Here are the main reasons why payload does not work with 6's:
- Maps are too BIG
- Respawn times are biased
- No one wants cart duty
What if we could make community payload maps designed with small teams in mind? As in small payload maps, with respawns made more fair to accommodate this change? Class limits are important, obviously no 2 engies or 2 heavies.
Fixing the cart duty issue is a bit more complicated. One adjustment that would help is by making the capture area around the payload larger, this could mean a scout pushing the cart is able to move a lot more letting them engage in more combat while capping. Maps like upward often you have to push over hill, but the payload is under the hill so the person pushing is completely separated from the action, putting the payload in the center of the action would make capping a lot less boring. I think these two adjustments combined would fix the issue of the scout doing nothing but push all game.
Will this make payload just as exciting and fast as 5cp? Well not quite, but I think it would be a big step in the right direction. It would give some off-classes more chance to shine, and I think this would be the ideal way of adapting the ever popular payload gamemode to work in smaller more competitive teams. I know the 6s community is known for being a bit stubborn, but hopefully I can spark some discussion.
Here are the main reasons why payload does not work with 6's:
- Maps are too BIG
- Respawn times are biased
- No one wants cart duty
What if we could make community payload maps designed with small teams in mind? As in small payload maps, with respawns made more fair to accommodate this change? Class limits are important, obviously no 2 engies or 2 heavies.
Fixing the cart duty issue is a bit more complicated. One adjustment that would help is by making the capture area around the payload larger, this could mean a scout pushing the cart is able to move a lot more letting them engage in more combat while capping. Maps like upward often you have to push over hill, but the payload is under the hill so the person pushing is completely separated from the action, putting the payload in the center of the action would make capping a lot less boring. I think these two adjustments combined would fix the issue of the scout doing nothing but push all game.
Will this make payload just as exciting and fast as 5cp? Well not quite, but I think it would be a big step in the right direction. It would give some off-classes more chance to shine, and I think this would be the ideal way of adapting the ever popular payload gamemode to work in smaller more competitive teams. I know the 6s community is known for being a bit stubborn, but hopefully I can spark some discussion.
http://www.teamfortress.tv/39474/pl-tapline
no mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that. it would be unplayable in pubs which means it would be unusable by 90% of a mappers audience, as well as being much less likely to be included in the game by valve. by asking a mapper to make an experimental map that is unplayable for most tf2 players (and very unlikely to be played by the remainder anyway) you are basically asking someone to waste hundreds of hours of their life to do something that no one will ever use.
the reason it's also not be likely to get picked up by the competitive community anyway is not because of a "stubborn" mentality, but because its just not likely that a payload map would be good for a competitive format. 5cp has had nearly a decade of competitive testing. when someone sets out to make a competitive 5cp map there are a series of guidelines that make your map near instantly playable for 6's at at least a basic level. payload has had very little testing (save for highlander, which doesnt apply to 6's anyway) so if someone sets out to make a competitive payload map, like fatherbrandon tried to do recently, there is no way of telling what works and what doesn't other than just by a TON of testing.
realistically, to make a payload map that works well in 6's, we would need at least a handful (3-4, ideally more) of dramatically different test maps, each being balanced with different concepts to try to figure out what works and what doesnt, all being tested consistently and with serious volume over the course of months to even come close to matching the sort of guidelines that 5cp has now. i dont know about you, but having 3-4 high quality, dedicated competitive mappers willing to work with the competitive community for months while ALSO having the competitive communities interest maintained during that time seems about as likely as valve handing us a $50,000 international tournament tomorrow.
no mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that. it would be unplayable in pubs which means it would be unusable by 90% of a mappers audience, as well as being much less likely to be included in the game by valve. by asking a mapper to make an experimental map that is unplayable for most tf2 players (and very unlikely to be played by the remainder anyway) you are basically asking someone to waste hundreds of hours of their life to do something that no one will ever use.
the reason it's also not be likely to get picked up by the competitive community anyway is not because of a "stubborn" mentality, but because its just not likely that a payload map would be good for a competitive format. 5cp has had nearly a decade of competitive testing. when someone sets out to make a competitive 5cp map there are a series of guidelines that make your map near instantly playable for 6's at at least a basic level. payload has had very little testing (save for highlander, which doesnt apply to 6's anyway) so if someone sets out to make a competitive payload map, like fatherbrandon tried to do recently, there is no way of telling what works and what doesn't other than just by a TON of testing.
