Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jaana

settings

Recommended Posts

Three changes I think would help the zone. The zone needs some original settings back.

 

1. 2 public freqs with no limit to each freq. Public freqs can generate population the way private freqs cannot because it leaves no one teamless, creates 2 teams with the same number of members, and can result in intense 20+ vs 20+ games. Private freq proponents have had their way awhile- take turns. Have capital ships enabled at 14 vs 14 and let them have blue bullets.

 

2. Antiwarp needs to be put back on spider and weasel. I believe they were put on javelin and leviathan because the rebels with the weasel had a faster antiwarp ship than the imperials with the spider. This is no longer an issue. Javelin and leviathan are too slow and defenseless (no speed, no cloak) to follow flaggers and keep within anti range. They are just not effective anti ships. Also, increase anti range back to just about full radar. There would probably be no negative effects to letting all four ships have antiwarp.

 

3. Back to 15 flags, no carry limit, 199sec resettable flag timer. 9 flags, 1 flag carry limit, 120s nonresettable flag timer eliminates certain intense elements that used to be found in a flag game. These include: 1) sufficient time to coordinate an effort to thor a flag holder, 2) time to break into an enemy base or break in far enough to frighten a flag holder into killing and resetting their timer, 3) the fear of a thor and use of thor guards that weaken the defense. A flag holder killing a flag holder should get all the flags- they shouldn't go to center.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree on most

 

- long flagtimer wont work with the current population

 

- pub freqs might work but before we concider putting pubs back we should test with maxfreqsize of 6 (or another low number)

 

- caps with blue bullets work only with 30vs30 flaggames, this isnt the case these days thats why caps arent that strong anymore, caps do need to be available when its alot vs alot, so 14v14 sounds good

 

- I agree with the antiwarp thing, spider and weasel sounds good. Rebels/Imps isnt a problem anymore

 

- Current antiwarp range is good, some people are working on a new very small map. From what Ive seen so far it will take 4 antiers to anti the entire zone. Thats not what we want. (if this new map will be used that is)

 

- 9 flags with 1 flag max on a ship is a fun new setting, it should be given more time to test though.

 

- Flagtimer is good. Currently the bases arent made for this low timer, but again players are making a new tiny map with better bases. Its doable there to fire inside the flagroom very often (example: map made by FF and CH, the G2 flagroom).

 

 

 

The thing is that a change of play is good IMHO, its fun to flag with the current new swz settings simple b/c it takes a bit more effort to win games. What needs to change is the map.

It true though that the shipupgrades need to be alot more expensive, theres no reason yet to remove them. Lets first give these settings some time so people understand how they work and what they can do with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These new flag settings seem to work, we just need a smaller map. Only thing that could change is the number of flags. Winning a 3vs3 game is almost impossible with 9 flags. But then again, if it's impossible to win, the flag game will be longer, and maybe more ppl will join. Hmm.

 

We could try pub freqs also, I can see how some people cannot enjoy of the flag game if it's already 10vs10, because they probably wont start a new freq. But we should also try having freq size limits of 5 or 6. Would be cool to have a game with like 5vs5vs5vs5. Also with pubs, we wouldn't get all this freq stacking. I have seen A LOT of games with 7vs0, 8vs0, ... It's geigh, everybody is just in for the rewards.

 

NO CAPS, it's more fun without them. Just get rid of them. (They will only work with pubs anyways.)

 

Antiwarp range is good as it is. But I agree that weasel and spider should get antiwarp back. It wouldn't hurt to give all the 4 ships antiwarp.

 

I also think we should take prox away from the greens, make it only buyable.

 

-Fox-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A change is needed... a long time ago already.... I also agree with alot of stuff already said, so not gonna repeat. Caps can be a thing that gives swz an identity or makes it unique from other zones. And the reason why it wasn't taken out yet was this reason. But something that won't work can't be a part of it anymore. Instead give swz 2 new ships who are unique in the subspace "world" and that can support flagging and population wise.

