Author Topic: TW CW Discussion (Read 6339 times)

Maniatiko · « **Reply #20 on:** July 28, 2007, 05:29:50 pm »

it would give NO chance for the other team to win, so discarded, maybe cap limit 4 ? or no cap limit (if so, games would mostly end up in TIE or be really lame)

-Major- · « **Reply #21 on:** July 28, 2007, 07:34:13 pm »

just simply change the map layout as I demonstrated earlier. or use this distance method even though it would take unnecessary resources.

Apocalypse · « **Reply #22 on:** July 28, 2007, 08:09:06 pm »

well atm (as its always been unless a noob clan thinks different, which is wrong) its been 3 maps. 20 minutes each. cap limit 5. with a tie breaker map, if that map ended in a tie it went by pure points(if team red had 12 -3 // 14 - 6 // 23 - 12 and team blue had 3 -6 // 35 - 27 // 23 - 22 it went by pure kills I.E: team red has 49 points where team blue has 61 points (counting just kills(all points on left side))

Dizzy So 1337 · « **Reply #23 on:** July 28, 2007, 08:55:41 pm »

Quote from: SirJamesaford on July 28, 2007, 05:10:16 pm

Hows about first to cap no time limit? I dont know... just tryin to help.

Actually I'm generally in favor of 1 cap limit for a CW round, if the match is best of 3. No time limit, though... thats crazy talk.

Quote from: Apocalypse on July 28, 2007, 08:09:06 pm

well atm (as its always been unless a noob clan thinks different, which is wrong) its been 3 maps. 20 minutes each. cap limit 5. with a tie breaker map, if that map ended in a tie it went by pure points(if team red had 12 -3 // 14 - 6 // 23 - 12 and team blue had 3 -6 // 35 - 27 // 23 - 22 it went by pure kills I.E: team red has 49 points where team blue has 61 points (counting just kills(all points on left side))

Mine is a new clan (but not noob thanks). If your clan doesn't have any problems running hour-long games with 8-10 players on a regular basis, all I can say is respect. In my experience that's quite an accomplishment. But don't you think that a shorter more decisive protocol would help lift TW out of its current 'niche' status?

haha · « **Reply #24 on:** July 28, 2007, 09:49:49 pm »

Quote

Scoring by Airstrike
In this example, every Airstrike grants one capture point to the winning team.

... hiding under a piece of bunker would save u from blowing up....and even if u die its only maybe a few times only..and u get a cap

Avarax · « **Reply #25 on:** July 29, 2007, 01:46:17 pm »

I think I've succesfully coded the script, also including an airstrike.

Dizzy So 1337 · « **Reply #26 on:** July 29, 2007, 07:00:21 pm »

Good lord when do you sleep? PM me with some contact details, I'd love to host it and see how it flies.

BombSki · « **Reply #27 on:** July 30, 2007, 03:04:25 pm »

The problem with current CW's is that its usually 2on2-3on3-4on4. The MINIMUM for a CW should be 4on4, where 5on5 would be the default.
At the moment its indeed like someone discribed earlier: rush and kill. this isnt the idea of TW and therefor nerfing the shotgun might actually not be such a bad idea. More players is also needed to be able to hold and take points rather than CTF-like rushing. Also i think most if not every 'position/building' should have heal polys or even packets. This is to keep rushing down and makes holding a place more important.
Also i agree there must be a list of maps for CW's.
I definately do not think there should be airstrikes in the CWs.
1st cap wins without time limit is a pretty nice idea.
As to comment on bringing the flags closer to eachother: not a good idea, changing the flags is a great idea however. play tw_marsh to get the idea.. its like bring the flag forward instead of capture it.

Avarax · « **Reply #28 on:** July 31, 2007, 08:47:12 am »

well, check out my script, the airstrike and mine laying however requires a 2.6.2 or enesce.com server to work properly. the domination part should work on 2.6.1 aswell. note that's still an early beta.

http://home.arcor.de/avarax3/TrenchwarDomination.pas

Date Posted: July 30, 2007, 04:31:29 PM

Here's a thread that allows easy installation and describes and explains the script a bit further.

http://forums.soldat.pl/index.php?topic=18136.msg206712#msg206712

Espadon · « **Reply #29 on:** July 31, 2007, 12:51:17 pm »

I loved tw_Marsh's almost football-like play concept.

BombSki · « **Reply #30 on:** July 31, 2007, 01:10:14 pm »

Yea, we definately need more maps based on this idea :O also its more realistic than ctf, because tw is about taking ground and bringing the frontline forward rather than snitching the flag and run.

Daimarus · « **Reply #31 on:** July 31, 2007, 06:00:31 pm »

Well, you are talking about things, that are already set.

TrenchWars, is CTF, but much more realistic and action-packed. Rules of those two should be (and ARE) simmilar.

-Realistic Mode On
-10 minues
-3 rounds
-Cap limit is 3. Not too much (almost impossible to manage that. I can, even in 5vs5 though), not too few
-2 grenades
-ALL weapons allowed. What's wrong in M79 or Minigun? There aren't noobs in ClanWars (at least there shouldn't be any).
-No weapon mods, except existing one for Realistic Mode
-No scripting, except passive one, like stats, profile-saving etc. NO AirStrikes!
-Starting map always was and will be GloryHill. Prefered second one might be NoMans, and the third one - Battlefield
-Teams should be from 3vs3 up to 7vs7. Thre shouldn't be acually any border, but 7 people per one team is highest playable number
-Winner of the first match chooses the next map. NoMans and Battlefield are just good ones, but it can be ANY map that ALL PLAYERS KNOW
-If there is a Tie, the KILL count is most important. If the number of kills is the same, then DEATH count is counted. If it is still tied, leaders should decide what to do.
-Leaders of both fighting clans might change minor rules like grenade number, time per one game, slighty modificated or disallowed (M79, Minugun) weapons etc.

Those are rules of battles in TrenchWars.

Daimarus

Espadon · « **Reply #32 on:** July 31, 2007, 08:17:13 pm »

No, M79 and mini really should be disallowed, as iM79s renders hiding in trenches more like shooting fish in a bucket. And the mini is just not realistic and in the spirit of TW.

Maniatiko · « **Reply #33 on:** July 31, 2007, 08:50:14 pm »

/agree

m79 is too overpowered

maybe IF IT is allowed, it should be like in call of duty 2 that its only 1 sniper per team, therefore only 1 player can use m79 per team

Espadon · « **Reply #34 on:** July 31, 2007, 09:13:45 pm »

Agree on that if possible.

Daimarus · « **Reply #35 on:** August 01, 2007, 02:40:38 am »

I wrote about enabling/disabling those 2 ones. I didn't notice any F11 to my rule set, so I think you like it at least a bit.

Avarax · « **Reply #36 on:** August 01, 2007, 04:49:02 am »

I dislike the decision of the winner being based on kills if the flag score is tied. I'd really recommend my you test out my script, it solutes this problem in a TW adequate way. Landmines and Airstrikes can of course be disabled.

Daimarus · « **Reply #37 on:** August 01, 2007, 09:24:13 am »

domination and such ARE SCRIPTING. It is not the passive one. Leaders should decide what to do is there is a tie in caps, kills and deaths

Avarax · « **Reply #38 on:** August 01, 2007, 09:35:20 am »

it indeed is passive, it just shows how much land is dominated by the teams

Maryleaf · « **Reply #39 on:** August 01, 2007, 09:50:14 am »

Dont listen to Daim anymore. I havnt seen him play in over 3 weeks. So nothing about TW can involve him anymore till he starts up again.

News:

Author Topic: TW CW Discussion (Read 6339 times)