I vote yes. Then maybe we can get all of the tournament participants together to suggest a ton of changes and then just vote about them, simply and easily.

Give arguments for/against various things, maybe some things from UU's versions or just things we come up with that will work, then get them going.

Still say m3 should just be revamped , But ya we need a tourny up. For names in update or shitz and giggles.

If we do, do tournments could u make it where each team could have the same unit. So theres no complaining about match-ups????

(exp.) north team rushes medic. south team could get medic too.
(just an idea if we do tourny

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Apr 6 2009, 7:38 pm by th1rt33n.

I've said since the MT tournament that you need to have random spawns for the civilians for balance.

Apparently the Volt is broken and the Scourge for L1 still last way beyond the duration of the spell. Expect a fix for that as soon I figure out why it does this. ;o

I just played a good game as Assault... I'm rather pleased with how the class turned out. L2 + L3 is a very powerful and satisfying combo. Still hard to hit on some of the faster classes. I have an idea for a different damage spell using Marines which I may or may not implement if Firebomb doesn't work out.

I also understand FaZ-'s complaints about Warrior HP. Three direct hits with Firebomb and the Warrior was still laughing with 1500+ HP left. Not so good, IMO.

"Volt:
- Heavy trigger reorganization and consolidation. If we're lucky, nothing got broken."

You didn't test before having a public release...?


I'd suggest getting as many of the controversial changes into your next version at once. We can see what's good, what's not, and come up with a "final" version.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Apr 7 2009, 12:41 am by FaZ-.

Of course I ran some basic testing. Please understand that sometimes changes cause unintended consequences that I did not foresee. I cannot, however, test for every possible problem under every possible set of conditions in every possible set of situations. The triggers for Volt were literally scattered all over and I cannot foresee all consequences of consolidating them and rearranging them into a logical order. To account for these facts, a warning was added.

I'll start detailing my "controversial changes" soon.

EDIT: Here's one:

Outpost Capture System Revamp
To be honest, two things about the capture system are rather lame:
1. You can stand on the beacon for 29 seconds and then have all your effort instantly negated.
2. Only the beacon matters for capturing but a capture can be blocked over a large area.

My plan is to have it redone to work like this:

<< NORTH (0) | ==== | (400) NEUTRAL (400) | ==== SOUTH (800) >>

Standing on the beacon unopposed will shift the outpost 1 point in your direction.
An outpost is captured when you get it ALL THE WAY over to your side. (0 or 800)
A previously captured outpost will become NEUTRAL again if it is pushed back to 400.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Apr 7 2009, 2:11 am by Mini Moose 2707.

For flashbang, is the unit slowed via an air unit or a burrowed unit? If it's an air unit, that means if you have any unit above it, they aren't slowed anymore. Also, some spell effects don't die if they are created outside the location (wraiths come to mind).

Flashbang is slowed by an air unit. That may be true, but it would've been the same story with Tear Gas before. ;o
I'll look into changing it in a future version because there aren't exactly have many burrowable units to spare.

Did you retest this or are you assuming that I ignored you for no reason? I checked every trigger and made sure it said to kill Wraiths at the entire arena and never the spell or player locations.

About friggen time we got a better system for this. I hate having to be a slow unit and end up losing it at 29 seconds, then dieing trying to resecure it.

Unless 400 is going at 12 per second, that outpost system is going to be kind of iffy. In that case, I'm fine with it, 34 seconds or so. This also allows multiple allies to capture faster, something I've always wanted to see. How would you depict that "rating", though? Just notices every 50 or something?

Fix M5 first please though so we can have something that isn't hugely broken in some way or another. =o

Ooohh good system ...
I may have to copy it.. teheheheh

http://www.staredit.net/topic/6952/

Where is the link to 1.4M5? The one I found says: "file cannot be found". Can someone please post it?

forgot I reported it

Yes, it would be per trigger cycle. I forgot to specify, but I'll edit that in. Notices would be given as to progress in capturing/neutralizing outposts. I can make it so multiple players capture faster or I can make it work for a force.

I will do what I can fix M5. I was just assuming you wanted to hear the controversial ideas before I started working on them.

I'll attach the map to this post since the DLDB file is having problems.
EDIT: Since 1.4M5 is no longer the current version, I removed it from this post. Check the DLDB entry for the most recent version.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 1 2009, 2:32 am by Mini Moose 2707.

<33333333333

Going to test immediately.

Hey Moose.. I was thinking about the new capture system... it'd take the players 2x as long to recapture the base with your system ><"... There's also the question of whether enemies can teleport to their outpost while their enemy is on the beacon.. since with your system.. 400 = neutral.. should it still be the same as before, where you can't teleport to the outpost as long as there're units on the beacon, or you can't teleport to the outpost once it becomes "neutral".

So maybe you should do..
<< NORTH (0) | ==== | (250) NEUTRAL (250) | ==== SOUTH (500) >>

It'd be ezier to capture the neutral bases in the beginning, and harder to recapture bases... which.. isn't the best... thing..

Also, how will the counts be awarded? Will it stop adding once someone is on the bigger location (near the outpost)? Or only stop when another guy is on the beacon?.. It's probably the former, but then how will the "warp gate connection interrupted" work out?... Also, what if I went on a beacon.. got to.. let's say.. 400 dc's.. and then I leave the beacon... Does it stay at 400, or go back to 250? Maybe it should go back to 250 slowly.

I think that when they are not on the beacon, it should slowly go back to neutral (when warpgate has not been captured yet). To help lower the time it takes to recapture/capture a gate time, you could have 'stealing' time recapture 2x faster than normal gain time, then once back to neutral, you gain at normal 1x speed. This way it only take 1.5x as long to capture (unless you had more people to help you capture, assuming more people = faster gain)

I don't think the large area should stop people from gaining the warpgate because it is a great hassle to capture a base when a mutant or summoner sends in his zergling every 15 seconds to run circles around your unit. However, I do think that capture time should be halved when they are in the large area.

Why would you be able to teleport to a neutral outpost? You never were able to before, so I wouldn't change that. However, teleportation would be blocked when an enemy is in your outpost as it is now.

I'll settle for 0/300/600... it's closer to what it is now. (360)
The alternative is to use the 0/400/800 and give it a double effect if it is under/towards enemy ownership until it reaches the halfway point, where it continues by 1 again.

Counts are awarded per death count, as I mentioned two posts before yours.
Only the beacon will matter for changing outpost ownership.
I can have a message telling you if your effect on the counter is stopped (and reversed, which by definition means it has stopped progressing in your direction) for any reason while you're on the beacon... which would be the equivalnet of "warp gate connection interrupted".

I can add a slow (1/3 or 1/4 speed, maybe) return to neutral if an outpost is neutral but not captured. However, the odds of two players from different teams simultaneously abandoning a beacon makes it seem to me like it won't come up much.

Actually, if you do 0/400/800 and give it -2 dc while towards enemy ownership.. it'd be 200+400 = 600 DC.. that's almost twice the time
However, if you do 0/250/500.. then it'd be 125+250 = 375, which is very close to the original 360.
Obviously, if you make it so that 2 people of the same team makes it twice as fast, then you can make it longer.. but 600 DC's too long.

So i'm guessing 0/300/600.. 150+300 = 450 / 12 = 37.5 seconds is best.. 600 would be 50 seconds!!