Ladle 34 Voting Discussion

[gawdzilla]

1. Yes, a bit smaller. I'd say remove but not enough agree.
2. Server logs.
3. Z-Man records like half of the ladle, hs.tv covered the semis and finals last time. No problem there.
4. 6v6

[epsy]

the semis and finals last time. No problem there.

only one of them *cough* :) Dunno how it could be done to cover both of them.

[orion]

take off the holes is like take off the free kick in soccer.

[Mecca]

Soccer sucks.

Anyways, I think we should try no holes or smaller holes in regular fort servers before a change like that is made... Otherwise like everyone will nerd rage and divide by 0.

[sinewav]

Anyways, I think we should try no holes or smaller holes in regular fort servers before a change like that is made...

DS Mega Fort has smaller holes right now (.75), and quite a few people are playing there (with no complaints so far). Check it out when you get a chance. It's surprising easy to adapt to.

[Mecca]

Should be much easier for me as I usually play defense.

[orion]

is better try sweep better,,, why quit holeS?? :S
its´n pro.. i think

[owned]

Suggestion for options:

2.oo (Current)
o.75
0.oo

I personally don't think many will vote on the third option - no holes at all - but that's no reason to remove the option imo.

Imo those aren't good options. The smallest change is less than 1/2 of the current radius? The smalest change should be like .8 of the current radius.

[sinewav]

Imo those aren't good options.

This is a good point. There are any number of sizes between 0-2. Perhaps we can make the vote two-fold? First to decide the nature of holes (same, smaller, none), then a second option is smaller wins (1.5, 1.0, 0.5 - for example only).

This is what I think about hole sizes so far:

1.50m - Hardly different from 2, not significant enough.
1.25m - Never tried, but still doesn't seem small enough.
1.00m - Half size. Definitely smaller, but is it more challenging?
0.75m - Tested in DS Mega. Players seem comfortable with it.
0.50m - Used in Fortress Onslaught. Very challenging, maybe too small?

This brings me to another idea: Those of us interested in the hole discussion should revisit Fortress Onslaught over the next few weeks. Can we learn something about holes and strategy from there, and how it might affect the Ladle?

Maybe instead of a 4v4 pickup game, those players could go to Onslaught occasionally? And I might remind you that pick matches would be a good place to try some hole sizes out too.

[epsy]

Will do this in the middle of this week on fort4.eu servers. Will start with 0.50, increasing over the days to try other values.

[Desolate]

the semis and finals last time. No problem there.

only one of them *cough* Dunno how it could be done to cover both of them.

What happened to the idea of one semi starting after the other was finished? Guess no one thought of it on the day.

[LucK]

the semis and finals last time. No problem there.

only one of them *cough* Dunno how it could be done to cover both of them.

What happened to the idea of one semi starting after the other was finished? Guess no one thought of it on the day.

They were talking about that but the teams didnt want to wait.

[Concord]

what about the other 95% of holes which are completely essential to Fortress

[Mkay1]

Tbh I do not see how 19/20 holes are Essential to fortress.

In a casual game at least 8 are nonessential, which leads to a maximum of 60% essential holes.

[Goodygumdrops]

fortress strategy felt very stale about a year-year and a half ago, but that feeling isn't around right now

things seem a lot more dynamic...why affect significant changes to the rules in that type of climate?