Battery changes for tournament stopwatch

Discussion for Bani's Tournament Mod

Moderators: Forum moderators, developers

Battery changes

Poll ended at Thu Dec 11, 2003 4:30 pm

Back door dynamitable/rebuildable, no spawn at command post
59
51%
Back door dynamitable/rebuildable, spawn at command post
39
34%
No change
18
16%
 
Total votes: 116

ildon
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 4:23 am

Post by ildon »

O2.iceman wrote:With these changes, battery could simply become the new sub (map from RtCW), which was also offensively biased.

Fast times were set, so it was just a matter of who could set the faster time.

Even buying 1 extra minute on defence gave you 3 extra rushes on offence because you spawned nice and close to the final objective.

ET could do with more offensively biased maps, like kendle said.
This is a good point. As it stands now there is no sub-like map for ET. I liked sub a lot in RTCW. No spawn camping. :D And a skilled team would always beat a less skilled team (unless one side made a big mistake, which means they should still lose anyway).
User avatar
AceAlive
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:14 am
Location: free tibet
Contact:

Post by AceAlive »

ildon wrote:
O2.iceman wrote:With these changes, battery could simply become the new sub (map from RtCW), which was also offensively biased.

Fast times were set, so it was just a matter of who could set the faster time.

Even buying 1 extra minute on defence gave you 3 extra rushes on offence because you spawned nice and close to the final objective.

ET could do with more offensively biased maps, like kendle said.
This is a good point. As it stands now there is no sub-like map for ET. I liked sub a lot in RTCW. No spawn camping. :D And a skilled team would always beat a less skilled team (unless one side made a big mistake, which means they should still lose anyway).
I also love playing sub. I know that in Europe the map wasn´t any popular but I just loved it, it was great fun :)

lately we scrimmed battery against a well known german et team and it was an interesting match.

axis we simply sent one guy to the back door so he shot an attackin covertops from time to time through the window.
the other 5 defended at the front entrance of the bunkers, where you have the 2 corridors coming together. we loved all those infights on the map, great fun like on sub.

we won our allies quickly because we had bult the ramp for some seconds and our engineer sneaked through adn axis didn´t notice him.
that was kinda lol, we won but only by luck, which isn`t satisfying at all.
it was also kinda lol how our opponent had like 3 covert ops, 2 field ops and a panzerfaust ;)

if only the bs with the ramp was different or the back door...the we would have a map that is decided by good 1on1 close-combat and medic-work instead of map that is decided by luck and spam as it is now.
check out my scripting-tutorials for ET and RTCW @ www.Game-Foundation.com
Image
Bedrock
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 3:56 am

Post by Bedrock »

god, "this will kill it for alot of us" if you mean your clan.. i wont go there. the map is made one way.. if your a GOOD clan.. no one is going to get a body.. thus no one will be going through the back.. thus, this map is one way only.. no map like that is fun.. theres a bunker out back with MG's in it.. that NEVER get used.. because of the reason that theres no reason to go out back.. you can knock off 4 mins of continous spawncamping between panzers, fops and just smg's without the command post.. yes. i've had this idea before.. its just i thought SD would never release maps to anyone.. i guess they have to bani, or he's going to script it in. either way.. its a great idea. same with fuel dump.
dA*Rogue
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 3:18 am

Post by dA*Rogue »

Certainly the above changes would totally change battery, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.

I think that with well timed pushes times can be set on battery as it is. I voted for a dyanmite-able back door, no spawn at the CP. This would probably force teams to defend closer in to the gun controls, and would make the map quite different to the others.
User avatar
Svartberg
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2004 7:35 am

Post by Svartberg »

Hrrrm, i think it would change the map too much - for competition 6v6 it may seem nice to give the offense an advantage because it's easy to block 6 people.

But personally, from my experience, any more than 6 people in this map, and you see the offense has a serious advantage in battery :
(Some of these happen in 6v6 too)
1. smoking the bunker/mountain, and the defense is seriously cut.
2. mortarring the defense camping is very very easy, you can even mortar the bunker if you know how.
3. we used to place machineguns on the sniper mountain in large games, it's incredible how it clears way for the offense.
4. any airstrike thrown will probably be nulled down by experienced medics, though etpro has made the hitboxed bizzare and it's a little hard now.
5. the ally team will ussually have the command post built and giving them an advantage.
6. after taking the bunker, experienced cov-ops are used to take any bodies of the defense and going through the command post, creating a huge headache for the defense.
7. the battery axis base is quite big, and it's easy to miss allies there, plus there's a noticable delay until an engineer can get to the gun controls - it takes but one dynamite for them to win.
(in oasis, after one gun is blown up, the defense is likely to camp and put all their effort on the second one, here there's no second chance)

Lastly, i think the design of this map is brilliant, the only thing i think is that the airstrikes/ffe (especially ffe) should be reduced to one each, i think it will fix the problems here.
dA*Rogue
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 3:18 am

Post by dA*Rogue »

Svatberg, your points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 are all null (as is your proposed limit on airstrikes/ffe) if clans run an alternative defence strat, which IMHO is far more effective...

The only think I will agree on is that the CP gives the allies some advantage.
User avatar
Svartberg
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2004 7:35 am

Post by Svartberg »

dA*Rogue wrote:Svatberg, your points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 are all null (as is your proposed limit on airstrikes/ffe) if clans run an alternative defence strat, which IMHO is far more effective...

The only think I will agree on is that the CP gives the allies some advantage.
ROFL, what different defense structure ?!
i don't think you quite understand the fact i can mortar any place the defense is going to be in, unless they are going to camp in the gun controls, and in this situation, we're going to have some fun taking the bunker.

As for smoke, it blocks the defense from attacking the allies, it has nothing to do with structure.

The only thing that the defense can do is to either mortar the offense or do ffe near the ramp, and mortars can always be mortarred themselves.
As for FFE, hence my original proposal to cut it down.
SickBoy
Posts: 145
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:29 am

Post by SickBoy »

Svartberg wrote: i don't think you quite understand the fact i can mortar any place the defense is going to be in...
I seriously doubt this :D
dA*Rogue
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 3:18 am

Post by dA*Rogue »

I'd like to play your clan on battery Svartberg...

You can certainly have fun taking the bunker...the bunker won't win you the game.
Locked