realistically, to make a payload map that works well in 6's, we would need at least a handful (3-4, ideally more) of dramatically different test maps, each being balanced with different concepts to try to figure out what works and what doesnt, all being tested consistently and with serious volume over the course of months to even come close to matching the sort of guidelines that 5cp has now. i dont know about you, but having 3-4 high quality, dedicated competitive mappers willing to work with the competitive community for months while ALSO having the competitive communities interest maintained during that time seems about as likely as valve handing us a $50,000 international tournament tomorrow.
I dont know. can you repeat the question?
I dont know. can you repeat the question?
niteno mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that.
and yet pl_tapline exists
[quote=nite]no mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that.[/quote]
and yet pl_tapline exists
maxc232I dont know. can you repeat the question?
you're not the boss of me now
[quote=maxc232]I dont know. can you repeat the question?[/quote]
you're not the boss of me now
i love people theorycrafting because everyone who does it is extremely intelligent (like op). /s
that being said pl_ competitive inclusion is bad in any sense, because pl_ in of itself is a bad, static gamemode. thats why no one should (and hopefully will) put effort into making more comp-fitting pl_ maps
i love people theorycrafting because everyone who does it is extremely intelligent (like op). /s
that being said pl_ competitive inclusion is bad in any sense, because pl_ in of itself is a bad, static gamemode. thats why no one should (and hopefully will) put effort into making more comp-fitting pl_ maps
Does anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.
Does anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.
thats just a worse 5cp because the need to push the kart slows down any momentum a team might have.
thats just a worse 5cp because the need to push the kart slows down any momentum a team might have.
I'm not sure, as I am not sure how it would work or flow
It could be stalematey still if the defensive team wins a fight and digs in with a sentry, heavy etc and the attacking team has to break it somehow.
The only thing I can think that is good, is that there are decisions to be made by an attacking team (do we all push the cart for max speed, or push up and prevent the defensive team getting dug in/spawn camp them) and the defending team (the need to stop the cart progressing being a factor when taking any fight). Then again, I can imagine the second just being resolved by defending teams setting up defences at certain choke points in order to avoid risk.
I'm not sure, as I am not sure how it would work or flow
It could be stalematey still if the defensive team wins a fight and digs in with a sentry, heavy etc and the attacking team has to break it somehow.
The only thing I can think that is good, is that there are decisions to be made by an attacking team (do we all push the cart for max speed, or push up and prevent the defensive team getting dug in/spawn camp them) and the defending team (the need to stop the cart progressing being a factor when taking any fight). Then again, I can imagine the second just being resolved by defending teams setting up defences at certain choke points in order to avoid risk.
JDawgManiacDoes anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.
Waste had a version that worked like that too
[quote=JDawgManiac]Does anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.[/quote]
Waste had a version that worked like that too
niteno mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that. it would be unplayable in pubs which means it would be unusable by 90% of a mappers audience, as well as being much less likely to be included in the game by valve. by asking a mapper to make an experimental map that is unplayable for most tf2 players (and very unlikely to be played by the remainder anyway) you are basically asking someone to waste hundreds of hours of their life to do something that no one will ever use.
the reason it's also not be likely to get picked up by the competitive community anyway is not because of a "stubborn" mentality, but because its just not likely that a payload map would be good for a competitive format. 5cp has had nearly a decade of competitive testing. when someone sets out to make a competitive 5cp map there are a series of guidelines that make your map near instantly playable for 6's at at least a basic level. payload has had very little testing (save for highlander, which doesnt apply to 6's anyway) so if someone sets out to make a competitive payload map, like fatherbrandon tried to do recently, there is no way of telling what works and what doesn't other than just by a TON of testing.
realistically, to make a payload map that works well in 6's, we would need at least a handful (3-4, ideally more) of dramatically different test maps, each being balanced with different concepts to try to figure out what works and what doesnt, all being tested consistently and with serious volume over the course of months to even come close to matching the sort of guidelines that 5cp has now. i dont know about you, but having 3-4 high quality, dedicated competitive mappers willing to work with the competitive community for months while ALSO having the competitive communities interest maintained during that time seems about as likely as valve handing us a $50,000 international tournament tomorrow.
