Ffa league v5 discussion

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:34 pm

So ffa league has been using my latest version of ffa league so i thought i would ask for some feedback. Ive fixed various issues like the bottle bug, some passability, and unit balance. I know the big issue is people dont like the reptile units, but its kind of a joke map, so just skip it if you dont want to play it.

What would you like to see in a potential v6?

To be more specific, what unit trades do you want, and on what maps?

Asmodian
Posts: 1467
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:28 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Asmodian » Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:50 pm

I'll look through the map pack so I can give some honest feedback. The only major thing that comes to mind right now is making the snow/desert/rock/grass map a 4 man start by removing the team that starts in the middle.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ » Wed Oct 12, 2016 8:31 pm

Or maybe both a 4 man with big teams and a 16 man with small teams, 4 to each quadrant

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Wed Oct 12, 2016 8:49 pm

I think the reason that one is still so bad is its only been played like 5 times. I can clean it up pretty easily.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ » Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:56 am

yea to be honest ive never played it...garnish is an amazing ffaleaguepack hipster that way

adrenaline
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby adrenaline » Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:31 am

Chaos (dark) - fetch priestess is the dumbest unit i have ever seen
River of Gold - the sword makes the game incredibly unbalanced... pretty dumb to have in competitive play.
Titus Groan - get rid of fire arrows... way too OP in middle... which is where most of the action happens since it's nearly always played as lmoth. I actually prefer the poison arrows in the original version.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head... I just generally dislike any new units, special abilities, artifacts, etc... Call me a Myth purist. Fun enough to play around with in casual games, I suppose... but I really don't think they belong in competitive play.

par73
Posts: 2832
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby par73 » Thu Oct 13, 2016 12:07 pm

2 or 3 teams would be a much better fit than 4 (per quadrent) on that map with the 4 biomes

the bow doesn't get used at all in rol

shadow
Posts: 518
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:51 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby shadow » Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:34 pm

adrenaline wrote:Chaos (dark) - fetch priestess is the dumbest unit i have ever seen
River of Gold - the sword makes the game incredibly unbalanced... pretty dumb to have in competitive play.
Titus Groan - get rid of fire arrows... way too OP in middle... which is where most of the action happens since it's nearly always played as lmoth. I actually prefer the poison arrows in the original version.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head... I just generally dislike any new units, special abilities, artifacts, etc... Call me a Myth purist. Fun enough to play around with in casual games, I suppose... but I really don't think they belong in competitive play.


Double that.
Zak, almost everything u make is complete garbage, play once and forget as nightmare.
Quality over quantity. Period.

And btw something weird happen in this game
http://gateofstorms.net/tournaments/FFA ... mes/159665
4:52-4:58, ligthning from flag kill my zerk, who just pick up sword
wtf was that ?

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Thu Oct 13, 2016 3:32 pm

Adren:
Can you clarify what you mean about the fetch priestess? I know its an underpowered unit but that seems like a knee-jerk reaction. I will take the flame arrows off titus groan, good advice. The sword on river of gold is only unbalanced on lmoth or koth, which is what everyone picks for that map, so the sword must be a big reason they choose it. I understand you prefer standard bungie maps. Its not up to me what MM says is pickable in ffa pack, so cries for myth purity are not really productive here. The goal of the ffa pack is to bring new ideas to the reg community about how myth can be played, not to make you play bushido, TSG, or mazz. I want to make those maps and units work within the current competitive myth meta. Now with that said, if i made a legitimately NOT fun unit trade, have too many new units on one map, or have some other issue making my plugin bad, I'm eager to rectify this.

Paris: so youre saying have 12 teams, 3 per quadrant? On river of light do you mean nobody can pick up the bow? Or its just too chaotic mid to get a chance to use it? If the latter, I would remove the bow from the map but it really doesnt take anything away from the map, at worst its a distraction.

Shadow: You are consistently unable to articulate why you dont like my plugins beyond the usual "its trash". To answer your question, the map is designed to kill any unit that tried to leave mid with the sword, in order to prevent you from abusing its power. Its a form of map balance. If you want to use the sword, it has to stay mid.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Thu Oct 13, 2016 3:38 pm

I would appreciate some feedback on the following things if encountered:

Fetch priestess
Dragonslayer unit (fenris guy from chimera with big sword)
Dwarven mortar urchin ball
Goblin stormcaster
Crown artifact (creates reflection shield)

adrenaline
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby adrenaline » Thu Oct 13, 2016 10:09 pm

what i'm saying about the fetch priestess is that it is a useless unit. if i had a choice, i wouldn't trade for one and i doubt anyone else would either. the fact that it's default is annoying. the trade on that map is fine, otherwise... just get rid of the fetch priestess and you have a good unit set.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Thu Oct 13, 2016 11:57 pm

