require base rape sometimes require more than a chaotic pub, and if there is a pickup group of 3-4 people they can usually roll everyone, but that's inherent in ANY online game (esp. FPS ones). We'll find a happy medium.
I would suggest maps like Thin Ice where there are more built up bases and no exposure of the flag would be suitable for your 64 Man Server. Whereas open and exposed flags will be a better momentum of game play, field play, and possibly set on your 32 Man Server. It would be a great idea to keep the styles seperated imo.
If you try to mix the different styles which can be drastically different from map to map, the influx of players which will drift in and out will create an undesirable play environment.
My guess would be, even casual players will most likely want to increase their skills too. Choosing and rotating maps which will inflict this behavior is in everyones best interest.
Look I totally understand what you're saying... but name a single -successful- online game that succeeded by catering to one playstyle over and over and over. I also don't want to cater to the person that will only EVER play light-offensive 300kph capper. That guy needs to learn how to support his team from time to time, or make a strategic base rape, or be a tailgunner once in a while. I think some people are scared to switch it up and are content with just doing the same thing over and over and over again (see: World of Warcraft). Of course on the other hand, WoW offers different playstyles. I just meant the overall content doesn't change much (before you pull a "gotcha" with my "name a successful game"
Many of these complaints/concerns will probably be moot once the tournament plan is laid out and we have regularly scheduled, BALANCED maps in a CONTROLLED environment.
I noticed a few of the "testing" maps from the 32-man sneak their way into the 64-man last night, and it was actually quite awesome (except for that one that had vpads but no invos at all). Playing with 32 per side then was actually quite good.
Oh, and I don't ever want to have to grind in Tribes. I like being able to load up a scout, ski my way towards the enemy base, and halfway there decide whether I want to run for the flag, snipe, or suicide and try defense instead. Switching roles on the fly, while possibly detrimental to very tight teamwork (I'm not going to go "oh, I'm done bombardiering" in the middle of a run), is part of what makes Tribes so much fun for me.
Doing one style of map over and over would get boring; just look at the map votes. While it's true that votes for new gametypes like Hunters or Siege get shot down (new types create variety) in favor of good old CTF, even some of the CTF maps get shot down at different times depending on what map is up. If we're playing a map that has no vpads and someone votes for another map with no vpads, I've noticed it gets a good handful of nays right off the bat. I can tell we prefer vehicles a little more on the basis that the same process doesn't always apply if we're on a map with vpads and someone votes for another vpad map.
Variety is the spice of life, no?
Magmatic is a good example of a map which can be on both 32 and 64. While still small, has the size to support a good play style. Also caters to vehicles, while the more experienced players will probably never take one, those who like - have them available.
Harvester is a good map for 32, but far too small for 64.
Not everyone will get to play their maps of choice.
I agree, only those who are skilled in just one role usually only want to play one type of map. Let's keep the game-play fresh and cycle through a large number of maps with varying map types.
you also took away from my post count which i am rly angry about yo
Good for you. However, I've yet to play on a Construction server, as I prefer the exhilaration of successfully getting an enemy flag and running for my life towards the general area of home base. Randomly switching mods between missions also sounds to me like an impossible feat, as I recall that mods are loaded with the server at runtime, not after with the scripts. In addition, completely changing the gameplay is a form of mental whiplash that, while not all too uncharacteristic with the on-the-fly strategy changes Tribes demands, I believe would be detrimental to a public server. Imagine, you're on a team where no one's played your mod choice before except you, and now you have 31 other people with supercharged weapons (splash damage and TD enabled) that don't do what they thought they did, leading to complete and absolute chaos. Chaos of the Bad kind.
An interesting idea, certainly, but I don't think that's what we want going here.
No, it concerns me for the stability of the playerbase if newcomers have to not only come to grips with the already precipitous learning curve of base or classic Tribes, but to also instantaneously learn a completely new mod that may not even have its own server in the master list.
Well I'm sorry that some of us came late to the party and can't play it exactly your way. We're finding ways to have fun regardless, and isn't that what a game is for?
I deleted it because it was gibberish... not because I was offended. Are you about to start a pointless flame too?
