1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Reinforcement settings...

Discussion in 'Infiltration Online' started by RaekwoN, Dec 4, 2003.

  1. RaekwoN

    RaekwoN Infiltration Level Designer

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 1999
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm just wondering what the players out there think of the default 3 lives setting that is currently running on most servers?

    I've read a few complaints here and there by people saying that the limited respawning ruins the game for them. There are a lot of arguments around this, like sloppy play being caused by people not caring about their "life", people might play more recklessly etc. But for those who are new to the game, it can be quite disconcerting.

    More respawns means more people actually playing, which means more fire fights, which means bigger groups when respawning, which means more fun?

    INF is pretty tricky to pick up as a new player. What I'm asking for is a server or two to maybe up the reinforcements to 10 or so at least. Give them a chance to really play the game, not sit out for 8 mins at a time while the more experienced players crouch around the map trying to find each other and finish the round.

    I personally do prefer to play the game with unlimited respawns, in fact, my two maps were designed with this setting in mind. But this is more for the new people than it is for me.



    EDIT: Afterthoughts
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2003
  2. TheShiningWizard

    TheShiningWizard Because it's more fantastical.

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2000
    Messages:
    2,644
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like having about three respawns, and it comes down to the way INF handles assault.

    Rather than time being the tiebreaker if both teams win the assault, INF uses remaining total survivors of the attacking team. Therefore, those lives become important, because being reckless with a single life can be the difference betwee your team winning the tiebreaker by 2% and losing by 1%.

    Also, when the offense knows that they can't just kill all of the defenders to win (unless they don't mind sitting around and killing 40ish soldiers) they focus on completing the objectives instead of hunting down the defense. Sometimes it pays to sneak past a defender instead of draw attention with gunshots.

    *Shrug* I think three and four are good numbers for respawns.
     
  3. sublime

    sublime Cynic

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, you know how I feel about it Raek as we've discussed it for hours or more on IRC. ;)

    I personally feel that when life is cheap (unlimited respawns) people play reckless and sloppy and rush about like chickens with their heads cut off. It's all a matter of taste I guess, but when I know I don't have many lives left I hook up with other people on my team to cover my back while I cover theirs. Life has value. It means something. When you're taking objectives or defending them, putting a huge dent in the enemies forces is a part of life and should be part of a realistic game. With unlimited respawns you lose that sense of urgency and the momentum swings that come with decimating the other force or getting decimated yourself.

    If you have as many lives as you need all of that falls to the wayside. This comes from experience in games with unlimited respawns and with limited. Limited just fits my personal playing style much better. Sure you get some of the above in the occasional game with unlimited respawns but it's almost second nature to those games with limited respawns, at least in my experience.
     
  4. (SDS)benmcl

    (SDS)benmcl Why not visit us here in the real world.

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    1,897
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like limited for the reasons sublime& FeelTheUniverseXXX stated. If its going to take more lives than that then you probably have a problem.

    Since 2.9 came out I usually use up all my lives for a varity of reasons. Doing stupid things is at the top of the list.

    I know its not very friendly for new people trying the game out and learning. I don't have that answer. The one thing I do know is that I rather have them try to value the number of their lives now. Give more lives now to change in 2 months time is just going to cause problems down the road.

    Learn the hard way now.
     
  5. RaekwoN

    RaekwoN Infiltration Level Designer

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 1999
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm talking first time players here. We did a little training session with the host from Giga before we did the live telecast. It took over an hour to teach him the basics. He was being tutored by Beppo no less.

    When I say basics, I mean, movement, stances, weapon functions etc.

    Most games in the FPS genre out there have unlimited, which I'm not proposing, lives. As it stands now, if you suck at INF, you gotta try really hard to get enjoyable games. Playing more is going to allow you to learn the intricacies much faster than sitting around spectating games.

    Learning the hard way now, leads IMO to less players later on.
     
  6. (SDS)benmcl

    (SDS)benmcl Why not visit us here in the real world.

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    1,897
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually now that you stated it that way I have to agree. Mayber a few "training servers" or some such would not be a bad idea.

    How did the host and the huys at Giga like it? What was their impression.
     
  7. sublime

    sublime Cynic

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    0
    Those are my feelings on all games, by the way, not just Infiltration. I've never been a fan of unlimited respawns and I don't guess I ever will be. Like I said, it's all just personal preference. I answered this as a gamer and not as a developer or team member as well, just to make sure that's known as well.

    Just thought I'd clear that up.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2003
  8. jaymian

    jaymian Sweet Merciful Crap!

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2001
    Messages:
    1,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think 10 reinforcements with 20 second waves would be good to start until we all get used to the new EAS gametype and the maps.
     
  9. Crowze

    Crowze Bird Brain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,556
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, perhaps you could have unlimited reinforcements, but have the waves in 60 or even 90 seconds. People would be more careful about what they do with their lives, but still be able to play the match out. The final scores would be based on the time used, not the lives used. This may also encourage more teamwork, as the team tends to get split up if the waves are too frequent.

