Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

A place for threads related to tournaments and the like, and things related too.

Moderator: Light

Post Reply
epsy
Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 2006
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:02 pm
Location: paris
Contact:

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by epsy »

Worth a shot, but probably not ladle anymore: 1 point per zone capture, time-limited matches. No other points. You're going to see holing all over the place with 6 players though.

PS: No, no other points. Maybe 2 points for a zone capture, 1 for a survival.

User avatar
INW
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC, USA

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by INW »

Concord wrote:
INW wrote: What? Where is this evidence?

I believe:

1v2 unconquerable lowers the value of individual skill relative to the value of player advantage. (Oh man, imma camp and wait for them 2 attackers to just die)

1v2 unconquerable also lowers the relationship between team skill and individual skill. (how the hell would it raise it? what the?)

See what I did there?

Where is the evidence! Where's yours?
That was my point with your post...

User avatar
DDMJ
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1882
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:15 am
Location: LA, CA, USA, NA
Contact:

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by DDMJ »

INW wrote:
akira wrote:There is a simple physical change which would dramatically improve the fortress experience for the better: lower rubber to a value between 2-3.
More deaths, faster shrinks, rising skill-level, less adjusts etc.

PS: 1v2 unconquerable is so stupid, I just refuse to post any argument about it.
+2
No, more like -2.

If that's the case, players with 130+ pings will be at such a disadvantage, unless you increase ping rubber.

Concord
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:24 pm

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by Concord »

INW wrote: That was my point with your post...

So, let's test it then, because we know what the current settings yield. Ladle 50 is coming up.

User avatar
INW
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC, USA

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by INW »

Concord wrote:
INW wrote: That was my point with your post...
Ladle 50 is coming up.
And no settings will* be changed ;)

*Should might work better there.

User avatar
theroze
Match Winner
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:30 am
Location: 47 72 69 64

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by theroze »

epsy wrote:PS: No, no other points. Maybe 2 points for a zone capture, 1 for a survival.
Interesting. Surviving would be essential, so some more defensive gameplay, but then again, this enforces one team to kill some of the other team, so a bit more aggresive gameplay. However, when one team has to comeback, rounds will be really long against a def which doesn't shrink fast. Time Limit should be added to this, then.
apparition wrote:You being able to kill so many players that quickly and efficiently is evidence that the community skill level must be dropping... Sad :/
Reigning champion of: Sir-spam-a-lot 2011

dariv
Round Winner
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:24 pm

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by dariv »

Why make 1v2 unconq? Holing is NOT a problem. If you're 1v3 then your team probably made some avoidable mistake earlier on and deserves to pay.

If you do change anything (and I don't really want you to) then the only problem is the massive slowly-shrinking sweepbox defences that mean it's still 6v6 after 10 minutes of play.
pLxDari - Challenge us!

User avatar
akira
Core Dumper
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Neo-Tokyo

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by akira »

DDMJ wrote:
INW wrote:
akira wrote:There is a simple physical change which would dramatically improve the fortress experience for the better: lower rubber to a value between 2-3.
More deaths, faster shrinks, rising skill-level, less adjusts etc.

PS: 1v2 unconquerable is so stupid, I just refuse to post any argument about it.
+2
No, more like -2.

If that's the case, players with 130+ pings will be at such a disadvantage, unless you increase ping rubber.
Good point, though I do not think it would be that much of a problem. At least I never experienced substantial drawbacks in low rubber US servers like new shrunk&BiH.

User avatar
þsy
Match Winner
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:52 pm

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by þsy »

Although I'm a fan of low rubber, I don't think it'd work so well in fortress. Even the grind would be effected, and even the slightest lag would cause problems. If anything it'd make people play even safer, and bold cuts and other risky moves would never get tried out

I don't see what the fuss is with 1v2 unconq - let's just try it out in a pickup match or a public game and see how we like it rather than debate at length what we think we'll feel about it

Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4188
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by Word »

dariv wrote:Why make 1v2 unconq? Holing is NOT a problem. If you're 1v3 then your team probably made some avoidable mistake earlier on and deserves to pay.

If you do change anything (and I don't really want you to) then the only problem is the massive slowly-shrinking sweepbox defences that mean it's still 6v6 after 10 minutes of play.
again, it's really individual skill vs team skill. If the 3 attackers of the other team suck and your defender is good, then it's just fair if he kills them IMO.

Concord
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:24 pm

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by Concord »

holing is obviously a problem. That's why teams are compelled to use such overwhelming defenses.

dariv
Round Winner
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:24 pm

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by dariv »

Concord wrote:holing is obviously a problem. That's why teams are compelled to use such overwhelming defenses.
They are not compelled... we didn't last ladle and narrowly lost to SP, rounds losses came from endgame 1v1s or cuts. Show me any successful hole in a 3v3 offensive, and I'll show you a sweeper that's not doing their job.
pLxDari - Challenge us!

User avatar
MrsKsr
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 807
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:37 am
Location: Paris
Contact:

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by MrsKsr »

Holing is not a problem, it's a tactic and a product of settings being changed. If you change the settings in any way the tactics will change, not always going to like the outcome of those changes but it happens. I can't see how changing the settings to making the zone 2 vs 1 unconquerable is going to fix this 'problem' since people can just hole with more players from the outset of the round. I also don't understand why it's such a bad thing that ladle fortress has become more team and tactic oriented. The level of skill is obviously higher which makes for more difficult and longer matches. Nobody wants to watch a 2 vs 1 sumo in the zone for eternity in a ladle :/ Is there really any need for fortress so become any more defence oriented than it already is? If a team leaves their defender alone, and the other team has player advantage, they deserve to be able to take the zone...
"You may say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only one;
I hope some day you will join us, and the world can live as one"


“Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around.”

I believe that to truly love is the ultimate expression of the will to live.

User avatar
Kijutsu
Match Winner
Posts: 676
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:37 pm

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by Kijutsu »

Concord, I thought you didn't like sumo? :roll:

Why don't we try removing holes for one ladle instead of all this madness.

User avatar
Lackadaisical
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 822
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 4:58 pm
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Where is the Ladle (and Fortress) heading in the future?

Post by Lackadaisical »

þsy wrote:Although I'm a fan of low rubber, I don't think it'd work so well in fortress. Even the grind would be effected, and even the slightest lag would cause problems. If anything it'd make people play even safer, and bold cuts and other risky moves would never get tried out
I think what people want to achieve by lowering rubber (as well as more acceleration) is the fact that defense will shrink faster. Very closed defense (which, imho, caused all the holing in the first place) is then not as favorable because it can be crowded more easily. More open defenses, which can expand easier, will have the old disadvantage that they can be cut. It is all about finding the balance between the two.


As a side note on an earlier topic some pages ago: I'm not convinced that a team with two skilled players and two sucky players who die easily should necessarily have an advantage over a team of four average players.

Post Reply