CUT2 vCTF

Post by **R.Flagg** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:46 pm

Just a reminder, ChaosCTF development is in fact underway.

And I still think that we have what it will take to make the game type shine. Including this bit, from the recent news post;

<a href="http://www.planetunreal.com/chaotic/pic ... 041804.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.planetunreal.com/chaotic/pic ... 41804_.jpg" hspace="5" align="left" border="0"></a> "We will have many more details coming in the near future, but for starters - (in addition to supporting vehicles & the use of our melee weapons) when you kill the enemy flag carrier in ChaosCTF, you cannot simply touch your flag and have it returned all the way to your base. You are going to have to actually pick it up, and carry it back home. And as you can see in the POTW, this means that at times, you just might end up with them both at once.

Note: This does not mean you can take your own team's flag from your flag base and run around with it, you cannot. It also does not mean you can score anywhere in the map, if you have both flags, you cannot. You must take your flag back to your flag base, and bring the enemy flag there as well. Because just as in normal CTF, you must have both flags at your flag base to score. And again, we have many more details about ChaosCTF to come."

Yes, yes, I know. I'm quoting myself, and it's news you might have already read.

But still, I decided to bump this topic. Simply because this is what is all over my mind these days. I've seen a few vCTF maps out there for example, that IMO are in dire need of stuff like CUT-style jump boots, AntiGravity Belts, grappling hooks (that hook vehicles), team teleporters, and so on. And we can bring that. Stuff that's kinda hard, or messier at least, to try to put in at the 'map' level.

Another idea I'd like input on, is the fact that the translocator is disabled by Epic for vCTF. If you know me, you might think I'd be Ok with that, because I prefer grapple play over xloc play. However, I don't. Because what I see happening is vCTF map authors, who do like xloc play, getting around this fact by placing xlocs in their maps, as a pickup item. Well, IMO, this is not the ideal solution. (esp because it just so happens that many folks who are fans of the grapple, also dislike the xloc)

I feel strongly that this is one of those options that is best handled at the server level, as it is in normal CTF and DM, etc. This way each server admin and his friends and regulars can decide if that's the typ of CTF they want to play or not.

So what if it were possible for us to do two things;

1) Make it so you could play both CTF and vCTF maps in one game type - ChaosCTF, and

2) make it so the "Allow Translocator" option works in that game type

This way you could pick whether or not you played with vehicles. What if it were possible to set up a map rotation that had a vehicle CTF map in it, followed by a non-vehicle map, and so on. Plus, you'd get to decide if you played with xlocs or not. The server admin could turn them on or off, just like in normal CTF.

I'm still waiting to hear from the coders if some of this is possible, or not possible, or whatever. But I would still love to hear more from folks about these ideas anway. Does it sound worth it?

Kaboodles · Post by **Kaboodles** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 4:11 pm

TKATK · Post by **TKATK** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 5:42 pm

that would seriously help breath life into CTF,vCTF is just too sloppy

|GoD|Plaguelord|LDR| · Sat Apr 24, 2004 7:01 am

Ah, I just love that pic... kinda reminds me of ancient china *Warriors of that time wore their Kingdoms flags on their backs*. Truely sounds like CTF and Chaos was made for eachother... I just wonder what the babies are going to look like

azrael · Post by **azrael** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:59 pm

Shadowstar wrote:I don't think we should remove any vehicles, except maybe the leviathan simply because its just too much, especially for vCTF.

First, I've said it before and I'll say it again: Leviathans just ain't that tough

. Besides, Chaos isn't about restricting choice now is it?

As for linkable/deployable shields/walls, why can't they be the secondary fire fir the MUG? Ice wall for ice ammo, solid but does no damage unless you lant on the spiky, crystalline top

. And fire ammo produces a firewall which is entirely intangible, except for the hot, burny sensation

. Also, it should detonate rockets and such.
Naturally fire shoul melt ice and ice douse fire, so ice and firewalls placed in clodse proximity to each other should not last long...

And, just for fun, the AWO could combine the selected ammo with the airjet to produce a tornado which wanders randomly(uses mucho ammo), freezing or burning anyone or anything in its way, possibly regardless of team damage settings then throwing them all ovr the place

-Penfold- · Post by **-Penfold-** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:54 am

I'd like to add something that I don't think has been addressed.

If you make a better CTF, and I'm guessing you will, undoubtedly some will like the change in rules/gameplay, but may not like how certain new Chaos weaponry affects gameplay/balance given maptypes or just personal preference. Because of this, I think that there should be a GUI option for the host to be able to toggle on or off each and every Choas UT weapon. This way, the improved gametypes will still be accessable to those who like the balance of the default weaponry, or just strongly object to one or two new weapons in particular. I don't intend this as an insult to your weapon designs, but rather a compliment to your new styles of gameplay--that they'll probably very popular. Why prevent a person from playing and enjoying ChaosCTF just because they don't like how a particular weapon's affects gameplay?