If the main issue is just lack of willing people to work on it and test it, I can certainly help if people like the idea. I have a bit of mapping experience myself, and I would certainly help if other people were down to do so also.
JDawgManiacDoes anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.
While thats not a bad idea, that is basically a payload on 5 cp. Your idea is very reminiscent of payload race, but that gamemode didnt really work out. I think payload should stay its own unique gamemode, because if its just 5cp with a payload, nothing unique can from from it.
AdebisiI'm not sure, as I am not sure how it would work or flow
It could be stalematey still if the defensive team wins a fight and digs in with a sentry, heavy etc and the attacking team has to break it somehow.
The only thing I can think that is good, is that there are decisions to be made by an attacking team (do we all push the cart for max speed, or push up and prevent the defensive team getting dug in/spawn camp them) and the defending team (the need to stop the cart progressing being a factor when taking any fight). Then again, I can imagine the second just being resolved by defending teams setting up defences at certain choke points in order to avoid risk.
5cp is actually far more "stalematey" because both teams can defend, and you get extra time for caps making the match's time unlimited. Payload is not a stalemate if defense is strong, because a stale mate means no one is winning and nothing is happening, if the payload is not moving that is not a stalemate because the defense is winning.
Also engie nests at choke points are really not hard to take out if you have a coordinated team, all you need is an uber and a demo. Remember I made sure the state that this idea only works with a class limit of max one engineer and max one heavy. So you dont have to worry about killing 3 sentries anyways.
[quote=nite]no mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that. it would be unplayable in pubs which means it would be unusable by 90% of a mappers audience, as well as being much less likely to be included in the game by valve. by asking a mapper to make an experimental map that is unplayable for most tf2 players (and very unlikely to be played by the remainder anyway) you are basically asking someone to waste hundreds of hours of their life to do something that no one will ever use.
the reason it's also not be likely to get picked up by the competitive community anyway is not because of a "stubborn" mentality, but because its just not likely that a payload map would be good for a competitive format. 5cp has had nearly a decade of competitive testing. when someone sets out to make a competitive 5cp map there are a series of guidelines that make your map near instantly playable for 6's at at least a basic level. payload has had very little testing (save for highlander, which doesnt apply to 6's anyway) so if someone sets out to make a competitive payload map, like fatherbrandon tried to do recently, there is no way of telling what works and what doesn't other than just by a TON of testing.
realistically, to make a payload map that works well in 6's, we would need at least a handful (3-4, ideally more) of dramatically different test maps, each being balanced with different concepts to try to figure out what works and what doesnt, all being tested consistently and with serious volume over the course of months to even come close to matching the sort of guidelines that 5cp has now. i dont know about you, but having 3-4 high quality, dedicated competitive mappers willing to work with the competitive community for months while ALSO having the competitive communities interest maintained during that time seems about as likely as valve handing us a $50,000 international tournament tomorrow.[/quote]
If the main issue is just lack of willing people to work on it and test it, I can certainly help if people like the idea. I have a bit of mapping experience myself, and I would certainly help if other people were down to do so also.
[quote=JDawgManiac]Does anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.[/quote]
While thats not a bad idea, that is basically a payload on 5 cp. Your idea is very reminiscent of payload race, but that gamemode didnt really work out. I think payload should stay its own unique gamemode, because if its just 5cp with a payload, nothing unique can from from it.
[quote=Adebisi]I'm not sure, as I am not sure how it would work or flow
It could be stalematey still if the defensive team wins a fight and digs in with a sentry, heavy etc and the attacking team has to break it somehow.
The only thing I can think that is good, is that there are decisions to be made by an attacking team (do we all push the cart for max speed, or push up and prevent the defensive team getting dug in/spawn camp them) and the defending team (the need to stop the cart progressing being a factor when taking any fight). Then again, I can imagine the second just being resolved by defending teams setting up defences at certain choke points in order to avoid risk.[/quote]
5cp is actually far more "stalematey" because both teams can defend, and you get extra time for caps making the match's time unlimited. Payload is not a stalemate if defense is strong, because a stale mate means no one is winning and nothing is happening, if the payload is not moving that is not a stalemate because the defense is winning.