Youre right the priestess has a weak attack at the moment, but thats something i can rectify. Its inaccurate to call it a useless unit, since it can heal an entire army simultaneously. But i hear you

shadow
Posts: 518
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:51 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby shadow » Fri Oct 14, 2016 12:02 am

Zak wrote:Shadow: You are consistently unable to articulate why you dont like my plugins beyond the usual "its trash". To answer your question, the map is designed to kill any unit that tried to leave mid with the sword, in order to prevent you from abusing its power. Its a form of map balance. If you want to use the sword, it has to stay mid.


Unable to articulate ? Oh you. Anything you make is trash because you just steal good maps and put almost random and not balanced unit set on them. I believe, best of your work is where u just steal good map and put one of the classic unit sets on it.
And u make tons and tons of that. That's why I always call and always will call you talentless bastard.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Fri Oct 14, 2016 12:59 am

shadow wrote: Anything you make is trash because you just steal good maps and put almost random and not balanced unit set on them. I believe, best of your work is where u just steal good map and put one of the classic unit sets on it.
And u make tons and tons of that. That's why I always call and always will call you talentless bastard.


So most 3rd party maps are new colormaps with stolen (bungie) units. RARELY you get a plugin that has an original colormap and original units, as well as original scenery, models, etc. What I do is I take original maps, original units, compile them into one plugin, and make my own original unit trades based off of bungie and 3rd party maps/units. There is nothing wrong with that, you can find hundreds of plugins on the tain that do the same thing. All of it is owned by take 2, so lets not call it stealing. I'm a synthesizer who has no interest in saying I created any of this on my own.

I can't help but point out how comical it is that some kid who played myth for less than 8 years, who fancies himself a myth purist, is calling me a talentless hack. FFA league is the most popular plugin on myth next to Mazz or AVA. I'm a MWC champ. What exactly do you even know about mapmaking? Have you made anything? Could you even steal tags from a plugin? I'm creating new content for myth, keeping the game fresh, so people are still motivated to come back year after year. What do you contribute? Why is classic better than NuMyth™? This is the future of myth like it or not. We have a plethora of unused units and maps that mesh well with classic bungie units that we can be using. WHY NOT have numerous different weapons, spells, units, and maps as options? Is nobody fucking bored of PG KOTH?

Now that we got that out of the way, my maps are balanced. The unit trades are are based off previously successful unit trades, and then modified so that they're original. I understand what units need to be in a trade to balance each other out. I've proven that repeatedly over the years, and the success of my plugin shows it. If you are actually providing feedback about unbalanced unit trades, go ahead and list a few maps that need balancing, why they're unbalanced, and how I should tweak them.

adrenaline
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby adrenaline » Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:15 am

Not trying to take the wind out of your sails, but your plugin is only downloaded a lot because it is a prerequisite for FFA league... And new unit sets with special abilities and shit is not the future of myth... I'm fairly certain that most people prefer traditional unit sets if given the option. Was not your original purpose of creating this map pack to collect good, old 3rd party maps into one collection, and remove the existing bugs? If it was, you've deviated wayyyy off course.

But of course we all have our own opinions about these things. That's just mine.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:38 am

adrenaline wrote:Not trying to take the wind out of your sails, but your plugin is only downloaded a lot because it is a prerequisite for FFA league... And new unit sets with special abilities and shit is not the future of myth... I'm fairly certain that most people prefer traditional unit sets if given the option. Was not your original purpose of creating this map pack to collect good, old 3rd party maps into one collection, and remove the existing bugs? If it was, you've deviated wayyyy off course.

But of course we all have our own opinions about these things. That's just mine.


It is actually played quite frequently outside of FFA League. Its been a frequent auto-host choice since 2013, and was also popular on mariusnet as "FFA Map Pack" before I deleted it and renamed it "Milk Man FFA League Map Pack". It really isn't my favorite plugin either but I can't deny its popularity. In the FFA league people DO have the option of traditional vs Zak and they choose my plugin time and time again. There is a reason for that.

That was my original intention yes. And I have vastly improved the majority of maps in my map pack. The original creators did not take into account unit balance, viable unit trades, ZOOM LEVEL, pathfinding, or much of anything relating to competitive play. Then I realized, why should I stop there? There are numerous UNITS that fit the same description of these broken maps. I can fix those too. And I did! The units I've added, who have survived the multiple patches this plugin has gone through, seamlessly integrate with traditional myth units. The wasp, the thrall elite, the frost warlock, the minion, and skeletons. I've shown its possible.

