LMS Tourney?

[Titanoboa]

maybe we need a kind of anti-camping/rim-hugging solution.. maybe a size_factor that's small enough not to really allow any kind of camping.. hmm

The size_factor should of course be as small as possible (see Concord's suggestion). We just need a balanced walls_length (Too short = people easily run away, too long = people tend to camp), and perhaps a deathzone (fast or slow expansion?) that ends rounds after say, 5 minutes? Or 3-4? 5 minute rounds are pretty long.

[Mecca]

Yeah, I suggested this in a previous post. A CTF style deathzone (ridiculously rapid expansion with no point reduction) with a timer that is announced every 30 seconds would be the perfect way to prevent camping. If people can see how much time they have until the game divides by 0 and kills everyone, they will make sure that everyone is dead before that happens. (at least, that is what I would do)

[Phytotron]

Why would you get points for killing people? This is a LAST MAN STANDING tournament.
Shouldn't points only be awarded for being the last man standing?

Because you guys really shouldn't even be using the term "last man standing." In true LMS, only the round survivor gets a point(s). No server I can think of presently or in the past actually uses or used that scoring method. A better term for the kind of standard servers I reference, and should be used in this "tournament" or "cup" or whatever, might be "free for all" (or deathmatch, but I agree with avoiding FPS references).

As for these concerns about "camping" and such, I think you all are overly concerned with it. Like I said above, the solution is good settings, not gimmicks like death zones and shit, especially complicated ones. In a good server (and with good players), it's not a problem. This includes not only physics settings, but scoring. If there are only scores for core dumps (and not for survival or win zones or suicides), that's a discouragement to "camping." High rubber, brakes, infinite (or practically infinite) wall length, win zones, huge arenas, scores for win/survive, all encourage and facilitate so-called "camping."

(I might also note that I actually don't much even recognise the use of the term "camping" in this game, as there are so few and infrequent instances where I think it might be an even partially legitimate description.)

I know Mecca and Titanoboa have (which makes their comments all the more confusing), but Dubs, have you ever played in Shrunkland or Bebop in Harlem? Or In Limbo, or the original Swampland?

I swear, to hear you guys talk about it (so to speak), one would think that a standard "LMS" server, and what settings are good for it, is a totally novel concept. Like you're doing this from scratch without, oh, several years of experience to draw upon. Like all there's ever been is Fortress et al, and now you've got to come up with new settings and strategies for this new game mode. I mean, come on. This isn't hard, kids.

[MrsKsr]

Uhm, I played in Swampland no more than a few times (mainly played fort :x).. I doubt I was around when BiH and the original Swampland was around, so no.. Hence the reason why your input, for me anyway, is so important.

[Mecca]

High rubber, brakes, infinite (or practically infinite) wall length, win zones, huge arenas, scores for win/survive, all encourage and facilitate so-called "camping."

false

Anyways!

I do like swampland settings, but I think the wall length could be a little longer. Too short of a wall length can make a battle between two competent players last forever.

Side question: How is a deathzone a gimmick? It's a good way to prevent rounds from lasting too long.

I also think the game mode should be called "Free for all" or "Classic play" if it will award kill points. I was under the impression that there would only be points for being the last player alive.

[Titanoboa]

What if there were non-shrinking "sumo" zones surrounding the arena? The zones would not directly affect gameplay; only indirectly through scoring.
Might it improve something or is it too original for you guys?

(If I wasn't clear, I can explain the idea further at request or even put up a server to demonstrate)

[Mecca]

Yeah Titan, please explain; I have no idea what you are talking about lol.

[Desolate]

No, zones around the arena would add the luck factor from sumo. If two players died at the same time, the other few players left would get more points for doing nothing.

[sinewav]

the luck factor from sumo

[Phytotron]

High rubber, brakes, infinite (or practically infinite) wall length, win zones, huge arenas, scores for win/survive, all encourage and facilitate so-called "camping."

false

How so? High rubber - harder to die, easier to survive. Brakes - slowing down, including the resulting tighter turns, gives a greater chance to use up less space and outlast a box. Huge arenas - lots of open space to cordon off and waste. Scores for win/survive - how is that not self-explanatory? Run, self-box, don't kill, be completely passive, "camp," and you still get points.

I do like swampland settings, but I think the wall length could be a little longer. Too short of a wall length can make a battle between two competent players last forever.