 

If there's a new map being made, i really hope that the bases will be wide enough. Very narrow corridors and very tiny chambers would be very dissapointing.

 

Upgrades shouldn't be given by flags, but you should only be able to buy them for a high amount of points. Flag upgrades are a reason for people to pick them up. That might be a good thing, but it's harder this way to start a flaggame because those people who pick it up are centerkillers usually. It was already taken out before with a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think we should:

 

-get rid of prox bty in center

-have some sorta way where you can change the zone to pub freqs when the population is high enuf and when the pop is low, the zone will change back to privs again. Like pb zone changes to small pb or traditional according to the population. I'd say when there's 10-12 active players, it should go to pub freqs. A new bot would have to be made, but i think it would be worth it .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you wanna make 7 and 8 crazy without screwing with the settings like you already did?tongue.gif Do like someone said and create new ships---- Support ships:P their bombs or bullets could heal!!!! YEAHHHH:P you cant really kill with them cause you got lvl 1 bullets but if you aim your teamates with your bombs you heal them for x amount!!!:P Bwahahhahaha

 

RickeyBoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original settings were excellent. The changes to them have hurt the zone. Most notable of these are: the change to private freqs and the transfer of antiwarp role to ships that cannot effectively antiwarp.

 

The zone was "broken" by some bad changes. The fix is to undo these changes, not to introduce more changes and then say how they might work *if*.. If what? Make ten more changes and make new maps?

 

There is no need to go to all that trouble. We already have settings that work. It's just been a very long time since we've seen them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't really tell if it hurt the zone, because the zone was already almost ded when those changes were implemented. When a zone is dying, you try out things to get it working again, because it seemed that the normal settings didn't work.

 

Settings haven't changed much. The only thing you mentioned that i agree with is the private freqs and how it doesn't work now. But changing freq sizes to 6 people might be very nice to do. Or make 3 public freqs.

 

antiwarp i agree with aswell, but it doesn't effect the zone in a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUOTE (jaana @ Aug 21 2005, 01:39 AM)
The original settings were excellent.? The changes to them have hurt the zone.? Most notable of these are:? the change to private freqs and the transfer of antiwarp role to ships that cannot effectively antiwarp.

The zone was "broken" by some bad changes.? The fix is to undo these changes, not to introduce more changes and then say how they might work *if*.. If what?? Make ten more changes and make new maps?

There is no need to go to all that trouble.? We already have settings that work.? It's just been a very long time since we've seen them.

Which settings are you referring to? There are the old settings from about one or two years ago, and then there are thee Old Settings like Old Elim. Changes have been made before. It is more or less a constant process for any zone. This zone has been very successful when subjected to changes, in the past. It has been successful with both private and public frequencies, with ship setting changes, and various other evolutions. However, that is not to say that this latest evolution is not a mistake. I would rather return to the settings as they were two years ago, along with the reinstitution of ship rules.

 

However, I think Sommy (and others) have good ideas with super-small maps and max freq sizes of 6, etc. It is worth testing, but that is what needs to happen. We need extensive testing, not just one game and oh this is great lets put it in main. When the zone is dead and boring, anything with a sizeable population that is new is going to be fun and seem to work, no matter how shitty the settings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, it seems like a some of the time that the case was that the zone hit a seasonal low and instead of just wading through it, everyone paniced. Furthermore, in some cases, one could argue that the settings changes just keep bringing the zone population down to a new low, after the initial showing of those saying "wtf?"

 

I'm not saying change is a bad thing, but I don't think it is always a good thing, either, and I think that it drives the fear in a lot of people of that change. I think we need to get to a place at some point where the changes do not occur so drastically, and we can change one or two things at once, so its not such a shock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUOTE (TC Dark Reign @ Aug 21 2005, 07:45 PM)
I can summarize arguments over the past decade with: "SWZ is dying! But don't change anything, because its fine the way it is!"

And at the complete other end of the spectrum, the argument is: "SWZ is dying! Keep changing the settings even though it doesn't help!"

