Feedback - Capture Mechanics

[KFS1]

I've heard something about capture changing in 1.31. What's changed?

We did away with Radio Tables and Radios. Instead each facility has a progress bar. When the progress bar reaches 100%, the facility is captured.

Does the bar get reset to 0 every time we move or fire a weapon?

No, it doesn't: you're free to defend yourself and hide wherever you like inside the buildings now.

Does the bar get reset if we die?

No: If you get an enemy building up to 75% and then die (or just leave the building) the progress bar starts to decay back to 0 - but very slowly.

Do I have to be at a particular spot in the buildings?

Nope - anywhere inside the buildings. When you enter, a capture/progress bar will appear at the bottom right of the screen, above the new "/own" progress bar that is displayed any time you are in a town.

If I am defending a building, can I make the enemy's progress go down?

Yes, once there are no attackers left in the building. If there are any attackers in the building, the bar will continue to go up despite your presence.

What happens if there is more than one person in the building?

The amount the progress bar moves every second is based on the number of players capping or defending.

Each additional player, up to 13 players, makes the capture (or uncapture) faster; the first extra player reduces the time by half.

So how long is the timer now???

A single player attempting to capture a facility from 0% will take slightly over 8 minutes to push the bar to 100%. Two players would take 4 minutes. 13 players would take 60 seconds. (That's as fast as it goes)

How long does uncapturing a facility take?

If the facility is partially captured but completely empty, it would take 12 minutes to get back down from 99% captured without player assistance.

If there are defenders in the building, they move the progress bar at the same rate as an equal number of attackers.

Edited June 3, 2010 by GOPHUR

[KFS1]

Oops; that should be "12 minutes without player assistance" for a facility to uncapture itself (assuming it was at 99.9999999999999999999999%)

[speed]

Most players think capture timers are too long.I know you guys are focusing on the best case scenario for us but,could it be set down a tad? Say 50% lower for experience.If players think it

is fine,keep it.

How did you guys come up with that capture number? Based on what parameters?If I may ask.

Doesnt hurt to try.Set it 50%,have players test it.Set 75%,rinse,repeat.If it is possible,we would really appreciate the effort.Game would improve alot.

The experience online yesterday,proved a huge blood bath,many corpses around the CP and practically noone captured or recapped any given CP.So,IMHO,humbly asking,could we have it toned down a tad?Wouldnt hurt,would it?

Thanks!

S!

Speed

[glaz]

I just want to be clear, if a facility is completely empty of players it will still slowly liberate itself?

[kc23]

Yeah, way way too long for solo caps. In low pop it makes things silly. Defense has far to big of an advantage.

[KFS1]

I just want to be clear' date=' if a facility is completely empty of players it will still slowly liberate itself?[/quote']

Correct.

Yeah' date=' way way too long for solo caps. In low pop it makes things silly. Defense has far to big of an advantage.[/quote']

Please explain your reasoning behind that. If anything, this eats into a former over-advantage of the defender because when you put 3 guys into a depot, it's not down to one of them lying at the table unable to defend themself while any others potter around trying to keep that guy alive.

And yes, the numbers are subject to scrutiny and re-evaluation before release. Up until now we've been testing other more pressing issues, so people have been avoiding trying to capture towns (especially ABs).

We're trying to make it clear that we want people to push hard for capture this weekend.

As to the numbers: let's just say ... I washed them with lots of soapy water before putting them into the server code? You catch my drift?

I started with what I felt would be aggressively Over The Top numbers to encourage discussion.

1 Player = 500 seconds

2 Players = 240 seconds

3 Players = 175 seconds

4 Players = 130 seconds

5 Players = 95 seconds

6 Players = 75 seconds

7 Players = 70 seconds

8 Players = 67 seconds

...

13 Players = 60 seconds

[izdbacon]

I really like the way the Rats are experimenting with game figures like this, the whole 'cat in an open house' idea will mean good things in future.

These numbers aren't so unreasonable - one man capping a CP by himself, having to hold it for eight whole minutes - suddenly it's a heroic effort again.

And WW1-type gameplay would mean no movement at all. With these capture times, a battle for a town really is a battle. Gone are the days of skirmishes where a town is capped in ten minutes, before any serious number of defenders get a chance to change mission. And without fast softcaps the best bit is, no more logging in a day later to see one side having captured half of Europe overnight. Even the real Blitzkrieg wasn't that fast.

Edited May 30, 2010 by izdbacon

[dvc]

With these capture times' date=' a battle for a town really is a battle. Gone are the days of skirmishes where a town is capped in ten minutes, before any serious number of defenders get a chance to change mission. And without fast softcaps the best bit is, no more logging in a day later to see one side having captured half of Europe overnight. Even the real Blitzkrieg wasn't that fast.[/quote']

No more soft caps.... nice ;]

[comstar]

The problem is that 8 minutes is long enough for it to get boring. I get in a depot and might as well go make a sandwitch.

[dvc]

The problem is that 8 minutes is long enough for it to get boring.

The problem is lack of teamwork. This game is made to be as realistic as possible. Rambo wasnt...

[ZeroAce]

Capture timers will always be too long in the eyes of players so long as it is seen as inconvienent to capture a depot alone.

But there's no reason you should be capturing a depot alone.

Players need to shift their mindset then we will see the game function under the current timers just fine.

The one fatal flaw with these system is this; Stupid people. People who care more about getting kills than the map.

I was playing in TZ3 in the beta server, and the problem wasn't that we didn't have enough infantry to mount a recap of several players, but that not one of them gave a damn to bother trying. Even though resistance was light, german held depots stayed german because they were more interested in sniping.

One of these idiots was only 10ft away from the depot building and he couldn't be bothered to heed our requests in chat that he help us cap. No, he had to keep crawling in the grass waiting for a sniper shot. I even saved him from getting knifed as a german came up behind him.