Nail on the head ::). Other than the one gibberish post the only others I'm deleting are yours Anarchy. Anarchy, the same guy I keep saying "Please get out of this thread" to instead of getting into a constant flamewar. But yes, I must be the asshole. Constructive criticism is welcome... elitist bullshit nonsense is not. Also your statement of how I have a primal instinct to go nuclear is funny considering you did your whole admin impersonation stunt just so you could talk shit and boot someone who votekicked you from the server. I haven't kicked anyone that didn't blatantly break any rules yet. It's really too bad that you had to be suck a dick.
I'll be testing out other map's and giving my new, fresh perspective on them as I see fit. I'm only beginning to realize how wrong I may have been before in judging these maps. Next up on the test list, air support 2! =D
Right on bro, I have always enjoyed Thin Ice. Also, I'm impressed by the way you have corrected yourself and admitted you were wrong. It takes a man to admit when they're wrong.
Let us know what you come up with as far as your favorite maps! I'm excited to hear what you have to say.
Thanks
Edit: Anyway, like I said in another thread, most of the player on Goon Haven aren't capable of taking advantage of the horrible design flaws of maps like Thin Ice and Archipelago, so they might actually be good choices for Goon Haven. You have to remember that the gameplay changes drastically when you go from a server where people are below average in skill to a server where people are above average in skill. It's been so long, I forgot about the times when we were all new enough to have fun on maps like those. TribesNext has brought that time around again for many people, so I figure we should just let them play it out until they get better. At least they are playing Classic.
Much of his "flame talk" was completely deleted. And while I'm not going to get into the objective/subjective argument with you, when not playing COMPETITIVELY, maps can be whatever. No need to argue over complete balance over a mostly dead game. Argue balance on Left4Dead forums... that's always fun. Let's please move on.
A lot of the back and forth is unneeded on a PUB. Pubs are designed to be fresh and different from time to time. As I've said, I'm working on the details of the organized tournament with my admins. We will ensure that those maps are properly balanced (and more than likely TWL branded).
I'm not naive. I'm actually quite formulaic. There is a reason I respond the way I do on message boards and it benefits players like yourself the most. You have quite a bit of technical skill. This is your strong point. Other members may respect you for that. Your weak point is your poor attitude.
We have MANY new players coming to the game and some of them may begin posting on this forum thinking it's cool to belittle other members.
You're also EXTREMELY knowledgeable about the game. This is why it can be so detrimental for the noobs to start behaving the way you do, toward each other. One thing that hurt Tribes 2 the most(and continues to) is the rivalry of gametypes, mods, players and so on... This can quickly ruin the Tribes 2 experience for someone new. This is why I urge people not to lance vehicles that take to long on the pad, could be someone who doesn't know any better yet.
Act as more of a mentor and less as a villain Kryand. You have the capability to lead teams to victory with you knowledge or stand alone with your poor attitude. Trust me.
Exactly. This is a bit unrelated (sorry!) but that's what I've been doing in Arena mod lately. I know a lot of new people play, so when I see someone like Roe Wolf trying to kill me (and he's trying oh so hard) I simply stop and run into the kitchen to grab a snack. By the time I get back, there's no other than Roe Wolf himself standing over my corpse with a big grin on his face as he spams the global chat with "Woohoo!" voice binds.
Played some of the newer FPS games? Halo 2 anyone? The skill level caps off pretty damned fast. The balance between skilled and unskilled players is reletively even. We don't see this in Tribes 2, player skill completely unbalances the game, and that's a good thing.
Many developers take player skill into consideration when balancing games today. You'll see patches coming out that will "fix" things that have become a community feature that the more skilled players use. Imagine if Tribes 1 had just come out last year, I guarantee they would have "fixed" skiing instead of embracing it. Tribes 2's shocklance would be nerfed. The tank's shields would be cut back, as well as the Jericho MPB's. They'd consider certain aspects of the game that the skilled players can utilize to improve their gameplay a balancing issue, and they'd fix it.
Tribes 2 doesn't hold newbies' hands when they start the game. It throws them into the meat grinder, and the tougher guys make it out alive, while everyone else heads back to Halo. This is why we love the game, because you can always become better at it. The tactics involved doesn't stop at finding the shotgun or sniper rifle, or learning where all the health powerups are. Tribes 2's tactics are extremely deep, and can change on the fly when you face a different player.
No, Tribes 2 isn't a balanced game, it never has been, and never will be. Good players will always own mediocre players.