Announcement

**syst3m kill3r** · 09-05-2008, 06:13 PM

Originally posted by Lemmin View Post

Pure pub suggestions.
1) The prize system. At the moment, if you are on the winning team at the end of a round, you get a prize which is cleverly based on time on the team, number of flag claims etc. The confusing thing is that this prize is given in the forum of bounty, which is almost instantly converted into points for THE OTHER TEAM. This seems a bit backwards - surely the prize should be awarded in points for yourself? Why should the other team get to reap my bounty and take my points just because I won the round? It does admittedly sometimes result in a lanc or terr with decoy or (useless) rockets, but not very often.

Suggestion: change the prize system to give points. If this isn't possible, how about making the prizes more interesting? Anti-warp, better rockets etc, and make prizes work for all ships, not just javs (which get shrap? I think?)

2) MVP calculations. MVP (and by extension team leader status) is currently given to anyone who has stayed with the same team and in the same ship for the duration of the round. Giving it only to people who have stayed in the same ship has a detrimental effect on basing, especially during longer round (15 minutes plus). This is because people (especially if they have made a flag claim) are reluctant to switch ships, even if an existing terrier or shark has to leave, resulting in one team collapsing.

Suggestion: change MVP / team leader calculation to allow switching of ships without loss of status - it will make basing much more competitive.

3) Teamkills. Basing can be ruined for an entire team by one malicious (or just incompetent) jav, and being polite about it and asking them to stop usually results in (at best) a stream of profanity and insults. Staff don't have time to monitor and control all javelins, and theres a definate grey-area about incompetent javs, even though the rules do state "deliberate or excessive" teamkilling as being illegal. Teamkills made by sharks are excusable, since they aren't usually under control of the shark (except very indirectly).

Suggestions: could the pubbot/roboboy be modified to monitor teamkills made by javs, and take action? As a starting point of discussion, how about automatically warning after 5 teamkills within 5 minutes, or 20 within 30 minutes... and on a second offense of the same kind, shipsetting the person into a spider and not letting them jav for the next 30 minutes of in-pub play time with that name? This way people will be told officially (not just by another "whining" team member) that what they are doing is wrong, and if they continue to do it they will be stopped from doing it for the next 30 minutes they spend playing in pub. These numbers are just suggestions, I expect they would need to be tweaked a bit...

I hope these suggestions all sound sensible to people. I'm only suggesting them for pure pub, and I don't think they will restrict anyones playing (except people who are trying to deliberately teamkill), but I think they will encourage more people to base, and improve the basing that does happen.

Feedback welcome.

Thanks,

LEM

I like all the ideas... but wasn't the Jav TK already implemented into the bot :?

I play as terr... and Always have someone targeting me when I have more than 300 bty lol

**Capital Knockers** · 09-05-2008, 06:13 PM

Lemmin is the shit, listen to him. I don't even have to read what he posted. Mad respects :wub:

**Lemmin** · 09-05-2008, 06:15 PM

The bot will count teamkills a person does, and report the number to staff if someone does a :report: after being teamkilled. I don't think it takes any actual action, but then, I don't play as jav.

It would seem to be only a slight extension of the bots capabilities to make it take automatic action.

**Lemmin** · 09-08-2008, 11:16 PM

Something that someone else suggested - how about limiting the number of javs in pure pub? Personally I'm sure that penalising teamkills would reduce the number of bad javs, but it might be worth considering limiting the number of javs to three per team (or some other number thats not too high). Maybe some kind of lottery system at the end of each round to choose who will be the next three javs.

At the moment, its ridiculous. I've seen teams ruined by a few bad javelin pilots - the people who are trying to play pure pub, the key players like the sharks and terrs, just leave when it gets too bad, and the team falls apart for the next few rounds.

This really needs to be addressed, because at the moment who wins in pure pub is not the team with the best players, but the team with the least worst javs.

If theres an issue of bot development resources, I will be quite happy to take over managing roboboy, and implement these features. I've worked on TWCore bots before (although some time ago) so I'm sure it wouldn't take long.

