Extended Time

[SockDog]

I don’t see how the two bite each other. Right now it’s only one extra reason to cut full-hold short. It’s not only boring, it skews xp. I really think spouting your anti-xp sentiments here is misplaced.

Me? You brought up XP and the need to protect its “value”. Get your facts straight. Until you brought it up the conversation was centred on the actual topic.

[DarkangelUK]

The tokajack!

I’m all for limiting round time per objective, as long as the overall time still only adds up to 20mins. 1st objective 7mins, 2nd 6.5mins, 3rd 6.5mins… I think any longer is pushing it.

[tokamak]

Is this assuming there are ‘battle sense / class / light weapons’ unlocks as a map/campaign moves forward? If there are underdog benefits of acquiring rewards faster, then there may as well be a global “at the 5 minute mark, everybody gets level 4 light weapons.” I don’t think I’d like knowing that just because my team was doing better, the other team gains a potential advantage (if I’m understanding this correctly).

Either way. But if the game is played in campaign sessions then it’s more relevant, especially if it’s the first map that allows the defenders to build a head start in gathered unlocks. If the game ends fast enough, this advantage remains limited.

If it’s about permanent unlocks then it doesn’t really imbalances the game but it would inflate xp. You want to avoid maps that generate more xp than others and not letting rounds in which the attackers stand no chance go on for the entire duration greatly helps to dampen that effect.

And yeah the discussion remains about the merits of ending matches early, not about xp in and of itself.

[Ashog]

Please no overtime! Just implement correctly (in W:ET it wasn’t working afaik) the Surrender! vote.
If it’s a fullhold, and there’s no way for a team to win, but play hopeless next 5-10 minutes - they should be able to surrender, thus triggering map change. The surrenders are also fun for a fullholding team actually.

[amazinglarry]

[QUOTE=Ashog;410870]Please no overtime! Just implement correctly (in W:ET it wasn’t working afaik) the Surrender! vote.
If it’s a fullhold, and there’s no way for a team to win, but play hopeless next 5-10 minutes - they should be able to surrender, thus triggering map change. The surrenders are also fun for a fullholding team actually.[/QUOTE]

The problem with voting in general is that it requires competent human beings.

[SockDog]

In preference to just having no choice at all?

Most of the time I think voting fails because people don’t see or understand what it’s about. Maybe in this case the game could pause and offer an opportunity to surrender.

“The enemy has pinned you down. You can still try and break through for glory and honour but if you want to surrender you can do so by pressing F1 Now!”

Or some such BS.

[Humate]

The problem with voting in general is that it requires competent human beings.

Thats true but dont you need kick votes for - cheating, tking etc

[amazinglarry]

All I can remember from my days in ET / QW is that if somebody was Team Bleeding, TKing or just being an asshat we’d try vote kicking ~5 times before it would finally go through.

Now obviously this was unique to however each server had their kick configurations set up… but on average (especially with configs that required global votes for it - dumb!) it took several tries to kick people.

The problem is some subset of people would see the initial vote, and vote… while it would then either need more players to go through, it would fail. Then the vote would be called again and then some of those same people wouldn’t vote at all, thinking they already did blah blah blah… you see where I’m going.

I’m not saying a voting system shouldn’t be in place at all, of course! Simply saying that is has NEVER been reliable in just about any game I’ve played… and if given the choice of having an overtime or surrender, I’d take the overtime (but I’m pulling for both :))

[Ashog]

Pfff, when have you last played ETQW? Patch 1.1? Seems so. The voting has been improved since then.

Nothing else irritates me so much as servers with voting disabled. I try not to play on such servers at all.

[Mustang]

Not a fan of overtime!

Here’s an alternative suggestion to /surrender.

If an objective hasn’t been completed in the first 6 minutes the attacking team gets +10hp, then for every additional minute that passes they receive an additional +10hp.

This tips the imbalance in skill by compensating with buffs.

[Hyperg]

[QUOTE=tokamak;410506]Overtime as long as someone is actively constructing, moving the EV, if an C4 charge is ticking and when someone holds a package.

