The Fortress

Team Strategies go here, if you want to share that is...
Post Reply
~*PsYkO*~

Post by ~*PsYkO*~ »

Lucifer wrote:You must have played with vanhayes, who's decided to hate holes. No, far as I know, most people like holes still. (Except goalies who defend against it, probably vanhayes kept getting holed and couldn't defend it and that's why he hates them now)
Naw you basically explained what I think lol. There was a string of about 2 hours I was playing defense straight and every round the other team holed me so I just got fed up...Really holes are great but they are a very cheap way to win a game.

~*PsYkO*~

Post by ~*PsYkO*~ »

Fonkay wrote:vanhayes was there, but it was everyone in the room pretty much. I accidently died while attacking, and someone yelled at me and told me that I wasn't aloud to makes holes. I told him that it was an accidental death, but holes are a stratagy and part of the game. Then vanhayes piped in with his "holes are for (kitty cats)" instant chat. and then everyone started ganging up on me. I promptly left.
Not a big deal, just wondering if I missed the memo that said "All strategy and teamwork of any kind is considered lame and will not be tolerated." :roll: :wink:

Also, I don't understand why there is still a instant win in Fortress.
I complain about holes, others complain about my nonstop middle attack when I am center lol...

gnorty
Core Dumper
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:45 am

Post by gnorty »

I think that peoples problems with holes stem from looking from the wrong perspective.

Really holes are great but they are a very cheap way to win a game
I translate this to "Holes are a very effective attack, and I think they are hard to defend".

In other words those who complain need to modify their defense to cope with this form of attack.


Winzones - dont like them full stop. killzones, maybe. MAYBE.

In fortress especially, the winzone is just wrong. So it breaks a stalemate between a weak attacker and strong defender? How does it do this? by rewarding the weak attacker. WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!

And that was shouting!

User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer & Local Moonshiner
Posts: 8610
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

Hmmm. If you're the only person left on your team, you still have to win it for the team. I'd rather you take the winzone than die attacking a superior goalie.

Still, it's useful to use the winzone to draw out the goalie. Make for the winzone and he has to attack you, if he wants to win.
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden

gnorty
Core Dumper
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:45 am

Post by gnorty »

but well timed, the keeper has no chance.

I can see the benefits of a tie breaker in these situations, but can't help feeling that the attacker has a massive advantage, when it is probably the defenders fault the stalemate was reached.

How about if when the timer starts the winzone, instead of a winzone, both zones move to the midpoint between the players, and they can slug it out sumo style?

Match ends quickly, and no inherent advantage to either player.

User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer & Local Moonshiner
Posts: 8610
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

I don't see why giving the attacker a massive advantage is such a bad thing. Without the winzone, the advantages go all to the defender.
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden

User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11427
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

gnorty wrote:How about if when the timer starts the winzone, instead of a winzone, both zones move to the midpoint between the players, and they can slug it out sumo style?
Gaa! My fingers are already itching to do something like that, but it'd be a hack I'd rather like to avoid. And I don't know what old clients would say to that.

gnorty
Core Dumper
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:45 am

Post by gnorty »

I don't see why giving the attacker a massive advantage is such a bad thing. Without the winzone, the advantages go all to the defender.
Seems obvious to me. Putting technical difficulties aside for a moment, consider the following.

After the preset time, the zones turn into killzones. The player with the highest proportion of wall in the winzone is killed.

That would be outrageous (IMO) but the effect is the same.

I understand the argument of if it is in the game, it is fair, and see your point about making a strategic decision to go for the winzone when a 1-1 victory is unlikely, but why not extend that? If there is little hope of overcoming the keeper, why try? just hang around waiting for the zone. every one on one would end up in a waiting game. The whole hole argument becomes more or less redundant.

Nope. for me the winzone is a no no. Sorry. It does nothing to reward skill, nothing for gameplay and there MUST be a better way?

