Let's say I were to create a map where one team's goal was to defend the fortress and the other team clearly had to attack. That was the nature of the map.
Is there a way to alternate ends. ie
Round 1 gold team is attack end,
Round 2 blue team attacks, etc, etc.
From what I can tell it's pretty random which end you're put.
Teams Alternating ends.
How about making 2 maps with each just 1 zone but on the other side of the area and every round those maps gets switched. Ok, thats quick and dirty but could work?
If it doesn't work with just 1 zone, make the second zone for the team that should attack size 0.1 or so and noone will be able to conquer it.
If it doesn't work with just 1 zone, make the second zone for the team that should attack size 0.1 or so and noone will be able to conquer it.
- bel
That's what I thought, that's how it works in sumo. You spawn in a position relating to your place on the scoreboard.Your_mom wrote:From what i understand spawn points are changed when the point leader changes. Winning team always spawns at point A, and losing team always at point B.
This being the case, belenus's idea would not work as if the lead position changed at the end of one round, The spawn points would be switched and the team would have the same spawn points on the new map.
Any other ideas on how I might achieve this?
-
philippeqc
- Long Poster - Project Developer - Sage
- Posts: 1526
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:55 am
- Location: Stockholm
- Contact:
Humm... the following might be just a band-aid solution:
Most of the time, one team will lead over the other for a good period (ie: many rounds, if not matches). Assuming that, the relative order might be considered stable enough.
Then make a rotation of 2 maps, one where the winning team has the zone, one where the losing team has the zone.
In average, it should give you a relatively stable approximation.
it would break down if the teams where very close, and kept trading the leading position. Then a team might end up owning the zone for many consecutive rounds.
Should you discover that one scenario, ie: defending or attacking, is easier to do than the other, you could use the flaw to always give the leading team the low ground, evening the confrontation.
Otherwise, I'd try convincing Joda to have a close look at the scenario.
-ph
Most of the time, one team will lead over the other for a good period (ie: many rounds, if not matches). Assuming that, the relative order might be considered stable enough.
Then make a rotation of 2 maps, one where the winning team has the zone, one where the losing team has the zone.
In average, it should give you a relatively stable approximation.
it would break down if the teams where very close, and kept trading the leading position. Then a team might end up owning the zone for many consecutive rounds.
Should you discover that one scenario, ie: defending or attacking, is easier to do than the other, you could use the flaw to always give the leading team the low ground, evening the confrontation.
Otherwise, I'd try convincing Joda to have a close look at the scenario.
-ph
Canis meus id comedit.