Well, (I think) you do have the option of deciding by total score in TF2, but the problem is that a capture is only worth 2 points, so it's basically broken. TF2's scoring also has many other broken aspects which make it unsuitable for deciding the outcome of a game, which you can see if you look here. Setting aside the numerous methods that could be used to straight-up farm points without ever fighting an enemy, there's also the fact that spies get 2 points rather than 1 for a backstab, and snipers get 1.5 points rather than 1 for killing someone with a headshot.
I don't like Sudden Death in TF2 either; no respawns is too drastic a measure. The tiebreaker should just be the usual form of sudden death in no sports - first team to score wins.
If you're even in caps, both teams will still be trying to do everything to stop the enemies from capping while trying to cap it themselves
... which is what I said.
No one (or at least I hope they don't) wants to see the game decided by a single crocket
It won't. The most important win condition is: HAVE FUN. If amount and degree of fun was measurable in an objective way, that would be the only
Not old CTF games. It was always to 10. Time limits were often an hour. If a team hit 10, they won immediately. If neither team hit ten, then points was the tiebreaker at the end of the timelimit.
And this is what I suggested we do.
The tiebreaker should just be the usual form of sudden death in no sports - first team to score wins.
Which results in exactly that which caused the tie breaker in the first place. Turtling. Unlike in real life, there's no exhaustion in a computer game. Just add up the individual points of all players on a team + 10 (or 8) times the number of caps if you want to worry a lot about that.
Exactly. That's the good thing about CTF, and I was pointing out that not having a cap limit doesn't lose this aspect of the game.
It won't.
It could, easily. A crocket that kills 2 or 3 enemies will probably get you a cap, or allow you to push through to the next point.
The most important win condition is: HAVE FUN. If amount and degree of fun was measurable in an objective way, that would be the only
Crockets are not fun. Losing or winning with such a significant element of chance is not fun. Random critical hits in general are not fun. There, it's settled.
Which results in exactly that which caused the tie breaker in the first place. Turtling.
Turtling shouldn't be an insurmountable problem unless the map is badly designed (e.g. 2fort). Still, I do agree that playing to the first cap could be an overly drawn out affair, though.
Just add up the individual points of all players on a team + 10 (or 8) times the number of caps if you want to worry a lot about that.
That would be okay if the TF2 scoring system wasn't rather fucked up, as I mentioned before. There's also the annoyance of having to manually do the work instead of it being done automatically by the game.
Instead of using Sudden Death or the score totals I'd rather just consider it a drawn round and let the match be settled by the other maps.
Crockets are not fun. Losing or winning with such a significant element of chance is not fun. Random critical hits in general are not fun. There, it's settled.
Crockets are not fun. Losing or winning with such a significant element of chance is not fun. Random critical hits in general are not fun. There, it's settled.
What, so your opinion is objective fact now?
At the very least they're more factual than Air Co's. Of course, if anyone is in favour of random crits I'm willing to hear their arguments.
At the very least they're more factual than Air Co's. Of course, if anyone is in favour of random crits I'm willing to hear their arguments.
Not really, unless you can show some concrete evidence. And I would be lying if I said I cared enough about random crits to argue for or against them - if I get one, or one hits me, I just go "Aw, Lucky!/Unlucky!" and keep on playing the game. I just get on with it.
Then again, on the other hand, when I stop having fun with the game, I just quit. Even if I'm winning - rare as it is - If I'm not having fun, fuck it, I'll go play something else. It's not like I'm playing for money, fame, prizes, what have you, I'm playing for fun, and if I'm not having fun, then why continue with the match? Naturally, that doesn't count for organized games, like the little picnic we have coming up, it'd be unfair on my team if I just fucked off seemingly at random, but most of the time, that's a non-issue. I have better things to do than force myself to play a game when I'm not having fun. My self worth does not directly relate to how well I can click on things.
Not really, unless you can show some concrete evidence.
As I've already said, random crits introduce a pointless element of chance into the game. Without random crits TF2 is more of a game of skill than with them. That's a pretty good reason not to have crits, whereas I haven't seen anyone give a good reason for having them.
As I've already said, random crits introduce a pointless element of chance into the game. Without random crits TF2 is more of a game of skill. That's a pretty good reason not to have crits, whereas I haven't seen anyone give a good reason for having them.
Ah, that Explains why I don't care - I'm more concerned with the game being fun, than being a test of how well I can click things. If I wanted that, I wouldn't bother with any FPS game, I'd just play this all day.
