Yeah, that was kind of my thought. Was looking for an easy way to solve some of the most annoying problems of the ticket system - but I guess it's not quite that easy. I'm not sure there's any way to fix the noob hate that naturally goes along with my suggestion or any suggestion that still relies on the ticket system for that matter. As for your suggestion, I think a good case study would be crossroads unless the way the map is played has changed recently. That map would very frequently go to tickets for a long time (it's prone to stalemate situations basically by design) - and artillery is an effective way to assault the enemy's base on it. Could be a good way to see if whatever gets implemented 'works'.
That's pretty much what I meant when typing it out - if one side has an advantage, they just win when the timer (in this case obstructed by tickets) reaches zero. Escort and nuclear are more direct with the countdown and feature an objective that needs to be completed by one of the sides. This works too, just not for symmetrical maps.
There were two crossroads games just two weeks ago, lasted for 2 hours or so. From 1.0 until now, I don't think I've ever "fully participated" in games that lasted for 200 minutes and longer. Back then we didn't have timer anyway, I really doubt if those "4~6 hours" games were actually that long, or just some fucked up memory. I've had games that I thought it lasted for 3 hours and I re-checked the screenshot, it was only 90 minutes.
the only reason why i put time limits on eastborough was because i was forced to (by trickster) the only reason why i made the tickets on glycen as they are is because it is not a commander map and it is not an "empires" map. the infantry maps are not fun to many and thats why they have a time limit on them. please dont use my changes on infantry maps as a rationale for changing the commander maps
Don't understand why this is still being discussed because people clearly don't seem to want it. 3 for vs 9 against says all it needs to IMO. By all means make a new thread which is more refined but I would be surprised if it got a much better response. In the event that it doesn't then its time to drop the ticket issue for a good while
9 people would still be a minority when considering the community as a whole. Especially when a lot of those votes seem to be due to the proposed sudden death change. And that is not even counting the amount of people that were supportive of it in-game. Will do...
lets just split the baby in half ... i mean either sides arguments are just assumptions and assertions, neither of us can prove anything, at least in the last 8 years there has been no round of empires without tickets. (though some maps where they are of no concern and they didnt go on forever either) maybe except of fighting about what neither one of us can prove, lets try out and evalute? theres someone willing to do it, i dont see a reason not to try. if theres a cvar, what is there to lose? except for that only one side will be right - but we aint in kindergarten, are we? i fear we are ...
We just need a better win condition. Let's do a pug on emp_district420 where there are infinite tickets
You cant base anything upon "Lol, these guys totally dug that tight shit when i told them in chat" No, you tell them to come here and make an argument. Whatever was said in spec, stays in spec.
Thats an incredibly naive point. There is no "right", there is only a majority of subjective opinions. Ones that would be impossible to even weight considering there is about a dozen forumers and not all them even play the game. Actual by the book feedback from community does not exist
Made a thread on that already, though it was more about adding additional win conditions along side the comm one. No one seems to want it though.
i 100% agree with this but sometimes they might not be able to for whatever reason... basing stuff on what is said in spec is a real bad way to go about stuff. its very "in the moment" and the stuff people say are usually not the things they would say hours later when they actually sit down and think about it.
I have the same opinion as you. 1: We definitely have quite a few people around here that disapprove this suggestion, majority or not. 2: Who dafuq to implement this?
that was polemic or at least intended as ... but at least the "games will go on forever" part will be measurable. if you play and its a single map the whole evening, i was wrong ...
