Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

XXxPrePxX

Ladder Tester
  • Content Count

    1,268
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by XXxPrePxX

  1. XXxPrePxX

    Change ladder?

    Everyone would agree with this, but you are mot considering the vast technical problems associated with such a plan. Come up with an idea tgat solves those and youll be on to something... its not like the devs went through hell creating the ladder environment for no reason...
  2. Zain is right. Trying to force people to only have one nickname is almost impossible. The only outcome of this would be the players that want to abuse it would be able to much more effectively since others who are not abusing it would be on one nickname.
  3. Yup -- this is a hell of a map and I could definitely see this being a favorite. Suggestions by Ravage are very nice as well.
  4. Definitely a lot better with the multiple entrances now. Still not sure if I'm sold on the map yet and I don't think it would work well in the competitive scene, but I'd definitely play it and have fun on it.
  5. @Tkragon Few comments: 1) The entrance on border patrol - This is a bad idea and will ruin the map. I know you were trying to go for a certain feel with it, but it ruins the map from my experience. It's a very tiny entrance way and it's the ONLY way to enter through land. This destroys the flow of gameplay and also heavily favors allieds over soviets. It makes scouting useless (as teams will have the garrisons early halting any early scout, especially from a soviet player). It stops the flow of any land units. It's very easy to build towards and set up shop and once a person owns the middle/cliffs, the game is essentially over. Essentially, it gives the map a 'gimmick' feel which is what aWarZilla was saying when it becomes another 'rekool' or gimmick based map. The map is SO camp-heavy due to the entrance, that the game becomes who can suicide kill their opponents oil derrick first wins. A potential solution might to just widen out the gap. That way, at least, if the soviets can somehow kill the garrisons, then they can maneuver past it. However this is still dubious. Maps with one small guarded entrance just aren't very successful. 2) You guys are saying CS is mirrored? Maybe my understanding is off, but the reason why CS is unfair is directly because it's NOT mirrored in terms of ore per side. People love the mirrored parts of CS but hate the fact that the ore is not mirrored. 3) I think creating a balanced non-mirrored map is a work of art and ultimately the most aesthetic and 'cool' maps are non-mirrored. However, mirrored maps are efficient and great for their purpose, so I'm a fan of both. 4) Your Woodland plains map has A LOT of potential. I think that could be a huge hit.
  6. Can completely attest to this. I started my competitive Ra2 YouTube some (idk) 8 ? years ago? Before they were a more popular thing.. The competitive videos struggled to get a few views. I noticed a few people on YouTube got tons of views from just facing the computer... put a few matches of me taking on 7 brutal enemies and like clock work got thousands of views. To this day, I still have random comments on THOSE videos and almost none on any competitive video.
  7. First off, the detail in the maps is second to none. Everything flows so smoothly. I'd absolutely love to play these maps in FFG settings. I hope to play the 4on4 one soon. I am skeptical about the flak cannons, I don't *Hate* them in ffgs, but I think they are unneeded. I'm not worried about the helicopter advantage, that's why we can have teammates... a team of all soviets here is fucked anyway. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of ore/gems near the home base (and no oils). I worry about the economy, but that might not be a bad thing. A lot of FFG maps that are created end up having wayyyy too much money. So I'm excited to see how this plays out.
  8. Very interesting map. I'm not sure that it needs the gems in the middle tho. I think that's a bit of an overkill on money and it stops some strategy of base-stretching in the early game. I also don't think it needs gems near the base as it kinda takes away from what Blood feud was about. I'm also uneasy on the oil derricks.
  9. Awesome, nice clear commentary with good speed (no lag) and crisp viewing! Great start to the channel.
  10. Thanks! As far as most important -- The rank-lobby interface and potential for hosting ones own tournament games -- Is this a more simple operation? Or would this require a ton of work and not likely to get done within the next year time frame? From my (limited) understanding, I would assume all one needs to do is set up the *ability* to log into the CNCNet Client with one's ranked account (connected via email sign up) and then one would have access at hosting tournament games and having rank displayed in lobby. That, at least to me, doesn't seem like too much work to accomplish?
  11. It would be an 8 player map. 4 seperate 1on1's start the game off. As soon as one person wins his/her match up, he can then enter the next match up or patiently waits until they are done and then he goes on to 'fight the winner' so to speak. This process continues until we have 1 champion out of the 8.
  12. I'm going to throw this idea out there: A map that is 8 players. This map is to be played as Free for all, or perhaps 4on4: It's where the map sets up 4 seperate one on ones, perhaps shielded by barriers that only go down once one of the persons die. So, you start out against one person (4 seperate one on ones on the map). As soon as you kill that person, your first barrier opens up and you can venture into the next persons one on one, perhaps these guys are still fighting you can choose to join in or wait it out and then fight. Etc. Or maybe you don't even need the barriers, just set it up such that it promotes fighting between the 4 seperate one on ones.