Also engie nests at choke points are really not hard to take out if you have a coordinated team, all you need is an uber and a demo. Remember I made sure the state that this idea only works with a class limit of max one engineer and max one heavy. So you dont have to worry about killing 3 sentries anyways.
Jnaejnaeniteno mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that. it would be unplayable in pubs which means it would be unusable by 90% of a mappers audience, as well as being much less likely to be included in the game by valve. by asking a mapper to make an experimental map that is unplayable for most tf2 players (and very unlikely to be played by the remainder anyway) you are basically asking someone to waste hundreds of hours of their life to do something that no one will ever use.
the reason it's also not be likely to get picked up by the competitive community anyway is not because of a "stubborn" mentality, but because its just not likely that a payload map would be good for a competitive format. 5cp has had nearly a decade of competitive testing. when someone sets out to make a competitive 5cp map there are a series of guidelines that make your map near instantly playable for 6's at at least a basic level. payload has had very little testing (save for highlander, which doesnt apply to 6's anyway) so if someone sets out to make a competitive payload map, like fatherbrandon tried to do recently, there is no way of telling what works and what doesn't other than just by a TON of testing.
realistically, to make a payload map that works well in 6's, we would need at least a handful (3-4, ideally more) of dramatically different test maps, each being balanced with different concepts to try to figure out what works and what doesnt, all being tested consistently and with serious volume over the course of months to even come close to matching the sort of guidelines that 5cp has now. i dont know about you, but having 3-4 high quality, dedicated competitive mappers willing to work with the competitive community for months while ALSO having the competitive communities interest maintained during that time seems about as likely as valve handing us a $50,000 international tournament tomorrow.
If the main issue is just lack of willing people to work on it and test it, I can certainly help if people like the idea. I have a bit of mapping experience myself, and I would certainly help if other people were down to do so also.
JDawgManiacDoes anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.
While thats not a bad idea, that is basically a payload on 5 cp. Your idea is very reminiscent of payload race, but that gamemode didnt really work out. I think payload should stay its own unique gamemode, because if its just 5cp with a payload, nothing unique can from from it.
AdebisiI'm not sure, as I am not sure how it would work or flow
It could be stalematey still if the defensive team wins a fight and digs in with a sentry, heavy etc and the attacking team has to break it somehow.
The only thing I can think that is good, is that there are decisions to be made by an attacking team (do we all push the cart for max speed, or push up and prevent the defensive team getting dug in/spawn camp them) and the defending team (the need to stop the cart progressing being a factor when taking any fight). Then again, I can imagine the second just being resolved by defending teams setting up defences at certain choke points in order to avoid risk.
5cp is actually far more "stalematey" because both teams can defend, and you get extra time for caps making the match's time unlimited. Payload is not a stalemate if defense is strong, because a stale mate means no one is winning and nothing is happening, if the payload is not moving that is not a stalemate because the defense is winning.
Also engie nests at choke points are really not hard to take out if you have a coordinated team, all you need is an uber and a demo. Remember I made sure the state that this idea only works with a class limit of max one engineer and max one heavy. So you dont have to worry about killing 3 sentries anyways.
Well, technically a team can be winning in CP and still have a stalemate over a point.
Maybe stalemate is the wrong term, but you can imagine a lot of times when the attack is halted for periods which is essentially the same issue to watch as stalemates in CP, it's not actually that fun to see teams repeatedly try and take out sentries and heavies with uber.
No, but in combination with pyros, heavies and snipers (1 max, I know), it becomes a lot more of a grind. Particularly as there is no objective to cap so the non-engie classes can kite the uber and counter-pop easily.
I'm not saying it can't ever work, I just think it has to be careful handled to keep it flowing. No issues with the idea being explored.
