PDA

View Full Version : CTF, VCTF and maybe ICTF as a single gametype


Discord
28th May 2005, 01:07 AM
With CTF for example, there will now be maps with vehicles

Pretty much says it all, eh? CTF, complete with following, will be merged with VCTF, complete with following, as things are currently projected to unfold. It'll all be CTF, just sometimes you'll have a ride and sometimes you won't.

Good idea or bad?

Bullet10k
28th May 2005, 01:52 AM
Keep it as a single, flags is flags. Since they really are CTF except with vehicles put in. But there is one thing i suggest: For CTF maps that have vehicles in them, the map name prefix should be "vCTF", just like how 1on1 is the prefix for 1on1 maps.

Kantham
28th May 2005, 02:02 AM
No. If I wanted chocolate in my peanut butter I'd buy a #$%& reese's cup.

Vctf is one and CTF is completely other things. ICTF is all about aim skills and Reflexes.

There is a no a big difference betwen VCTF and CTF , ICTF is way apart.

Discord
28th May 2005, 02:11 AM
ICTF is way apart.

I haven't heard anything about ICTF being separate or not in UT2007, although certainly that issue is also part of the equation.

Kantham
28th May 2005, 02:16 AM
No. What i mean is that ICTF is way apart from VCTF and CTF. It's shock rifle insta kill and all depend on your reflexes & aiming skillz. I don't like it. But i am sure UT2007 will still have it.

The producer of UT2007 want to keep the thing simple by adding a couple of new stuff. Wich is normal for a new game to have.

T2A`
28th May 2005, 02:18 AM
All there needs to be is a check box when choosing the gametype for Instagiblets, like when you challenge another team in the single player mode (if you've played that). It was absolutely retarded of them to add iCTF as its own gametype. Why not add iDM, iDDOM, iAS or whatever else and go all out? :rolleyes: The Instagiblets check box fits perfectly in the "Game Rules" tab currently available; I'm surprised it's not there.

Additionally, beside the fact that they need to go back to UWindows, there is absolutely no reason for choosing a gametype to not be a pull-down menu like in the previous games. Pain in the ass, I tell you. Plus, the way the GUI was laid out, I've always clicked "Back" by accident when I wanted to change gametypes instead of using the tab, and I still haven't learned to not do that unless I catch myself. It's just not intuitive, you know?

As for tagging the CTF maps with vehicles, I hope they don't. Having all these damn extensions and prefixes on map names is ugly, IMO. I don't even like maps being called 1on1. The way I see it, if you click the map, and it says "2 Players" that should be good enough a clue. The map preview could show the vehicles in the pictures or something, or maybe the description could say "Contains vehicles."

G.Lecter
28th May 2005, 07:28 AM
No. VCTF is clearly different than CTF.
VCTF maps are terrain-based and its tactics are completely different than CTF. CTF needs much more walkways, lifts and z-axis, which is (nearly) impossible to make in a vehicle-oriented map. UT became famous because of the 'classic' gametypes, so these gametypes shouldn't be merged with the new vehicles and modes...
I wouldn't mind having CTF and VCTF maps in the same menu if the mapnames use a different prefix, but I still prefer a different menu for each gametype.
About InstaCTF, I'd rather have an option inside the CTF maplist to play this, instead having another menu... :D

_Zd_Revanchist_
28th May 2005, 10:01 AM
I have to say if they are merged i wont be buying the new UT, I play CTF alot now theres no DOM anymore :(. I hate iCTF and never played with vehicles in my life of UT* and dont want to start anytime soon, if they go far from a weapons only pure ctf game type then i think UT will suffer.

The_Head
28th May 2005, 12:30 PM
I hope they don't merge them..... VCTF sucks.... (mainly because all the maps are crap)
And if I can't see the point in an option, why not choose CTF and run the IG mutator? surely that gives the same effect.
I hope epic dont ruin our favourite gametypes by adding vehicles to all of them.

Discord
28th May 2005, 01:27 PM
Here's my take on it:

1. It's still early in the ballgame, so who knows what will happen.

2. I'm all in favor of VCTF support, as I like the gametype. I also like CTF though, and occasionally play some ICTF.

3. IF CTF and VCTF get merged, here's how it will break down. Admins who want a CTF server will remove the vehicle maps from rotation. Admins who want a VCTF server will remove the non- vehicle maps from rotation. End result? Still separate gametypes, and no classic CTF won't go away, but you'll have to dig through a single tab in the serverbrowser to find what you're looking for.

I voted no. I definitely want VCTF in the new game for reasons I'll elaborate some other time. I also definitely want it to have its own category for reasons of ease- of- use.


*edit* OMFG, after I voted "no" the google ads at top of page were both for Reese's cups. :con: :lol:

The_Head
28th May 2005, 01:57 PM
In response to your point 3:

Yeh thats fair enough, just more work for server admins.
What is the problem of having them as seperate gametypes?

Discord
28th May 2005, 04:18 PM
What is the problem of having them as seperate gametypes?

I dunno, really, except that it might look funny having 5 gametypes (DM, TDM, SUR, ONS, CON) PLUS 3 CTF variants.

I dunno... if there's some kind of clever way to make sure you can filter out the variant(s) you don't want to play ATM, I guess merging them would be OK. Like maybe the admin can indicate which type of CTF the server runs most, and you can either filter the CTF tab for that type or else just view the whole mess and take your chances depending on your mood.

But I still think forcing the unfiltered Grab-Bag-O'-CTF on everybody might be kind of a drag.

MrMaddog
28th May 2005, 08:51 PM
CTF & VCTF...yes!

