Territory Control and Team Fortress 2

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
I've had a good idea of what to do to TC to get it to work, the problem is optimization.

If it ever happens (read: if you pay me lots of money) I'll take a third bash at tc_strata and do this instead.

(I did have a long post about how TC fails, but the internet (being made of cats an' all) decided to eat it)
 
Last edited:

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,776
7,672
Shmitz, I was talking about the technical aspect of reusing the entities. With a linear map like dustbowl it is far easier to do because you can just make the final stage reuse the first stage's point with a simple reset. In TC since it is random you need to do a lot more handling yourself.
 

UKCS-Alias

Mann vs Machine... or... Mapper vs Meta?
aa
Sep 8, 2008
1,264
816
In that TC+KOTH and TC+PLR system its both under the control of the mappers. And its quite easy to use that same round priority trick to make such system. Its just that you need to know what you are doing to get that system what could make it hard.
 

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
Whilst a koth system for tc offers ease of balancing, it doesn't allow much to be reused between rounds, and thus is a little pointless as tc is as shmitz said, all about point reusing.
 

HeaH

L8: Fancy Shmancy Member
Oct 2, 2008
553
102
I would much rather play a map thats fun than a map that reuses points
 

Ida

deer
aa
Jan 6, 2008
2,289
1,372
it uses the same cap times and walk times as Dustbowl

The problem is the broken spawn times in Hydro, stuck at instaspawn

They're not broken are they? I thought they gradually decreased towards 0.

(Which still sucks)
 

NoodleCollie

Stoat fiend
aa
Jul 30, 2009
383
335
If the target was to make it gradually harder to defend the point, wouldn't that mean in increase in defender spawn times? Personally I'd rather have a final point that was slightly too easy to cap as opposed to slightly too hard, since otherwise the map might never end.
 

Ravidge

Grand Vizier
aa
May 14, 2008
1,544
2,818
They're not broken are they? I thought they gradually decreased towards 0.

(Which still sucks)

That's the plan. But they screwed up the outputs. So instead of going towards 0, it goes well beyond into the negative scale.

As Icarus said, It will be instaspawn when the clock hits 3:00.

It's something like: 10s spawnwaves > 6s wave > 0s wave > -8s wave >-16s wave
 

Trotim

aa
Jul 14, 2009
1,195
1,045
Alright but what... someone else (sorry too lazy to check) said still stands - spawntimes should INCREASE as rounds progress, no?
 

NoodleCollie

Stoat fiend
aa
Jul 30, 2009
383
335
In case anyone's interested, this is some of what I've come up with in the initial analysis/plan for my map (bar irrelevant details as to what my environment/setting will be like):

--Final Control Points--

Final points are outside, main route leads uphill to control point. Minor route enters the general area nearer the control point but can "carry" less people; it is also off the main route and so takes longer to get to. There is one one-way route to allow attackers an opportunity to use it to their advantage; this is further away from the control point than the minor route and is considerably off the main route. Area directly surrounding the control point is abundant in small sentry nest areas, similar to Dustbowl 3-2. Defenders spawn a 4- to 5-second Demo run from being able to intervene on the control point, making death more significant. Note that the control point can be visible before this, such Dustbowl point 2-2 where the fence prevents the defenders from getting to the point too quickly while still allowing them to see what's going on.

It is extremely important that the final control points and their arenas should be balanced to a pinnacle. Players are going to spend a lot of time in the final control point arena; it should be a fairly large environment with equal opportunities for the attacking team and the defending team to use this environment to their advantage. If the area is too easy to defend and too difficult to attack, the map will technically never end. If the area is too easy to attack (although this would be the lesser of two evils), the defending team will have little chance of successfully defending. Control points 2-2 and 3-2 of Dustbowl are good examples of fun playing areas, although in 3-2 the spawn would be a little too close to the point in this case for the defending team.

A useful factor for this final area would be, while the defenders take a couple of seconds to get to the point, the attackers should have a larger distance between their spawns and the main point arena. This would mean it would take longer to get pack to the point area, so again making death more significant. The distance would, however, need to be calculated carefully as, although it would encourage tactics and teleporters, if we were to err on the side of caution it would be to keep the point capture-able as opposed to completely defend-able in order for the map to end. A decent length to get to the final point might be just less than from the Blu spawn to Dustbowl 2-2, with a setup gate to allow the point defenders to set up a bit of a base instead of immediately getting rolled.

Obviously, the defenders would have a longer respawn time (~5 seconds avg) compared with the attackers (~2 seconds). Like in Hydro, these times can vary as the game goes on.