  13. The discord is actually really awesome and developed by the players. They even have a chatroom for 'tips for newbies' that would be idea for this situation. Mad props to Mustache and the crew for creating that whole set up.
  14. I like it and i think it is a map that could potentially be added toquick match (ranking system). It has a unique feel to it and seems balanced.
  15. Sure, the inequality in competition is definitely a problem, but that also gets easier to deal with as you get better as a player. My advice would be that you just need to get more experienced and better at the game to enjoy it more. Maybe find a good group of people to play with on the Ra2 Discord that WILL help you instead of being ass holes.
  16. Agree with Ravage's remarks. I'm not an extra-small map person so those are irrelevant to me, but looking at the last map I was very interested in it but does seem to have problems with too many gems and not enough home-base ore. It almost has a little big lake feel to it (and that's a good thing). The second map is also interesting to me.
  17. Yeah -- that doesn't happen even on the dead Ra2 XWIS ladder and it didn't happen for the majority of it's existence. There's a much larger player pool here and there's still competitive spirit that lends to QM. Besides, even if we assumed that a large percentage would want to only play hosted-ladder games, whats the problem with that? As long as people are getting games the system is working. But again -- I think this won't be an issue as there will be enough people to enjoy QMing and hosted games.
  18. I see your point, but I disagree that it would be that big of an impact. There was never really any serious problems on Ra2 with it-- Sure, you had a number of players who one-mapped Little Big Lake or Mount Olympus with crates on, but those players almost never entered the top 10 at the end of month as they would get bashed hard (considering thier playing +5 games, just bash them on a low points nickname). Even when the ladders were dead, those types of players weren't competitive in the end of the month. They had their fun and added activity to the ladder. It's also a simple fix by adding a map quota % if that's what we're worried about. The one point you bring up that is important is the negative population of QM activity, but I think this is STRONGLY offset by the additional activity found by this type of interface with the lobby and increased players playing due to tournament games being hosted.
  19. I was going to start a discussion on this as well -- as it stands in the ladder we have the top 4 ranks as yuri players. Of course, this is a small statistical anomaly, but I fear that as time goes on, more and more players will adopt yuri to win in the ladder. We went through a period of 5 or so years where there was no yuri's revenge competitive scene, and now that it's finally back I feel like more and more yuri-faction players are going to continue to use the faction to reach higher ranks. One possible work-around here is my suggestion of lobby-interface. This would allow players to host their own ladder games. From here we can either ban yuri from QM and have QM more balanced sov/allied warfare, or hell -- keep it in, and those who do not want to face off against yuri can make their own ladder games. I feel like that would solve this issue immediately.
  20. @dkeeton @Grant Any thoughts on how we can get the players to log in to the lobby and thus show off their rank/badges in lobby and perhaps Host one's own ladder games? Would it be very difficult?
  21. You didn’t understand... for soviet this is actually a major disadvantage you give the allies an early spy sat to stop any rushes you force the soviet player to depend on protecting the spy sat otherwise they are fucked its easy for the allied player to kill the soviets spy satellite so soviets are screwed on a map that already favors allies strongly besides its useless in ava games other than giving everyone a free map hack and making the game too easy
  22. Yup spy satellites ruin the map. Cant do any proper rush against them and such. As a soviet player i have no problem playing without it and in some respects actually prefer no spy sat as it becomes a big problem if it dies and as you so eloquently stated... the allies can kill it rather easy with planes while the soviets dont have tge capacity to rebuild it...
  23. Absolutely, I don't see why not. On my #1 wish, I don't think it would be hard to allow people to log into the lobby and thus have a lobby-rank interface where ranks are shown in the lobby, badges are shown in the lobby, and users can host their own tournament games. Get it done admins! That'd be sweet. You already have the badge images from old YR WOL :D. I would QM SIGNIFICANTLY more if I knew my rank was shown in lobby and badges accumulated. There would also be 100's more tournament games with people opening their own ranked games.
  24. For 6) yes I mean the Ra2 Mode. for 8 no I didn't know, that's a nice option, thanks. I think our communities focus should be in #1. Integrating ladder with lobby should make #2 easily possible and should set the groundwork for a clan system. Thank you for the reply, I hope there's still work being done on number 1.
  25. OP, not trying to be a douchebag to you, but take it from someone who has literally played over 100,000 games of ra2/yr (probably much more)... You are coming off sounding like a newb. You are complaining about people knowing the maps better than you, knowing how to kill you fastly, and using teamwork in free for all against you. If you were a more skilled player you'd be able to stop all of these actions. Want to learn? There's many ways to do so and we have many talented players here. IF not, then just host your own games.
×
×
  • Create New...