LEM

**Pressure Drop** · 09-09-2008, 10:15 AM

Firstly some nice input, i'd like to see a tk watcher for javs and also the MVP reworked but that might be hard to code i dunno

i'd also like to see the pure pub the primary pub again

Originally posted by Lemmin View Post

1) The prize system. At the moment, if you are on the winning team at the end of a round, you get a prize which is cleverly based on time on the team, number of flag claims etc. The confusing thing is that this prize is given in the forum of bounty, which is almost instantly converted into points for THE OTHER TEAM when you die. This seems a bit backwards - surely the prize should be awarded in points for yourself? Why should the other team get to reap my bounty and take my points just because I won the round? It does admittedly sometimes result in a lanc or terr with decoy or (useless) rockets, but not very often.

Suggestion: change the prize system to give points. If this isn't possible, how about making the prizes more interesting? Anti-warp, better rockets etc, and make prizes work for all ships, not just javs (which get shrap? I think?)

I don't see this as a problem as alot of people like big bty's some actively camp and run just to try and get it. Others don't care that much but seing a large bty over there head makes them feel self-important. I don't think htis is a bad prize at all and a lot mor visible than points which are pretty meaningless.

I'd rather more instances of random fun things prized like 10x the normal prize bty, decoys, 10 - 20 secs of super or sheilds - refresh of rocket, reps, port and burst. maybe every one in a hundred a thors hammer etc ... basicaly a short-term one of prize that is different and won't completely overpower the game long term.

I'd also like to see some things like bounce or a thors hammer in ?buy for a LARGE amount of points. It would add a little more fun to points without completely overpowering as only a few people should be hitting that amount of points per reset etc ...

**HateTheFake** · 09-09-2008, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by Pressure Drop View Post

I don't see this as a problem as alot of people like big bty's some actively camp and run just to try and get it. Others don't care that much but seing a large bty over there head makes them feel self-important. I don't think htis is a bad prize at all and a lot mor visible than points which are pretty meaningless.

I'd rather more instances of random fun things prized like 10x the normal prize bty, decoys, 10 - 20 secs of super or sheilds - refresh of rocket, reps, port and burst. maybe every one in a hundred a thors hammer etc ... basicaly a short-term one of prize that is different and won't completely overpower the game long term.

I'd also like to see some things like bounce or a thors hammer in ?buy for a LARGE amount of points. It would add a little more fun to points without completely overpowering as only a few people should be hitting that amount of points per reset etc ...

this

**Lemmin** · 09-09-2008, 11:36 AM

Originally posted by Pressure Drop View Post

i'd also like to see the pure pub the primary pub again

Yes, me too, but I though that might be a bridge too far

I'd rather more instances of random fun things prized like 10x the normal prize bty, decoys, 10 - 20 secs of super or sheilds - refresh of rocket, reps, port and burst. maybe every one in a hundred a thors hammer etc ... basicaly a short-term one of prize that is different and won't completely overpower the game long term.

Yes, that would work as well. Maybe after a big, hard fought round with high bonus etc it might be fun to have a one-shot rocket, port or burst in a wb, lanc or spid. As you say, it won't completely overpower the game if its one use.

I still don't like the fact that my bounty effectively goes to the other team when they kill me though. If there was a points bonus rather than bounty bonus, and there was more stuff to buy, it might work out just as well.

LEM

**Andy H.K.** · 09-09-2008, 01:35 PM

My 2 cents.

1. Prize
I agree that the prize for winning should be points and not bty, which really only last for 1 life. Yes there are regular point resets, but at least points last for a longer time and it is an actual resource players can make use of (think ?buy)

As for prizing of various upgrades.... it will be good indeed if every ships get some kind of "rearm".

I don't like the idea of giving bigger stuffs like super/shield/bounce/thor. While it may increase the fun factor, the randomness of it will hurt competitive gameplay.

I also wonder if it's good to let players ?buy them with a lot of points. I kind of like the idea, but I doubt if I could accept it because it feel so "extreme-game like".