--Middle Control Points--

Since both teams will start off owning two middle control points each, the routes between these points for both Red and Blu will have to be similar to cut down on unintentional advantages to either team. Once one team has captured a point the routes between the next points can be a little different, overall being a little more difficult to capture for the attacking team.

Each point will need AT LEAST one main route and one minor route between it and the two points either side of it (in a square arrangement), as the stalemate on the choke points was the main detremental feature of Hydro. There will need to be a little of "no-man's land" (think CP Gorge, just as the attackers enter the facility around the second point) between each point in which players can fight without being particularly on each other's ground; this land should become a little harder for the attacking team to take control of after the first capture of the game, when playing moves on.

Overall, the layout of the points and the routes between them should be EASILY NAVIGABLE, fairly open (not so many tight turns and sharp inclines like Hydro) and EASY TO LEARN. Ideally, a player should know their way around the middle area after having played a round concerning each of the possible pairs of control points. TC maps can be difficult to find your way around at the best of times, so the layout should be as intuitive as possible (but not boring, obviously) to compensate for this. To better show which ways are blocked, possible routes to control points not being used in the current round should limit the player from going remotely near them instead of just blocking off the entrance to the route itself. For example, if there is an open area with the entrance to a blocked route at the far end, players should not have to go up to that end to see that the route is blocked; other props or brushes, such as wall, fences, barriers, etc., should be used to limit players going in that direction in general, and channel them towards the correct passage. In Hydro a player is more likely to see the blocked-off passages rather than the arrow signs to tell them where to go, so this should be made obvious for them.
 

Tinker

aa
Oct 30, 2008
672
334
Whilst a koth system for tc offers ease of balancing, it doesn't allow much to be reused between rounds, and thus is a little pointless as tc is as shmitz said, all about point reusing.

You could make the maps assymetrical and use the same spawn multiple times, I guess.

Also PLR seems logical for this gamemode.

I think Hydro's big problem is that while the individual cap points are built very well and play nicely, the areas that connect them are pretty horrid. And that's where most fighting happens. That, and diminishing spawn times make for a creative idea gone bad.
 
Nov 14, 2009
1,257
378
I was reading x6herbius's essay, and I think you may have a few misconceptions. The largest one is IMO, the final control points are the least important part of the map. In my 10 or so games of hydro (on a 30 min rotation), I have never reached the final point. Just to check it out, I tried a 24/7 server, and was lucky to be on the winning team for a few matches.

What im trying to say, is that people really dont spend that much time around the final points.

Oh ya, and one more thing about how TC is bad because of game mode:

You have to win three consecutive matches to get to the final point. No one likes loosing three times in a row, and will likely ragequit. Think L4D(2). Would you like to play through three full matches of Vs. and lose all of them? I dont think so, and Hydro expects you to like doing that. Remember, 1/2 of the people are the loser :p
 

TheBladeRoden

L420: High Member
Oct 26, 2007
491
168
When I was working on Freezerburn, I had a few ideas to make it stand out from Hydro.

1. Got rid of the bonus humiliation rounds (the A/D portions) so the bases would just be normal points and be linked to two other points instead of the one.

2. To get around stalemates I first had the spawn times flat during the round. But when the timer runs out, the spawn times are set to zero. And whenever someone on your team dies, your team's spawn timer goes up a bit. And ultimately the better team would have enough spawn time advantage over the other to take over the point.

3. lengthened the paths between points and put in a middle battleground. But naturally there was no more room for CP's. So I thought maybe a switch that could be triggered to unlock a door to a resupply room or forward spawn or something.

Though sadly, while I managed to get those ideas functional, my layoutting for my map was fail, so I never got to test to see if any of those ideas did any good.
 

NoodleCollie

Stoat fiend
aa
Jul 30, 2009
383
335
I was reading x6herbius's essay, and I think you may have a few misconceptions. The largest one is IMO, the final control points are the least important part of the map. In my 10 or so games of hydro (on a 30 min rotation), I have never reached the final point. Just to check it out, I tried a 24/7 server, and was lucky to be on the winning team for a few matches.

What im trying to say, is that people really dont spend that much time around the final points.

Yeah, I meant it in the sense that if you do get onto the final round then your playing area is going to all be around a single point, so it needs to be well-balanced to avoid one team winning straight-off, which happened to me yesterday. The Blu team had barely got out of their spawn before Pyros came pouring in and capped the thing.
 

Tapp

L10: Glamorous Member
Jan 26, 2009
776
215
I think that the flaws of TC outweigh the benefits. All the extra work isn't worth a persistent, changing game-field. It comes across with the pretense of non-linearity, but it boils down to the most linear game mode in existence.