Rules for Season 8.....RvS

[Flies]

 

[alaric]

Personally, I think that a match should be a draw as long as both teams have guys left alive. The reason for this is simple: Either way we set it, somebody's gonna camp. I'd rather have the team with fewer guys do the camping.

Here's a short example to illustrate my point. Red Team and Blue Team each have four guys. In the initual exchange of gunfire between the teams, one guy from Red Team is killed. The teams break apart briefly to regroup.

The way the rules are written now, Blue Team has to find and kill the rest of Red Team to get the win. This encourages Red Team to camp.

If we were to change the rules, Red Team would have to find and kill Blue Team to tie or win. This encourages Blue Team to camp.

So, either way, one of the teams will camp. I just think it's more fair to force the team with more guys left alive to attack if they want the win. Everthing the game says is a draw, is a draw.



Onto the disscussion about smoke. Smoke does lag the game for some people. It could also be argued that it helps campers camp. However, it also adds a lot to the game - tactics wise. It can be just as effective at stoping camping and can provide a useful distraction at a critical moment.

Personally, I think it adds more to the game than it takes away and I'd like to see it stay.


I can't think of anything else right now, but if I do, you'll be the first to know!  

[Ssickboy]

I agree 100% with Alaric on smoke and tie games.

I'd like to see more clarification on the rules concerning guest picks what etc.  Bucc mentioned a solution awhile back that was interesting.  Something like: on first match, guest picks map, host picks color.  The following matches maps are picked by loser, and winner picks color.

I'd like to add an ammendment to that as well:  The clan with the most Liberal players always pick map and color.  The # of Liberal players is determined by those wearing patches that say "Bush sucks," "Green Peace," or "We love Dick Clarke."  

please post flame replies in the general gossip section.  

[Typhy]

I'd like to add an ammendment to that as well:  The clan with the most Liberal players always pick map and color.  The # of Liberal players is determined by those wearing patches that say "Bush sucks," "Green Peace," or "We love Dick Clarke."  

What an idea! One of the best I've ever heard!

Smoke grenades: The only legitimate use I've seen for smoke's is for Thermal Snipers at Peaks. Other than that, their primary use seems to be to lower framerates. I have the same attitude about this as I do about maps in AA. I believe that if the recommended computer can't get playable framerates ( 15 FPS or better ) with smoke nades, then I believe they should be banned. I'd like to hear from someone who's running the recommended system ( 733/64/512 - I do believe that Loth has this configuration ).

Ties/replays: I'm strongly in favor of all ties being replayed. I think counting ties for the team with the most players would simply encourage camping. I think we should force games to be won by killing your oponent, not by hiding from them.

[Supernatural Pie]

Ties/replays: I'm strongly in favor of all ties being replayed. I think counting ties for the team with the most players would simply encourage camping. I think we should force games to be won by killing your oponent, not by hiding from them.

It's funny how this can work both ways.

Consider this scenario: Team A is down to 1 player. Team B has... oh... 5 players.

The last guy on team A camps until time runs out. Oh shucks... looks like they'll just have to replay the game.



It's problematic either way. Need to think about it.

[Typhy]

Very rarely will one guy be able to hide from 5 guys.

[Supernatural Pie]

On a big enough map, you never know.

Actually, on most maps there are places that some guys would never even think to look. Most people don't bother looking in those places because it's such an illogical place for either team to find any action... but that's the whole idea with camping out the clock.


Hmm.

[Supernatural Pie]

Ok after discussing the matter with typhy, I have come to my own conclusion.

Matches should not have a time limit.

Bottom line. That's the only way to solve it.

[Typhy]

I disagree.

In a 1v4 situation, that would give the 4 the option of camping. IMO, the current rule forces the 4 to attack.

[Supernatural Pie]

I still disagree.

If a camper is "good" enough, he will be able to find a nice little corner, possibly in a shadowed, elevated, or enclosed area, and point his gun at the only entrance, and maybe even have a jammer with him, it's very difficult for anyone to get him.

[Typhy]

I still disagree.

If a camper is "good" enough, he will be able to find a nice little corner, possibly in a shadowed, elevated, or enclosed area, and point his gun at the only entrance, and maybe even have a jammer with him, it's very difficult for anyone to get him.

You'd be surprised how easy it is for 4 guys to take out a camper when you've got Netfone up.

[Supernatural Pie]

Ok, I will admit, once you find him, it's no problem to take him out.

But you have to find him first, and a skilled camper will know all of the unknown locations.

[Typhy]

Ok, I will admit, once you find him, it's no problem to take him out.

But you have to find him first, and a skilled camper will know all of the unknown locations.

2 guys can do the exact same thing - they're just harder to kill.

[alaric]

Matches should not have a time limit.

Bottom line. That's the only way to solve it.

I assume snipe means rounds here, not matches.

Now that's an interesting idea. On the surface it seems to be a good way to increase the time it takes to cb, but when you think about it, having a lot of ties probably increases the time even more.

However, I'm not conviced this is the best course of action. I imagine a scenario where there is one guy left on each team. Not only could this round drag on for ages, but the one that camps will have a huge advantage. It's an interesting idea, but I'd like to see more discussion on it before making up my mind.

[Typhy]

Matches should not have a time limit.

Bottom line. That's the only way to solve it.

I disagree. This would only increase camping. I think the current rule is the best way to prevent against campers.