Myth purists are a minority in the world of gaming. The majority of gamers WANT new content. They want new weapons, new characters, new skins, new levels, new EVERYTHING. As long as it is balanced. It is my job to bring you both.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ » Fri Oct 14, 2016 4:30 am

I think the fact that zak has salvaged a lot of these maps from woeful path finding and zoom level (elevation) issues continues to be somehow overlooked. Not to mention that a lot of the meshes in the ffa league pack offer more, not less, vanilla UTs than the originals...

Stoned Trow is an inclusive, myth grass roots organization dedicated to bringing happiness to the myth populace. We are adding both vanilla unit sets, and different levels of experimental or "zakked" (to use myth dialect) unitsets. We can't really be held responsible if some of the experimental unit sets are more popular than the "reg" unit sets, that's just the will of the people.

Honestly I'm a bit tired of ppl who subject others to game after game of PG BC or what have you throw a fit every time someone wants something a bit out of the box. Everyone has different tastes, can't we start to accept what other mythers think is fun?

If you are so opinionated about UTs, why not suggest your own UTs rather than just mindlessly trying to tear down what zak has built? He is always willing to listen and incorporate the UTs people would like to see.

wwo
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby wwo » Fri Oct 14, 2016 5:16 am

It really comes down to: do you want to know 10 units perfectly, or 100 units well enough? Let's reduce it down to 5 unit characteristics: movement speed, attack speed, attack power, defense rating, and hit points. Let's also say the range for these is 1 to 5. From that we can arbitrarily make 10 archetypal units, such as

A: 1, 1, 5, 5, 5 (bruiser/tank)
through
J: 5,1,1,1,1 (scout)

with distinctive permutations between. By being able to know these units inside and out, one can master their interactions at an instinctive level.

Now let's say you want to sell some DLC, so you decide to add in new units that use up every possible combination of attributes, which would be an additional 3,115 unit types. The differences between the overwhelming majority would be negligible, and would still be grouped subconsciously according to the previously defined roles, such as "This is like a scout, except a little slower but with twice as many hit points". The only scenario where this would have any significance at all is where all of these units were available to be chosen from. Instead, Myth already limits you to 10 tradeable unit types, and with trading totals and limits that force a minimum of unit types of those 10. You're not going to remove a map's basic infantry unit and a solo artillery unit from trading just to add in two more options for scouting, so in the end you're still just using the same units you always did, but with different names and slightly altered characteristics. It removes the instinctive play and replaces it with artificial complexity for the arbitrary virtue of "variety".

People can play whatever they want, but no one needs to pretend one way is better than the other.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1591
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Giant Killer General » Fri Oct 14, 2016 5:48 am

I'm all for people being able to play whatever they want, however they want. I just find it ironic that this defense is now being used by many of the same people who have in the past accused others of having fun in a different way than themselves. Yes, you have finally come to the realization that people play games and have fun in different ways (something I have been saying for years), including some that are more competitive, elitist, or purist than yourselves.

I am also all for new positive changes - remember I had the idea for the king of the map gametype, and for the different rulesets in the gkgtagset that altered what I felt were flaws in bungie's gameplay (such as bad trading values for many units, duds, etc). Which is further ironic again because some that are currently anti-purist now with regards to this ffa mappack, were staunch myth purists when it came to duds, and even trading values (such as yourself mm, if I recall correctly). So maybe purist isn't even the right term for some people when they just seem to be following whatever their particular preference is.

However just because I am for some change doesn't mean I am for any and all changes. Some changes are bad. And currently any of the new stuff in this mappack seems to have just been thrown in without any real thought into it. My suggestion would always be to take past bungie units, then make 1-2 changes to them, and make them INTUITIVE changes by their name, description, and look so people kind of know what the unit is like even if they haven't seen it before. Reg Myth has like mostly 15-20 unit types to remember, which everyone has had 15+ years to memorize. Having to remember another 20 unit types spur of the moment isn't going to be conducive to making any of them mainstream. Nobody should have to have zak physically present in the game to give them a course on what each new unit type does. This is sloppy in my opinion.