Mind you, I only refer to the original Swampland (by Swampy) as Swampland. I only ever refer to that other crappy server (by ca$h MBC) that co-opted the Swampland name as Mud Puddle. The latter is the one with too-short wall length (not to mention a host of other settings that lead me to describe it as the "I don't wanna die!" server). Although, even the actual Swampland maybe could've used a 100 unit increase, at least so long as it was combined with the miniscule CYCLE_DELAY it had. Give it a more reasonable CYCLE_DELAY and the wall length would be fine.

Which reminds me, a key setting I left out of the list of things that encourage and facilitate so-called camping: low CYCLE_DELAY.

Side question: How is a deathzone a gimmick?

It's unnecessary and detracts from the core of the game, as well as disallowing the players to decide the outcome themselves. And it's particularly gimmicky when its function is made more complicated by special expansion types or sumo stuff or whatever. It might be fine for a casual server or "game mode," but doesn't belong in this.

In the case of expanding death zones, like in—uh, is it Yellow Submarine that has it?—it invariably leads to players becoming completely non-confrontational, and just trying to cordon off the largest amount of the safe part of the arena to themselves while waiting for the other player to die in the zone. Sound familiar, maybe a little bit like what you call camping? I think so. I've had players in there refer to it as "good strategy, you noob." Well, if that's true, then "camping" is a legit strategy too. Your solution creates the same behaviour it sets out to prevent.

Even a "nuke" like Lobster Cage had is unfair because, again, it doesn't allow the players to decide the outcome. Additionally, it rewards the wrong players, beginning with the player more at fault for prolonging the round by getting him off the hook. It rewards the players with lower scores since they're saved from having their score deficit increased. And it rewards a high-score player who may already be core-dumped at the moment, as he doesn't have his margin decreased. In fact, the only player who really gets punished is the one who was actively pursuing the "camper." How's that right?

This kind of stuff is important if you want legitimate, fair competition for a tourney, which I think is part of the point of this topic. Something like the 'nuke' might be useful for everyday casual operation, but I think should have no place in an organised competitive tourney/cup/whatever deal. (It's kinda like no harm, no foul in a pickup basketball game, or counting off 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, BLITZ! in 7-on-7 flag football, or do-overs in any casual game with friends—none of which will fly in organised competition.)

I've said it before, I'll say it again: The best prevention of so-called camping is good settings (and good players).

I also think the game mode should be called "Free for all" or "Classic play" if it will award kill points. I was under the impression that there would only be points for being the last player alive.

I was under the impression everyone was just misusing "last man standing." You all should settle on that. If you all do actually want a true 'LMS' game, with points only awarded for round survival, then you can scratch pretty much everything I've contributed to this (except the point that an LMS-type scoring system would only encourage and facilitate the sort of camping behaviour you're wringing your hands over ).

*****

Dubs, you should come play in Shrunkland sometimes, then. And by the way, I specified Bebop in Harlem, not Breakfast in Hell. I know you weren't around for the latter. The former is a current server, and a derivation of the original Breakfast in Hell.

[Phytotron]

At risk of digressing too far into what constitutes "camping" (an old debate, to boot), I do want to make one other point. It's not always the person on the inside who is the perpetrator; indeed, in some servers, it often isn't. If you make some big, huge box around someone—whether it's with infinite walls, or finite ones and you just circle it—and that player does what s/he can to outlast it, then you're the one at fault. That player has every right to do that, and you can't complain that they're a "camper" and demand that they just crash themselves when they still have space (any more than an "open" player can demand you follow their tunnel rather than turn back and "backdoor"). That's why I made up the instachat, "Ah, a nice, big, roomy box all for me!"—to mock the big-box-and-runners.

If you make a big box, the onus is on you to do one of the following, all of which involve shutting up with complaints or accusations of "stop camping, camper noob!":

A) Make smaller boxes to begin with.
B) Actively compress the big box you made (finite wall length).
C) Go in and get them.
D) Let them out to engage them.


Now, if someone is repeatedly, deliberately self-boxing, closing themselves in to either bait and crash pursuers or get into a tedious endurance game—that becomes on them.

[Mecca]

High rubber, brakes, infinite (or practically infinite) wall length, win zones, huge arenas, scores for win/survive, all encourage and facilitate so-called "camping."

false

How so? High rubber - harder to die, easier to survive. Brakes - slowing down, including the resulting tighter turns, gives a greater chance to use up less space and outlast a box. Huge arenas - lots of open space to cordon off and waste. Scores for win/survive - how is that not self-explanatory? Run, self-box, don't kill, be completely passive, "camp," and you still get points.[/b]

High rubber makes it harder for everyone else to die as well. It also allows for more potent traps(or whatever you want to call them).

Most people just use brakes to compensate for cycle_accel if they feel they are going too fast. The refill and depletion rate can also be manipulated.