Can't see why there would be a problem with just adding vehicle actors to any CTF map? Heck, even Halo can use the same map for DM & CTF w/ vehicles in them.

IMHO however, I think having an iCTF gametype was a serious mistake. It's just the same ol' CTF gametype that automatically runs IG... :rolleyes: UT2004 has filters where if someone wants to go on a server with IG (or not), then they can use that...

NwS-bbanks
29th May 2005, 02:37 AM
all i have to say is try and ride a truck thorugh any ctf map and you will quikly get stuck!!! vehicles should not become part of ctf. Vctf is its own catagory just liek onslaught is its own. and teamdeathamtch and deathmatch are ther own. incorporrationg vehicles means all new maps. say goodbye to all your favorite ctf maps cause non of them can hold vehicles in them. and added vehicles to ctf is kinda turning the game into halo. evrygametype is gonna have vehicles now? all gametype are gonna end up as all onslaught the way things are looking. specially if that triple damage comes bac.....

quote.....
The_Head I hope they don't merge them..... VCTF sucks.... (mainly because all the maps are crap)
And if I can't see the point in an option, why not choose CTF and run the IG mutator? surely that gives the same effect.
I hope epic dont ruin our favourite gametypes by adding vehicles to all of them.

Discord
29th May 2005, 03:08 AM
all i have to say is try and ride a truck thorugh any ctf map and you will quikly get stuck!!! vehicles should not become part of ctf.

evrygametype is gonna have vehicles now?[/I]


No. It seems that their current plan is to have some CTF maps with vehicles thrown in. Not all... some.

And we all know how it works, Epic releases a new game, the CTF crowd gets hold of the official maps and says, "thanks Epic!" and then promptly tosses them and replaces them with custom jobs.

Which means there'll be no shortage of old- school no vehicles, xloc- tossing CTF servers.

It's just that you'll have to comb the serverbrowser a little more carefully to spot them, IF there are also servers running vehicle maps.

Nobody's getting rid of CTF, I'd deemer them if they did. ;)

Taleweaver
29th May 2005, 03:49 AM
iCTF is simple: this should never have been released in the first place. Since you can filter on servers running a certain mutator (eg instaGib), it's even useless to make it into an extra gametype.

vCTF is a different matter, as the map has to be layed out completely different from a normal CTF map, and - even worse - shouldn't include translocators. The layout can be overcome (this is the mapper's problem), but the translocator can cause a problem on servers running 'all retail CTF-maps'.
I wouldn't mind this gametype to be separated from normal CTF, but I opt to change the option "allow translocators: yes/no" to "allow translocators: yes/only in non-vehicle maps/no", with the middle option as default.

Discord
29th May 2005, 04:21 AM
I wouldn't mind this gametype to be separated from normal CTF, but I opt to change the option "allow translocators: yes/no" to "allow translocators: yes/only in non-vehicle maps/no", with the middle option as default.

Yeah, that's going to be absolutely crucial.

Bullet10k
30th May 2005, 11:42 AM
It doesnt matter how different vctf or ictf is from ctf. FLAGS IS FLAGS. Dont seperate them. Instead, like i said before, just put vctf as the map prefix.

BooGiTyBoY
30th May 2005, 03:22 PM
If they put them together, I'm sure UT2007 will have a voting feature just like 2k4 does (or something very similar)
If you want to run a pure ctf server, have a filter for it in the map list that the admin can choose when running the server. Same with vCTF.

JaFO
30th May 2005, 05:09 PM
As long as the vehicles fit the map it's fine by me.
Given that it's being designed by the guys at Epic instead of a bunch of amateur mappers who can't agree on the basic rules for vCTF I expect those maps to be better than the current variants.

For some reason I expect the vehicles in CTF-maps to be more like transport/superweapons. ie : something that adds to the map without dominating the infantry.

The 'translocator'-issue is easy to solve : as soon as there's a vehicle-spawn on a map the translocator is replaced either by the hoverboard (or whatever it's name may be) or removed from the game (for the duration of that map).

Mixing vCTF & CTF-variants is a great idea as it keeps the game fresh and forces you to have a wider range of skills (which is good).

edhe
30th May 2005, 08:23 PM
Vctf is one and CTF is completely other things. ICTF is all about aim skills and Reflexes.

There is a no a big difference betwen VCTF and CTF , ICTF is way apart.


So let me check this.. ICTF is 'all about skills and refelxes' implying that NW CTF isn't? I know i'm taking the piss but ICTF is just dull, stupidly dull. Everything that's 'great' about ICTF is elsewhere too.

On topic - as long as there are plenty non vctf maps then i wouldn't mind a single gametype, otherwise keep seperate

Discord
19th Jun 2005, 08:50 PM
Bumpage for new news. There's a new Steve Polge interview vid out from a Belgian site:

http://www.arena51.be/downloads/streams/e3_2005_ut_2007.php

The pertinent bit here is confirmation that (at least as of now) iCTF will be a separate gametype. That and Steve Polge trying to make a funny at the end. :con:

Renegade Retard
20th Jun 2005, 05:57 PM
Leave CTF alone. Period.

If you want to trick it up, then make it another gametype. Don't monkey around with an essential part of what made UT what it is today.

It makes just as much sense to combine vCTF and ONS, since they both have vehicles and large maps. And if some says "But vCTF and ONS are two different types of games" without realizing that vCTF and CTF are as well, I'll biotch slap them for being clueless.

kafros
21st Jun 2005, 07:44 AM
Why not merge ONS while at it. Capture the core and destroy the flag...