To me, this is like complaining how fast or slow someone is putting down their stones in a game of Go, or how loudly they place them on the board. It's not the point of the game, the point of the game is to out-think your opponent for victory. You could argue "Oh, but this would be like if you could randomly put a stone on the board that wins the match for you", but that's just silly - After all, you still have your precious click-test, it's just that sometimes, your clicking will work better than other times, IF you hit. If you're not playing in such a way that you're effective without them, or you're playing in such a way that they automatically destroy you, then you need to up your game, since they're not the focus of the game.
Sure, I want the game to be fun too. I wouldn't bother playing if I didn't enjoy it. Obviously there's more to TF2 than clicking on things - it's primarily a game of teamwork, strategy, and tactics, and when I say "skill" I mean those kinds of skill too, not just clicking skill. By FPS standards the level of "click-on-heads" skill in TF2 is relatively low. However, the point is that random crits do not add to any of these elements of the game, but they definitely do detract from them.
I rather enjoy a serious competitive game, and random crits detract from this experience, so to me they make the game less fun, and I'd rather not have them.
As for your Go analogy, that's just silly. Clearly placing your stones loudly has no effect on the gameplay. Random crits definitely do.
In any case, if you're indifferent to random crits, I don't see why we're having this conversation in the first place.
As for your Go analogy, that's just silly. Clearly placing your stones loudly has no effect on the gameplay. Random crits definitely do.
You seem to have missed the point - I was likening it to complaining about things that don't particularly matter, but may annoy some people. That said, if you were an unscrupulous player, you could leverage it to your advantage, as if it annoyed someone, it can put them off, and make them more likely to make exploitable mistakes.
I rather enjoy a serious competitive game, and random crits detract from this experience, so to me they make the game less fun, and I'd rather not have them.
That's fair, and a much better way to state your opinion than stating it like it were fact. However, I would politely disagree on that point - I think that you can have a serious competitive experience with the critical hits in place, as nobody is more likely to get them than anyone else. Thus, "Random" critical hits. You admit yourself that the game isn't primarily a click-on-things-faster game, and I'm yet to see how random crits provides a serious impediment to teamwork, strategy, or tactics. If they do, then there is something the fuck wrong with your Teamwork, strategy and Tactics.
In any case, if you're indifferent to random crits, I don't see why we're having this conversation in the first place.
Because that's what this forum does to people. On the upside, while we might all argue more, we're certainly all much better at it. I can't even argue with regular people anymore, I just get accused of trying to confuse people into agreeing with me by using fancy arguments. Which is saying something, considering I'm pretty much the FRCF village idiot. That said, I'm interested in the train of thought that lead to the opinion, and what better way around here to get people to explain exactly what they're thinking to you than to disagree with them? Half the time, even agreeing on most points but not all is enough to prompt someone explaining it to you like you're an idiot - which is fine, because I'm an idiot, but one supposes that it must get a little annoying for everyone else.
That's fair, and a much better way to state your opinion than stating it like it were fact.
Mate, I was responding to Nineless. It should've been obvious from square one that I wasn't being 100% serious when I made that comment.
and I'm yet to see how random crits provides a serious impediment to teamwork, strategy, or tactics.
If an enemy soldier or demoman suddenly gets a critical explosive and kills two of your teammates, that's a pretty serious impediment to all of the above.
That's fair, and a much better way to state your opinion than stating it like it were fact. However, I would politely disagree on that point - I think that you can have a serious competitive experience with the critical hits in place, as nobody is more likely to get them than anyone else. Thus, "Random" critical hits.
I said that crits detract from the competitive experience, not that they completely remove it altogether. Mind you, the crit mechanic is designed so that if you've recently done more damage, you have an increased chance of a crit, going up from 2% at 0 damage to 12% at 800 damage (see below) While the crit mechanic is definitely a lot better than it used to be, I still don't see how random crits add anything to the competitive experience, while the possibility for battles to be decided by crits is an obvious detriment.
I'm excited for the scrims now. As many of you who have been playing when I'm around have seen, I'm quite the badass I always said I was. ph33r.
I shall respect but I shall not fear. The few times we've shared the field, I've outscored you. =D I even recall killing you as a pyro while I was a medic. COMBAT MEDIC FTW!
Mate, I was responding to Nineless. It should've been obvious from square one that I wasn't being 100% serious when I made that comment.
Of course. And I'm arguing for shits and giggles, we're just shooting the shit, this isn't exactly a debate with a moderator, an audience, and those annoyingly small glasses of water. Seriously, fuck those little glasses.
If an enemy soldier or demoman suddenly gets a critical explosive and kills two of your teammates, that's a pretty serious impediment to all of the above.
I'd call that unlikely - Stickies - the most common cause of group explosive kills - don't crit, IIRC, and if your teammates are sticking so close together and are low enough health that two of them get wiped by a single crit grenade/rocket on anything but luck - which is less likely, I'd say, than the two of them getting wiped by a regular grenade - then you're already doing something less than well before the grenade came along. It was not the cause of the problem, but it certainly highlighted it. I do see what you're getting at, but I don't think it's your primary problem, there.