Arena size should always be proportional to speed/accel anyways. Most servers with large arenas as high speed servers.

I do like swampland settings, but I think the wall length could be a little longer. Too short of a wall length can make a battle between two competent players last forever.

Mind you, I only refer to the original Swampland (by Swampy) as Swampland. I only ever refer to that other crappy server (by ca$h MBC) that co-opted the Swampland name as Mud Puddle. The latter is the one with too-short wall length (not to mention a host of other settings that lead me to describe it as the "I don't wanna die!" server). Although, even the actual Swampland maybe could've used a 100 unit increase, at least so long as it was combined with the miniscule CYCLE_DELAY it had. Give it a more reasonable CYCLE_DELAY and the wall length would be fine.

Which reminds me, a key setting I left out of the list of things that encourage and facilitate so-called camping: low CYCLE_DELAY.

People can still easily camp with any cycle_delay... I doubt people will be entering this tournament with intentions of camping anyways.

Is there a server currently online with similar settings to the original swampland? I think I remember what it was like but I'm not 100% sure.

Side question: How is a deathzone a gimmick?

It's unnecessary and detracts from the core of the game, as well as disallowing the players to decide the outcome themselves. And it's particularly gimmicky when its function is made more complicated by special expansion types or sumo stuff or whatever. It might be fine for a casual server or "game mode," but doesn't belong in this.

The point of the DZ is to keep people form getting bored. Nobody wants 10 minute rounds.

In the case of expanding death zones, like in—uh, is it Yellow Submarine that has it?—it invariably leads to players becoming completely non-confrontational, and just trying to cordon off the largest amount of the safe part of the arena to themselves while waiting for the other player to die in the zone. Sound familiar, maybe a little bit like what you call camping? I think so. I've had players in there refer to it as "good strategy, you noob." Well, if that's true, then "camping" is a legit strategy too. Your solution creates the same behaviour it sets out to prevent.

I was referring to a "nuke". Slowly expanding DZs that deduct points are terrible ideas for all servers.

Even a "nuke" like Lobster Cage had is unfair because, again, it doesn't allow the players to decide the outcome. Additionally, it rewards the wrong players, beginning with the player more at fault for prolonging the round by getting him off the hook. It rewards the players with lower scores since they're saved from having their score deficit increased. And it rewards a high-score player who may already be core-dumped at the moment, as he doesn't have his margin decreased. In fact, the only player who really gets punished is the one who was actively pursuing the "camper." How's that right?

It does let the players decide the outcome. If you want more points, kill more people. Players will enter the tournament with full knowledge of the DZ (keep in mind this DZ should be set on a timer that would be considered a long round, it should not appear frequently). If players just run from people and wait for the DZ, they have no effect on the game, there is always a way to kill someone anyways.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: The best prevention of so-called camping is good settings (and good players).

There is always a way to camp...

[Phytotron]

Not going to respond to most of it because I don't think my arguments were sufficiently rebutted. But,

I doubt people will be entering this tournament with intentions of camping anyways.

Then why did you all bring it up and make an issue of it?

The point of the DZ is to keep people form getting bored. Nobody wants 10 minute rounds.

In the servers I play(ed), that's not an issue (unless xdude is there and the other remaining player plays his game, maybe). Hell, BiH has a 10 minute match limit. Maybe you just need to get out of high rubber and stop basing all your experiences on that.

Is there a server currently online with similar settings to the original swampland?

Nope, not that I'm aware. But, if you "include breakfast_in_hell.cfg" from the examples folder, you'll get something in the same family.

[Word]

(unless xdude is there...)

[Mecca]

The point of the DZ is to keep people form getting bored. Nobody wants 10 minute rounds.

In the servers I play(ed), that's not an issue (unless xdude is there and the other remaining player plays his game, maybe). Hell, BiH has a 10 minute match limit. Maybe you just need to get out of high rubber and stop basing all your experiences on that.

I have been out of HR for years and most of my playing experience is in low rubber to begin with, broskilex.

Most of the time when I go into Mud Puddle, Xdude is there, LOL!

You should stop basing all your experiences on regular, random gameplay. Players tend to be much more defensive during competition(you wouldn't know this), compare ladle tactics with DS mega fort tactics. If the walls are too short I am pretty sure there will be quite a bit of backdooring and running (not that there is anything wrong with that, but it will make the competition take quite a while, and that will be boring.

Is there a server currently online with similar settings to the original swampland?

Nope, not that I'm aware. But, if you "include breakfast_in_hell.cfg" from the examples folder, you'll get something in the same family.[/quote]

Thanks, I'll take a look when I get a chance.