The most successful non-standard, non-bungie units have always been very close derivatives of standard bungie units (thell warriors, thrall elite, etc). And that's because bungie did do a good job in designing almost all of them (bre'unor maybe being the only poorly designed unit). This is why people don't mind the new troll unit, you tell me its a maul that can go underwater - ok great got it, I know how to use it now. However it could have been made even better, you should have just called it / made it look like a scuba maul or undead maul to make its differences more intuitive.

To be clear, I have 0 issues with zak doing whatever the hell he wants with his work. It's his work, his time, he enjoys doing it, that is just another way he is having fun with the game. I am not going to pull an adren and try to call him a loser for spending all this time on something myth-related. However I do think this would have been made infinitely less controversial for people had you just separated this into 2 plugins - 1 that was more standard, and 1 for the crazy shit so that each of these 2 audiences could more easily find what they were looking for. Instead, having them all mixed in together like they are now means each of your 2 audiences has to go digging for the shit they actually enjoy which is quite difficult in a plugin with 100 maps in it. As of now, I am not going to bother digging through these 100 different maps, trying to get familiar with their names so I know what to pick. If you had it separated out, I probably would use it more. And this is the problem that has and will continue to ultimately hinder the "popularity" of your plugin.

I am fine with the reg stuff, a couple maps have unbalanced hills, that's it. And it is a good contribution because myth does need more FFA maps with lots of starts since bungie didn't make any with more than 6 starts. But why isn't this organized better then? Why didn't you just make an ffapack that was just for adding a bunch of starts to it? Call it 12-start ffa mappack or whatever. Then when I go into that plugin I know what I am looking for and what I am getting - easy. That would have been great with that alone on just pre-existing maps. 12 man ffa on desert? Yes please. And then another one with different maps but all reg units. And another one with all the crazy shit. Instead, there is no organization here, it is just a huge clusterfuck of random maps. Organize the mappacks in a sensible manner, and stop making them so bloated - nobody can find what they are looking for.

Lastly - calling this plugin popular is a huge stretch. It just came out, and it is mostly played just because of ffa league. The only times I encountered prior ffa map packs outside of ffa league was just 1 time when crun specifically requested them to do some different 1v1s, and the only reason he and the other 1-2 people were familiar with it was from previous years ffa league. Also, they still always suffered from the exact same symptom - some are good, some are shit. And due to this good / shit ratio, I think myself and many others basically don't bother wasting our time looking at it (it wasn't long before I stopped using it in those 1v1s). If you are wondering why people keep playing PG BC / Koth or whatever, this is the reason why - because we know it is good so it won't be a waste of our time. And the future of myth could be new maps with new trades, but rest assured they will be mostly reggish trades, not any of this crazy shit.

adrenaline
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby adrenaline » Fri Oct 14, 2016 8:19 am

surprisingly well said.

Giant Killer General wrote:Nobody should have to have zak physically present in the game to give them a course on what each new unit type does.


This is exactly why I am against these maps being used in FFA league. All competitiveness is thrown out the window when 1/12 people in the game know what a new unit does. Half the damn games I barely trade in time because I'm trying to decide whether or not a particular new unit is worth trading for. League or tourney games are not the place for beta testing new shit...

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Sat Oct 15, 2016 4:14 am

Just for comparison, games like HOTS have several hundred megabyte patches every couple weeks, and new heroes every 6 weeks. My plugin has seen 8 versions over 4-5 years.

Giant Killer General wrote:However just because I am for some change doesn't mean I am for any and all changes. Some changes are bad. And currently any of the new stuff in this mappack seems to have just been thrown in without any real thought into it. My suggestion would always be to take past bungie units, then make 1-2 changes to them, and make them INTUITIVE changes by their name, description, and look so people kind of know what the unit is like even if they haven't seen it before. Reg Myth has like mostly 15-20 unit types to remember, which everyone has had 15+ years to memorize. Having to remember another 20 unit types spur of the moment isn't going to be conducive to making any of them mainstream.


Most of the new units are exactly as you just described. They're mildly modified, given a new appearance, and even have an explanation visible at the top of the screen describing what they are. Yes there are some units that cast a projectile we haven't seen before, and those take time to learn. Frost warlocks were a big one when I first made the plugin, but you'll notice they are rarely encountered, and actually pretty easy to learn. I think we need to give mythers a little more agency here, they are quite capable of learning the units, but its a lot easier to complain because you dislike the idea of new units to begin with.

Giant Killer General wrote: Nobody should have to have zak physically present in the game to give them a course on what each new unit type does. This is sloppy in my opinion.


Well I actually don't have to be there, it just helps mitigate the confusion and overall toxicity of the discourse in regards to the units. I don't give a "course", its a quick description of the unit and anything important they may need to know, which they could learn on their own. Players don't read the flavor at the top of the unit, which has a description of the unit.

