Re-deploy Screen ?

[[LNS]Jubei]

there you have it, it's just like the translocator, wich means if you are playing alcazar, with 3 unhackable deploys, top cloud, node room and ground level, a gunner could teleport from cloud entrance to bottom entrance, in a matter of seconds.

if you are at ground level and a ranger is hopping at cloud base, cool, just teleport to cloud and nail him.

and you still say that it doesn't change anything to the xmp gameplay


then you're the ignorant and not us.



gg

 

[[DOA]Kharn]

I can see the arguments FOR and AGAINST teleporting, but the problem with it IS the example Jubei stated, chase the arti carrier? oh no, ill teleport in front of him and catch him on the way out.

If you cant see the change in gameplay there then you cant be helped

 

[Sir_Brizz]

there you have it, it's just like the translocator, wich means if you are playing alcazar, with 3 unhackable deploys, top cloud, node room and ground level, a gunner could teleport from cloud entrance to bottom entrance, in a matter of seconds.

if you are at ground level and a ranger is hopping at cloud base, cool, just teleport to cloud and nail him.

and you still say that it doesn't change anything to the xmp gameplay


then you're the ignorant and not us.



gg

There are THREE EXITS on Alcazar WITH IN-GAME TELEPORTERS between them! How is this ANY different than catching a flag runner in CTF? Or a ball runner in BR? Or an Arti carrier IN ANY OTHER MAP? The Arti carrier has THREE CHOICES of exits, and he can start heading towards one and turn back and go to another whenever he feels like it. Using this as an excuse is only proving my point that it won't GREATLY AFFECT gameplay.

If you're a gunner chasing an arti carrier and go from the bottom to the top you have to: Find your deploy, click the "teleport" button, find the deploy point you want to get to, and feasibly wait 1-2 seconds before the teleport even takes place. Giving any cover the arti carrier has time to kill you (or even just random enemies), the arti carrier plenty of time to change their exit location (in which case you will have to follow the forementioned steps AGAIN), AND, more than likely, plenty of time for the arti carrier to RUN PAST THE DEPLOY YOU ARE TRYING TO GET TO.

The thing is, in alot of XMP games both public and competetive, a single arti carrier BY HIMSELF can take, run, and return an artifact all by himself. That's not strategic, it's a flaw. My hope with teleporting was to curb it JUST A LITTLE so the team who had an artifact stolen could get back to base and try to recover it faster than just suiciding and respawning. It wouldn't help any other way than that, unless you needed to recharge on health stations or whatever.

The fact is, your argument doesn't have any validity based on the impediments I would have placed on teleporting. Teleporting would only be FULLY worthwhile when an artifact has been stolen, and even then you have to know RIGHT where you want to go, and right where the Arti carrier is going. If he has no cover and you kill him right after you teleport, that's his own frickin fault. If it's supposed to be a "team game" and you can run an arti by yourself...where is the team???

 

[WolfmanK]

Thought you were bowing out?

 

[Sir_Brizz]

He brought up a specific instance which has been brought up twice so I figured I better explain WHY that particular argument isn't really valid. Now I will bow out, unless someone else has a realtively valid argument

My biggest thing? I'd like to see it in action before I say "OMFG It'S goNe RUUN mai Game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111oneoneoneoneoneone". I think it could work nicely, but if I saw it in action I could totally change my mind.

 

[Naib]

There are THREE EXITS on Alcazar WITH IN-GAME TELEPORTERS between them! How is this ANY different than catching a flag runner in CTF? Or a ball runner in BR? Or an Arti carrier IN ANY OTHER MAP? The Arti carrier has THREE CHOICES of exits, and he can start heading towards one and turn back and go to another whenever he feels like it. Using this as an excuse is only proving my point that it won't GREATLY AFFECT gameplay.

Firstly there may be 3 exits to the node room, but there are only 2 from the base, both with a deploy point.