Also, what about a mutator that gives the ChaosCTF carrier of an enemy (only) flag EMP radiation. More specifically, all (friend of foe) vehicles that come within a certain radius will simply blow up (even with friendly fire 0%), and every weapon the player fires gets a bonus damage (perhaps 1.5-4X, gui configurable) against all (or enemy only if friendly fire is 0%) vehicles. EMP radiation, unfortunately would disable use of the grappling hook for the flag carrier. Players carrying only their own teams flag would not get this weapon bonus (to prevent them from avoiding returning it base in favor of going on a vehicle shooting spree), though they could (if gui toggled on) get proximity instant vehicle kill radius (to prevent hopping in a ride to take they're flag back). EMP charged weapons (basically whatever weapon the carrier has armed) would look similar to a damage amped weapon, though with a white and blue glow that looks more electric.

Why?

-To prevent vehicles from having anything to do with flag carrying speed.

-Give a flag carrier a chance against vehicles, as unlike ONS, every single opponent will be solely attacking him/her. (perhaps even have all avril rockets kill all vehicles with one hit, gui toggled)

-Give people incentive to actually carry the flag (instead of waiting for someone else to grab it so that they can defend the carrier--from a distance--in a vehicle.

-To add a simple twist that some might really enjoy. (I'm no modder, but would it really be that hard to script?)

TKATK · Post by **TKATK** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:29 pm

maybe add a edited map vote,where you vote what weapons,vehicles shall be replaced by what next game

ChaosJester · Post by **ChaosJester** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:54 pm

I would like to see an option placed in the settings to restrict flag carriers from entering vehicles. I would like to see the differences between the setups in play so I want the option. It is easier than all other ways to simplify that issue, and good players wouldn't be so affected as they would still defend the carrier anyways so carrier abilities would unbalance the game, so IF it is possble and simple enough to to be worth the teams time coding, I would prefer that to other more complicated schemes. I want to frag and go.

-Penfold- · Post by **-Penfold-** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:54 pm

ChaosJester wrote:I would like to see an option placed in the settings to restrict flag carriers from entering vehicles.

Preventing vehicular use in speeding the flag speed is not so simple. As has already been mentioned, just because a player cannot enter a vehicle does not mean he cannot stand on it or grapple to it.

Although, I am starting to wonder if carrying the flag in vehicles is really such a bad thing. Perhaps it just needs getting used to. Perhaps it just needs higher cap points for a win. Perhaps all the Chaos that would ensue by having all these vehicles involved is just what CTF needs to be fresh.

I must say, though, that I think a player should have to exit the vehicle to pick up a flag. Drive-by flag captures/pickups shouldn't be possible.

TKATK · Post by **TKATK** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 11:01 pm

how about adding a function so that everything in a very small range of the player is slowed by 50%,that would allow to tank with vehicles,but not make the player uncatchable

ChaosJester · Post by **ChaosJester** » Fri Apr 30, 2004 11:35 pm

-Penfold- wrote:Preventing vehicular use in speeding the flag speed is not so simple. As has already been mentioned, just because a player cannot enter a vehicle does not mean he cannot stand on it or grapple to it.

There is already a solution for your problem: enable flag drop on grapple in the menu. That also solves issues with flag carriers using grapples to stay away from the action. As for standing on a vehicle, there will likely be problems with attempting to solve that issue. I doubt that it will be solved by anybody and still have vCTF of any sort. I agree vehicles may be a good thing, and I think they will. I will wait and see.

Post by **R.Flagg** » Sat May 01, 2004 12:42 am

Yay! ChaosCTF talk!

Penfold and ChaosJester, thanks much and please keep coming at us with ideas. But as Pen started to come around to seeing, I don't think flags in vehicles will be such a bad thing. Anyway, I think I can safely say that we will be allowing flag carriers in vehicles. The part we'll need your help with, is making sure it's still fun.

For the moment though, I do not see a reason to change the default rule Epic put in, about flying vehicles. As far as I can tell so far, with my limited playing of the game type, not allowing flag carriers to get in Raptors and Manta's is a good thing.

But of course I understand why many folks are concerned that a flag carrier in a vehicle can ruin the game. And hey, to be fair, when it's this early on (in UT2004 and Chaos at least), who know's, maybe they're right. But I really think it'll work out just fine. Our job, after Epic's of course, is to see that you can take flags in vehicles, and still make the game type fun, or even funner. Which I think they, and in turn us, can do.

There for example needs to be plenty of ways for the foot soldier to take care of the vehicle flag carrier. Ok, we can do that. As I've mentioned, we'll have toys.

And keep in mind, that the maps themselves will play a very important role in making it balanced and fun. I totally agree with you though Penfold, that "drive-by" caps might not be such a good idea. I've had fun with it in the past, flying my StrangeLove missile back in UT, and picking up the flag on the fly....., but that's another story. (perhaps)

I actually favor the idea of CTF bases that cannot be entered with vehicles. Make the base the place for getting off your horse, and doing some old fashion fraggin. Perhaps even middle ground in some maps, that must be crossed on foot.

