A Mod To End Stalemates?
Fantasmo
Join Date: 2002-11-06 Member: 7369Members
Join Date: 2002-11-06 Member: 7369Members
<div class="IPBDescription">vote_endgame</div> It seems to me stalemates are usually the result of a combination of factors; lousy marine teamwork, marine base turtling, and lousy alien teamwork. Hopefully as teamplay improves on pubs (I'm an optimist) stalemates of this kind will decrease but for now...
Has there been any consideration for an Endgame Vote Mod on public servers?
One of the biggest beefs with v2.0x pub games are the long 2-3 hour stalemates. I think, for now, if wouldn't be a bad idea to create a mod which allows players to vote on whether a game has ended or not.
<b>Endgame</b>
<b>1. Yes</b>
<b>2. No</b>
75% for a successful vote?
Just an idea what do you all think?
[Edit] I apologize if this has been suggested or done. [/Edit]
Has there been any consideration for an Endgame Vote Mod on public servers?
One of the biggest beefs with v2.0x pub games are the long 2-3 hour stalemates. I think, for now, if wouldn't be a bad idea to create a mod which allows players to vote on whether a game has ended or not.
<b>Endgame</b>
<b>1. Yes</b>
<b>2. No</b>
75% for a successful vote?
Just an idea what do you all think?
[Edit] I apologize if this has been suggested or done. [/Edit]
Comments
<a href='http://www.teamng.org/grenade_exploit2.dem' target='_blank'>Grenade Exploit on ns_caged (500k)</a>
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'><!--endemo--> That's just not right.
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--> Apparently under some conditions (like the one in Optikal's demo) no amount of alien teamwork will help.
vote_endgame anyone? <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
[Edit]
You know what is really beginning to scare me?
<b>"Stalemate Strats"</b>.
I mean it, I've actually heard/witnessed teams plotting ways to lockdown marine start and slowly upgrade to HA/GL and level 3 weapons/armour. Sometimes as soon as when an onos makes their first appearance.
Clearly a Stalemate Strat that is gaining much popularity takes advantage of the armoury and how the ammo goes directly into magazine which allows you to fire grens continuously. I'm not sure how something so obvious could have been overlooked but it has got to be changed in the new version.
<!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
What gets me is that I see clanners do it as much as regular pubbers. Why I ask you, why?
[/Edit]
You can do this in in 1.04, you just have to have 100% ammunition. The reason this works in 2.0 is because the GL is actually and effective weapon, and multiple spam GLs are overpowering.
ok.. <b>NO, please NO</b>
Thanks for punishing those marines who survived in 1.04. I loved having to reload half a clip, then getting the other half from the armory, AFTER reloading half of the clip, allowing me to reload the gun TWICE just to get one reload's worth of a reload. That sound fun, or make sense? no?
Don't punish us for something that isn't wrong! If you want to GL lame, it's your deal. If they want to be GL lamed, it's their problem. If it sucks so bad, leave, then they won't have anyone to be lame to. Or wait for them to get bored. If they want a stalemate-you can tell them where to stick it, too.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've had it used against our clan in clan games. THAT sickens me: it's using a completly lame strat to extend a game and hence win on time. The only way we managed to break one was with FIVE carapaced oni all of whom died in the process of just killing their armoury/tfs. Another five minutes of constant hitting their base was required before they went down. Proper GL spams, like the one in that demo, cannot be broken. They just can't be.
WE lost hives, took them back and finally spent 3 hours breaking into a hive, three hours.
We finally won when a greifer recycled IPs and blew res on mines before they could eject them. For real it was more of a grudge match/chore then a game, but niether team wanted to lose.
BTW That game was a perfact reason why onos SHOULD be able to devoure and redeme. They would sallie out there base every 40 minutes with a HA/M\HMG train and MURDER everything we threw at them. They werent even all that good. The only way to take down a lev3 HMG train is to devoure, redeme and then go back.....
