Truxa Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 Hi! I'm here to post about yet another vote-spam to force a map-change. The original renegade had jelly servers with various server settings, as voting was not in the game, this wasn't an issue but here in Renegade X it is. I feel that it should be possible to 'turn off' voting or atleast 'turn off' the vote option to force a mapchange, especially when the server is running the marathon settings. Essentially, there is no map change unless you destroy the enemy base or when your own base gets owned. This is realy getting lame to the point that it's no longer fun to play with certain people of whom you KNOW they will initiate votes as soon as they can, to change a map when they are in a disadvantage. YES, you might get the occasional team that downs a single building and then turle in for a tight defense, or just camp outside the base (as is the case with field and GDI WF is down). GDI is pinned down and Nod can't realy finish the job. It's all up to the right tactics realy. And this sort of a 'stalemate' is what is making a MARATHON FUN! If you don't like this game mode, then join a server which has a timelimit, preferably a 30-minute one! Yes ... You might not find a server that has 0 others playing in, but then YOU must be the first! There is bound to be many others who do not enjoy marathon but do enjoy the shorter/faster games, they will follow and the server will get more populated. You just have to be that 1st lamb that crosses the dam. Don't force your type of gameplay upon others the way you do. You are breaking the community as you are breaking the fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goku Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 I dont have a problem with map votes i just think there should be a option to say x minutes of the map should pass before you can vote map change (Note:the first 3mins should allow this vote incase you choose the wrong map or something). Hopefully beta 3 will reduce vote spam with the cool down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.D. Lovecraft Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 I agree 100% with you Truxa. It gets ridiculous when you're playing a tight match in Marathon and you have to press F2 every 2 minutes just to keep playing that match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RypeL Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 Yeah we will include a no midgame mapvote option for servers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubot2 Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 I second this. It's also annoying to see people whining about how long the game is taking. If you don't like long games then DON'T PLAY ON THE MARATHON SERVER! Jeez..... I personally love the long matches Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerbil Tube Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 Crate hunting ftw. Love marathon matches when all thats left is one building on both teams. Then it gets changed because "its not going anywhere!". Its called strategy for a reason, long term planning. If you don't like building up a force and coming up with a tactic then don't join. Maybe lose the change map vote altogether and replace it with a surrender option. If the whole team doesn't like it anymore then give them a way out. Could give each player on the winning team some extra points for forcing a surrender. Just a thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truxa Posted October 12, 2014 Author Share Posted October 12, 2014 Oeh surrendering! Might be an option if e.g. you have Hon/bar+pp vs ref+strip/wf One team can save up a load of cash to buy a rush, thus having an upper hand, but the 1k-chars present on the other team decimates that rush easily, leaving a stalemate. But, the team with ref, would be able to rush again in 10 minutes, while the other team cannot. The ref team has the upper hand and could force this surrender! However, for a team to surrender, I still thing voting would be abuse sensitive much like the mapchange. If it is to replace mapchange votes, then perhaps 75% or more of the team willing to surrender is enough. 50% is too easily reached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RypeL Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 Maybe only let the top 3 of each side initiate a surrender ? Top 3 should mean that they are doing fairly well but if they still vote for a surrender it should be more justified then when someone from the bottom who is just bored initiates it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truxa Posted October 12, 2014 Author Share Posted October 12, 2014 Maybe only let the top 3 of each side initiate a surrender ? Top 3 should mean that they are doing fairly well but if they still vote for a surrender it should be more justified then when someone from the bottom who is just bored initiates it. Indeed. Top 3 should initiate and accept surrender for it to be able to succeed. But it would still need a majority though. Top3 + totalling 51%. ORRR to make it more complicated: Total team score (based on present players as midgame people might leave but teamscore is unaffected) for a vote to pass, 51% of that total score must accept the surrender. (lets say 20v20, total score of 40.000, majority would be 20.400+ score needed to accept the surrender. Sometimes it needs the top 3, sometimes the top 5 or 2 top5 players and the remaining 10 bottom players, to reach the 51%+) I'm in favor of this because sometimes I'm in that top3 So, it's also a bit beneficial to me personally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.