Here's the terrble thing: The only reason the cap system is seen as viable in large population timezones is not because we then have enough people to cap a depot and survive, but because only in a saturated environment can depots be capped by chance rather than concerted effort.

I have no doubt the system can work at all timezones. But it can only work if the players want to make it work and work as a team.

[smythes]

I have no doubt the system can work at all timezones. But it can only work if the players want to make it work and work as a team.

Very true and this is why it is a new game. Unless people to learn to hit CP together things will be very slow on the map, people will have to "get" it.

How do you get infantry to the target under fire? Is it possible? Will people use more smoke (Underused in my opinion).

If the Stamina Bar stays as it is, it may be a lot easier as infantry will move a lot faster...

[dvc]

One of these idiots was only 10ft away from the depot building and he couldn't be bothered to heed our requests in chat that he help us cap.

1 hour ago. Situation:

2 ei upstairs in Dover-Deal CP.

I said 3 or 4 times on chat to group around cp trow nades and rush it. I think nobody read as 1 allied went in and died. 20 seconds later other one done the same and died as well.. Didnt have to wait long, as of them respawned and again, same story...

I was still waiting just outside, safe... Had to chuck some nades thru top window and rush it by myself...

conclusion:

READ THIS FKIN CHAT PLEASE, MARK CONTACTS (before u die) AND THINK A LITTLE... IF U RUSH CP IN GROUP, IN 99% AT LEAST 1 OF U WILL STAY ALIVE AND CP WILL BE CLEAR AND READY TO RECAP.* ITS EASY, JUST SWITCH YOUR BRAIN FROM Call of Duty TO WW2.

*YOUR EXPERIENCE MAY VARY

AND ONE MORE THING: GRENADE IS YOUR FRIEND

Edited May 30, 2010 by dvc

[romzburg]

Yeah, last night I saw an enemy running and lost sight of him after missing two rifle shots.

So I went to a cp in the general area he was headed.

Went inside, and saw it was being capped.

Went back outside and tossed 1 grenade into the upstairs and was rewarded with the death scream.

If I had tried to run up to kill him I would have died, I was just a rifle.

And as to the timers, I think they are good. It *should* take a while for a lone capper! And now when I see someone libbing, I run in and "help".

GJ, CRS!

____________________

motormouth:

Much as Romzy's posting style can give me headaches (and the fact that he's "NEVAR WRONG!!"), that post pretty much nails it on the head.

sgtchief:

romz you['re] my damn hero

sydney:

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

irelandeb:

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

pete, linc & julie:

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

owilde:

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[ZeroAce]

Players will do what it takes to win, eventually.

I just think it's going to take a lot of hard knocks and whining on the part of the players before they adjust their playstyle to focus on better ad hoc tactical coordination. Old habits die hard.

This begs for a rework of the missions system along the lines I suggested in the barracks, as a way of increasing real time coordination between non-squads.

Only after the old way fails miserably will they start to do things differently. Necessity breeds teamwork in games. Players only do the bare minimum required. They may whine when the required amount of teamwork increases, but they will adjust and the game should be better off for it in the long run.

The only way such a system can be short circuited is if the players don't care about winning, or define winning only in individual kills. Then rather than adjust themselves to help cap they will simply adjust themselves to never cap.

[zeta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by glaz

I just want to be clear, if a facility is completely empty of players it will still slowly liberate itself?

Correct.

So lets put this more clearly:

1) allies cap axis depot

2) no allied player stays inside the depot

3) in 12 mins that depot will go back axis?

That is what liberate means.

For cap bar to return to 0% is something else....

[romzburg]

So lets put this more clearly:

1) allies cap axis depot

2) no allied player stays inside the depot

3) in 12 mins that depot will go back axis?

That is what liberate means.

For cap bar to return to 0% is something else....

No.

Once it gets to 100% capped, it stays there until a player comes in to switch it back.

It takes 12 minutes to go from *ALMOST* capped down to zero.

If a player gets it 99.99999% capped and then leaves before he finishes, or if he gets killed, the facility will slowly go back down to zero, even with no players inside.

It's like pushing a boulder up a hill that isn't very steep. More people make pushing it uphill easier and faster, and when that boulder gets to the top, it stays there. But if you don't get to the top, and everyone leaves, it slowly starts to roll back down hill, even though no one is pushing it downhill.

____________________

motormouth:

Much as Romzy's posting style can give me headaches (and the fact that he's "NEVAR WRONG!!"), that post pretty much nails it on the head.

sgtchief:

romz you['re] my damn hero

sydney:

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

irelandeb:

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

pete, linc & julie:

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

owilde:

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[zeta]

Yep.

So lets not call it "liberate".

[heavymetal]

Who gets credit for a cap in 1.31? All who helped, or only the first guy to get inside?

[wooker2]

Will the timers be reduced if the players want it?

[dvc]

Who gets credit for a cap in 1.31? All who helped' date=' or only the first guy to get inside?[/quote']

good question

[zeta]

From the readme:

- History of people capping the current facility is maintained, currently credit goes to the player present with the most contributions or - In the event of a tie - who started capping first

[dvc]

From the readme:

- History of people capping the current facility is maintained, currently credit goes to the player present with the most contributions or - In the event of a tie - who started capping first

dont like it.. should be a point for every minute or something similar

[smythes]

dont like it.. should be a point for every minute or something similar

If people are hungry for points they will run off and start capping another cp, perhaps, when someone enters the first cp before them.

When its a matter of teamplay this is a me or us scenario - people will have to choose. Perhaps not a biggy but a consideration.

[ZeroAce]

I'd change it to say those who reach a certain threshold of helping cap get credit, to encourage group capping.