[quote=Jnaejnae][quote=nite]no mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that. it would be unplayable in pubs which means it would be unusable by 90% of a mappers audience, as well as being much less likely to be included in the game by valve. by asking a mapper to make an experimental map that is unplayable for most tf2 players (and very unlikely to be played by the remainder anyway) you are basically asking someone to waste hundreds of hours of their life to do something that no one will ever use.
the reason it's also not be likely to get picked up by the competitive community anyway is not because of a "stubborn" mentality, but because its just not likely that a payload map would be good for a competitive format. 5cp has had nearly a decade of competitive testing. when someone sets out to make a competitive 5cp map there are a series of guidelines that make your map near instantly playable for 6's at at least a basic level. payload has had very little testing (save for highlander, which doesnt apply to 6's anyway) so if someone sets out to make a competitive payload map, like fatherbrandon tried to do recently, there is no way of telling what works and what doesn't other than just by a TON of testing.
realistically, to make a payload map that works well in 6's, we would need at least a handful (3-4, ideally more) of dramatically different test maps, each being balanced with different concepts to try to figure out what works and what doesnt, all being tested consistently and with serious volume over the course of months to even come close to matching the sort of guidelines that 5cp has now. i dont know about you, but having 3-4 high quality, dedicated competitive mappers willing to work with the competitive community for months while ALSO having the competitive communities interest maintained during that time seems about as likely as valve handing us a $50,000 international tournament tomorrow.[/quote]
If the main issue is just lack of willing people to work on it and test it, I can certainly help if people like the idea. I have a bit of mapping experience myself, and I would certainly help if other people were down to do so also.
[quote=JDawgManiac]Does anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.[/quote]
While thats not a bad idea, that is basically a payload on 5 cp. Your idea is very reminiscent of payload race, but that gamemode didnt really work out. I think payload should stay its own unique gamemode, because if its just 5cp with a payload, nothing unique can from from it.
[quote=Adebisi]I'm not sure, as I am not sure how it would work or flow
It could be stalematey still if the defensive team wins a fight and digs in with a sentry, heavy etc and the attacking team has to break it somehow.
The only thing I can think that is good, is that there are decisions to be made by an attacking team (do we all push the cart for max speed, or push up and prevent the defensive team getting dug in/spawn camp them) and the defending team (the need to stop the cart progressing being a factor when taking any fight). Then again, I can imagine the second just being resolved by defending teams setting up defences at certain choke points in order to avoid risk.[/quote]
5cp is actually far more "stalematey" because both teams can defend, and you get extra time for caps making the match's time unlimited. Payload is not a stalemate if defense is strong, because a stale mate means no one is winning and nothing is happening, if the payload is not moving that is not a stalemate because the defense is winning.
Also engie nests at choke points are really not hard to take out if you have a coordinated team, all you need is an uber and a demo. Remember I made sure the state that this idea only works with a class limit of max one engineer and max one heavy. So you dont have to worry about killing 3 sentries anyways.[/quote]
Well, technically a team can be winning in CP and still have a stalemate over a point.
Maybe stalemate is the wrong term, but you can imagine a lot of times when the attack is halted for periods which is essentially the same issue to watch as stalemates in CP, it's not actually that fun to see teams repeatedly try and take out sentries and heavies with uber.
No, but in combination with pyros, heavies and snipers (1 max, I know), it becomes a lot more of a grind. Particularly as there is no objective to cap so the non-engie classes can kite the uber and counter-pop easily.
I'm not saying it can't ever work, I just think it has to be careful handled to keep it flowing. No issues with the idea being explored.
FUNKemaxc232I dont know. can you repeat the question?
you're not the boss of me now
and you're not so big
[quote=FUNKe][quote=maxc232]I dont know. can you repeat the question?[/quote]
you're not the boss of me now[/quote]
and you're not so big
AdebisiJnaejnaeniteno mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that. it would be unplayable in pubs which means it would be unusable by 90% of a mappers audience, as well as being much less likely to be included in the game by valve. by asking a mapper to make an experimental map that is unplayable for most tf2 players (and very unlikely to be played by the remainder anyway) you are basically asking someone to waste hundreds of hours of their life to do something that no one will ever use.