 

Not that I even care. Just being the devil's advocate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUOTE (jaana @ Aug 18 2005, 12:32 AM)

3. Back to 15 flags, no carry limit, 199sec resettable flag timer. 9 flags, 1 flag carry limit, 120s nonresettable flag timer eliminates certain intense elements that used to be found in a flag game. These include: 1) sufficient time to coordinate an effort to thor a flag holder, 2) time to break into an enemy base or break in far enough to frighten a flag holder into killing and resetting their timer, 3) the fear of a thor and use of thor guards that weaken the defense. A flag holder killing a flag holder should get all the flags- they shouldn't go to center.

Jaana, when I read this argument I wonder if you've played the zone in the past year (before the new flagging settings went into effect). Here's the problem with it:

 

To flag means to pick up flags, set up a base, defend it and attack enemy bases. Everyone is too lazy to do that. Why should they when nobody cares about any flags anyway? What would happen is that there would be no game until one person/team (usually person) picked up all the flags. Then, with the game about to end, oppenents would sometimes sense the potential for the "intense elements" and try to recover flags. Sometimes.

 

Because of current SWZ mentality, often the person carrying all the flags/the last flags, would decide that he/she should extend the game by giving them away or neuting.

 

Opponents felt that this was their right anyway. If the person won the game, all that person cared about were points; that person was selfish and lame. This went both ways, in fact. What usually happened was that the nme team would recover the flag (usually all 15 at a time), and the flags would change hands many times. Usually whoever had them wasn't sure if it would be alright to win.

 

95% of the time, when someone decided to win a game, and won it, the opponents would become very upset. Not so much because they lost, but because they felt cheated. Especially if they were the ones to scavenge the flags in the first place. But even if they didn't.

 

So, basically, there was no game until one person/team was about to win. Then, if anything was to develop out of it, it would be at the sole discretion of - usually - one person. BUT, if anyone wins the game, he/she is likely to upset a lot of ppl. So it was a lose-lose situation. Win the game, everyone will make you feel bad. Don't win, you'll feel bad for a) losing, and, more importantly, cool.gif feeling cheated.

 

Now, if you take a closer look at what I said above, you'll see that nobody ever flagged until the game was about to end - when one person/team had all the flags. Games never DEVELOPED, they just went straight to the end.

 

Now look at your own argument. Do you see what I see? I see a person who is only interested in the end of the game - not the development of the game.

 

Flagging SHOULD be a FIGHT to own each flag. Once one team achieves this, that team should win. That was NOT the case with the previous flagging settings. Where a game should have ended, it would often be artificially extended in an effort to try and simulate the "intense elements" that occur at the end of a game.

 

Why try when the other team is SUPPOSED to let you recover the flags anyway?

 

Games were redundant and boring and almost always ended bitterly. In addition, where SWZ flaggers used to be some of the best flaggers in subspace, SWZ flaggers started to become terrible. The development of skill and strategy was no longer required.

 

With the current flagging settings, games develop. This is because, if one team decides to win - or even decides to start flagging - it's very difficult to obtain AND secure all the flags. So both teams have to TRY.

 

The most important thing that these settings bring back to the zone is AUTHENTICITY. Games are real because they develop naturally. This makes games more fun.

 

Not to mention, skill is now required.

 

Also, the fact that it's so difficult to win small flag games gives the game an opportunity to grow into larger games - again, naturally - which we've seen over and over since these settings went into effect.

 

-PL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Pharaoh's Legacy @ Aug 22 2005, 04:17 PM)
Games were redundant and boring and almost always ended bitterly. In addition, where SWZ flaggers used to be some of the best flaggers in subspace, SWZ flaggers started to become terrible. The development of skill and strategy was no longer required.

I blame pubs biggrin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a very good argument, PL. For once, I believe you have changed my mind about the flag settings through a post in a forum. Which has never happened to anyone. Ever.

