thanks. Currently, i am bein b lazy and havent forced all the extraction objects to only appear for minigames, so technically i woupdnt use my mercy variant for anything else. The prefab, which could be put out soon, will come with the right labels for gametypes.
Here is video of the new functionality of the beacon. Video #1 - New button press progress indicator. Initial Capture, and Conversion. Same team cannot continue pressing button after capturing. Video #2 - Point scoring animation. Requisition and initial capture of new beacon. Three maps - with updated Extraction mechanics Regret - Extraction Demo Fathom - Extraction Demo Mercy - Extraction Demo Known bug: Occasionally, team who has captured a beacon can still press the button. Please try to obtain video evidence of this occuring and what was leading up to it around the beacon. THanks.
pretty excited... I just had one of the highish level PC players state "It's fun. A lot better than strongholds" lots of testing has been had the past couple days, and we're starting to get some bookmarks and other games played independently. When there are players online, and even when it seems like there aren't, I can usually get a game going from scratch. That means people see it, are at least curious, so they join. Also, I am getting a lot of players repeatedly joining. New players usually quickply pick up on how to play. Not very many bugs or unintended moments of gameplay... if you see stuff, please report it and record if possible!
My back is getting better I should have my map playable and ready for this gametype soonish. It depends on Pat Sounds schedule as we still have to finish are 1v1.
Has anyone else noticed any bugs? Play testing it? I have encountered a fairly big one on the Regret varient linked here. I would avoid that map at least for a couple days or until I post that I think I have it fixed. It is allowing a person on one team to capture the beacon (Charlie on Regret is the one I noticed) for the opposing team! LOL, that has not happened on any other map, and so I think I may have made a mistake when dropping the prefabs into that map... not sure yet. So, expect to possibly see this bug elsewhere... I have also noticed a smaller issue, which is not a bug but more of a lack of planning - new joiners to matches already in progress do not see any navs until the navs are refreshed due to some change in circumstances - like someone capturing the beacon, converting it, or it going into it's final "warning" before scoring. (or finally, a new beacon becoming available) Imagine me, when people say "what do I do?"... I type "press the button"... they say "What button", I say, "you mean which button?" They say, "yeah, what one?" I say, "LOL, the Nav!" and they go "what nav?" ANd I say, "awww ****".
I think I have the bug on Regret fixed, where it would allow you to capture for the opposing team. (blue would cap for red). The pieces for that Charlie site were too close to the walls of the dev map. Dev map walls appear to be deadzones where things dissappear and sometimes never return. The game literally forgets about something it consideres to be outside the map's boundaries. All three demo maps are in good working order again - resume testing please. I got many games in last night and noticed no major bugs... some people didn't understand what to do, but it was mostly players who seemed to not even know how to play the game. Most people picked it up quickly. (I had full lobbies on PC at 4am, so that is a GREAT sign) Navs for new joiners after match starts - I made a first attempt at this last night, but it is not perfect yet (but doesn't break gameplay). The solution I came up with is to make all new joiners see "Objective" at whichever site is currently open, in yellow. But apparently new joiners are not seeing it and the current players see it when a ne wperson joins. I'd bet I got the logic reversed on it because I was tired Additional things to do before moving on to 2-site: (not sure if they are all possible) Gametype - give players credit in the stats screen for caps and points. avoid dropped weapon interference of buttons - might need to be a small raised platform for switch assembly and all site pieces to sit on. May not actually prioritize this as a must have. Gametype - if tied, delay end of round if any station armed. I have seen that it is kind of awkward when you have it armed but there is less than 45sec remaining and there's really no reason to keep playing. I might make it so round also ends early if there is no time to actually do anything new. This may not be possible to iron out perfectly, but I'd like to try. Slightly change colors of navs - brighter blue for better contrast, pinker red, lighter grey.
do you remember what Halo 4 did when teams were tied and at OT there is not enough time to hold the site long enough to score? Problem is, it is making some situations cause you to not keep trying for the objective any more, cuz there's no way you can win. I am considering and trying to figure out how to make it just score for the team who is holding it, if and only if the teams are tied when the game ends. That way, since it takes 45 sec holding it to score, and if there is only 30 sec left, the team who did capture it for that last bit will be rewarded for doing so and it breaks the tie and they win. That could also be a capture of the site at the very last second. Would keep thigns interesting I Think. Does that sound fair and is a good scoring mechanic for this mode?
I want to say if it were in that situation on H4 is would simply just tie if it went to time. But in any case I'd say that's a welcome addition given the fact that overtime would become useless if it didn't give enough time to cap.
Took a stab at that feature last night, but its hard of not impossoble forbthe game to distinguish between round end and ot end. This might mean ot just goes away entirely, fyi.
