A new kind of TC arrangement?

Discussion in 'Mapping Questions & Discussion' started by Altaco, Apr 20, 2009.

  1. Altaco

    Altaco L7: Fancy Member

    Messages:
    485
    Positive Ratings:
    121
    I had this idea a few months ago while I was thinking about the problems in the current way valve has gone about TC maps, and I think I've figured out a way to help it. I figured that to prevent both teams from turtling in their bases, each round could be 3 caps instead of only 2, with a neutral point in the middle, and other bases around it. There are many possibilities for different arrangements here. Here's a picture:
    [​IMG]
    What do you guys think? Potential pitfalls? Suggestions on how stalemates/timing should work?
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2009
  2. medd

    medd L2: Junior Member

    Messages:
    50
    Positive Ratings:
    2
    Yeah just disregard this. I misread it as a CP map! My bad.

    I don't play much on TC maps so I can't really give you any input :(
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2009
  3. Mar

    Mar Banned

    Messages:
    607
    Positive Ratings:
    63
    It's not TC itself that promotes turtling, It's the way Hydro and most TC maps are made that cause turtling. Same thing for CTF. You can make a non-turtling CTF map, but none of the popular ones do that.

    If you want to have a good TC map, you need a neutral area (not a CP!) between the CP. Look at valve 5 cp push maps, the most balanced maps in the game. Each have +3 routes to the point, each route is big enough that you can build uber in it, and the spawn is far away from the point. Wider tunnels, more routes, and 0 sentry nests would fix TC.
     
  4. Icarus

    aa Icarus

    Messages:
    2,246
    Positive Ratings:
    1,181
    Not 3, more like 2.5.

    2 Main routes, and one side-route or one-way route.

    Valve always has at least 2.5 routes into every objective (ie CPs)

    Well has 2 Main gates, and the one-way sewer pipe
    Granary has 2 Main routes, and one drop-down for defenders
    Even Dustbowl is a prime example. There are usually 2.5 routes into every CP.
     
  5. uma plata

    uma plata L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    298
    Positive Ratings:
    86
    I think as long as there is the option of 1 cap ending the round, there will be turtling

    The consequences of everyone "forgetting" to defend in a TC map is basically an instant loss

    So yea, you're idea sounds like it may be the right way to go, if the last CP on either side starts out locked, could promote some forward momentum with aggressive teams. But you could also have some very long rounds if there's a lot of back & forth on the central CPs

    I always thought having just 1 cp open per round, on an attack/defend system would help TC out quite a bit, but I've never seen it in practice
     
  6. GrimGriz

    GrimGriz L10: Glamorous Member

    Messages:
    774
    Positive Ratings:
    133
    I'd like to see dustribute style TC ... (you have to have the intel on the point to cap it)....but for me the downfall of TC maps is the spy/scout cap
     
  7. RichT

    RichT L1: Registered

    Messages:
    23
    Positive Ratings:
    4
    Problem is if you have all the seperate routes is possible that one team could cap the middle then simply rush to the left/right and get the point before the other team can re-act.
    Other than that good idea.
     
  8. YM

    aa YM LVL100 YM

    Messages:
    7,099
    Positive Ratings:
    5,739
    So this is exactly the same as what I suggested in the strata thread? Yeah I think it could work, provided the team who cap's the middle first have an obvious advantage in capping the next one, a forward spawn, reduced spawn timers, etc. So that instead of setting up a defence at your own point its a mad scramble to cap the middle, then its a hunker down to take the next point. So its like a load of mini-granarys.
    Hell I could even try out a version of strata like this without too much trouble.
     
  9. Altaco

    Altaco L7: Fancy Member

    Messages:
    485
    Positive Ratings:
    121
    I've been playing with the entities trying to get a proof of concept working, it's acting up a lot. Points aren't in order on the HUD, wrong points are in play, proper round-specific walls aren't opening up, etc. This is going to be some tricky shit.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2009
  10. MangyCarface

    aa MangyCarface Mapper

    Messages:
    1,616
    Positive Ratings:
    1,275
    Having 3 caps would solve nothing. 1 middle cap would definitely be interesting.
     
