RedFaction PureFaction

[Philip]

Hey,

 

I have some questions about some changes in PF.

 

What are your opinions on these four maps?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoGhoWd1XvE&feature=related

 

Do you think any of them would be suitable for RF? The scaling could be different, perhaps one for small team games or larger matches only and not duels.

 

Also, the little ramps in DM-Rankin could be changed to portals, and the lift could be changed to a jump pad. Or perhaps jump pads for each ramp, that fling you up into a portal (and put you on top). That way, the sound would be increased. It's a rather convoluted way to do it though.

 

In my opinion, the last map works in UT, but it might be severely lacking in RF because of the movement system.

 

What are your thoughts on hit sounds?

Edited September 26, 2011 by Philip

[Butter]

Always been a fan of the UT hit sounds...but those levels....

 

IMO the gameplay or RF best lends itself to symmetrical maps that concentrate player flow into a central confrontation area. For example, for me personally, the funnest maps in CTF were always WL and BC. Nice, symmetrical maps with a central area that gave an advantage to the team holding it. In WL that advantage could be circumvented via the two tunnel passages and in BC it was circumvented via the base tunnel to center door and rail sniping (ugh).

 

I really don't think RF gameplay works well with ramp-heavy levels that involve a lot of vertical level changes. Having high ground advantage in RF is ridiculously more overpowered than any other FPS I've played (except CS). I don't care how good you are. I don't care if you are the child of Allan, Furyweb, and Fek. If I shoot you from top with an AR first, you are going to die first. By the time you even get to look up and see where I'm shooting from, you're dead.

 

Anyway, I'm not a fan of those maps in RF at all in CTF. I think some of them can be very good DM/Duel maps, where it would take more skill rather than pistol whoring (I always loved levels like One To The Dome in DM because it forced 1v1's vs frag-whoring).

 

RF CTF to me was always about hectic, tense gameplay with lots and lots of confrontations. I've always loathed maps where I'd spend 15-20 seconds walking around hoping I'd run into someone.

[Pea]

I completely agree with Butter. :icon_happy:

[Philip]

While I agree to an extent, certain aspects have changed.

 

The way people play the game has changed (well certainly for Nick and I). We time most of the armours (before we just used to time one or two items) and if someone holds top, we can usually re-take it if we are careful. Timing them is essential, because it means we have 20 free seconds to roam around, shoot from different places, etc. It's easy to assume something is more of an advantage than it is, based around the opponents lack of skill.

 

There is going to be a click limiter in the new PF, and the head hitbox bug is going to be resolved/bypassed. This will give people above an even greater advantage, so we plan to lower the head multiplier from 2.0 to about 1.2. This may seem extremely underpowered, but given that the head hit box is usually non existent (until standing up), it should be a reasonable change.

 

At the moment, if you stand up and try to run away, you'll be dead in a few shots. Thus, the change will actually speed up game play somewhat but it will allow room for faster escapes. Hopefully lessening the height advantage. Another reason that the height can be an advantage in DM02 (especially) is not just the height itself, but the fact the map makers put three armours and health quite near each other.

 

For example, if someone tries to out-aim me from top of Warlords, even if they have a reasonable aim, they're going to struggle because I'll be near two armours at mid and a further one when I push (which I'll likely get to before the opponent). If they crouch, most of their body is hidden, while their head takes no damage, when the head hit box works, this will lessen such advantages.

 

Portals are also new in RF.

 

So although I agree with some of what you have said, I personally think it could be viable if the armours were put in the right place, in addition to the weapons. Perhaps it would be worth while thinking of a completely different idea... Like a map similar to CM but designed a bit more complex around the base area? Speaking of CM. I think with the click limiter and rail nerf, it's actually going to be a pretty fun map to play.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Philip

[nick]

Height advantage is only a big deal because of bugs honestly. With the head hitbox working it's probably not always advantageous to have high ground. There's nothing inherent in the mechanics of RF that make height overly advantageous, except that it's more difficult to dodge when someone is above you, but it is doable.