the reason it's also not be likely to get picked up by the competitive community anyway is not because of a "stubborn" mentality, but because its just not likely that a payload map would be good for a competitive format. 5cp has had nearly a decade of competitive testing. when someone sets out to make a competitive 5cp map there are a series of guidelines that make your map near instantly playable for 6's at at least a basic level. payload has had very little testing (save for highlander, which doesnt apply to 6's anyway) so if someone sets out to make a competitive payload map, like fatherbrandon tried to do recently, there is no way of telling what works and what doesn't other than just by a TON of testing.
realistically, to make a payload map that works well in 6's, we would need at least a handful (3-4, ideally more) of dramatically different test maps, each being balanced with different concepts to try to figure out what works and what doesnt, all being tested consistently and with serious volume over the course of months to even come close to matching the sort of guidelines that 5cp has now. i dont know about you, but having 3-4 high quality, dedicated competitive mappers willing to work with the competitive community for months while ALSO having the competitive communities interest maintained during that time seems about as likely as valve handing us a $50,000 international tournament tomorrow.
If the main issue is just lack of willing people to work on it and test it, I can certainly help if people like the idea. I have a bit of mapping experience myself, and I would certainly help if other people were down to do so also.
JDawgManiacDoes anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.
While thats not a bad idea, that is basically a payload on 5 cp. Your idea is very reminiscent of payload race, but that gamemode didnt really work out. I think payload should stay its own unique gamemode, because if its just 5cp with a payload, nothing unique can from from it.
AdebisiI'm not sure, as I am not sure how it would work or flow
It could be stalematey still if the defensive team wins a fight and digs in with a sentry, heavy etc and the attacking team has to break it somehow.
The only thing I can think that is good, is that there are decisions to be made by an attacking team (do we all push the cart for max speed, or push up and prevent the defensive team getting dug in/spawn camp them) and the defending team (the need to stop the cart progressing being a factor when taking any fight). Then again, I can imagine the second just being resolved by defending teams setting up defences at certain choke points in order to avoid risk.
5cp is actually far more "stalematey" because both teams can defend, and you get extra time for caps making the match's time unlimited. Payload is not a stalemate if defense is strong, because a stale mate means no one is winning and nothing is happening, if the payload is not moving that is not a stalemate because the defense is winning.
Also engie nests at choke points are really not hard to take out if you have a coordinated team, all you need is an uber and a demo. Remember I made sure the state that this idea only works with a class limit of max one engineer and max one heavy. So you dont have to worry about killing 3 sentries anyways.
Well, technically a team can be winning in CP and still have a stalemate over a point.
Maybe stalemate is the wrong term, but you can imagine a lot of times when the attack is halted for periods which is essentially the same issue to watch as stalemates in CP, it's not actually that fun to see teams repeatedly try and take out sentries and heavies with uber.
No, but in combination with pyros, heavies and snipers (1 max, I know), it becomes a lot more of a grind. Particularly as there is no objective to cap so the non-engie classes can kite the uber and counter-pop easily.
I'm not saying it can't ever work, I just think it has to be careful handled to keep it flowing. No issues with the idea being explored.
If certain classes hold up the game too much we have the ability to inflict further limitations. Such as no heavy and engineer at the same time. However TF2 doesn't have a large competitive audience, so the assumption that 6s is the "most fun to watch" is subjective.
Yes the attack will be haulted, if it wasnt the attacking team would win every round. So making payload too offense centric could actually make the gamemode LESS fun. So yes this has to be carefully handled. If this mini-payload works with the standard 6's class, its also possible to simply ban engineer, heavy, and pyro. I only wanted to refrain hard banning certain classes because it alienates the playerbase which is one of the issues in current 6s.
[quote=Adebisi][quote=Jnaejnae][quote=nite]no mapper wants to make a competitive exclusive map, and a tiny payload map would be exactly that. it would be unplayable in pubs which means it would be unusable by 90% of a mappers audience, as well as being much less likely to be included in the game by valve. by asking a mapper to make an experimental map that is unplayable for most tf2 players (and very unlikely to be played by the remainder anyway) you are basically asking someone to waste hundreds of hours of their life to do something that no one will ever use.