User avatar
2020
Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1322
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:21 pm
Location: the present, finally

long-view

Post by 2020 »

imagine if there's been a tournament
there are say a hundred starting players
it all comes down to the last match
the last game
all the other players are now spectators
and it comes down to 1v1
and everyone knows that the goalie is good
and the attacker happens to be one of the weakest players...

a win-zone!????????!!!!
no thank you

although not quite as dramatic
i find it very stressful to be in the last few at the end
but when it works out....
aaaaaaaaaahhhh

there was this guy the other day
he was obviously new to it
and he just couldn't reduce the zone
we made a few comments
he got shafted
we kind of laughed
and the very next round he disappeared
!
i've played so long
i am starting to forget that
the fortress is a very threatening place for newbies

on the whole
winzone is fine
let players argue and call each other names because of it....
so what
hold the line

User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer & Local Moonshiner
Posts: 8610
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

If the tournament was structured so that a shitty attacker went up against a really good defender in the deciding round, I wonder if the tournament would have been worth playing. ;)

Sure, I happen to agree with the sentiment against the winzone. But I want that noob who's left to take it for the team rather than give the other team the round. We fought hard to get to that point! Don't forget about the teammates sitting on the sidelines watching. Maybe they all died stupidly. Fine, let the goalie win, his team deserves it. Maybe they all fought really hard, were badly outnumbered, and playing against a really good team. Lose the round because the person who survived was the noob that just camped in the corner? They earned it! Let him take the winzone.

We can go back and forth with counterarguments. Maybe a special zone that just hands the win to whoever gets there first isnt' an optimal solution, but if you work it into your tactics, it works well, I give a damn what people say. If you don't, and you really do use it as a cop-out for good play, then yeah, the people are right about it.

ANd I'll still smile when it says "Match Winner: Lucifer's Team" :)
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden

User avatar
wrtlprnft
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1679
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:42 am
Location: 0x08048000
Contact:

Post by wrtlprnft »

Maybe just let the winzone give less points than any other way to win a round? So there is still a reason to fight if you are good.

User avatar
2020
Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1322
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:21 pm
Location: the present, finally

Post by 2020 »

wrtlifnt: that's a good idea
hold the line

gnorty
Core Dumper
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:45 am

Post by gnorty »

how about this

at "winzone" time, a new kind of zone appears, centered on the contended zone, but maybe 3 times larger.

anyone OUTSIDE this zone dies instantly. The zone the contracts steadily, leading to a "fight or die" scenario.

thinking about it, moving the vacant zone to the same center would work for this quite nicely. It then works out much like a variant of sumo.

Must be a good idea, I thought of it twice now!

User avatar
Phytotron
Formerly Oscilloscope
Posts: 5041
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:06 pm
Location: A site or situation, especially considered in regard to its surroundings.
Contact:

Post by Phytotron »

Lucifer wrote:I'm afraid there's only one launch that works, but you might come up with running patterns, like they have in football, that people can run after the break to bring the team to a certain configuration. The catch is, the longer it takes to setup, the deeper the other team will penetrate before you launch your attack
See: screen pass (in American football).

User avatar
belenus
Round Winner
Posts: 269
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by belenus »

How about this, i guess it was already mentioned above, but.... if there are only 2 players left, 1 of each team, just move both fortresses into the center on top of each other, like Sumo or Thunderdome and let em fight it out.

The other way... zone around zone was quite nice too... also, would it be possible to make the winzone a fortress too? So you either could fight for the real zone or just the Winzone?

But Winzone is really the cheapest way to win a round/match and if the last attacker is weaker than the defender... than that team DESERVES to loose and not win because he can drive into a Ring.

The better team should win, not the team that can use a winzone.


Talking about cheapness... holes come to my mind.
If you are a good attacker you won't need holes... if you are not you, you do! Most of the players obviously do need em or just want an easy way to win.

I am strictly against using holes (which were made in the purpose of letting another player through) because if I would use a hole and we win that way... it was out of cheapness, not out of skill.

If the hole was an accident because someone crashed trying to attack or one of the defenders made it, by all means, take it! But making a hole just for someone else to get in is CHEAP.

About advantages. Imho noone got a real advantage, neither attacker nor defender. Everyone got his own advantage, they are just different.

The defender got the advantage at start... he got his circle and should be safe inside if he closed it good enough... but thats it... after a while when the attacker is good, he closed in on the defender, making his circle smaller... thats when the attacker starts getting an advantage, or more like, advantages adjust to be even... if the circle gets small enough, the advantage is clearly with the attacker.

This is speaking with fully equal skilled defender and attacker. If any is better... well thats personal skill advantage and shouldn't be counted in.
- bel

Post Reply