Giant Killer General wrote: The most successful non-standard, non-bungie units have always been very close derivatives of standard bungie units (thell warriors, thrall elite, etc). And that's because bungie did do a good job in designing almost all of them (bre'unor maybe being the only poorly designed unit). This is why people don't mind the new troll unit, you tell me its a maul that can go underwater - ok great got it, I know how to use it now. However it could have been made even better, you should have just called it / made it look like a scuba maul or undead maul to make its differences more intuitive.


Except you lose the visual effect of the troll, which is a big part of the reason for adding it. Again, you just have to read the description and its the same as taking a maul and calling it a scuba maul. And again, a lot of these units are close derivatives of standard bungie units.

Giant Killer General wrote: I do think this would have been made infinitely less controversial for people had you just separated this into 2 plugins - 1 that was more standard, and 1 for the crazy shit so that each of these 2 audiences could more easily find what they were looking for. Instead, having them all mixed in together like they are now means each of your 2 audiences has to go digging for the shit they actually enjoy which is quite difficult in a plugin with 100 maps in it. As of now, I am not going to bother digging through these 100 different maps, trying to get familiar with their names so I know what to pick. If you had it separated out, I probably would use it more. And this is the problem that has and will continue to ultimately hinder the "popularity" of your plugin.


Fair point, but the point of the plugin is to compile. Making multiple plugins defeats the purpose of the pack. I would rather tone down the unpopular aspects of the plugin than make multiple packs for people to download, and I think people prefer downloading one pack instead of two. The great thing about that is you can just pick the handful of maps you're familiar with, or you can explore the plethora of maps you've never tried before and possibly find a new favorite. The important thing is I make it clear what is in the map, which I can definitely work on in the next version.



Giant Killer General wrote: I am fine with the reg stuff, a couple maps have unbalanced hills, that's it. And it is a good contribution because myth does need more FFA maps with lots of starts since bungie didn't make any with more than 6 starts. But why isn't this organized better then? Why didn't you just make an ffapack that was just for adding a bunch of starts to it? Call it 12-start ffa mappack or whatever. Then when I go into that plugin I know what I am looking for and what I am getting - easy. That would have been great with that alone on just pre-existing maps. 12 man ffa on desert? Yes please. And then another one with different maps but all reg units. And another one with all the crazy shit. Instead, there is no organization here, it is just a huge clusterfuck of random maps. Organize the mappacks in a sensible manner, and stop making them so bloated - nobody can find what they are looking for.


See the paragraph I just posted. Nobody would download the "12 start ffa map pack" as well as the "ffa league map pack", and the "seventh god ffa league map pack", and the "bushido ffa league map pack". People prefer one plugin that everyone has, it makes things run more smoothly and takes a lot less motivation to download. So instead I'm going to trim the fat, like you said. The pack is a bit too big. The problem is, that as I make more standard trades, that makes more overall maps available.



Giant Killer General wrote:Lastly - calling this plugin popular is a huge stretch. It just came out, and it is mostly played just because of ffa league.


Its been around for at least 4 years, you can do a quick search of some of the maps and see multiple pages of games just played on those maps, adding up to hundreds or maybe even a 1000+ played on this plugin. Even today it was played over 30 times, a lot of those on an auto-host dedicated to testing the weirdest units added in v5. I'm not saying this to brag, just to point out that this plugin is going to keep getting hosted, so it behooves us all to work together and make it the best plugin it can be.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Sat Oct 15, 2016 4:16 am

adrenaline wrote:surprisingly well said.

Giant Killer General wrote:Nobody should have to have zak physically present in the game to give them a course on what each new unit type does.


This is exactly why I am against these maps being used in FFA league. All competitiveness is thrown out the window when 1/12 people in the game know what a new unit does. Half the damn games I barely trade in time because I'm trying to decide whether or not a particular new unit is worth trading for. League or tourney games are not the place for beta testing new shit...


I always err on the side of making new units underpowered, so if you're not comfortable with a new unit, don't get it! Nobody is making you play with new units, just get the standard bungie ones and blow the rest up. Or skip that game.