 

Ray, I disagree. I hate privs. Probably now more than before because I am not affiliated with a squad. But, actually, "squad freqs," or whatever you'd like to call them, don't form much anymore. Privs usually consist of vets, which isn't really fair to new players. If noobs played side-by-side with vets, opposing another team of equally distributed players, they have a chance to learn from more experienced players. A pub freq full of noobs, half of which usually doesn't even flag, doesn't stand a chance against a team of vets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Raynor @ Aug 23 2005, 01:52 PM)
Time for a healthy combination between pubs and privs

I've always found 3 public freqs interesting... But it was difficult back in the day because of the stupid theme. But fack the theme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are referring to the case of the "altruistic" flagger who artificially extends the game for the sake of not ending the game. The game becomes bland and noncompetitive because the unofficial etiquette is that it is more acceptable to pass flags back and forth than to win the game. There is nothing exciting about this.

 

But we all remember people used to play the game the way it should be played. The competition to win was not always contrived.

 

The question to ask is why they stopped playing, and why they stopped putting flags in bases.

 

Reasons include:

- The map would be unchanged for 6 months+ and it didn't matter how excellent the map was, it was just too boring when you've played in the same map for that long.

- The map does eventually get changed but some maps were just not as good as others. For example, the black and white one, the

one with the very thick walls.

 

The decrease in population was used as justification for changes.

- The change to private frequencies. It has been private frequencies for a very long time now.

- The change of antiwarp role to ships that cannot effectively antiwarp, and the reduction of antiwarp range. These changes have made it easier for enemies to base hop. Also some of the later maps we've had had bases that were so large it was very easy to get out of antiwarp range. You don't have a good game when you can't antiwarp a couple of reds that are in a base with reasonable resources (e.g. one antiwarper).

 

It was neglect that brought the population down, then changes that hurt the zone some more. We have excellent settings buried beneath all these changes that have hurt the zone (e.g. priv freq, antiwarp role).

 

But now some more settings have been introduced: 1 flag carry limit, low timer settings.

I think these new settings give the games a watered-down feel:

 

1) There is nothing exciting about getting into an enemy flagroom that has many flags. This is because you can only pick up one flag.

There used to be strategy. You used to make a decision based on split-second evaluations:

- I wonder if they have antiwarp on?

- what are the odds I can get out with flags?

- Should I pick up flags? All of them or diversify?

- Should I attempt to double kill?

 

Now, when there are many flags to be picked up, it is a bland process of everyone picking up flags and half-heartedly trying to survive. A flagholder's survival used to be more important than it is now. Whole teams used to help a flagholder get out, thor guard, or help him survive after warping out.

 

2) It is uninteresting to hold a flag when fighting in a flagroom.

It is as if once you pick up a flag, it becomes debateable whether you are actually helping your team out when you kill a red. After all, if you kill that enemy that flag will yellow to the center.

You and your team should receive a direct benefit from killing the enemy, not a questionable one.

 

3) There is little hope of overturning a flag game once one team has all the flags. This is because timer cannot be reset and flag time is so low. This leaves attackers who put in an effort feeling cheated. No doubt they will adapt to these negative feelings and learn not to try anymore.

 

That being said, the new settings have a couple of things going for it. One is its introduction was accompanied by a sorely needed map change. The other is it negates some of the effects of these antiwarp settings because base hopping is not really a problem anymore.

 

I have no problem trying things out. In fact, I think it takes too long to try things out sometimes. It takes too long for a change (such as a map change, or switch between public and private freqs) to happen. Then when something is finally "tried out", there is the tendency for it to be just "left in"- the same kind of tendency to just leave the same map in for months and months, or leave it private frequencies for months and months (.. over a year??) and ignore that it hurts the population or it is not fair to not take turns and at least have public frequency days.

 

I am not saying a new map has to be made every month, but we have several that can be rotated in and out. Or promise the public that submitted maps that were custom made for the zone and look like there was effort put in them will be put in for at least a week.

 

Back to my point. We already have excellent settings that work for the zone. It is wrong to implement some settings that hurt the zone, then use that as justification for arbitrary changes that make the game bland and will only hurt the zone some more if left in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...