2. MVP

I agree that the current MVP system should go. It does not really indicate the most contributing members of a team, rather who's the most stubborn-headed with a single ship. The side-effect of discouraging people from changing ship is bad for the game. Players should not be punished for being flexible and switching ships according to the situation.

The bot would better off simply report who in the winning team made the most flag capture and made most kills. It may also be worthwhile to mention who in the losing team made the most save.

3. teamkill

I don't think anything would work. Such vague rule as "no deliberate or excessive teamkilling" is hard enough to enforce by manual moderating, let alone with automated processing. Say you force players who TK 5 times in 5 minutes to switch ship, does that make TKing 4 times in 5minutes acceptable? or TKing 5 times in 6 minutes? How can you possibly define "excessive" clearly? And how possibly can you define "deliberate" if you can't read people's mind? A few days ago, I have been hunting a certain LT. Then I switched to their freq, change to ship 2 and attach , simply to annoy them. All I did is point my ship to the general direction where the bounced bomb would hit them. I never fired a shot, and they're already threatening me about reporting me for "intend to TK them" . So I should get banned for scaring the shit out of them for looking like I'm going to TK them? The only enforcable way to do it is to completely ban jav, which will of course kill the whole game.

You can't do it with bots, and reporting rarely get immediately answered. Yet I also agree that TKing harm the game, at least for the victim team. The bottom line is, the Tker at the same time won't gain much other than a bad name, as their team probably will not be winning.

I think there is a way to get rid of the problem of having an incompetent TKing member on your team: freq scrambling.

Yes, for now you're stuck with him. Your team is losing fast, getting 0-3 in 10 minutes. However, after 2 or 3 continuous win, team is scrambled, there's a chance that he will not be on your team. Even if he is, your team may also get other more capable members.

A lot of pure pub game die like this: one team get most of the better players, or the opposing team simply refuse to try. Those stuck in the losing team will leave game, weakening the team further. This is a vicious cycle, and the team can get very uneven. Yes the bot encourage those in the winning team to switch side to even things out, however it is ineffective because the reward of a few bounty simply cannot compensate for the loss of flag bonus. There is not enough motivation to switch team and lose those "easy points". And eventually, easy as it is, they are going to get bored of the lack of action and leave, too. Team scramble will help reduce occurrence of such situation by mixing up players of various skill level and evening out team.

Do consider implementing team scrambling. I believe it's worth it.

**Lemmin** · 09-09-2008, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by Andy H.K. View Post

My 2 cents.

Thanks, comments are always appreciated

I don't like the idea of giving bigger stuffs like super/shield/bounce/thor. While it may increase the fun factor, the randomness of it will hurt competitive gameplay.

I also wonder if it's good to let players ?buy them with a lot of points. I kind of like the idea, but I doubt if I could accept it because it feel so "extreme-game like".

I actually quite like the idea of allowing people to ?buy one off big items. From the point of view of a new player, they will be amazed when they first see a thor, and they will ask "what was that?" and when they are told that you need 100,000 points to buy it, it will give them something to aim for. If you set the limit at something nice and high, then only a few people each reset will ever get one, so it won't prove too disruptive - it might even end up being a neat way of breaking one teams deadlock on the flag room.

2. MVP

The bot would better off simply report who in the winning team made the most flag capture and made most kills. It may also be worthwhile to mention who in the losing team made the most save.

I don't think reporting most kills will help. The really valuable team members in pure pub are the sharks and the terriers - they often make flag claims, but they don't get that many kills. Giving MVP to people who stay with the same freq all round (but allowing them to change ship without losing status) is the best way I think.

3. teamkill

I don't think anything would work. Such vague rule as "no deliberate or excessive teamkilling" is hard enough to enforce by manual moderating, let alone with automated processing.

Agreed, but I think what needs to happen is that staff clarify what excessive actually means. In my mind, 5 in 5 minutes is excessive (but could happen accidentaly through a rep or bad bounce or something). If staff can't decide on what excessive means, then how can they ever hope to enforce the rule, automatically OR manually?