That said, I would say 11/12 of the people in ffa league know the units/maps, you're the 1/12 that doesn't know how any of it works because you pretty much drop whenever its a map you dislike.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1591
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Giant Killer General » Sat Oct 15, 2016 5:00 am

yea zak yur not picking up what im putting down. This is the fundamental disagreement that we have. You think that a few extra downloads matters, I don't. To me, using different plugins adds an additional hierarchy of organization when searching for maps in the game hosting menu. Then people can search broadly by plugin first, then by a smaller list of maps that are now sorted more generally by the plugin. This is infinitely more important than trying to cram everything into a single mappack to save a few downloads. Downloading is something you do one time. Searching for maps is something you will do many many times if you want people to use your plugin.

Disagree about how you are handling new units, but again its yur work and yur entitled to do it however you want. But seriously no one would care if you just separated it out into a separate plugin. Separate it out and I would 100% use your reg myth plugin. As it is now there's no way I am going to bother trying to learn 100 different maps to sort it out by memory which ones that I like.

Yur also limiting yourself greatly by clinging to this notion of having just 1 mappack with everything in it. As it is now, it is literally becoming difficult just to scroll through the list of maps when hosting even to find a map that you know the name of. This problem can only continue to get worse the more you try to develop this. Adding another layer of organization through different plugins though would unlock many more possibilities, where you could create as many variations of anything that you wanted, without affecting the experience of the host. Come up with a naming scheme for the series of plugins and it will organize itself into a neat series of plugins that will seem as if they are all just 1 plugin anyway.

Really no idea why you are fighting this idea so hard. The downloading and plugin installing experience on myth is super easy and done only once per plugin. Seriously who is complaining about that? The repeated and ongoing experience of the game host / expectations of the players is waaaaay more important.

HMP
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby HMP » Sat Oct 15, 2016 7:05 am

Could do it like this:
Create tagset plugin containing all of the new units/tags, basically everything except mesh tags.

Create plugins for meshes however you want to organize them (by number of starts, source of map, theme, unit sets, whatever)

Set all the meshes to require the tagset. This will make the tagset automatically activated.

Put it all in one zip file.

Then people still only have to download one thing, but it is easier to find the map you want. Total file size should remain about the same. You can also easily add new maps into a new pack.

Somewhat related, if enough people could agree on rebalancing changes (like fixing bre and brigs), you could create a patch. It would always be active and not need anyone to activate like a tagset. Could also include agreed upon 3rd party units (wouldn't do anything on its own to already existing maps, but would make things easier for mapmakers since you wouldn't have to deal with extracting tags). The main issue would be that everyone would have to agree with it and download it or games would be red. So probably unlikely to work, but it would be nice.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1591
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Giant Killer General » Sat Oct 15, 2016 2:02 pm

see now that is a great idea HMP. I didn't even think of tagsets and what exactly they are fully capable of, but yea you could use tagsets even as another modifier for number of starts, maybe specific unit trades, etc. Now a great idea like that COULD be the future of myth. Take every popular trade you can think of, put it in its own tagset, now you can combine trades on maps never seen before. Same thing with starts. That unlocks many many more fascinating possibilities. Combine them all into a single .zip and you still get the benefit of single download if you want, but it self organizes when putting all the files in the plugin folder. Also if named properly, when someone selects CRAZY UNITS plugin or whatever it would be called, then I know what I am getting into.

punkUser
Posts: 1375
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 11:13 pm

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby punkUser » Sat Oct 15, 2016 4:12 pm

In terms of the "overall rebalancing" thing, this was experimented with a few years ago with the "GKG Tagset" actually: http://tain.totalcodex.net/items/show/gkg-tagset. Not sure if anyone still uses it though or if not, why not.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ » Sat Oct 15, 2016 6:26 pm

We should definitely make the map names more informative. For example "light reg" "dark reg" "light hybrid" "dark hybrid" "elf" "bre unor" etc. We'll prioritize this for the next release.

The idea of having tons of tagsets is really limiting and overly complicated for players. It prevents experimenting with different permutations of hybrid UTs etc. Also, I kind of like that the ffa league regular season forces ppl to try new things.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1591
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Giant Killer General » Sat Oct 15, 2016 7:04 pm

yea i don't really get the resistance to this, but even if you do not like the tagset thing, you absolutely should still do the separate plugins.

and see, that attitude right there is a complete contradiction of "let people play whatever they want, however they want, whenever they want", which you supposedly supported just a moment ago. You want to "force" people to play something that you like, when they know that they don't like it, as if you know better than them. Should I force you to play gkgtagset then? Do you like it when other people force unnecessary decisions on you in general?

the crazy units does take away from ffa league for me and others, but because the majority of games are not crazy units, many of us just put up with it because we still want to participate with the rest of the games. If it suddenly emphasized a lot more crazy stuff, then obviously some people would stop playing.

someone else (hmp im looking at you) really should pick up some of these ideas because i don't think zak and mm are getting it or are otherwise uninterested. There is really no need to go through them if someone else can put it together. I can almost guarantee it would be relatively popular. I would totally support such a project.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ » Sat Oct 15, 2016 7:59 pm

As I said, using multiple tagsets would completely destroy any creative control over UTs other than vanilla reg units. It would be impossible to balance across different tagsets & would limit the variations of hybridity we can experiment with. Think about it.