If you put one person on defence, and tell your team where there carrier goes, I'm sure someone will be close enough to a deploy to teleport back to the base to some them.

Escaping via the jump tubes would be imposible as you would never have time to get to the bottom before someone teleported to the upper base deploy.

I would call that a great effect to the game play.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

that's not true because it would take AT LEAST 5 seconds for someone to teleport there. You would be able to pass through the jump tubes AND run past the deploy point before someone could get there in time.

Besides, if you have cover (like you SHOULD) it wouldn't matter if there was one person chasing you.

 

[GotBeer?]

I'd just like to say that I have a problem with the whole "let's make it easier for noobs to learn" argument. At what point does this new ut2k4-player-friendly-XMP stop being XMP? "Let's swap radar for the ONS minimap, so ut2k4 players understand it more easily. Let's add teleportation like in ONS, because ut2k4 players have it already. Let's add a spawn point map so new ut2k4 players don't have to learn the map. Hey look everybody, I'm playing...Onslaught!"

Everyone of us here at some point was new to the game, and had to learn how it works. Just like EVERYONE ELSE has to learn EVERY OTHER game out there when they first start. If someone in the first few minutes of gameplay starts saying, "How come when I turn, the little yellow arrow on the map still points up and why are the blue/red borders moving?" and "Why won't the shiny metal tree let me teleport to another shiny metal tree?", do we really want them to stick around?

That being said, I really don't see a problem with say, the radar expanding to show which teleporter you're viewing during respawn. That would help the occasional player that doesn't have the time to learn every map figure out where he's at and doesn't really affect gameplay. As for teleporting, if it's implemented similarly to Brizz's suggestion with it's admitted "limited usefullness", why include it at all? And if it's more robust than that, with players hopping from owned spawn point to owned spawn point, the game has just been changed in a fundamental way. I know FMI has been kicking it around, still a bad idea. If you really want to teleport, make a mutator and see if anyone wants to join your server.

And to finish things off (for me, anyway), wasn't the original goal of UTXMP to make the port as close to U2XMP as possible?

 

[Mort_Q]

Suicide
Pros:
Player can be anywhere.
Player re-deploys as the class of their choice, healed and reloaded.
Cons:
They die and lose points.

Teleport
Pros:
They don't die and lose points.

Cons:
Need to be at an owned deploy point.
Re-deploy as same class, unhealed and not reloaded.

If FMI wants to add this... which would you do?

Suiciding is still better, since we all know that point-whores are mostly useless.

Is it worth tweaking to make Teleporting a stratagy that will be used? The purists will of course say no. I'm not sure it matters much.

My Opinion...

Screw the teleporting outside the spawn timer. That seems to be the only valid arguement against Sir_Brizz's idea, and that is a matter of opinion for now... we'll need to play it and see if FMI does this.

If you just set it up so that you are allowed to redploy from an owned deploy point to another owned deploy point (if you're not carrying an artifact) then it just saves you the trouble of suiciding. Only benefit is that teleporting feels less like an exploit (suiciding is a necessary evil to combat getting stuck in a map, imho) and more of a strategy, which I think is worth it myself.

Still, suiciding is more useful.

Do you add in the ability to change class? Is that too much, or should they be forced to take the death penalty (points)? Still suiciding bound to a key is better, as you don't need to be at a deploy point.

How about this... instead of arguing against teleporting, come up with a form of teleporting that would be balanced against suiciding.

Everyone of us here at some point was new to the game, and had to learn how it works. Just like EVERYONE ELSE has to learn EVERY OTHER game out there when they first start. If someone in the first few minutes of gameplay starts saying, "How come when I turn, the little yellow arrow on the map still points up and why are the blue/red borders moving?" and "Why won't the shiny metal tree let me teleport to another shiny metal tree?", do we really want them to stick around?

I haven't suggested anything for UTXMP that I didn't suggest for U2XMP during the beta. These are things that I believe are unfinished/unpolished as opposed to design choices. I am probably right on some of them and wrong on others, but from what I've read and seen, U2XMP was rushed and didn't get the polish it deserved.