You can't do it with bots

I believe you can. The bot already counts how many times each person teamkills (And that figure is reported to staff if someone does a :report: via pubbot) - its only a simple extension of this to get the bot to apply a time factor and take warning/shipsetting action (both of which it can already do).

All that is needed is a decision within staff as to what constitutes excessive teamkilling and a small amount of bot programming. And of course the strength of will to implement it and deal with the complaints of the people who get caught teamkilling.

Team scramble will help reduce occurrence of such situation by mixing up players of various skill level and evening out team.

Its an interesting idea (although most of the veteran/regular pub basers are willing to switch teams when the bot makes its "uneven teams" speech).

How would you stop people simply switching back again?

I often play in pure pub with my own squad - several (or sometimes many) of us on the same freq working together. It would be annoying if the bot was scrambling us up every so often. We would definately try and get back on the same freq together, and if the bot stopped us, we'd probably leave pub altogether.

In my experience, uneven teams generally sort themselves out eventually. Theres enough of a mix of players coming and going that you never have to wait more than a couple of rounds to get a good team.

Thanks for your comments, plenty to think about!

LEM

**Andy H.K.** · 09-10-2008, 01:42 AM

First, on the point of TK regulation.

Agreed, but I think what needs to happen is that staff clarify what excessive actually means. In my mind, 5 in 5 minutes is excessive (but could happen accidentaly through a rep or bad bounce or something). If staff can't decide on what excessive means, then how can they ever hope to enforce the rule, automatically OR manually?

My argument is that, they can't. No one can. As said in my last post, any kind of such rules without clear-cut will not work. In our case, there will always be some number of unacceptable, yet allowed "almost excessive" TK.

Speaking strictly in terms of competitive gameplay, something may warrant a ban if they give a side a massive advantage and destroy all meaningful gameplay. TKing is something that, on the contrary, give the TKer's side disadvantage. Remember, this eventually lead to the TKers THEMSELVES getting the disadvantage, too. I myself am all for watching the jav or anything else capable killing everyone helping them, and then finishing the useless one off personally.

However, I also understand the need to ban TKing is based on a social point of view. No one like getting "betrayed", or getting killed without legal means to retaliate. In this, I have faith in self-regulation of the community. Notorious TKer would get bad reputation. This alone should keep new/less skillful players in check and to be more careful. All the yelling they get would easily remind them. As for those who doesn't care and will TK anyway.... well, if they don't care, they won't care if there is any rules or any ban at all.

Some may say there could be people of poor sportmanship who will switch team and TK to "help". First of all, they won't gain much if they don't stay on the winning team 100% of the time. Secondly, anyone who acted like that will probably get very infamous, we are not a very big community afterall. I myself would laugh at anyone who consider such act worthwhile.

I think only in extreme cases do we need to call for manual intervention. Any kind of automated moderation would always leave a "gray area", are easy to cheat through, and create more inconvience to player and more problem rather than solving existing one.

More on the team scrambling part when I'm back from work.

OK onto team scrambling.

How would you stop people simply switching back again?

This is not necessary, in my opinion.

The idea of team scrambling come from the "successor" of Subspace: Infantry.

In Infantry there is a zone called "CTF: Twin Peak" where two team compete in warzone-style CTF game. There is no private team in this zone. If a team won 3 games in a row, teams are scrambled.

In CTF: Twin Peak, Players are allowed to switch between two teams, as long as it does not uneven the team too much. Of course, the team switcher's contribution bonus will reset.

It is understandable that there may be a few companion that a player can't go without, and will switch team just to be with them. in such case, 1 more player for freq 0 means 1 less player for freq 1. Since the system itself will always prevent team from going too uneven, it does not allow too many people to do this, unless the two freq sort of "trade" players.

And, if you and your squadmate always gather and keep getting scrambled, this could indicate that one side, probably your squad, is dominating the field. In that case, I think it is reasonable to ask you to split up. Doing so will probably even things up, leading to a more exciting game.

And I just got another idea from yet another game: vote kicking.

This idea come from "Soldat", sort of a 2D counterstrike/Quake. In Soldat, players can nominate "bad" players, such as those cheating, to be kicked from the game.