    Just a thought.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2003
  10. yurch

    yurch Swinging the clue-by-four

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sleepy

    Something to consider is match time. Unless the map is evolving through to a good deal of new areas and objectives, players will grow tired of it, leading to a very sloppy play. The window for this (depending on game) can be around 20-50 minutes.

    Now you have to consider, with unlimited respawns or not, how many re-spawns would you use in 20-50 minutes?

    Another unfortunate fact is that currently, the attackers usually break through when the defenders lose some or most of thier players. This is due to map design - it's going to be very difficult to get a map/gametype that has enough movement for the game to stay interesting/beatable/entertaining for long enough, yet not so difficult as to provide a 50 minute stalemate.

    Granted, some mappers (who remain unnamed) are pure sex regaurdless.

    I think a good deal of it just has to deal with the travel time for attackers and defenders.
     
  11. ant75

    ant75 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2001
    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    0
    I understand raekwon's concern but i tend to disagree. If new players want to practice their skills they should do it offline. Unlimited respawns would do more harm than good because they give new players bad habits. The main thing to learn about inf is not necessarily the technique, it's the spirit : learning to be careful and act more *like in real combat situation* is not something natural to most players, and that's what needs to be teached first.
    I wouldn't mind servers with 3-6 reinforcements , but i'd also like to see how 0 reinforcement matches would go... In a word, more diversity would be welcome.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2003
  12. Bhruic

    Bhruic New Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2002
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does the number of spawns control the timelimit of a map? I was under the impression that the timelimit is based on the size of the map, to some degree, but independant of respawns. Even with the respawns we get now, I find a lot of maps end up running out of time before the objective is completed, or everyone is dead. Increasing the respawns would seem to make that more likely to happen, but that's about it.

    Bh
     
  13. yurch

    yurch Swinging the clue-by-four

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    0
    Err, I meant in the scope of an average 50 min game a player would only realistically use x number of respawns if he could spawn whenever he needed to... IE if we increase the availble EAS spawns to a certain point it would play like unlimited respawns...
    Circular logic, yes. I appear to have forgotten what I mean.
     
  14. DarkBls

    DarkBls Inf Ex-admin

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2000
    Messages:
    4,551
    Likes Received:
    0
    Couldn't agree more
     
  15. poaw

    poaw You used to sleep easy at night.

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2001
    Messages:
    1,512
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think Raekwon is somewhat right. It does take a long time to pickup on how to play INF, and limited respawns don't really help much. Even watching other players doesn't help much when learning, except for the layout of the map. You can't see what functions the other player is using, or even get an exact picture of what he is seeing and doing. For example, a new player doesn't see a veteran sniper illumating his reticule, controlling his breathing, or zooming in his scope.

    As a solution, I would say adding a mode in which 3 or so respawns are added every once in a while. Like a fresh wave of reinforcements, so they can play poorly and die repeatedly, and come back rapidly enough, but after a number of deaths they have to take a break, then they go back in again after awhile to try again.

    Although I don't see this situation as seriously reducing the number of players. If someone likes INF they'll stay and learn, if not, they'll leave. But it does affect the speed at which new players get up to speed.
     
  16. spm1138

    spm1138 Irony Is

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2001
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am replying late to this because I've been thinking about it and that takes time (you know how slow tectonic plates move?)

    Unlimited respawns can undeniably lead to sloppy play and general arseing about. Whether or not that is a good thing I don't know.

    I think 3 respawns is definitely not a good thing as it leads to the attacking team hunting the defending team down and basically winning because they've killed everyone. It's very reminiscent of LMS type game-modes.

    I reckon anywhere from 5-8 is probably the magic number if you want the gameplay to revolve around the objectives and require team-work.

    I also believe that more respawns is more enjoyable simply because playing is more fun than not playing. I know I myself am now making a conscious effort to avoid servers with the respawns set low.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2003
  17. Excelsiore

    Excelsiore Binary Liberation Front

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with 5-8 being ideal.
     
  18. [C22]-Acolyte

    [C22]-Acolyte Ai kotoba afuro to gunsou!

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2002
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree, more respawns needed.
     
  19. DarkBls

    DarkBls Inf Ex-admin

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2000
    Messages:
    4,551
    Likes Received:
    0
    Max 3. Like previously said people are more careful with less respawn.
     
  20. Rostam

    Rostam PSN: Rostam_

    Joined:
    May 1, 2001
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    hmm. I do not believe unlimited respawns would mean more firefights. I think it would mean less. I think people would take a handgrenade, pop the pin and rush for the enemy. I think people would group rush the enemy. All in all, less firefights because people wouldn't care about their lives and suppresive fire would not work.

    Also I believe if giving players unlimited lives new players would not learn INF faster. I remember when I started playing INF, in 2.85, when I was dead I would follow my teammates and learn a great deal from them.

    Also, with free ghosting turned on on just about every server for the time being, newbies can learn the maps real quick.

    The way I see it, unlimited respawns is a big no no.
     

Share This Page