Need feedback on something... would like more than just one opinion (Hex, see if you can gather more) Currently, although it is not intended to operate in this manner, the button presses DO allow other teammates to press the button when you do, and this can quicken the time it takes to cap the sites. Is that okay? It wsan't our intention to reward teammates working together in this manner, but is it okay for gameplay and possibly even a bonus for the meta? I'm not entirely sure I can cure it, but I won't try if it's actually preferable. It's supposed to work like this. Player 1 on Team 1 presses button, that itself deactivates the buttons and makes him/her wait a second or so to press it again. however, if the players press it at approx the same moment, it registers as being pressed twice (not a bug, just an unintended consequence). I am also hearing what sounds like a very quick cap from players (not myself) and I need to see if this is possible with a very quick double-tap of the buttons. I use Hell-jumper which has "B" as the interact button. Those buttons are pressure sensative and force you to actually hold it for a moment. A shoulder button may not actually make you do that short hold, so in those cases perhaps there is a button like that which actually allows you to press it twice before it deactivates. (It could also be keyboard users since I am on PC, who are pressing the 'E' key twice, quickly.) It is also possible it is just an audio glitch making it sound like the button was just pressed twice very quickly. .... There is not much left to do before I release a prefab/set for this game mode for people to start running wild with. I have decided that in the interest of time, I am going to release this WITHOUT the feature mentioned preiously, to alter the way rounds end and do an alternative scoring for whichever team holds the site at the time the round ends in a tie situation. I will continue developjment of that, but it may take a while and the mode is FULLY functional right now without it. I've got at least one pro player interested in playing the mode, so I am really wanting to get this out! ... The plan is to keep the three exising "DEMO" maps intact (and make more), and continue to make improvements as the mode is polished more. Players bookmarking those will always have the latest and greatest. If you put prefabs that may later be improved on your new Forge maps, however, you'll need to either accept that state or replace with better prefabs in the future. (prefabs may merely be small patches or completely replacing all items for the mode) ... I'll start on 2-site version of the mode soon, which will hopeuflly not take as long to develop since I've tried to keep the development of this 1-site version forward compatible with that enhanced setup. I'll see how well I did with that piece once I start trying to changing things for it. ... I should also be clear that no map will be able to have both 1-site AND 2-site capabilities, unless you save a separate copy.
sorry, a couple more things.. Fathom - I need a good suggestion for changing either the 2nd or 3rd site location, because they feel very redundant, just flipped one side to the other. Does putting one of them up on the ramp at the back with the window make sense? I don't like that spot because someone can very safely sit in the cubby and cap it without you being able to adequately attack them... but is that much of a concern? Overall I think people like playing fathom Extraction the least comparitively... ... Also, I would like someone to test this hypothesis. That players who choose team colors other than Red or Blue are interfering with the functionality of the switches and causing the bug of "capped for wrong team". In other words, the non-r/b player is possibly not being auto-killed fast enough to avoid them travelling into the zone that is around the switches, which toggles which team is capping it, and causing it to flip to the opposing team when it shouldn't. Can someone test doing everything in their power to walk into a switch area while another color, switch teams (to r or b), and see if you cap for the appropriate team after switching?
I personally would prefer if presses didn't stack as is kind of messes with the idea of set-in-stone cap/conversion times. The reasoning behind this is very similar to my outlook on return speed influence in CTF. If you give teammates the ability to stack influence (whether it'd be to a button press, returning an away flag, or standing in a stronghold) it has a high chance of taking away from a potentially tense, yet interesting, situation. Having set times allows beacon defenders to punish attackers for initiating an uncoordinated offensive push followed with poor timing. Same scenario applies to the first push for the neutral site. I'd like to hear other people's take on it, especially the pro if he has anything to say.
I hear that. The only counter-point I'd have is that there is a penalty of sorts for putting two players into the capping - that, it may end up being balanced by the fact that there are temporarily two players not getting ready or starting to fend off an attack. Two players busy is a disadvantage to them... But I think your feedback is enough for me to try a couple things to see if it can be cured... stay tuned. Oh, and the pro was just Ace that one night on his stream saying that extraction was fun and then seeming excited that I said I almost had it finished, in the chat... I don't have an open line of communication or anything...
Go try the demo maps again. I had one night of testing, not exactly conclusive, but somebimprovements were made. Shoud not cap for incorrect team. Should no longer allow teammates to capture faster than single player, and also should not allow quik double tap with nonpressure sensative buttons. There is also a new cap reset notification and some other tweaks.
Also @Ryouji Gunblade is going to be creating a prefab or two for an alternative station visual effect. I will possibly be creating demonstrations when ready so that people can weigh in on how the different pieces look. (Not operations, just visuals) His idea is that we could have covy and unsc variants. I guess it would be good to start asking for feedback on that line of thouught...if there was enough consistence between two variants of visuals, do you think it will avoid new people getting too confused by the differences? Heck, i like my hologram contraption, but he says ugly... he might be right, idk, lol
I always overreact when things aren't classic enough. Once that's taken care of, we can make lots of new versions. I think everyone could take a crack at it. Make something that has a few objects but sells the "Extraction" object motif. I went with a white glow inside a colored spherical shape with 2 white rings inside, to mimic the old design. But it could be nearly anything with the power of visible boundaries.
I like the idea, but unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to look at your concept yet... re: many designs... The only thing that concerns me, like I said above, is players thinking, "Oh, okay I see this Extraction lobby and I've played that on H5 already, but WTF is this thing it looks different than the one I played the other day" or having the maps just be so different in terms of this visual that there is confusion. So, while it is technically true that someone can always recreate things if they want to, since none of this is locked down for editing, I think we may all want to come to some sort of consensus on the design before putting forward a "finished" design, which hopefully won't change much if any after the fact. Also, I've noticed that when scripting gets more than the very basic, people probably won't take it upon themselves to try and tweak stuff. For instance, you will need at least one portion of this visual immediately visible when each station becomes active, so that there is something visual there besides the nav marker just floating. So, that piece needs many scripts copied from the current design to that new piece. If someone doesn't copy it exactly perfect (of course that means meticulously going between them and comparing settings until they match), the thing will not work as expected. The rest of the pieces will at least have one or two scripts I think, but those are somewhat basic. On the point about customization. Per map, I do plan to put a white-paper out about how to tweak things to tailor for each map, but also provide recommendations for what not to change, else breaking it, or at least making it not function as intended.