I don’t care if it’s fair or balanced, having redundant minutes at the end of the match because the objective can’t be met anyway is just a boner killer.[/QUOTE]

This is my stand as well in the matter. Been on both ends of the sword for loads of TeamFortress2 scrimms and yes it involves some desk smacking and input device abuse when you’re the victim of the last second save but it also feels awesome when you manage to exploit a spawn or situation advantage so you can “grab” that extra time and secure the win.

[murka]

I would honestly not touch the global timelimit.
Even when you fail, you can still try. The best games were usually a lockdown for so long, but getting frustrated and trying different things until a wild sparkle of hope appeared. Usually at that time the defense was bored enough that they couldn’t fall back in time and the attack started rolling through. So obj times of 18:00/19:00/19:55 are possible and I’m sure most agree that those are the best games. This is for pub play of course.
I remember so many matches from etqw where we had not pracced much so we sucked, but the extra time was like warmup. The first map we didn’t get the obj done in time and the attack on us was hard, but the next map we won, and then came the decider. Usually the games got so long that we lost the 3rd map because of other reasons, but without a global timelimit, we would have resulted in 0:4 loss.

So no overtime, not in a million years and especially not for plant objectives. The best moments are when you plant at 0:40 time left and don’t know exactly if you got it or not. Oh and it’s always fun to argue about different results from the game. Like in w:et we had a match where the endgame flags stated we had won, but the console said we didn’t. Go figure

[zenstar]

Why not both? CVAR?
Opinions on this are obviously split so why not allow the servers to choose?

[ailmanki]

There is that minas tirith for et, which is set to a timelimit of one hour.
Now sometimes the attackers got stuck at first gate - for one hour… lol.

I modified the mapscript, so that you get 15 mins at start, and for each objective (there are 5 gates till one is on top of minas tirith) 9mins additional. And for last objective, giving a total of 60mins.

The maps in DB are already not so long, 20mins max? So I think that should be no prob at all.
In ET it was mostly possible to completely skip objectives, and go for the final one. But when that is not possible, when there is an obstacle which has to be done before, I think then the time can be adjusted. Like tank/C4 opening a new path.

The other thing I would like to see is Suddendeath, you plant C4 in last second at last objective, then timelimit is extended - until C4 is disarmed or goes boom.

[Breo]

The objective mode should have overtime because objectives need to make the difference between winning/losing, not the time when the charge is planted within the gametime. I see regulary that engineers plant the charge in the last seconds without knowing that the last 30 seconds (time to detonate the charge) is pointless.

Gametype without overtime should be the stopwatch mode, because in this mode you need to set the best time.

[DarkangelUK]

If it’s the last objective and it’s a C4 plant then yes, I agree… even if you complete the arming of the C4 with 1 sec to go, then the defence should have to disarm it before they can gain the win.

[INF3RN0]

I think this would be an interesting thing for objective mode, but not for stopwatch.

[Rex]

Keep it the way it was in ET or QW, no overtime.

[murka]

I hope I’m not the only one who didn’t stop fighting even if we had no chance for the plant. Was interesting to see if extra time could have given us the win, ie plant at 0:23 remaining and we kept the room till the end. I don’t play for the game win, i play for my own win.

But if you must, only add overtime for obj mode. Although what if another plant happens and the first is defused? more overtime?

[Breo]

More constructive feedback is needed.
Without overtime the last 30 seconds is basicly TDM because the attack team have no goals to archieve.

With overtime you still need to start to plant within the actual gametime here’s an example:

Arming charge: 5 seconds
Time to detonate: 25 seconds

When you start planting at 19:59 and finish it succesfully you get 29 seconds overtime. If you arm the charge at 19:40 you get 10 seconds overtime.

Currently the game feels unfinished when it just stops at 20:00 while there is a charge active. Both teams need to play till the end with overtime, without it the defend team already won at 19:30.

But if you must, only add overtime for obj mode. Although what if another plant happens and the first is defused? more overtime?

You need to defuse all the charges that are planted before 19:59 which means you can get max. 29 seconds overtime.

As mentioned earlier I agree to keep it the way it is (current method) for Stopwatch because this mode is about setting the best time.