I've been speaking with HMP and his ideas are a bit different than what you think they are i.e. he thinks we should separate out the meshes and use one master tagset. I agree with his idea for a separate tagset, he really sold it to me as a master tagset that then could be used for other map compilation projects, and serve as a way to standardize 3rd party units across all maps (there are unfortunate differences right now, right down to "reg" units such as FGs which have different versions on different maps). The separation of meshes, however, I think would be better accomplished through better map labeling & sorting by start # (another great HMP suggestion).

I do thank you for your input gkg, and everyone else's. Keep it coming. I would be particularly interested in specific UT requests.

HMP
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby HMP » Sat Oct 15, 2016 9:21 pm

So I separated the plugin into 5 parts: there are 4 different map packs and a master tagset. The map packs are for 4 starts, 5 starts, 6 starts, and 7+ starts. The tagset is automatically activated by the map packs, so you can just put in plugins and ignore it. Now for example, if someone requests gor ash, you know it has a bunch of starts, so just pick the "ffa league (7+)" plugin, and your list is massively narrowed down.

The meshes themselves could still be named better, some are clear what kind of units they have, some less so.

HMP
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby HMP » Sat Oct 15, 2016 10:56 pm

Actually, I figured out an even better setup. The tagset should be split in 2: one part would contain only collection tags, and the other part would contain every other tag related to the units. I figured out how to set up a map so it automatically activates two tagsets, so both parts would be invisible/automatic for the player. The benefit of this is that it would be easier to update unit balance/fix bugs as well as update maps. Update file sizes would also be minimized, as the collections don't need to ever be updated, so people can just download it a single time.

Currently ffa league pack v5 is 606 MB (uncompressed), and the whole thing needs to be uploaded/downloaded every time there is an update.

This system would give us:
ffa graphics - 463 MB (only download once)
ffa tagset - 19 MB (new download to rebalance units or fix bugs with units)
ffa 4 - 40 MB
ffa 5 - 25 MB
ffa 6 - 27 MB
ffa 7+ - 30 MB
the mapsets would need to be downloaded only for new unit trades or fixing things on the actual map (flags/scenery/unfair trading points)

Actually, could add sounds to the graphics as well and that would make the tagset part even smaller.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:26 am
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Zak » Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:41 am

HMP wrote: So probably unlikely to work, but it would be nice.


I don't know why this part is being ignored, and its one thing I'm in agreement upon.

Giant Killer General wrote:yea i don't really get the resistance to this, but even if you do not like the tagset thing, you absolutely should still do the separate plugins..


The resistance is for multiple reasons.

So lets say I do what HMP is suggesting. I'm now going through 230 maps, many of which have non-standard units, and removing ALL 3rd party units. Then I have to make an identical unit tag (lets say its a warlock I want changed to a frost warlock). Now I link up that unit tag with the tagset so that particular warlock unit tag is replaced by a frost warlock, but doesn't replace all warlocks in general. Okay now keep in mind I have approximately forty non-standard units in this plugin. Then imagine me going through 230 maps to make a new unit tags for each team, for each non-standard unit, on those maps. Are you getting an idea on the man hours involved?

Lets say a player is cleaning out their plugins, and they delete just ONE plugin from this pack on accident. They're now downloading the whole pack again, just so they can play in a game thats about to start using one of the maps in that pack. Or a player wants to find a map, but doesn't remember how many starting locations it has. He knows the name, he knows what it looks like, but he's now looking through 6 plugins to find a map because he can't remember a trivial detail about the map. Either way you're doing some digging to find what you want, separating into multiple plugins doesn't solve the issue.

It won't reduce the number of downloads (people are still downloading the whole thing just to get an update from 1 of the 7 plugins HMP is proposing). A smaller map list honestly would be a nice thing, I see why you would push for it. However its not the big issue you're making it out to be. I can just reduce the number of 3rd party units, and make more obvious "standard" trades. Yeah its a pain to search through the map list, but I can categorize them by # of starting locations like you suggested, rather than terrain type (what it is now, which goes snow/cave and urban/rock and desert/grass/swamp). It accomplishes the same thing without opening the can of worms that is 7 plugins.

