Three ideas to improve Fortress

[7575757575]

Hey, I read some topics here and it seems that some players have problems with pickup or some strategies.
Thats why I decided to make my ideas public to everyone.

My first suggestion is to reduce the maximum amount of playing players. (maybe 7vs7)
I would like this, because i think the main reason why players organise pickups is that they are sick of playing 9vs9.
Some players get lags or some players (including me) have no longer a "real" position. With real position i mean sweep, attack, center or def.
in my opinion a fort game has one center, one defender, two attackers and two sweepers and in a 9vs9 the players with position 4-6
are driving through the map and wait to kill someone (that can be alot fun aswell).
I (now talking as defender) have also a problem with the fact that often the own zone is down/destroyed/****** cause of the big amount of players,
because of the deathtails, the centerattack you cant really block as def in a game like this or just because of holes.
I have not really a problem with a destroyed def, actually is like a good fight with a coming center but when its in 4 of 5 rounds
and always 3 teammates and 4 enemis try to get in the zone its not that funny anymore.

k, that was my first suggestion.

I'm really have no idea how my second suggestion will work in real but i would really love it to see.
I also have no idea if you (i say you, because i have really no clue from coding and this stuff) are able to arrange that.
The idea i'm talking about is to have no longer one holesize. Maybe two or three different sizes witch are choosen randomly.
If one of these holesizes would has the size 0, maybe it will prevent planned holes. And maybe you all hate the suggestion because you like to hole the defender.

I just want that you think about the second suggestion, now my last idea.

After playing matches with uneven teams and I have already read that idea before i was thinking of a poll. A poll that mixes all players.
From this i expect more even teams/matches. Alternatively we could do a poll that starts a little pickup.

TY for your attention,
75

[MrsKsr]

I like the idea of different hole sizes, iirc there was once discussion about hole size being dependant on the speed in which the bike crashed into the wall and also shrinking holes. Not sure if that went anywhere at all?

*looks around*

[Z-Man]

The shrinking holes are not really well implementable right now, and the suggestion for variable hole size was to make it depend on speed. And I don't quite see how any of that would influence play in a meaningful way.
Random hole size now, on the other hand, that could be something.

The team mixing function has been discussed before, but AFAIK not been implemented yet.

[apparition]

7v7 or 9v9 (and 6v6) has been debated for a long time now. I don't think it would hurt to reopen that discussion, but I think it leads to the same end: the more people playing the less people complaining. It would be nice if we could shift our groupthink from only allowing one Pro Fortress game at a time to encouraging two. Even when Pro Fort is full people still just hang out in there until they can play rather than starting their own public game. I think the system would have to automatically redirect players for that to happen. I guess there's always pickup...

Random hole sizes would be fun

[Jip]

Well, there are servers with max 4v4, 6v6, 8v8, 9v9, 10v10.
If for example MB53 decides to make his server 9v9, ask him to change it. Everybody can go to another server if he doesnt like 9v9.

I like the random hole size idea though. Add settings EXPLOSION_RADIUS_MIN/MAX. I will have a look later if my skills are enough to do it.

[7575757575]

yeah, you are right, I really forgot the 6vs6 or 9vs9 debate(s).

One thing to the random hole size: If we try this, we should really have just two or three different set sizes.
And one of the size should be 0, with the aim that planned holes in a 3vs1 situations get less attractive.

[noob13]

I don't like the random holse size idea. Planned holes are a big part of today's competitive fortress and adding any luck to that would really just suck. Making hole size speed dependent is much more interesting, in my opinion. What if you needed at least 50 m/s to make any hole at all?

[matchbox53]

If for example MB53 decides to make his server 9v9, ask him to change it. Everybody can go to another server if he doesnt like 9v9.

well i was convinced by few people to reduce it to 7v7 but it didnt turn out to be a good idea and as what most think everyone likes the idea to be in 1 server at a time i can actually give this a chance if everyone is willing to vote for it if the majority doesnt mind 7v7 then i would change it .

[Mkay1]

I would want 7on7. lala

[apparition]

I want 3 Pro Fort 6v6's going on at all times of day and night!

[7575757575]

I don't like the random holse size idea. Planned holes are a big part of today's competitive fortress and adding any luck to that would really just suck. Making hole size speed dependent is much more interesting, in my opinion. What if you needed at least 50 m/s to make any hole at all?

My main reason why I was think about the random holesize was to avoid the planned holes in a 3vs1 situation, but i still wanted that there
is the possibility to get holed as defender (e.g. when an attacker traps a sweeper and the sweeper crashes into defenders wall)

Thats why i really dont like the idea to make holesizes depending on speed. So the only way to hole is to speedup and hole
-> every team / player tries to survive, noone takes risk and when its 5vs2 or sth like that the team is planning a hole
---> long, not really spectacular rounds and matches.

( btw, i really would like the random holezise idea with bigger holes than 0,75. So sweepers have to be carefull what they are doing )

[Lackadaisical]

1. More acceleration
2. Less rubber
3. Less brakes

No need to go all nexus 9 at once. Small steps.

[scene]

7 vs 7 wouldn't be bad, that would lead to an even number of people on each side at the split. But, I don't know how it would make a huge difference besides lengthening the rounds even more than they already are

[ppotter]

I think 75 was mostly referring to MB's mega fort which is 9v9, which is too much for a proper for game really. Just end up with far too many attackers usually.

[Phytotron]

1. More acceleration
2. Less rubber
3. Less brakes

How dare you suggest altering any of the standardised physics of Fortress?