Our pure pub version could goes like this: if someone want a player on his freq gone, he can nominate the player to the bot. And then, the bot would ask members on that freq for a vote of whether that player should go. If say more than half of the freq members voted for the decision, the player will be sent to the opposing freq, while still retaining his contribution percentage.

The pros of this system is that, since sending 1 player away means 1 less friendly, and the one getting sent away got nothing to lose, it assure that most decision to send someone out is desperate enough that people would rather take the disadavantage in number just to get rid of him. This may help solve the problem where a TKer ruin the game for everyone in a freq. and if he TK the other team too.... I believe being sent back and forth is quite annoying.

**Lemmin** · 09-10-2008, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by Andy H.K. View Post

First, on the point of TK regulation.

My argument is that, they can't. No one can. As said in my last post, any kind of such rules without clear-cut will not work. In our case, there will always be some number of unacceptable, yet allowed "almost excessive" TK.

It sounds like we are calling for a clarification of the teamkilling rule.

As I see it, rule 3 (covering teamkilling) is really two rules. Deliberate teamkilling is illegal (even one deliberate teamkill). This should still be policed (and judged) by a human.

As a seperate rule, excessive teamkilling is illegal. If you say something is excessive, you have to put a number in there. I may feel that 1 teamkill is excessive (I haven't teamkilled in a jav in pub in at least 5 years), whereas someone else may feel that 1000 teamkills an hour is excessive. Therefore someone in staff with the power to make a decision needs to say "THIS number is excessive" and then the rule can be policed adequately. Otherwise its at the whim of whichever member of staff answers the cheater call, and we are getting random justice.

TKing is something that, on the contrary, give the TKer's side disadvantage. Remember, this eventually lead to the TKers THEMSELVES getting the disadvantage, too.

This depends on why people teamkill. A lot of bad javs don't really care which side wins. They enjoy making a big BOOOM that kills a lot of little moving things. Many people play pub (any pub, not necessarily pure pub) in order to get a good win/loss ratio (its something I look at as well) - killing eight friendlies and then getting killed still gives you an 8:1 kill/death ratio.

In this, I have faith in self-regulation of the community. Notorious TKer would get bad reputation.

Unfortunately this has never worked. We know who the notorious teamkillers are, staff knows who they are... but noone has any power to stop them playing in pure pub.

If you ever try asking a teamkiller to stop, or change ships, the usual response is "STFU whiner" or worse. Every jav thinks they are good, every jav thinks that teamkills are the fault of the ships that got in the way of their shot etc. Over 9 years of playing pub, I've seen no evidence that social pressure works on the majority (and the worst) teamkillers.

As for those who doesn't care and will TK anyway.... well, if they don't care, they won't care if there is any rules or any ban at all.

If they don't care, then they won't mind getting locked into a spider for a while! :grin:

Any kind of automated moderation would always leave a "gray area",

The way I see it, an automated system with fixed limits eliminates the grey area - if you teamkill X number of times you are shipset. Thats it, theres no arguing, no appeal. You can't say "so and so MOD is unfair" or "that mod doesn't care if people teamkill". Automating it means the same rules it applied to everyone in the same way, and there is no ambiguity.

are easy to cheat through,

I suppose you could change names and come back on to carry on teamkilling, but that sounds like a lot of effort. Hopefully being shipset to something less dangerous would give most casual, accidental teamkillers the idea that they had done something wrong. Anyone bypassing the bot is therefore a deliberate teamkiller and should be banned.

and create more inconvience to player and more problem rather than solving existing one.

I don't see how. It only invconveniences teamkillers - people who are already breaking the rules, and people I therefore have no sympathy for. They get to stay on their team, keep their MVP/leader status, they are just put into a ship where they can't kill their own teammates any more. After a short time, they are allowed to return to jav, hopefully having learnt their lesson.

If they decide to leave the freq entirely then the freq has certainly lost one player, but at the same time there is less teamkilling, so less chance of other players getting annoyed and leaving (its always the teamkilling that eventually annoys me into leaving pub).

-----------------------

OK onto team scrambling.

