More than 3 rounds of campaign?

(Smartypants) #1

I would like to be able to set the number of rounds with a cvar. This would be nice for scrimmages. Also people could hold onto their increased skills longer.

I say leave it up the admin.

Eric B.

(damocles) #2

Not so sure myself. Any more than three rounds and the entire team will be level four in something, with many people being level 4 in many things and a few colonels hanging around. It’d be insanely chaotic, with massive airstrikes, pinpoint perfect snipers, assassains everywhere, engies that can drop dyna faster than the skaggy ho back home, automatic panzers, etc

I think three rounds works well. By the end, the good players will have one or two level fours and the bad players have levels two and three. The only purpose you would get from extra rounds is to give the players that suck an opportunity to see the level four skills for themselves, which completely eliminates the incentives of the skill system.

(Smartypants) #3

First of all, you seen to think having a lot of level 4 players is a bad thing. I disagree. Don’t forget many players are bringing skills they already have to the game and can obtain the skills fast.

I had a guy playing on my server yesterday that was laying down ammo as a LT then suiciding and picking it up as a medic just to raise his XP points, and it worked.

Secondly you are assuming everyone is starting on round one together. I submit to you that the way it is now, if you join a game in the third round you already have a situation where a significant amount of players are level 4.

Also I feel once you have earned level 4 you should be able to keep it a few rounds. As a player I like a challenge, so it doesn’t bother me a bit to go up against a level 4 player as level 1.

In any case the way around this that I found is to make longer rounds. With 60 minute rounds you can get to level 4 in one round.

I am suggesting that admins be given the option to increase the number of rounds via a cvar. If not, I would like to see the rounds capped at 4 or 5 instead of three. It is going to happen anyway when they start modding the game. The cvar can be added in minutes it is not hard to do.

The fact that there is a modding community proves players and admins want as much flexibility built into the game as possible.

Eric B.

(damocles) #4

First of all, you seen to think having a lot of level 4 players is a bad thing. I disagree. Don’t forget many players are bringing skills they already have to the game and can obtain the skills fast.

Tell me about it! The other day I played a game where the Axis on round 3 had two or three high level players, and they were unstoppable because most of the allies were still low level. The allies never even made it across the bridge all round. Too many level 4’s is a bad thing. It turns the map into a spam fest.

I had a guy playing on my server yesterday that was laying down ammo as a LT then suiciding and picking it up as a medic just to raise his XP points, and it worked.

This is more of an exploit, and really should be dealt with in the final release.

Secondly you are assuming everyone is starting on round one together. I submit to you that the way it is now, if you join a game in the third round you already have a situation where a significant amount of players are level 4.

And if you have more rounds, then even more players will be on high level if you join late in the campaign. What’s more, if you have say 6 rounds and you join in at round 3, you have to spend another 3 rounds at a disadvantage before the campaign restarts. At least with three round, you’ll either have to play one round disdvantaged or two rounds where you start slightly behind.

Also I feel once you have earned level 4 you should be able to keep it a few rounds. As a player I like a challenge, so it doesn’t bother me a bit to go up against a level 4 player as level 1.

If you want to keep it longer, earn it faster. It’s all about giving the player’s incentives to work as a team and to excel in their skills. More rounds would just result in the bad players not needing to improve.

In any case the way around this that I found is to make longer rounds. With 60 minute rounds you can get to level 4 in one round.

That’s your choice. Personally I think the time limits should be left to whatever the mappers set them to. After all, they know the map better than anyone and have play tested it. By setting it to 60 minutes, you’re making it extremely difficult for an axis win.

I am suggesting that admins be given the option to increase the number of rounds via a cvar. If not, I would like to see the rounds capped at 4 or 5 instead of three. It is going to happen anyway when they start modding the game. The cvar can be added in minutes it is not hard to do.

You’re completely right. Except I bet you any money that most players will still play 3 round campaigns because they will realise it is more balanced.

(NoSoup4U) #5

[quote=“damocles”]

Tell me about it! The other day I played a game where the Axis on round 3 had two or three high level players, and they were unstoppable because most of the allies were still low level. The allies never even made it across the bridge all round. Too many level 4’s is a bad thing. It turns the map into a spam fest.

