Changing DTAS flag for something else

[Midwinter]

I was thinking about the objective we have to defend/capture in DTAS: a flag. Though it doesn't bother me at all (I just use my imagination as to picture which objective we are trying to capture/defend), it would be cool if the objective mesh changed from time to time to more 'realistic' elements. This poses some problems. You can't make the mesh selection totally random, because you would get weird objective placements (for example, a communications tower in the water). But we can determine the kind of terrain we are standing on, so it would help us select a set of viable objectives for that terrain type. As a example of viable objectives for each terrain type we could have:

-Wooden floor: usually inside of buildings. We could have a small radio transmitter (such as those in irak, for example)

-Grass: usually outside . We could have a radio tower

-Sand: The radio tower would be fine here as well.

And in case the mapper has not defined the terrain type in his map, we could have a set of "universal" meshes which could fit in every terrain type (i.e. inside and outside of buildings). Things such a power generator, or something similar.

The goals i pursue with this post are 2:

-Know the opinion of fellow INFers about this idea.

-Get people to provide ideas as to which objective meshes would be suitable for each type of terrain and compile a list with them. That way , the objective could change from round to round and it would add a bit more to the "randomness" DTAS is based on.

 

[Mappie]

Call me old fashioned, but i like the whole flag thing in DTAS. I have come to know and love it. Is it realistic? Not really. But it brings me that 'old school' feeling of 2.86 when it was at its height. Now that's not to say that I would not like the new random objects. I just like the simplicity of the flag i guess.

 

[Psychomorph]

The spawns in DTAS are random.

1) Why not spawning the objective near the defenders allready from the beginning (no player x set the flag).

The objective could be a jeep with a small communication thingy in the back.

The time is needed for the attackers to be around the flag, to win the round, could be a bomb plant.

The bomb to plant have the player who reaches the jeep first.


2) For maps with small spaces (for example Swamprat) the jeep is replaced by a small camouflaged tent with all the communiacation hardware inside.

This tent is perfect for swampy maps and and indoor.


A) In the Radar you should have no mark where the objective is (you just know where it is about to be, since it will be at the other side of the map).

Only when you are near the objective area you see the mark in the radar.

That would prevent the attackers starting to rush toward the objective (which I don't like) and the players who find the objective can report to team mates and lead them toward the objective, which would create more realistic team play.




I think this would create more realism and add more a SpecOps feeling.

 

[Crowze]

From a technical standpoint, it is impossible to determine the texture type - geo tried it with RT and it just doesnt work. What could work is an objective type on a per-map basis. DTAS already has the ability to use a red flare instead of a flag.

 

[Midwinter]

I was thinking something similar to having different footstep sounds for different textures. Is the terrain type info saved in the textures?

 

[cracwhore]

I think we should worry about making DTAS fun, before we worry about that flag.

 

[Midwinter]

Well Crac, DTAS is fun enough for me (it really depends on the people playing, but that's true with every game/gametype). I have been playing a lot more of DTAS lately and those have been the best games of INF in a long, long time. Almost no people TDMing, which led to some very intense games.

 

[geogob]

How about a CD?

 

[Nukeproof]

That would certainly be nice but mainly makeup.

I was once thinking of combining aspects of 'Spec' and 'DTAS'. The Spec could be the only one to secure the area or he'd need to escape and the rest of the team would be his escort.

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

A kind of search & rescue mission could work like this:

You have 4 different independent random "spawns":

1) Spec (alone)
2) Spec-escort (seperated rest of the team)
3) Spec-hunters (=entire opposing team)
4) Escape spot (displayed by a flag)

Spec-escort would get the exact location of the Spec and the escape (distance and direction - like DTAS flag now)

Spec-hunting team would only know current distances to spec and they can see the flag showing the extraction point when in line of sight.

Hunters win if they kill the Spec - Spec team wins if he makes it to extraction point (maybe accompanied by teammate)

This would only make sense in large open areas and it would require some sort of "spawn order" so Spec doesn't spawn 5 feet from extraction etc...

I believe this could be a little more dynamic than DTAS since both team need to hurry... Also both teams would have more tactical variety:

Specteam:

- rush to extraction
- Hide and prepare for hunters
- Drag attention off Spec so he can Sneak past

Hunters:

- find flag and setup an ambush
- separate Spec from team


etc...

Any comments?

 

[Kitty.cat]

Wow. So I know the idea of NPC's have been thrown around a bit in the past. But what about VIP securing? Or hostage rescue or whatever for DTAS? Go secure the OpFor's VIP or go secure and extract the NPC "hostage" or whatever.

 

[cracwhore]

That game is called 'Counter-Strike' - and I'll kindly thank you to never mention it again.

 

[Nukeproof]

Well I admit it's similar.

But you would use random spots and the Spec spawning separated from his team - escape not static. No NPC's all players...

If you need a story it could go like this:

The Spec is a wounded parachuter (i.e. pilot beeing shot down over enemy territory). A rescueteam who has radio contact with him (and know his exact position) is send to safe him.