While the crit mechanic is definitely a lot better than it used to be, I still don't see how random crits add anything to the competitive experience, while the possibility for battles to be decided by crits is an obvious detriment.
I'm sure you mean battles between single players, rather than entire rounds, because I'd think entire rounds being decided by random crits would be exceedingly rare outside of arena - though inside arena, they'd still be rarer than regular wins, though I have no data on that.
However, I will agree with you on one point, because the old Crit mechanic really was broken as fuck - It used to mean that a heavy that was sufficiently supported by medics could crit almost constantly, which at times was a game-breaking strategy - especially on some maps where it was possible for the heavy to be in the open, with two medics hidden and constantly healing. If things started to turn against said heavy, just drop two ubers in a row. Not that heavies don't already pull a lot of crits, considering your crit chance also used to be every unit of ammo, rather than every second as it it currently. So that meant the heavy got 800 bullets, with 9 damage each, and with a chance to crit for two seconds every four bullets - or in other words, if he fired through his entire ammo stock, that was 200 chances at a crit, and at times with up to a 22% chance unboosted.
For the record, the command to turn this off on your servers is - again, IIRC - tf_weapon_criticals 0.
I'd call that unlikely - Stickies - the most common cause of group explosive kills - don't crit, IIRC, and if your teammates are sticking so close together and are low enough health that two of them get wiped by a single crit grenade/rocket on anything but luck - which is less likely, I'd say, than the two of them getting wiped by a regular grenade
"Low enough health"? Are you kidding? A critical sticky does 353 damage directly above it, and roughly half that at 10 feet away. So, you think people are to blame for being below 180hp? Seriously? Crockets are similarly powerful, with 270 damage directly underneath, and half that at 9 feet away. That's 135+ damage within a 9 foot radius, and that's enough to 1-hit scouts, engineers, snipers and spies.
I'm sure you mean battles between single players, rather than entire rounds,
No, I mean battles between teams. Killing 2 or 3 players will often lead to the capture of an objective, which is rather a big deal.
because I'd think entire rounds being decided by random crits would be exceedingly rare outside of arena - though inside arena, they'd still be rarer than regular wins, though I have no data on that.
Sure, I agree that they would be relatively rare, and in arena as well, but why let it happen at all? At the very least, I'd say that random criticals should be disabled in arena, even if people want them for the other game modes.
In your original post can you edit it and post teams, maps, rules, and any other pertinent information in regards to the scrim? I honestly get lost in some of these discussions and it would be nice to have a post that I can easily find to reference to.
It seems to me that the server has the most players practicing at around 9am my time onwards (about 8-9 hours from now). Not sure if that trend will persist or not.
There's also the annoyance of having to manually do the work instead of it being done automatically by the game.
TWO FUCKING SECONDS WHILE YOU TYPE IT INTO A POST TO BROADCAST HOW HUMILIATINGLY BAD TEAM A DEFEATED TEAM B. Seriously, that's bullshit.
Without random crits TF2 is more of a game of skill than with them.
You know what's hilarious? You argue against random criticals with the argument of "Makes it more a game of skill" and then in the TF2 thread you argue against the Direct Hit WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO REWARD SKILL.
I rather enjoy a serious competitive game
Which shouldn't be what we're doing. We're having the Picnic to have fun talking shit to the other team and laughing as we blow them up. Or get blown up.
considering I'm pretty much the FRCF village idiot
BULLSHIT! We still haven't decided who the village idiot is! Claiming you're the one is unfair to the other candidates. I nominate Apreche.
ph34r
Seriously, fuck those little glasses.
You're supposed to drink it empty before you start debating. Then once you're done with your argument it should be full again due to the spittle and froth of you passionate arguing. Size of the glass just indicates the level of the participants. Teeny tiny glasses means shitty arguers, pint glasses means awesome folk.
Stickies crit. They're sparkly if they're critstickies.
UNDEAD STICKIES! I now picture a post-it note vampire.
I'd say that random criticals should be disabled in arena
Now that, I'd somewhat agree with - Arena is much more a straight up game of "Kill the other guy first", and I can see the case for and point of disabling them for those matches.
Stickies crit. They're sparkly if they're critstickies.
I've been playing on and off since TF2 came out, and I've never, ever seen one, so there you go.
No, I mean battles between teams. Killing 2 or 3 players will often lead to the capture of an objective, which is rather a big deal.
I don't think so. I've seen many, many times where two defending players have been killed in short order, and the objective was left uncaptured, because the remaining players didn't just go "A herp a derp a der, I'll just keep behaving as if they hadn't died, instead of modifying my tactics".