Although an interesting idea, the more I think about it, the less I like it. I enjoy building up team respect, I like learning how other random people play, and coming to a non-verbal arrangement with them.... THIS terr is good at getting into flag room, THAT terr is good for midbase, follow HER into the flag room because she reps at the right times....

If, after a long hard fought round (which in itself is a sign the teams are pretty balanced), I got scrambled onto a team half of whom I didn't know, then all the time I'd spent coming to an accomodation with my team would be lost.

The only time I'd think scrambling was useful is after a game in which one team has won all the rounds in the minimum time... thats an indication that the teams are wildly unbalanced and then it might be worth mixing them up.

And, if you and your squadmate always gather and keep getting scrambled, this could indicate that one side, probably your squad, is dominating the field.

Theres little chance of Osssify "dominating" pure pub, most of us aren't that good! We mainly want to be on the same freq so we aren't killing our squadmates (in fact it's a squad rule that you don't hunt your squaddies in pure pub) although of course its nice to play alongside people you know and trust.

------------------------

And I just got another idea from yet another game: vote kicking.

This is another interesting idea... You are bringing up some cool stuff to think about

There would need to be some controls to stop it being abused... I can imagine some people just sitting in safety and nominating everyone on their freq (so maybe only allow one nomination every 10 minutes or something?).

My other concern is that voting someone off takes a while to do, and it distracts your team from the game. If you are in a desperate battle for the flag room and you want to vote a teamkiller away because they are murdering you, by the time you have messaged the bot, the bot has asked for votes, waited for them, and taken action, 3 minutes is probably past. The round is lost (partly because everyone was busy voting) and the point where kicking the person from the team would have helped is gone.

It sounds quite complicated to implement in pure pub, although maybe it would make a fun event in its own right. I certainly don't think it should be considered as a replacement for any other kind of teamkill monitoring, although maybe it could be implemented and used occasionally (maybe one in 10 games could have it turned on, to make things interesting?)

I'd love to see vote kicking tried to see how it works out, maybe with a fixed length trial (weekend, anyone) first and see if people like it.

Anyway, I'm liking the ideas this thread is generating. Hopefully someone will implement some of them!

I'll re-iterate my offer of before - I'm willing to do bot development for pure pub if development resources are a limiting factor on whether these ideas get implemented.

LEM

**DankNuggets** · 09-12-2008, 01:02 PM

Got to get this off my chest first

I hate to harp on this, but it was what got me into playing this game more than 1x a week: The Public Scores Website. How many people seriously try to get 1M points? I know i did when it would be recorded on the website. Also allows for "pub squads" and a reason to earn points besides earning them.

For all the talk on "improving" this or that website, no one's really talking about remaking the pub website. I mean, things like draft tourny, bwc, racing--even TWL-- only happen for a very short % of the year. Public is on and happening 24/7/365. Also, quite a few people still regard it as the "bread and butter" of TW. It wasn't exactly a fancy website when it was up 3 years ago, and it doesn't need to be now. Just a few colors and stats.

Public Prize System

I agree that there needs to be better prizes for ships like spiders, wbs, lancs, and all other ships that don't currently benefit from "normal" prizing. True, all MVPs get decoys and "refreshements" (well those with items) after long matches, but most matches don't give you anything (unless you're a jav). I'd also have to say that prizes like portals/rockets for ships that don't normally get them would have to be reserved for the occasional match -- it would be too much of a change to give it to them after every win -- keep it to the 30 min + rounds or after winning the best of 5 game.

I had never really thought about the prize bounty actually helping the opposing team more than yourself. I bet a lot of other people didn't realize this either. Not to mention that unless you're a terr, or outside of base, that extra bounty disappears rather quickly. Points are a better option, but only if you can use them for something.

Which leads me to my next point: We need better options for ?buy. The past couple of weekends have shown how the other features (prox, bouncing bullets) can be overpowered if everyone has them. However, if only one or two ships have them at a time, then they're more of an asset to their team (like anti is now) than just for the one person's benefit. Also they could raise the price from 1000 pts to something like 10,000-20,000 points so most people couldn't afford to buy them more than 1x-2x a day.

