Test a Cram Reset in ?go base

[A fem bot]

It's a shame that so many players including myself have the skills to break cram but were excluded from the elitist games, leaving roughly 20-25 people left in this game who still base.

And now those same elitist players want to re-code the game.

That makes perfect clear sense.

[qan]

Sounds like it definitely needs some rework. Breaking cram and still being warped after is indeed a bad experience.

[Falconeer]

As a map maker and editor I would shy away from altering a map by adding completely new entrances. It would mean in 20 years of the game an entrance has never been in that location, so there would be a lot of testing required at least. Of course some would want entrances in completely new locations and that's there prerogative.

With that said there are two ways to control flow inside a base:
1. by narrowing the entrance size and even changing the direction.
2. by increasing or decreasing the time it takes to get to the entrance.

I propose you test various entrance modifications of course, including the one i'm putting forth here.



In keeping roughly with entrance locations in pub, I modified the new entrances to be diagonals. This means they will be nearly impossible to traverse at one ship wide only. The location to them is a short distance however, but this is offset again by the somewhat medium tube length. You could opt to copy pub exactly (have horizontal and vertical tubes only) and then all that would be required is moving the entrances further away from the action. You could also put in a vertical and horizontal tube to the towers but instead of a 90 degree angle to the horizontal tube could incorporate a diagonal tube, this would achieve a middle ground of difficulty in breaking in. The diagonal tube would have to be 1 ship length.

I also propose these tubes are initially closed off, and only become accessible when a cram lasts more than 5 minutes. It might not be enough to break in, but it could be enough to alter the strategy at the main entrance when you have to send a defender to both of or one of the tubes.

And again to make this even harder you could also open up the wall of the tubes to bomb fire... but then it would be damn near impossible to traverse a diagonal tube that is under fire from the exit and from the walls.

Here is an example of long vertical tubes, the holes in the tubes makes it difficult to defend main, you could move the holes further up until the block close to the tube blocks it's fire etc.



And here is the example i spoke of above - adding a diagonal in the L tube, to increase time to traverse/difficulty to traverse.



And again if the L tube is too fast to access and easy to bypass, you can always open it up to bombs along it's wall, or close off the entrance tower, and make the entrance further down the base. As well these two options would only open up after 5 minutes of unbreakable cram.

My main point here is that three entrances work if you play with the above variables. Three entrances as accessible and open as the 1 entrance you currently have of course would never work.

[Jerome Scuggs]

ive been saying it for 15 years now

gonna say it again

replace map with ?go fatbase

literally the only useful thing that sack of shit cig smoke ever did in this trash zone and yall just gonna continue to ignore it

but i see you, fatbase, just know that you are acknowledged

[Majorcrisis2]

Sounds like it definitely needs some rework. Breaking cram and still being warped after is indeed a bad experience.

This happened yesterday. I had no clue this was actually tested, especially in base2. My team had a solid cram, but then we needed it to make time we lost in FR battle. So i am not sure what to think about this change. It sure made me laugh and be confused at the same time when it happened. I think this can be a good thing when a team is also dominating FR besides cram. But when your team cant get time in FR you really can use this cramtime.

[qan]

This happened yesterday. I had no clue this was actually tested, especially in base2. My team had a solid cram, but then we needed it to make time we lost in FR battle. So i am not sure what to think about this change. It sure made me laugh and be confused at the same time when it happened. I think this can be a good thing when a team is also dominating FR besides cram. But when your team cant get time in FR you really can use this cramtime.

Hmmm. Interesting. If the team holding cram is down time and on a comeback, does it make sense to reset?

If not, how should this be handled so that it's fair? For example -- extreme/unlikely case -- say it's 0:00 to 7:30, and the 0:00 team takes FR. They continue to hold cram for 7:30.

- Should cram be reset once the time is even, and they've held for more than the length of the hold timer, 3m?
- Should the hold timer be reset once the time is even? (This would allow them to continue to hold cram for a full 10 minutes and win. But, possibly this is desired, as it would be a huge comeback after a total beatdown.)
- Should it work as it does now, which would mean that the reset would occur probably sometime between 3 and 4 min or so after the underdog team's flag take?



For Falc: I admire your willingness to try and reinvent base, but most basers argue against changing even a single tile, as it can dramatically affect many aspects of the game. I'd thought of perhaps a series of randomly-selected doormodes that would modify pairs of tiles, very slightly altering the arena. This would favor adaptation rather than memorization of patterns, and would arguably be a better test of basing skill. But we've come too far on the path established, so it seems it's best to leave it where it is. Which admittedly is: inaccessible to new players, and a bit stale.



Also, looks like I've got to take the time to do this with map regions after all. Needs to check if a Terr "is in FR minus the cram" vs "everywhere else." No easy way around it. It's not at all difficult ... just tedious to make the image file and config file to do it.

[qan]

Map regions for base were fairly easy to put in place. Should have just done that straight away. Let's see if it works.

[Jessup]

Where did you place the coords qan? I was thinking my original idea where to put them may not be the best as a terr often goes to the in lower in base pocket by the entrance which wouldn't trigger it. I think this spot is probably best to be the true break line. Not sure if you did it here or what.

[Jessup]

[qan]

Yep, very close to that. Just slightly diagonal instead of straight. The lower point is the same. Top point of each side is at the furthest tip of the bar.

[Falconeer]

qan yeah it's up to the community who actually uses the base to decide what they want of course. if they want new entrances, then they have to decide that. from there they would test which entrance modifications are best.

this is all in the territory of being a mapper for me - in other words i map based on what the majority wants to change and would enjoy/like, not for myself or my own personal changes i want. so i was just putting forward some example maps of possible 3 entrance bases to gauge what people think. mostly, because i heard turban talking about base needing 2 entrances, and I was trying to explain to him that three could work too if done right.

i don't know if you guys actually want to pursue another entrance? the way turban was talking it seemed like a possibility.

[Jessup]

Yep, very close to that. Just slightly diagonal instead of straight. The lower point is the same. Top point of each side is at the furthest tip of the bar.

sweeeeet GJ.. Glad it was doable and not too hard to program in. Your cords for line are even better I think with the diagnol line. Wooooot!

[qan]

Hopefully works OK ... let me know if it doesn't seem to trigger anymore. It's a fairly big departure from how it worked before, so there are a few things that might go wrong. It does seem to load the map image and cfg OK, though. If I have time I'll test.

Would still like feedback on handling cram reset when the losing team is holding. Should we be doing it? Presented some options on how to handle.

[Rab]

Would still like feedback on handling cram reset when the losing team is holding. Should we be doing it? Presented some options on how to handle.

It's too early to say. Need to play more games. But my early opinion is that the objective of this is to prevent a really long cram, whichever team it is, rather than to be some kind of robin hood.

[Majorcrisis2]

Hopefully works OK ... let me know if it doesn't seem to trigger anymore. It's a fairly big departure from how it worked before, so there are a few things that might go wrong. It does seem to load the map image and cfg OK, though. If I have time I'll test.

Would still like feedback on handling cram reset when the losing team is holding. Should we be doing it? Presented some options on how to handle.

Is it an option to make it like a "if time difference is bigger than x than z" formula of it?
Like lets say if score is 1-1 you still use that 3 min cramreset. But it score is 1-7, its a 4-5 min cramreset?
But maybe this will be too complicated, but just a thought.