Assault or Duel?

[Sportaçus]

^sounds like a modded warfare to me

 

[JaFO]

You sound like you can make this work if you took the time.

Anyone dedicated enough to the resurrection of Assault can do it.
Besides, if I had the time to mod anything it would probably be something for off-line fun.

^sounds like a modded warfare to me

but that's what Warfare/Onslaught really are ...
The fact that most levels have vehicles is something that may make it less interesting to some people,
but the core concept is exactly that : Assault Evolved.

 

[Lostsoul]

you're mistaking a few people that already had an interest in playing assault with the general public that might want to try something different.
Name a gametype that has something like an 'assault mixer' and you'll find people that are above average committed to playing the game.

Actually, most of the communities did something like the Dry Lobster AS Mixer as time wore on and new peole came to a trickle. And I am not confusing the people, many of them it took personal favors to get them to try it out, the vast majority just had bad opinions based on race and trial servers and 32 man spam fest servers.

you're forgetting that assault *requires* teams to win games in as short a time as possible.
Every other gametype can be set to a timelimit that is big enough for players to learn the map and gametype without having to wait for the map to change.

Sorry, but I don't have a whole lot of respect for players that would jump in to any online game without first learning basics. Before I played 2k4 online, I was an average player that played games single player until i beat them then moved on, only playing against humans in Q2, and even I was smart enough to play the game offline and learn some basics before going online. So, point out learning tricks, but don't talk about learning basics.

exactly my point.
It is not different in how it is learned, but you barely get that time on the average map because of the way assault works.

Your average player does not need to know the tricks, I can show you demos of average players playing key roles.

I'd disagree. The people playing Assault'99 at this day are all capable of finishing the maps in under a minute. I seriously doubt it is limited to 'competitive situations' .. then again anyone left in this game probably is a competitive player of some sort as I doubt any 'normal' gamer is playing a game that's ten years old.

Capable yes, but hard to be done, like yu said, pretty much the only people let are hardcore players. As for playing a ten year old game...I play old games all the time. Death Rally anyone? Play that as much as I can, just hard to get it going right. I pull at my SNES and N64 sometimes.

which is (IMHO of course) still way too fast for the (average) player to learn to enjoy the gametype.

In my own experience it takes about 10-15 minutes to get a good feel for the gametype (= rules) and environment (a few basic weapons, health).

Give someone access to the same map for about half an hour and he'll be a threat (capable of finding most weapons and probably a powerup or two) even if he's a complete newbie, provided he's willing to learn.

Assault doesn't even come close to those numbers, because the map & rules will have changed at least once in that timeframe.

Why people should play offline first, you get those chances to learn basics. You only need to get a few things, I did well w/o knowing much.

You can add all the hints in the world, but all those things do is cause information-overload during the short time he is playing ... and that's not helping (new) players either. IMHO that is the major flaw in the 2k4 version had as we went from having no information to (at times) too much data to process.
It's one of the reasons why gametypes in a fast-paced setting like UT should be as simple as possible. ONS/WAR are about as complex a gametype possible that still attracts new gamers with little difficulty.

I hated the info myself, even as a n00b. I hate ONS/War so I won't comment.

yet another reason why assault was doomed to fail ... people do not want something different.
They want something familliar.
In fact the only reason ONS/WAR manages to be successfull is because it allows players to continue to pretend that it is still DM or CTF (or domination).

You are right people like the same **** over and over again, look at the battle fields and all those clones, but that does not mean other things fail because people are clones following around the same ****. In that case, UT is doomed to keep failing....oh, wait...

their vision changes, your favourite never does which is why Epic seems to 'screw up' from your pov

Agreed

So why would you want Assault back then ?
Isn't it time you'd tried something new ?

I don't want it back, I got kids now. I like new, but I also like good.

 

[Lostsoul]

3:30 is not the shortest you can do a UT2k4 assault map by far - Fallen City is one of the longer ones, because it's on foot over some long distances.

You can do that bloody convoy one in 30 seconds or so if you know what you're doing; and the defending team can't do **** about most of it. Tank Factory can be done in around a minute.

You are wrong, way wrong, on all counts. Unless you came from Mi5 or FAT, you would not know anyway.

 

[ambershee]

Ok, one minute and six, running through it quickly just now. That's still a ****load quicker than 3:30; and that's without multiple players chaining the objectives rather than doing them sequentially.

 

[Lostsoul]

I can do a 1v0 TAM match in about that time span as well, and that is ten rounds

 

[Sportaçus]

So is anybody up for the challenge?

 

[Grobut]

Honestly now, nobody said that a new AS gametype would not be allowed to make certain fixes to the gametype, yes the UT gametype had flaws, like beeing able to bypass allmost the whole level with trick jumping, but who said a new AS had to inherit this "feature"? i could think of quite a few ways it could be prevented if the mapper doesen't want players to do this (like employing blocking volumes of a sort that prevent you from going to a location untill your current objective is delt with, and making doubly sure by making objectives indestructable untill the objective before it is triggered).

And it's not easy enough to learn? no, it's not DM, and it's not supposed to be DM, it's supposed to be AS, a very different gametype that offers a very different kind of challenge to players who enjoys such a thing, it was an alternative to the more mainstream gametypes that alot of us genuinely enjoyed having, because it was different and offered some variety.

Not everything needs to be designed for retards with the attentionspan of a fruit fly, it's OK for there to be atleast one gametype that has a slight learning curve.

 

[Unknown Target]

...making doubly sure by making objectives indestructable untill the objective before it is triggered)

.

This.