Anyway, we'll probably follow the default rules for vehicles and flag carriers, at least at first. And see how you folks feel after that.

azrael wrote:As for linkable/deployable shields/walls, why can't they be the secondary fire fir the MUG? Ice wall for ice ammo, solid but does no damage unless you lant on the spiky, crystalline top . And fire ammo produces a firewall which is entirely intangible, except for the hot, burny sensation . Also, it should detonate rockets and such.
Naturally fire shoul melt ice and ice douse fire, so ice and firewalls placed in clodse proximity to each other should not last long...

Ya know, that aint half bad. I could use my MUG flames to melt your ice wall. Very interesting.

And while I'm personally very excited about the new possibilities with vehicles, don't forget that "normal" ChaosCTF will be there too. There are going to be plenty of CTF maps w/o vehicles, and we'll be there too. I'm always gonna wanna play maps like Unearthed and that awesome MoonDragon for example.

Anyway, thanks for talking ChaosCTF with me guys. Please keep it coming.

-Penfold- · Post by **-Penfold-** » Sat May 01, 2004 2:37 am

One thing that would be very cool.

Have a script so that the flag rotates such that it always flaps away from the direction of travel. Seeing a scorpion go backwards with the flag pointing into the wind would look pretty stupid. (or does UT already do this?)

Now could you elaborate on team teleporters? Are you saying that from the base, a player can translocate to various locations (even center map), but only the team can do this?

Maybe have it so that any player can be a destination, but the person cannot have fired weapons, been hit, have translocated, or have received a reinforcement translocation within the previous X seconds (gui setting). Any of these things disturbs the stability of the incoming personel, so as a safety mechanism, no unstable transportations are allowed. Stabilized mobile beacons (all players who who have stable beacon fields) show up on maps (like small moving powernodes) and can be warped to from only certain points on the map. Or perhaps there is an aditional requirement for a stable beacon, the previous criteria, plus the player being crouched while not moving (rotation is OK of coarse)

The hud would always indicate 2 numbers in the translocation status display: Number of stabilized mobile beacons, and number of players in the nearby vicinity of a tranporter (likely ready to transport). One can only warp _from_ a translocator _to_ a mobile beacon. No transporter to transporter, no beacon to beacon, no beacon to transporter. Perhaps have a limit of one translocation per life. This way a person would know when it would be worth holding fire and taking cover to allow reinforcements and when it would be a waste of time.

Another GUI option would be translocation damage... Each time a player translocated he would lose this percentage of health/sheilds. This way you could take some of the advantage out of the system so that not everyone would indeed want to translocate.

Of course, the flags would be rigged with a jammer that, through the carriers beacon, prevents that team from being able to teleport at all. Thus any team which has the enemy flag loses the ability to transport. Should the flag be dropped, it would take Z seconds (gui configurable) before the teams teleportation network would become operational. (this way if a carrier is struggling, he can drop the flag and hope to hold out for reinforcements.

Another gui configuration would be a toggle box for "Can teleport if both teams carry eachothers flag".

Beacon point would be a few feet in front of the player with a stabilized mobile beacon.

There would be no actual translocators in the sense of the weapon that launches beacons. Beacons are standard equipment, worn on the belt or some such.

ChaosJester · Post by **ChaosJester** » Sat May 01, 2004 2:37 am

Thank you R. Flagg. I have found happiness. I will be able to enjoy ChaosCTF goodness without taking a huge framerate hit from vehicles except when I want them! (jumping for joy) Will any more team game information be forthcoming? I would like to know how the vehicles will work with the flags. I agree with penfold that the teams should not be able to auto-pickup dropped flags from inside vehicles or pick up them from bases from inside vehicles. This is also a shameless attempt to ask for screenshots to see how they work... or just the gametype in general.

Please?

-Penfold- · Post by **-Penfold-** » Sat May 01, 2004 2:58 am

I think having 3 (each base and a center) areas that don't allow vehicular navigation is a great idea, so long as it does not produce too much bottle-necking.

I think having a few shortcuts that require leaving the vehicles behind would also be cool, with a longer, hard to navigate route available for the vechicles. Maybe even a mid-map jump over some lava that is only possible in a vehicle. This would be hard to accomplish, but would result in a good shortcut.

Another idea for the bold would be to have a bonus if you make a flag capture without the flag carrier(s) ever touching or grappling a vehicle. Instead of 1 point they would get a bonus point such that they would receive the points for two captures with one.

Or have it so that you get points based on which vehicles were _not_ used in the flag capture and return. More accurately, a flag starts of say worth 7 points. Having the flag carrier ride (when I say ride I mean in or on) a scorpion and the flags max points becomes 6. Should the carrier ride in a hellbender then 5, a golaith 4, A manta 3, a raptor ride 2, and a leviathan 1. No matter how many different times or types of vehicles that the carrier has riden (rode?) the one that really affects the score is the worst offender. Hence if all vehicles but the leviathian and raptor were riden by the carrier(s) then a capture of the flag is worth 3.

Then, of course the points needed to win a round would be raises substantially, and there would be some strategic gambling going on... Hop in that raptor for an easy 2 points, or high-tail it in the scorpion and go for 6 points. The choice is yours.