For the sake of argument, say you earn 100,000 points a day.
?buy could be expanded to (forgive me if the #'s are off, i can't open the game right now)
rockets/repels/burst -- 500
portal -- 1000
xradar -- 1000
decoy -- 5000
anti -- 3000 and add to it
prox -- 10000
shrapnel -- 500
bounce -- 10000
brick -- 50000
thor -- 500000

just a guess on the prices, but you can see where i'm going with it.

It might make it seem more like EG, but that's not such a bad idea. It's the next most popular zone, so people must like what's going on in there. Also, let's not make TW purposely boring so that it contrasts with EG.

MVP System
Currently, you can change ships to help your team with !ship <#>. however, it could be a little more "intelligent" or perhaps have no warrants at all. I have tried many times to switch to spider/shark/terr only to be told that one is not needed, when clearly it was at the time (afk ppl, ppl not basing). Also, it should be fixed so that it can be used if you are in a ship that's deemed to be overused. Ex. the other day i was in jav, and wanted to switch to shark b/c ours were no where to be found. !ship 8 told me to !team and pick a ship that was needed. Sure enough, !team said there were too many javs, but didn't comment on any needs. Yet i was unable to switch out of jav with the !ship command (to retain my MVP status).

I'd suggest dropping the "need" for the ship to retain MVP.

Alternatively, I suggest removing the current warrants for MVP and make it sort of a KOTH calculation, that uses time spent in FR as the main indicator of MVP worthiness.

TKs

I think i'm probably running out of characters... but then again i've already posted too many times on it in other threads

**Lemmin** · 09-12-2008, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by DankNuggets View Post

Got to get this off my chest first

I hate to harp on this, but it was what got me into playing this game more than 1x a week: The Public Scores Website.

Very good point Dank. Its been gone so long, I'd forgotten about it. But I now remember checking the scores after every reset, and being pleased the few times I was on the score board. I also remember looking at the pub scores for my squad, and encouraging my squad to pub in order to keep us in the top 5.

It can't be hard to bring back the pub scores. Preferably a small box on the front page of TW. Theres plenty of room - theres loads of "red space" down each side, and most of the rest of the page is taken up by graphics and a big (largely empty) calendar and some banners. Can we sneak a little "top 3" score box in there?

A point though... mucking around with pub settings at weekends ruins this idea. If kills become easier, or bounties change, then lots of points are easy, and those who don't play at weekends (or only play then) will end up with skewed scores. There would also be no consistency between different scorereset periods.

there needs to be better prizes for ships like spiders, wbs, lancs, and all other ships that don't currently benefit from "normal" prizing.

Yes... any prizes at all would be good!

True, all MVPs get decoys and "refreshements" (well those with items)

I've never noticed a refresh when I've been playing shark. Maybe I die too quickly? I've never got a decoy either, ever, regardless of ship. It would be nice though...

Which leads me to my next point: We need better options for ?buy.

I'm still not convinced this would work, although I'd like to try it. One problem with TW is simply surviving long enough to get my expensive ?bought item into position to be used. In more open zone, survival is relatively easy, but I can imagine how angry I'd be if I'd spent 500k on a thor only to get TK'd the second I attached into the midbase with it.

The safes are quite a long way from the base as well - if the ?buy options were expanded it might be nice to have some kind of safety just below the bar beneath base entrance?

Expanding ?buy options would fit in nicely with an increased emphasis on points though. If you spend all your points on buying stuff, you aren't going to show up on the score board..... an interesting balance.

Currently, you can change ships to help your team with !ship <#>. however, it could be a little more "intelligent" or perhaps have no warrants at all.

Definately, there should be no restrictions. Pub is supposed to be free-form, and its a good place to try out different strategies. Gameplay shouldn't be imposed by the bot. For instance, who is to say that a team composed entirely of terriers and sharks is necessarily bad? It might be a perfectly valid way of gaining and holding flagroom, if someone wants to try it.