Sure, I agree that they would be relatively rare, and in arena as well, but why let it happen at all? At the very least, I'd say that random criticals should be disabled in arena, even if people want them for the other game modes.
Didn't you argue for Vanilla TF2 rather than Neapolitan TF2? Guess what, Vanilla TF2 and No random crits are mutually exclusive. You can't argue that you don't want anything that changes the original game, and then immediately also demand the removal of things in the original game.
Also, Air co raises the point, though I never noticed it before -
You argue against random criticals with the argument of "Makes it more a game of skill" and then in the TF2 thread you argue against the Direct Hit WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO REWARD SKILL.
Since my search skills did not give me an answer what time are we doing this tomorrow?
We're not. I'm busy working. I was originally going to do it a week from tomorrow, but Cremlian's going to Otakon that weekend. I might just say "fuck it" and do it anyway, though, because it's a rare Saturday off for me, and I don't want to hold everyone up much longer.
Comments
I don't like Sudden Death in TF2 either; no respawns is too drastic a measure. The tiebreaker should just be the usual form of sudden death in no sports - first team to score wins.
Instead of using Sudden Death or the score totals I'd rather just consider it a drawn round and let the match be settled by the other maps.
I'm actually a bit surprised that's not faster. How much does that set you back a month?
Then again, on the other hand, when I stop having fun with the game, I just quit. Even if I'm winning - rare as it is - If I'm not having fun, fuck it, I'll go play something else. It's not like I'm playing for money, fame, prizes, what have you, I'm playing for fun, and if I'm not having fun, then why continue with the match? Naturally, that doesn't count for organized games, like the little picnic we have coming up, it'd be unfair on my team if I just fucked off seemingly at random, but most of the time, that's a non-issue. I have better things to do than force myself to play a game when I'm not having fun. My self worth does not directly relate to how well I can click on things.
That's a pretty good reason not to have crits, whereas I haven't seen anyone give a good reason for having them.
To me, this is like complaining how fast or slow someone is putting down their stones in a game of Go, or how loudly they place them on the board. It's not the point of the game, the point of the game is to out-think your opponent for victory. You could argue "Oh, but this would be like if you could randomly put a stone on the board that wins the match for you", but that's just silly - After all, you still have your precious click-test, it's just that sometimes, your clicking will work better than other times, IF you hit. If you're not playing in such a way that you're effective without them, or you're playing in such a way that they automatically destroy you, then you need to up your game, since they're not the focus of the game.
I rather enjoy a serious competitive game, and random crits detract from this experience, so to me they make the game less fun, and I'd rather not have them.
As for your Go analogy, that's just silly. Clearly placing your stones loudly has no effect on the gameplay. Random crits definitely do.
In any case, if you're indifferent to random crits, I don't see why we're having this conversation in the first place.
While the crit mechanic is definitely a lot better than it used to be, I still don't see how random crits add anything to the competitive experience, while the possibility for battles to be decided by crits is an obvious detriment.
I will enjoy attempting to virtually simulate your death.
However, I will agree with you on one point, because the old Crit mechanic really was broken as fuck - It used to mean that a heavy that was sufficiently supported by medics could crit almost constantly, which at times was a game-breaking strategy - especially on some maps where it was possible for the heavy to be in the open, with two medics hidden and constantly healing. If things started to turn against said heavy, just drop two ubers in a row. Not that heavies don't already pull a lot of crits, considering your crit chance also used to be every unit of ammo, rather than every second as it it currently. So that meant the heavy got 800 bullets, with 9 damage each, and with a chance to crit for two seconds every four bullets - or in other words, if he fired through his entire ammo stock, that was 200 chances at a crit, and at times with up to a 22% chance unboosted.
For the record, the command to turn this off on your servers is - again, IIRC - tf_weapon_criticals 0.
A critical sticky does 353 damage directly above it, and roughly half that at 10 feet away. So, you think people are to blame for being below 180hp? Seriously?
Crockets are similarly powerful, with 270 damage directly underneath, and half that at 9 feet away. That's 135+ damage within a 9 foot radius, and that's enough to 1-hit scouts, engineers, snipers and spies. No, I mean battles between teams. Killing 2 or 3 players will often lead to the capture of an objective, which is rather a big deal. Sure, I agree that they would be relatively rare, and in arena as well, but why let it happen at all?
At the very least, I'd say that random criticals should be disabled in arena, even if people want them for the other game modes.
In your original post can you edit it and post teams, maps, rules, and any other pertinent information in regards to the scrim? I honestly get lost in some of these discussions and it would be nice to have a post that I can easily find to reference to.
Kthnxbai
Seaslug Medic Ro
Also, Air co raises the point, though I never noticed it before -