 

Here's a game where height advantage really does matter a lot:

 

http://www.own3d.tv/video/38919/QHLAN_14__Final_-_Milton_vs_Rikoll_-_Map1__DM4

 

DM4 clinic by Milton :3

 

That being said I believe Ironic to be the only viable map out of the four. Rankin is perhaps doable in TDM but could never be scaled to work in RF duel.

 

I probably shouldn't be so confident saying that, but scaling Rankin would be a serious challenge. It would definitely be the slowest map the game has seen in duel (except for the weirdo ones with 2xAmp etc).

[Butter]

Yeah, I think you guys have a prominent duel mentality.

I always look at it from a CTF/TDM stand-point. I was never a fan of 1v1 duels in RF.

 

So those maps may work in duel scenarios but honestly I don't think that's where the future of RF is. RF is about team play and team play attracts the most players in FPS games.

[nick]

Maybe, but I think he was suggesting the maps for TDM, not duel. I could see Ironic and Rankin as viable TDM maps. The others...not so much.

[Butter]

Yeah I can see it in TDM when I think about it (especially with modified pistol mechanics).

[Philip]

I'd play duels in RF because I felt I should or whatever, but I liked team games more. While this is still true to an extent, I have learned more about duels and I enjoy them more than I used to. Duels are also easier to obtain (I just bug Nick). This thread was made primarily to think of team game maps, but when I thought/think of battle scenarios in my head, I am usually thinking of a 1v1 situation and not a team game (if that makes any sense at all...).

 

I remember how Rankin was played in UT team games, and honestly it could be really fun. You'd basically just dominate top, time the shock rifle, and get the two armours and amp. The problem is that the movement was faster.

 

I do still wonder about Roughinery. That is actually quite an open map, and it could play quite nicely. If there was a 200 armour, or a power up attracting a player, it would mean that fights would be more frequent (without the 100 armour in UT, there probably wouldn't be many fights).

 

The changes in PureFaction are looking quite good so far. I might upload a video soon, just as a small promotion or something :]. I'd like something more polished when I advertise it on other gaming sites.

Edited September 30, 2011 by Philip

[Pic0o]

Good feedback in this thread guys. Changes sound pretty cool too. As Butter mentioned about being more a team based fan, this is me to a tee. Granted, I can hardly enjoy an FPS of any type for more than an hour, but raw deathmatch is totally not my bag.

 

I enjoy encountering rival players, but I am much more of an exploration and distraction kind of guy. It also makes me laugh at the whole lack of hitbox in vanilla RF when crouched, since that was a huge part of the whole baton action, while I was oblivious to the lack of a crouched head back in the day. :lol:

 

I could handle team deathmatch games, because I'd just dick around and distract people since I knew mass kills wasn't my deal. I completely blame my enduring of the Call of Duty games for making me loathe DM and the 1 man to rule them all thing. As I say this, I know full well that was also a huge part of RF DM games too. :P

 

Co-Op beating on bots or zombies? A different and more enjoyable tale. Especially if I can melee them bitches down! :)

Edited September 30, 2011 by Pic0o

[Butter]

Co-Op beating on bots or zombies?

 

Ding ding ding ding!!!!! Winner!

[Philip]

Trailer made by Nick. Edited October 4, 2011 by Philip

[Pic0o]

Nice vija. Features look pretty cool. I also enjoy seeing guns on the maps. :yar:

 

When you say hit removal, that means no more blood flash on hit, right?

[nick]

When you say hit removal, that means no more blood flash on hit, right?

 

Yeah.

 

All the weird screen manipulation/epilepsy-inducing nonsense is optional in match mode. Mostly because it's frame-rate dependent. Screen-shake for example is gut wrenching at 60fps but relatively modest at >120. A lot of the player-base still can't hold a decent frame-rate so yeah (hilarious I know).