 

[Lostsoul]

Honestly now, nobody said that a new AS gametype would not be allowed to make certain fixes to the gametype, yes the UT gametype had flaws, like beeing able to bypass allmost the whole level with trick jumping, but who said a new AS had to inherit this "feature"? i could think of quite a few ways it could be prevented if the mapper doesen't want players to do this (like employing blocking volumes of a sort that prevent you from going to a location untill your current objective is delt with, and making doubly sure by making objectives indestructable untill the objective before it is triggered).

And it's not easy enough to learn? no, it's not DM, and it's not supposed to be DM, it's supposed to be AS, a very different gametype that offers a very different kind of challenge to players who enjoys such a thing, it was an alternative to the more mainstream gametypes that alot of us genuinely enjoyed having, because it was different and offered some variety.

Not everything needs to be designed for retards with the attentionspan of a fruit fly, it's OK for there to be atleast one gametype that has a slight learning curve.

Obj's can not be skipped in 2k4 (exception being in Junk getting the 'Bender through the gate).

Personally, I like being able to skip objectives, not as easily as it could be done in 99 though. I like the added depth and the extra avenues for attack. With the exception of stock maps for 2k4, every map pretty much had the same 2 paths, left and right. I have never seen a community so happy with stock maps as I have 2k4 AS.

Grobut
Where you are heading reminds me of what was it, UTR, the remake of 99 in 2k4. I remeber those guys wanting to "fix" AS, was some interesting forum debating going on.

 

[ambershee]

You can't skip objectives in 2k4 - but in a few cases, it's possible for someone to run on to that objective before you've completed the previous; allowing that objective to be completed immediately thereafter (i.e 'chaining'). Sometimes you're blocked by doors, or what-not, but this isn't always the case.

 

[Sportaçus]

^ where do you see this happening?
The maps i play on, you have to do the objs in order.

 

[TurdDrive]

You can't skip objectives in 2k4 - but in a few cases, it's possible for someone to run on to that objective before you've completed the previous; allowing that objective to be completed immediately thereafter (i.e 'chaining'). Sometimes you're blocked by doors, or what-not, but this isn't always the case.

agree every objective should be blocked by a Door/Something

 

[Grobut]

Obj's can not be skipped in 2k4 (exception being in Junk getting the 'Bender through the gate).

You still need the abillity to block players though (and let them pass when appropriate aswell), else the attacking team could in theory make sure they have a guy standing ready at each objective ready to trigger them when able, and maps could still be won much too fast.

Personally, I like being able to skip objectives, not as easily as it could be done in 99 though.

There's nothing wrong with adding some tactical depth, like making sure the attackers can infiltrate from different routes, and attack different objectives at different times so the defenders don't allways know what to expect, that's just good level design (especially for big maps for many players), and obviously mappers should be able to create such maps, it's exploits that where not intended by the mapper that needs dealing with through some blocking system, or you will allways get UT99 style loop holes where attackers can use an unfortunately placed static mesh to win the level in 20 seconds flat, and the map is doomed to be boring.

 

[Lostsoul]

Ugh, i'm not going to waste my time on this again. The only people that actually care, really truly care dedicating countless days, about Assault, don't have the skills or time to make maps. The people that do have the skills and play once in a blue moon, want to modify it and make it a point A to point B race with no room for ingenuity, thus killing the point.

 

[ambershee]

^ where do you see this happening?
The maps i play on, you have to do the objs in order.

Fallen City, you can get over the blockade that's the first objective, with a little help from a team mate - then cruise on to the next objective and wait for it to become viable.

Convoy has two objectives once you get into the trailer, and someone can run straight for the second even if the first is not complete, and wait for it.

There are probably better examples, but I'd have to look to remember them.

 

[Grobut]

Ugh, i'm not going to waste my time on this again. The only people that actually care, really truly care dedicating countless days, about Assault, don't have the skills or time to make maps. The people that do have the skills and play once in a blue moon, want to modify it and make it a point A to point B race with no room for ingenuity, thus killing the point.

Sadly there is probably a lot of truth to this

 

[JaFO]

Why people should play offline first, you get those chances to learn basics. You only need to get a few things, I did well w/o knowing much.

off-line play does not prepare anyone for the effects of ping/lag ...
It's still is odd that you get a good chance to adapt in new CTF/DM maps, whereas the same can not be said about AS.

Your average player does not need to know the tricks, ...

but he needs to be aware of them
AS has too much map-specific aspects that make it needlessly hard to learn when you consider the time you get to learn a new map on-line.
In AS it is possible for a map to start downloading and the game switching to a new map before the old one finished downloading. There's no other gametype with such a 'feature'.

Another problem is that the gametype is easily compromised by flaws in map-design, which can't make it easy for anyone to learn how to create new maps. That might explain why race/trick-maps became so popular ... they're relatively easy to make and any flaws won't wreck the game.

.. I hate ONS/War so I won't comment. ...

Care to explain what it is you hate about those gametypes ?
Is it the mechanics or the vehicles ?

 

[Lostsoul]

Like I said above, I won't waste my time talking to you about Assault, you don't get that makes it special for those that have played it for the better part of a decade.

Care to explain what it is you hate about those gametypes ?
Is it the mechanics or the vehicles ?

I will comment on this. I get bored in ONS. I always have. Pubs are to random, people don't work together. Clan match wise,I don't like it when **** gets stuck at a single node. I hate Prime more so for that reason. It ties in to why I like Assault, fast paced, even for UT

WAR is the same, but ten times worse with the ORB and those retarded "objectives".

Edit
Despite not liking to play it, I have seen some great matches when I was a TWL admin. The curb stomping Global gave to Jawa, after Jawa tried to forfeit win there way to the top, was great. The 3v3 League also had some great game's. Fun to watch, but still no fun for me to play.