Here's an example from the BTs vs MP5 CB ( we had like 25 ties ). Sar and someone else were left alive at Prision against me. Whenever I tried to move up into the cell block - from any direction it seemed - I'd take fire. They had the area perfectly camped out. I moved back down into the basement, and patroled it, since they had more players, I forced them to attack me ( don't remember how the game ended ).

The current rule forces the team with the most players to attack, isn't that the way it should be?

[c| King.of.Pop]

I agree with Alraic and Ssick.  Campers, Shmampers, they are sooo easy to find, especially in a cb situation, couple that with nf and an HBS and you've got all the tools you need to find anyone.  Unknown parts of the map?  are there really any anymore?  Jeez these maps are so small, its actually getting harder and harder for people to camp if you think about it.  Plus I have no sympathy for anyone that goes running blindly into a hotzone where someone could be camping (or just waiting a moment) and then gets himself shot and complains of camping...thats just too funny.

I think also a draw is a draw.  Don't forget about that fact that if a guy is outnumbered 3 to 1, 4 to 1 or even 2 to 1, and he's gimped, it's hard to say wether he trully is camping or trying to find his enemies.  Because as much as you might speculate, you can't obviously see what he's up to.  And what if that happens late in a round?  Lets say with only a minute left in a hail of gunfire all but one guy is left on a team and he's gimped.  Are you gonna give the other team the victory just because he ran out of time to try and kill the enemies he has left?  No that would be rediculous.  Your clan just wasnt able to find him in the time officially allotted.  It should be replayed and a round should be decided by who is left standing when the game says, "xxx team wins the round".

as far as smoke grenades and what not, how can you start picking what tools to take out and what to leave in?  The best thing about this new game is all the more options you have to use and deploy.  Each kind of grenade presents a different challenge.  That's what adds spice to this game, that's what makes this game more interesting.  It's all good stuff to me.  It's all tactics, new tactics that we didnt have in GhR, that make this game what it is, I wouldnt take that away just because someone's comp cant get the fps that the next guy can get.

Bucc's suggestion about host and color is good.  One question though, isnt the whole point of allowing guest to pick color and map because supposedly the host can have an inherent advantage?  Doesnt that kinda defeat the purpose of even allowing the losing or guest team to choose anything after a defeat?  Just throwing that out there.

one last thing...lets not forget that the designers of this game are the most objective, unbiased party here.  The game was designed so everything in it can be used, why would we take that away from the game?

Talk amongst yourselves

[Mr. Lothario]

     There are maps which have unfair spawns. This is a known fact. If the choosing team can choose both map and color, they can take advantage of those spawns. If the choosing team can only choose map, they cannot take advantage of those spawns (assuming an equally knowledgable foe). Split map/color choice is an excellent idea.

     My reaction to smoke grenades causing lag? To sum it up, damned if I know. RvS plays like a slideshow for me under almost all conditions, so I've never noticed whether smoke has an effect or not. I will argue in favor of keeping all kit items in the game, including smoke grenades. Smoke has other legitimate uses than thermal sniping, but it seems that no one has noticed and codified the potential uses (apart from me... mwa ha ha). I have no doubt that once some clans start using new smoke techniques, many other clans will emulate them, adding another layer of tactical considerations to CBs. That end is a good one.

[th.Sentinel]

Leave all kits in the game. Every single object has its purpose and shouldn't be taken away. The smoke nades give good cover when you need to cross a danger zone, like the airport alley and some other maps. If your comp can't handle it, well that's not the game's fault. It was just the same in Ghr and prolly every other game. I had a 300 Mhz G3 for a loooong time, I played under the specs of ghr. But still I cb'ed because its just for fun. My highest framerates on all the big maps like Train Depot and Refinery were around 5-8 fps. Unplayable, but it makes you better and you have to come up with all sorts of new tactics to be able to play. Lookin at the floor while running... That should be the same way with RvS, if you see smoke and your framerates drop from 20 to 1, there should be some sort of way to get out of the low rates. Just find it and play the game.

Map/colour pick should be on the losing side. The better clans then have to come up with tactics (or allrdy have them) to win in the disadvantaged positions aswell.

A tie is a tie, a win is a win. When you play co-op and have to kill all the e's, you also lose when you don't kill 'em all. So it should be the same way in a cb.
If you kill 3 out of 4 of the other team, you should see it as a loss for yours, because your teamtactics weren't good enough to kill the last guy.

[BFG]

Of the RvS games that i played last season, i cannot think of a single round where there was the issue of camping... i guess that is credit to the guys we played and the style of both clans.

Id probably want to keep clear of the "no time limit" option... it could result in a camper being able to pick people of one by one in a well defended area.

And i still feel very much the same about the kit restrictions etc... Game designers go to a huge amount of time to create well banlenced enjoyable games... I think to stick our fingers in and start banning bits and pieces won't get us anywhere... Keep em in and if both teams don't like somthing, agree to not using it, but the default should be kept with the full kit range.

[Typhy]

Loth, if we were going to use such a setup, we'd have to make it so that the winning team picks the map. There is an 'advantage' spawn at almost every map, so color pick is far more valuable than map choice.

Map/colour pick should be on the losing side. The better clans then have to come up with tactics (or allrdy have them) to win in the disadvantaged positions aswell.

I agree. The goal of having the losing team pick the map is to give them an advantage - thus making it hard for a team to win 2 matches in a row.