Hunters own the territory and have shot down the aircraft and now try to kill the pilot. - but dunno his exact position

Extraction would be the planned pickup spot which hunters don't know.

 

[Kitty.cat]

I think the only way NPC's would REALLY work. Is perhaps a diplomat being held hostage by the OpFor, and you'd have to go in and secure their area (just like normal DTAS) which would secure it for "extraction" (aka a Win for the hunters)

 

[Midwinter]

Nuke, that gametype already exists. Beppo coded that some time ago (you will have to look for it, because i can't remember exactly where in these forums it was posted). Basically it spawns one team member separated from his teammates. The enemy tries to kill him, while his teammates try to escort him to safety.

EDIT: AFAIR, spawns were not random. They had to be specified in some config file.

 

[Crowze]

Search for Captive. It's a mutator designed for the Specialist gametype, where it spawns the specialist with a specific loadout in a set location on the map away from the rest of the team. I would love to play it online.

 

[Psychomorph]

I believe this could be a little more dynamic than DTAS since both team need to hurry...

Thats what I personally would not like to see, where everybody have to hurry, cuz they have marks in HUD and all that.


I would rather like to see some more realism. As I suggested, the attackers don't know the point and spread out in teams. Once one team have contact they report to mates and all teams take an assaulting formation with all what they got.

The objective would be a military gadged. The time you need to be near the flag in current DTAS would be the time you need to plant a bomb. After the plant few seconds escaping and boom, even if the 'escaper' is gettin killed, the bomb makes boom anyway.

To make it easier for the attackers they could have a notification when near the objective, or a mark in HUD, or something else.

When the attackers don't find the objective for to long, after some minutes a message can tell the attackers the direction, it's like the headquarter identified the position of the objective via setellite and reported it to the soldiers.


But why I reply myself, nobody seems to be interested.

 

[ant75]

I was thinking something similar to having different footstep sounds for different textures. Is the terrain type info saved in the textures?

Unfortunately i already see one problem with textures : many mappers (including me) are using the grass footstep sound for carpeted floors (i don't know why SS never bothered to create a carpet footstep sound ). That would mean you have the same objective mesh for grass and carpet textures...
Also, i remember having this discussion a while ago on the dtas thread, and after trying several things many people agreed that the flag was the most convenient way to symbolize the objective without facing gameplay/realism inconsistencies (remember the smoke flare in cqb maps).

And to continue on the dtas modifications suggestions, i'd really like to see one day a gametype with a displaceable objective, as described a long time ago here :
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showpost.php?p=1377237&postcount=17

 

[Nukeproof]

I know about the spec variant but its only SPEC and you still have to deal with EAS objectives, right?

@Psycho: I don't really see how this is unrealistic. No hurry because you have marks in the HUD but because you better get to the Spec before the opposing team does. If you use a red-flare to mark extraction spot and implement a pickup chopper for extraction, this would be more realistic than any current INF gamemode - IMHO (if you use above mentioned story of the shutdown pilot)

I agree DTAS discussion continued would be nice - but it also requires somebody to code ....

 

[Psychomorph]

No I didn't say it is unrealistic. It would be a very different game mode that you suggest and it would a fast one. It would be about finding and covering one person and moving as a team fast toward the extraction point. I´m absolutely not agains this gametype, but as said, it would be a total different thing.


I for example was suggesting it closer to the current DTAS, where you could swarm out as a team, sneaking upon the opposite location and destroing an important object.
It would be still the same game, a to-captured objective randomly in the map, the attackers have to get there and 'do someting' to win.

I don't see any (big) coding problems there, the bomb plant is allready in INF, spawning a mesh is possible, removing marks in the radar is possible.


But I would really like to have radar marks beeing removed. To allow the attackers to find the objective (if visual contact is hard) a sound could be made, like the to-destroing-jeep has the motor running, the communication device makes some sounds etc.

I have not a big problem with the flag, but lets be honest, a jeep, or any other military gadged would be much better. No objective marks in the radar (when attackers still balanced enough) would be better too.

 

[(SDS)benmcl]

Well the reason the flag was finally agreed on is that the flag is not actually the objective. the game type is not called DCTF but DTAS. The flag only marks the centre of an area or position to control. You are securing a location and not an object hence there is no problem using a flag to indicated the centre of that area.

Now as for these other suggestions like planting a bomb and such well we have it already. Not sure why you want a new mutator for something we already have. It is one of the game types released by SS called...

...wait for it...

EAS. Yes the game type you want is already there. All that needs to be done is for the mappers to take the EAS game type to the level it should have been from the start. Mostar comes the closest.

Instead of waiting for someone to write a new mutator get after the mappers to start producing the dynamic maps the EAS maps that would really shine.

Lets face it, and most people know I love DTAS from the RA days, some of the placements of the flag is just plain dumb. I always wanted a system where an admin could create a list of positions for the flag carrier to spawn.

But I would rather have mappers get creative and push EAS to a new level and that is pretty well what all the suggestions here point to.