the reason it's also not be likely to get picked up by the competitive community anyway is not because of a "stubborn" mentality, but because its just not likely that a payload map would be good for a competitive format. 5cp has had nearly a decade of competitive testing. when someone sets out to make a competitive 5cp map there are a series of guidelines that make your map near instantly playable for 6's at at least a basic level. payload has had very little testing (save for highlander, which doesnt apply to 6's anyway) so if someone sets out to make a competitive payload map, like fatherbrandon tried to do recently, there is no way of telling what works and what doesn't other than just by a TON of testing.
realistically, to make a payload map that works well in 6's, we would need at least a handful (3-4, ideally more) of dramatically different test maps, each being balanced with different concepts to try to figure out what works and what doesnt, all being tested consistently and with serious volume over the course of months to even come close to matching the sort of guidelines that 5cp has now. i dont know about you, but having 3-4 high quality, dedicated competitive mappers willing to work with the competitive community for months while ALSO having the competitive communities interest maintained during that time seems about as likely as valve handing us a $50,000 international tournament tomorrow.[/quote]
If the main issue is just lack of willing people to work on it and test it, I can certainly help if people like the idea. I have a bit of mapping experience myself, and I would certainly help if other people were down to do so also.
[quote=JDawgManiac]Does anyone remember the weird joke payload map, I think it was called dogbread, where the cart started in the middle and could be pushed by either team?
I feel like this is an idea that could be worked on, because it allows for the same attack and defend mechanics of 5cp and koth, where you're not locked into one role.[/quote]
While thats not a bad idea, that is basically a payload on 5 cp. Your idea is very reminiscent of payload race, but that gamemode didnt really work out. I think payload should stay its own unique gamemode, because if its just 5cp with a payload, nothing unique can from from it.
[quote=Adebisi]I'm not sure, as I am not sure how it would work or flow
It could be stalematey still if the defensive team wins a fight and digs in with a sentry, heavy etc and the attacking team has to break it somehow.
The only thing I can think that is good, is that there are decisions to be made by an attacking team (do we all push the cart for max speed, or push up and prevent the defensive team getting dug in/spawn camp them) and the defending team (the need to stop the cart progressing being a factor when taking any fight). Then again, I can imagine the second just being resolved by defending teams setting up defences at certain choke points in order to avoid risk.[/quote]
5cp is actually far more "stalematey" because both teams can defend, and you get extra time for caps making the match's time unlimited. Payload is not a stalemate if defense is strong, because a stale mate means no one is winning and nothing is happening, if the payload is not moving that is not a stalemate because the defense is winning.
Also engie nests at choke points are really not hard to take out if you have a coordinated team, all you need is an uber and a demo. Remember I made sure the state that this idea only works with a class limit of max one engineer and max one heavy. So you dont have to worry about killing 3 sentries anyways.[/quote]
Well, technically a team can be winning in CP and still have a stalemate over a point.
Maybe stalemate is the wrong term, but you can imagine a lot of times when the attack is halted for periods which is essentially the same issue to watch as stalemates in CP, it's not actually that fun to see teams repeatedly try and take out sentries and heavies with uber.
No, but in combination with pyros, heavies and snipers (1 max, I know), it becomes a lot more of a grind. Particularly as there is no objective to cap so the non-engie classes can kite the uber and counter-pop easily.
I'm not saying it can't ever work, I just think it has to be careful handled to keep it flowing. No issues with the idea being explored.[/quote]
If certain classes hold up the game too much we have the ability to inflict further limitations. Such as no heavy and engineer at the same time. However TF2 doesn't have a large competitive audience, so the assumption that 6s is the "most fun to watch" is subjective.
Yes the attack will be haulted, if it wasnt the attacking team would win every round. So making payload too offense centric could actually make the gamemode LESS fun. So yes this has to be carefully handled. If this mini-payload works with the standard 6's class, its also possible to simply ban engineer, heavy, and pyro. I only wanted to refrain hard banning certain classes because it alienates the playerbase which is one of the issues in current 6s.
I kept everything inside
And even though I tried, it all fell apart
What it meant to me
Will eventually be a memory of a time when
I tried so hard
And got so far
But in the end
It doesn't even matter...
I kept everything inside
And even though I tried, it all fell apart
What it meant to me
Will eventually be a memory of a time when
I tried so hard
And got so far
But in the end
It doesn't even matter...