Alternatively, I suggest removing the current warrants for MVP and make it sort of a KOTH calculation, that uses time spent in FR as the main indicator of MVP worthiness.

I don't think time in flag room is a good way of deciding who is an MVP. Someone who helps the team by keeping the roof clean, or fights in the midbase to distract the attacking enemy, is doing an important job and they shouldn't be penalised.

We should be avoiding anything that attempts to constrain gameplay, at least in pub. It should be freeform, people should be allowed to camp and shoot through holes (not that I like it, but its a valid tactic) or attack from the roof, or kill enemy terriers as they enter the tunnel. We should simply reward team success, not only reward people who succeed a conventional way.

I think i'm probably running out of characters... but then again i've already posted too many times on it in other threads

You have? I don't know your views on teamkilling and javs... Give me a clue

Thanks for your input, some important points mentioned there.

LEM

**Andy H.K.** · 09-13-2008, 09:08 AM

More on Jav:

Tking should be discouraged, yet it can never be adequately stopped/moderated because there are simply no absolutes. None can clearly seperate "accidental" and "intentional". You can call for moderators, but they are not always there when you need them.

Staffs can try to assign a number to "excessive", but it will never be satisfying as it's all relative. Besides, one single accident alone is capable of crossing the "excessive" line, since there is no limit on how many people you can kill with a bomb anyway. Such stuff is dangerous to be monitored by automated process, when all they can do is count the number of kills. Banning/force-switching TK javs to other ships would be counter-effective. From my point of view, I'd rather watching those trolling TKers stay than to have a system that hinder those who's trying to learn javing. This is a system that go against every players, who all have the right to jav, and will jav.

So that's why I propose viewing the problem from other perspective and come up with such solution: of allowing the in-game players to police themselves.

Vote-kicking is not a perfect system, however at least it provides an immediate remedy which is somewhat accountable. Afterall, whoever you nominate is just what is it, a nomination. Nothing is final until the community has decided. Hopefully the TW community would have a consensus of what "bad TK" is, and how "bad" they allow the "TK level" to reach. You can say there will be still "random justice", but remember we're dealing with something that has no absolutes.

As for the voting system itself, I say 1 nomination per minute would be enough. You can't spam whe you can speak once per minute, I suppose? Of course, if somehow a group of players (say 7 or 8, considering on average, pub freq have 15 ppl max) goes into a collaborated silly effort of spam-voting each other/vote-kicking everyone else....well, I'd rather get kicked.

One final word: I have faith in the maturity of TW community, and if otherwise they deserve all kind of baby-sitting policy that would be imposed on them.

On Team scrambling:

I'm open on this, as I too enjoy having a concrete team and does not like having it break up all of a sudden. We've yet to see which way is better to general gameplay.

On prizing/super ?buy:

I am kind of reservative on this. One of the reason is that I view TW as a much deeper game than EG. TW calls for "precision" skills and tactics, whereas it seems to me EG is all about "reflex" skills and !buy prize for some superior firepower. But if it's only occasional yes I think it would be quite fun.

On restriction:

Hell I should've talked about this sooner.

LIFT THE BAN ON LEVI

It may sounds crazy but I believe levi actually enrich the gameplay of basing, simply because there is more stuff to worry about. That was also one of the why small weasel was so hated and loved: it actually have an impact in basing. Some people may still have such mindset as "I should not be killed when no enemies is in sight", or "I should be absolutely safe in the flagroom". Something shall break this, no place should be absolutely safe. People think turtling/cramming is good, something shall break this. There is a missing piece in the gameplay of TW, levi is the missing piece. It's time to complete the game.

Are people afraid of levi? Are people afraid of that big explosion? Are people afraid of being killed through the safety of walls? Are people afraid of the stealthy artillery?

Are people afraid of LT? Don't people find it challenging to hunt down a LT? Don't the LT find it exciting and at the same time stressful when trying to help basing? Don't people realize there always is a counter to everything?

Don't people realize as hostile as it could be, it could be THEIR power?

I say: It's time to shake things up and evolve.

Announcement

Suggestions for pure pub

Suggestions for pure pub

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Channels