The other day i played a game where it was the first campaign, and the same thing happened : It’s skills/teamwork in the end that will bring you through : not two players who have level 4.

(Vengeance) #6

well said nosoup4u

(RivrStyx) #7

Man …sit through 6 -30 min rounds to complete a campaign… i think 3 is enough…plus 6 rounds would be no challenge to max your XP. A lot of Level 4s would be a disaster and a total chaos if you think spamming wouldn’t take place. 5 or 6 FOs calling artillery and airstrikes everywhere as the solders spam anyone that could possibly get that onslaught.

3 is a good base from getting to grueling, chaotic and drawn out.

Once more maps … a campaign of 3 different maps will be nice.

(Smartypants) #8

I don’t understand your point, we get 5-6 FO spamming artillery now on the first round. If you don’t like a server that has 6 rounds don’t join it. I am getting the same effect on my server anyway by making the rounds 60 minutes long.

Eric B.

(Dahmian) #9

I had a guy playing on my server yesterday that was laying down ammo as a LT then suiciding and picking it up as a medic just to raise his XP points, and it worked.

post that in the bug thread :cool:

(Ragnar_40k) #10

Maybe they can add a factor, e.g. for 3 (or less) rounds this factor will be 1, for 4 to 6 rounds the factor will be 2 etc.
And then you need XP multiplied by factor to reach a certain level.
E.g. on a 3 round campaign you need 1x140 XP to get level 4, while you need 2x140 XP to get on level 4 within a 4 round campaign.

(Ifurita) #11

personally, I think most maps are broken when you start off with a majority of level 4’s. To be honest, I’ve had the most fun playing Stopwatch:

  1. Rewards good offensive play - not just sitting back and racking up experience points. In fact, I think Stopwatch more efficiently drives the desired game behaviors than the experience system does.

  2. Rewards those who can drive a quick close to a game by being sneaky, efficient, or both - currently, those people, the engy-covert ops who sneak thru early get no XP bonus to reward their winning the game

  3. Changes the game up and allows people to play offense AND defense. 90 minutes on defense gets old fast

  4. You still get the benefits of building experience, which can be substantial if you’re playing a hard 30-minute round

  5. At a minimum, every 30 minutes XP and maps reset to level the playing field for everyone - minimizes the impact of late joins, experienced players leaving mid-campaign, and the results on one lopsided game

Just my 2 pennies

(karpo_007) #12

I think there should be a option to allow more than 3 maps. People that don’t like it can us other servers. When ET was just a rumour they said that result of one map would affect what will be next.

Wouldn’t it be fun to Start from Normandy, if allies win they would move towards Berlin, if they lose they would retreat… Just a tought.

(NoSoup4U) #13

I am working on the idea of a mappack (campaign), where the choices you make as a team will affect the outcome (mapchange, vehicles or not in next map).
Check the bottom of this thread, as i dont want to repeat myself :wink:

http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1263

(karpo_007) #14

Sounds very good!

(Wils) #15

Campaigns can span up to six maps I think. Three isn’t a hardcoded limit; it’s just what we felt gave the best balance and designed the game around.

It’ll be possible for server admins or mappers to write and distribute their own campaigns, the only caveat is that both the server and clients need them so they’ll need to be packed into pk3s.

(karpo_007) #16

Sounds great, thanks for the info.

(bogs) #17

Lead Level Designer’s who finally have time to post in forums ehh… :slight_smile: that can mean only one thing !!! oooo the anticipation!

(Ifurita) #18

Will it be possible to write conditional map rotation, e.g., IF allies win Fuel Dump, THEN next map = xxx, IF axis win Fuel Dump, THEN next map = yyy?

(Wils) #19

Lead Level Designer’s who finally have time to post in forums ehh… :slight_smile: that can mean only one thing !!![/quote]

Yeah: I was having my lunch :slight_smile:

(=MLK=FOO) #20

Lead Level Designer’s who finally have time to post in forums ehh… :slight_smile: that can mean only one thing !!![/quote]

Yeah: I was having my lunch :)[/quote]
Who gave you the right to EAT??? Cause I will have them fired… NOW GET BACK TO WORK!!! :slight_smile: :drink: