just remove them from classic mode, you wont notice it. flag maps still can have them. make it an option of emp_info_params -> bool enableTickets. tanks should and allready do end games - not tickets. the slippery slope from research is enough ...
lol, that's what I was thinking. Common sense anyone? Surely tickets aren't hardcoded into the maps, alternatively execute 2 different server cfgs, one for small amounts of players, then one for large amounts of players. I dunno, don't know how it works. Surely it's possible though. If not, get coders to change it so we can.
It "might" be possible with a plugin to determine it based on players, but IMO that option I mentioned earlier done via proper code is better.
But we need tickets and sudden death for classic mode, because every map has to end somewhen. Therefore tickets are better than a fixed timer. And I can't think of any other meaningful parameter, which should end a map.
make the map defined ticket number a multiplier for example, it counts all the players in server that are not spec at game start, multiplies it with the mapper set multiplier, and that are the tickets if tickets are set to nf 10 be 8 in the map, and there are 32 players in each team then the real tickets will be nf 640 be 512
how many sudden death endings did you have recently? but srsly, the topic was raxes and apc spawns ... this aint the suggestion forums guys
Tickets should always be the same. Why should a team with MORE people have an advantage of a team with less people?
I can think of several meaningful parameters: The command vehicle is destroyed, you are victorious! All spawn points and players in the game have been eliminated, you have won! Success! You have control of all the flags on the map! ect. Far better than being one hit killed by a single stupid rocket due to a even more stupid game mechanic.
i belive you mis-read the calculation would be calculated on ALL THE PLAYERS IN THE SERVER NOT AS SPEC the fact that the numbers are different in my example is because the fictive map gave nf more tickets then be in the map entity that controls it atm
you'd wish, but actually you acted more like a politician than a scientist. as scientist youd leave anything out that is irrelevant to your problem, while politicians obscure their real intentions behind lots of words and meaningless numbers :p
that sounds more like a mathematician to me scientists want to "break" things, they want to find freak cases that redefine the borders of what they already know they want to find the loop holes and back doors also my numbers where not meaningless, it is an example that could manifest in a real map
+ of players in the server x 10 = tickets for both teams 62 players = 620 tickets each 20 players = 200 tickets each
I'm late to this discussion (seeing as my SVN didn't work), but I believe we should have APC spawns and fairly expensive raxen, or cheap raxen and researchable spawns (give it when mechanical is opened, like someone suggested). I've always thought 400 res for a rax is too much though, and maybe 200 is too cheap, 300 would be a good cost for me - whether or not we have apc spawns in, it would still mean you could place a 2nd rax pretty much by the time the first is built (on a small map like crossroads), or by the time people get to their destinations on a map like cyclopean. Regarding tickets, scaling at the beginning to the amount of people on a team is not quite right, as many join after the comm vote (if you've already said that, my apologies). Maybe tickets should merely be tested for 32, 48 and 64 servers, and the size of the server dictates how many tickets would be given (or selected at the server owners discretion). Scaling sounds good, but testing tickets would probably be easier, and the drawbacks of too many tickets on a large server with only a few people playing, aren't that great - it merely removes a ticket win in favour of conquest, which isn't a bad thing.
IF its the only doable way - i'd rather have cheap rax and let spawns reserach. the other way round it would only lead to apc-rushes being a more rewarding, if not the only sane, strategy. and as you might remember those rushes were more of a all or nothing strategy - if you fail you were pretty much screwed. i fail to see the drawbacks of many tickets on a large server. im for removing them completely from classic mode. imo tickets dont really add anything good to classic gameplay - ofc something alike is needed on the flag/conquest/howevertheyarecalled maps.
Makes sense...although I still kinda like 300 as the res cost for raxen. You've said that before, but please bear in mind we had 4 hour games regularly while testing 2.0, flasche. Removing tickets is a good way to lead to infinite games, and while some games are epic like that, most people don't have that kind of time to spend playing. If you think about a classic map like slaughtered, getting to nukes and rails really happens in the first 15-20 minutes or so. A standoff like that can last for hours, if tickets are not an issue. Tickets also allow losing teams to lose. While this may seem like something we don't want to encourage, if you picture a situation with a losing team pinned inside a base and being hammered for an hour or so, while hemmed in with enemy tanks and being artied until they give up (if they do), you can see how it'd be a problem - we don't want people to get so tired of being crushed that they just give up and leave [on a side note, it used to be to hold out for a 9-mine]. Anyway, having said that, i'm feelin' you on this and think games have been cut short by low tickets. I'm thinkin' that's just because tickets were balanced for 48 (42?) and really need to tested for higher load servers. Alternatively, we could bump tickets by 500-1000 or so, to remove the looming threat of tickets, without removing the mechanism entirely. The aim is to get enough tickets to have a good game, without a lot of turtling/losing time which will turn people off.
But, technically, don't stalemates happen regardless of tickets? Thanks to revving and squadrev stalemates tend to be more of a mapping and tech thing than a gameplay thing. But yeah, agree on both bumping up tickets and keeping games from being soul-crushing. It's a conundrum.
You're right too...but it happens less frequently. During testing it did pretty much happen every game, and although I loved it then, it seems like it wouldn't work with a public release. It's understandable - no one wants to still be playing the game they started at 10pm, at 3am...or at least, not more than once in a blue moon.