I'm not suggesting anything that has to do with modifying the GL so chill out.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->ok.. <b>NO, please NO</b>
Thanks for punishing those marines who survived in 1.04. I loved having to reload half a clip, then getting the other half from the armory, AFTER reloading half of the clip, allowing me to reload the gun TWICE just to get one reload's worth of a reload. That sound fun, or make sense? no?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe it's late but I can't make sense of what you are trying to saying here. As for "punishing" people, I haven't made any suggestions as to how the armoury should be modified, but something as simple as not letting people USE the armoury and SHOOT at the same time will do.
I'm not looking to alter the game Speed 2 Dave, my suggestion is to add an option to allow player to vote whether they think a game has ended or not. How you percieve any of my post as "punishment" I do not know.
May I also suggest that you calm down a bit. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
May I also suggest that you calm down a bit. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fantasmo, I have nothing wrong with your idea. Some of the supporters seem to think that nerfing the armory (literally) is the only solution. I do, however, think that this end-game vote is the same as auto-concede, something that is already in the game.
Whenever someone points to the solution being Nerfing the armory back to its useless 1.04 self, I really get frustrated. It didn't solve the problem, it just slowed the problem down (and punished all the other players, as well).
It's all good. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Regarding the armoury. Please correct me if I'm wrong because I have never spammed nades from the armoury myself. The reason nade spam is so effective from behind an armoury is because you can fire nades while holding down USE which allows you to top off your GL as you fire. This allows you to unleash a continuous barrage of nades without the need for a break to reload.
If I am correct about the mechanics of nade spamming from the armoury I think it shouldn't be that way. As for tweaking how much ammo the armoury gives out I have no comment other then I think it feels just fine in v2.0. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I do, however, think that this end-game vote is the same as auto-concede, something that is already in the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I disagree here. Auto-concede kicks in when there is an inbalanced number of people per side. The endgame vote deals with stalemates not inbalanced teams so I think there is a role for both features.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Whenever someone points to the solution being Nerfing the armory back to its useless 1.04 self, I really get frustrated. It didn't solve the problem, it just slowed the problem down (and punished all the other players, as well).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see. Welp Speed 2 Dave we have no problems here, this thread is about a endgame vote option not nerfing the armoury. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> You can deal with the idea of armoury nerfing in another thread if it really frustrates you. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
its not hard, keep the armory exactly as it is, just dont allow grenade launchers to clip-load
Make a vote script, easiest way would be to move all the players to the readyroom after a successful vote.
Realize though, that the dug in team is more likely to vote no.
F4 ending usually takes about four people from the same team. A vote system couldn't possibly have less than 4 votes required to end the game and still do what it was intended to. F4 will probably hit before a vote could succeed.
Then there's the problem with any vote: you need someone with the correct privalages (possibly none) to remember the command to start the vote and actually want the vote to start. Even on servers that enable mapvoting, how often do you see votes?
A nice idea, but not practical.
Maybe because you guys did it to cheaply win in that CAL Tournament.... <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'><!--endemo-->
ok.. <b>NO, please NO</b>
Thanks for punishing those marines who survived in 1.04. I loved having to reload half a clip, then getting the other half from the armory, AFTER reloading half of the clip, allowing me to reload the gun TWICE just to get one reload's worth of a reload. That sound fun, or make sense? no?
Don't punish us for something that isn't wrong! If you want to GL lame, it's your deal. If they want to be GL lamed, it's their problem. If it sucks so bad, leave, then they won't have anyone to be lame to. Or wait for them to get bored. If they want a stalemate-you can tell them where to stick it, too. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
EXACTLY! It can be used to good measure if not abused, but noooo, we HAVE to have jerks ruin it.
alright, if there is a time-limit before a team "auto-wins" in NS, it should be the aliens. The marines have something called "ping of death" that works to their advantage. If the aliens live long enough, I'd argue they should win anyway (it's the MARINES job to clear THEM out).
But yeah, tourney rules are screwy to begin with... 6 people? I need at least 9 to do well, 2 squads of 4 and a comm. I guess if you're really good you could lower it to 2 squads of 3 and a comm.. but that's 7.