  11. The Political Gamer

    aa The Political Gamer

    Messages:
    4,468
    Positive Ratings:
    1,682
    Is there a way to have teams vote on the next spot? This idea has some problems with tie breakers and server cooperation but it would be kinda cool.
     
  12. red_flame586

    red_flame586 L7: Fancy Member

    Messages:
    437
    Positive Ratings:
    108
    the problem is that it's not very logical. the thing with hydro is that you move your way across a large battle field. With this, you are constantly jumping out to side points which, in a real battle, would never happen. You would just run straight for the final enemy position.
     
  13. Altaco

    Altaco L7: Fancy Member

    Messages:
    485
    Positive Ratings:
    121
    I'm hoping it might make people actually like TC.

    The idea is that each round the same middle point is used with different bases, and each team's trying to control the whole area. Does regular TC make much sense either? Does killing each other over a briefcase or standing on metal plates make sense?

    Seems like a bad idea. People would constantly vote for an area that they had found easy to defend/attack from, and it's not possible without a server plugin.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2009
  14. l3eeron

    l3eeron L8: Fancy Shmancy Member

    Messages:
    594
    Positive Ratings:
    85
    I'm a huge fan of TC!

    I'm really liking the idea of an attack/defend tc map with a neutral middle point worked into the system some how.

    Kinda seems like it would be the reverse of steel...
     
  15. Altaco

    Altaco L7: Fancy Member

    Messages:
    485
    Positive Ratings:
    121
    I've got a proof of concept mostly working but there's a few hiccups. Right now, the main one is in appearance. How might I get the middle capture point to always be in the middle on the hud?

    Another issue arises from that because the middle point is neutral, the game assumes that even a round with red points at both ends is playable since there's a point red doesn't own. Any way to prevent this?
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2009
  16. A Boojum Snark

    aa A Boojum Snark Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado

    Messages:
    4,767
    Positive Ratings:
    5,508
    Ok, I finally got some time to toy with solving the wrong-round problem you talked to me about (and mentioned above). It seems the only way to make it function properly is setting up a CP ownership tracking logic net that manually controls which rounds are viable by overwriting their priorities.

    The HUD issue can be solved by having each round send a SetCapLayout to the master.

    We also talked about having trouble resetting the middle point to neutral every round. Turns out CPs refuse any input sent from the time the round ends until the next round activates (after the hold-period, when you can start walking). Two ways I found to fix this, each with a slightly different visual inconsistency.
    1: You can delay the reset input until after the round activates, which means people will see the point being owned on the HUD, then mysteriously go neutral.
    2: Add in an eighth point that is invisible, never capped, isn't shown on the HUD, and is used in all the central rounds. This prevents a team from winning by capturing the three "real" points. Then on the end points we use outputs to reset the middle point and then 0.01 seconds later force a winner via SetWinner to the master. The visual error with this is people will see the second point reset in the world during humiliation time.

    I think the second option is nicer, but it's also more complicated, as it would have to be tied into the aforementioned logic net to prevent to the point reset from interfering with the base-defense rounds when someone takes all the center points.

    If you need/want me to set this all up I can, I just don't want to start if it's not going to be required.
     
  17. TheBladeRoden

    TheBladeRoden L7: Fancy Member

    Messages:
    491
    Positive Ratings:
    165
    If your system can work with a layout that has multiple central points, I might be interested.

    [​IMG]
     
  18. A Boojum Snark

    aa A Boojum Snark Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado

    Messages:
    4,767
    Positive Ratings:
    5,508
    There is an 8 CP limit in the code. Your method could be done via fakepoints, might make it a little more complex.
     
  19. Shaar

    Shaar L3: Junior Member<BR>toboruin

    Messages:
    231
    Positive Ratings:
    103
    Why doesn't someone just make an all out TC map without rounds? It'd stop some turtling I think, especally if routes were randomly closed off and opened up again depending on who capped where. once all the control points are held by a team then then could attack the last base.
     
  20. A Boojum Snark

    aa A Boojum Snark Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado

    Messages:
    4,767
    Positive Ratings:
    5,508
    Player density, mostly. A large map with all points in play ends up with people too spread out, and if you make it too small it becomes a mess.