Giant Killer General wrote:and see, that attitude right there is a complete contradiction of "let people play whatever they want, however they want, whenever they want", which you supposedly supported just a moment ago. You want to "force" people to play something that you like, when they know that they don't like it, as if you know better than them. Should I force you to play gkgtagset then? Do you like it when other people force unnecessary decisions on you in general?


Really nobody is being forced to do anything, since everyone knows what they're getting into when they play FFA League, and then the players actually pick FFA pack all on their own when they get 2nd place. If nobody liked it then the maps wouldn't be selected all.

Giant Killer General wrote:the crazy units does take away from ffa league for me and others, but because the majority of games are not crazy units, many of us just put up with it because we still want to participate with the rest of the games. If it suddenly emphasized a lot more crazy stuff, then obviously some people would stop playing.

someone else (hmp im looking at you) really should pick up some of these ideas because i don't think zak and mm are getting it or are otherwise uninterested. There is really no need to go through them if someone else can put it together. I can almost guarantee it would be relatively popular. I would totally support such a project.


People often pick maps from the FFA League BECAUSE of the crazy. They like River of Gold with the sword in the middle. They pick Myth of Gor'Ash for the giant pyramid hill. They'll choose a snow map for frost warlocks, or leagues to play as Gor'Ash. They like the novelty. I'm not ignoring the fact there are people who dislike those things. I'm trying to bridge the gap so its palatable for everyone.

So Milk Man and I are going to work to tone down the crazy, make it more standard. We will make the meshes organized by # of starting locations. I like the feedback, keep it up!


punkUser wrote:In terms of the "overall rebalancing" thing, this was experimented with a few years ago with the "GKG Tagset" actually: http://tain.totalcodex.net/items/show/gkg-tagset. Not sure if anyone still uses it though or if not, why not.


Lack of overall interest from the casuals. Nothing wrong with the tagset, just not popular.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1591
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Giant Killer General » Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:28 am

I think we are talking about a bunch of different things now that is making this more confusing.

Yes at bare minimum you can make the mesh descriptions better by including the # of starts, more description on the trade, etc.

Okay so a more advanced organization using many tagsets is not practical due to limitations with the way myth mapmaking is designed - got it. But the whole thing that started this whole brainstorming session in the first place is the core issue that you are mixing your personal hobby for experimental units, with more standard stuff. Just keep them separate. Nothing you mentioned addresses this core issue. It is not 7 plugins, or a huge list of tagsets. It is just 2 plugins. Keep your experimental stuff separate from the regular stuff, until / unless the experimental stuff has been well "vetted" and becomes more mainstream and familiar like a thell warrior or thrall elite.

That is the most important thing. Otherwise you are upsetting 2 very different audiences. It taints the map list. I don't want to have to memorize which ones are shit and which ones are normal. This is why we don't have a mappack to put together mazz, glad, and every other co-op plugin put together. Or a mappack for putting ww2, gfgg, fetchball, and every other non-standard myth set together. It doesn't make sense, they are each for completely different audiences. So if you wouldn't combine them there, then why combine them here? This is a radical change of gameplay that you are offering with your new weird units - it deserves a separate plugin. Separate it out, then you can go wild to your heart's desire with new crazy shit and nobody will care.

Or at the very least, include what has crazy units in it or not in the mesh description as well. But with everything else already in there, those descriptions may start to run out of room. And the lengthy map list is still becoming a pain in the ass to scroll, and only getting worse.

Many other mappacks have been made, they were able to split out the meshes just fine. Some meshes have even been included in multiple mappacks. Not sure why this is such a huge technical challenge.

Actually the real reason you probably don't want to separate it out is because you want more exposure for your new crazy shit. If it was separated out of course less people would try it. So you are forcing the more standard audience that just want your normal stuff to also download and likely eventually play or at least look at your crazy stufff too. But the problem there is you are irritating your standard fanbase in the process who isn't into that shit, and never will be. It is like subscribing to a company's email list to get information about one specific topic, and instead they send you a bunch of other unrelated emails trying to sell you some completely different shit as well. Sure, you can try and do that to force it down your entire mailing list's throats to maximize your exposure - but don't be surprised when some people decide to unsubscribe.

User avatar
Flatline
Posts: 196
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Ffa league v5 discussion

Postby Flatline » Tue Oct 18, 2016 4:56 am

FGS on every map and a shitload of new stupid units sucks :)


Return to “Free For All”