If UTXMP is exactly the same as U2XMP, then it'll be a great game... but if FMI spends the time to polish the stuff Atari didn't let Legend get to, then it can be an even better game.

Polish, not changes in gameplay, I agree.

[speculation] making some things more ONS like is not just about the new players, but because the code is already there, and is functional... why recreate the wheel? [/speculation]

 

[Sir_Brizz]

My thoughts and opinions are how to make UTXMP more accessible to new players from ANY other game. My teleporting idea was never even close to the implementation of teleporting in ONS, so it's incomparable. Bashing an idea on the similarity of it's credibility to that of a feature in ONS is no better than saying "XMP...that's just like ONS right?"

The point of UTXMP was to allow XMP to continue it's life. To make XMP like Legend WANTED to make it, and to fix alot of the problems that XMP had (and it DID have them). If you don't want problems fixed, changes made, and new ideas for gameplay explored then you want U2XMP and that game already exists.

I'm with Mort on this one. For all I know my idea sucks in proof even though it sounds good in concept. I just want to try it and see how it works. If it doesn't, I'm not going to defend it until the bitter end.

 

[Naib]

that's not true because it would take AT LEAST 5 seconds for someone to teleport there. You would be able to pass through the jump tubes AND run past the deploy point before someone could get there in time.

Besides, if you have cover (like you SHOULD) it wouldn't matter if there was one person chasing you.

I'm quite fast as a ranger, but it still takes me more than 15 seconds to go from the node to the top exit using the jump tubes. And a lot longer if I don't start on full energy. The only way you could get close to 5 seconds is with one of the trick jumps. In this case it's gonna make things harder for the new player, not easier, as they would have a lot more problems attacking.

 

[GotBeer?]

I was using Onslaught as an example, since that seems to be referenced so much in these forums.

And to finish things off (for me, anyway), wasn't the original goal of UTXMP to make the port as close to U2XMP as possible?

What I was saying here is that from what I understand, the original idea for the move to UTXMP, and what the majority of players seem to want, is the same gameplay but with fixes for the broken stuff; such as netcode, framerate, weapon balance, and no support from Suktari. I honestly believe changing too much stuff in the game will break gameplay and make it 'feel' like a completely different game. So like I also said:

If you really want to teleport, make a mutator and see if anyone wants to join your server.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Fortunately they have a chance to TEST OUT some of these changes. What if my idea DOES suck, well they can fix it. But I'd rather they tried it and it failed then that someone had to make a mutator to try it and it worked and no one used it. (because they wouldn't)

 

[[LNS]Jubei]

you know






if it ain't broken

don't fix it

 

[T-Shinzon]

There isn't anything wrong with trying it, is there? The people against teleporting make it sound like onslaught teleporting. Well it is NOT ONSLAUGHT TELEPORTING!! It is based on the spawn timer, therefore it is VERY SIMILAR to suiciding and choosing a new spawn point. Good players would do this anyway, so it doesn't change gameplay as much as you make it sound.

Of course, the results could be quite unexpected compared to what we think will happen when it is actually beta-tested. If so then, the arguements for or against it are quite valid. Why not just try it? Some people just can't take new ideas... Let the idea break in for a little while, like a shoe.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

What do you mean if it ain't broken? The game has serious gameplay flaws (if you want to call them that) that were never reolved!

 

[Naib]

It is based on the spawn timer, therefore it is VERY SIMILAR to suiciding and choosing a new spawn point. Good players would do this anyway, so it doesn't change gameplay as much as you make it sound.

If it's not going to get used, is it worth FMI taking the time to code it?

 

[Captain Kewl]

We're not.

 

[Mort_Q]

We're not.

Glad that that's settled...

... how about a Suicide Timer !?

 

[[DF]phalanx]

is this where dandel comes in and says he will