User panel stuff on forum
  142 posts on 5 pages  First page12345Last page
General Discussion
2015-10-07, 01:51
Member
69 posts

Registered:
Aug 2014
wernerml wrote:
BogoJoker wrote:
Maps made in '96 may have been designed for weapon strength / movement in '96, but it is not difficult to understand that things have changed 20 years later.


THAT's what I always say!
from 96' to ~2005 the LG was FUN....

from 2005 to 2008+ it became A NIGHTMARE... (I don't even like 1on1 anymore, BECAUSE OF THE SHAFT WHORES)


Woah woah woah. I didn't know LG was causing people NIGHTMARES...
I'm sorry. We will patch this as soon as we can. Please don't hesitate to contact me directly if you have any more dire concerns regarding QuackWorld.

Thanks.
2015-10-07, 02:14
Member
202 posts

Registered:
Dec 2006
BogoJoker wrote:
sned wrote:
Team overlay always on/off - The two disagreeing sides seem to cancel each other out.
cl_iDrive always allowed.


I originally proposed these because the features are already in place on servers / clients to use or not use.

FWIW, I heard support for iDrive in this thread and in the real world, where (surprisingly to me) many new players I've encountered were aware of iDrive and using it as they learn QW.

I implemented the iDrive functionality with TF2's scripting a long time ago, and there are a lot of people who use it. I'm sure this helped to spread the concept around.
2015-10-07, 05:02
Member
278 posts

Registered:
Jan 2015
erlend wrote:
I think QW is as perfect as it can get as it is. That's why I'm still playing it, 19 years after my first 4on4. Just my two.

+1
dev
2015-10-07, 10:57
Member
172 posts

Registered:
Mar 2012
fake shaft ruined qw in many ways.... u actually needed skill on high ping shafting and predicting lg etc...
2015-10-07, 20:05
Member
38 posts

Registered:
Jan 2014
bogojoker wrote:
FWIW, I heard support for iDrive in this thread and in the real world, where (surprisingly to me) many new players I've encountered were aware of iDrive and using it as they learn QW.


I was more referring to the idea of iDrive being always allowed, and not being seen as a slight cheat. There wasn't much support for that, at least in this thread.

iDrive could become universally accepted over time, like fakeshaft was. Or it could go the way of the fRJ script: used in small pockets of the scene; frowned upon everywhere else. I'm okay with either outcome. But iDrive is similar to the fRJ in that it lowers the hand-eye coordination ceiling a little bit. So I can see the case against it.

--

I'm pretty passive about team overlay. However, if I was forced to pick, I'd say team overlay always on. Why? Allow me to ramble.

In biology there is the concept of emergent complexity, in which, as the complexity of a system increases, new possibilities for expression arise: a heart does things a single heart cell can not; a flock of birds does things a lone bird can not.

QW 4on4 is largely an exercise in information triage: efficiently sharing/analyzing information, but not to the point of distraction. Team overlay moves some of that information out of the voice channel and onto the screen. This frees up space in the voice channel for discussion of tactics and strategy, rather than item reporting. And I've noticed this difference in-game. It's not a huge difference, but it is there.

Is there skill in knowing when to report? Of course. But moving status information to the team overlay results in a more complex system. It's like raising the bandwidth of a connection. New opportunities for expression emerge that would have otherwise been squeezed out.
2015-10-07, 22:50
Administrator
1022 posts

Registered:
Apr 2006
I wrote some stuff about teamoverlay and teamsays earlier and how I think that allowing teamoverlay ruins ppl's ability to report teamsays. Let me just clarify:

I don't think teamoverlay per se is bad, rather that mixing things up is bad. Using teamoverlay in mixes and then not in official games ruins things IMO. I think it should either be allowed at all times or not at all, anything else seems confusing. I know I'm more of the conservative type in general, and I do think that teamsays are a part of especially the 4on4 skillset. However I'm not sure what I think about teamoverlay.

I've grown the "mishabit" of looking at the teamoverlay while playing mixes because I don't think that I get reasonable information with teamsays there. I actually quite like the style of it. I do miss some really important things like where people died IF killed by nmy weapon (as in rl/lg nmy) though.

I'm starting to wonder if allowing teamoverlay (or something like it) always would help people get better at understanding the game and at the same time _not_ really change anything for those who doesn't like it.. But then again people used to teamoverlay doesn't usually report that good so it does ruin it for people who doesn't want to use teamoverlay, and we're back where we started.
2015-10-08, 12:09
Member
137 posts

Registered:
Sep 2006
Since this is a brainstorm thread,

how come granades arent affected by the throwers movement?
2015-10-08, 13:00
Member
1433 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
Friendly suggestion to anyone who thinks about doing changes to QW: Do not ever waste a single second on trying to reach an agreement accross the community. Will not happen, ever, forget about it. QW community is a reflection of the real world: people will never ever agree on one single thing.

If you want to get things moving, create your own branch of QW today, find your own developers today, do changes today, test changes, reflect on your tests, do more changes, find server admins who will run your modified game, run tournaments in your modification. Nothing stops you from doing this, everything is available to you. Also this is how people will vote on your changes: by changing the code for you, by installing servers for you, by participating in your tournaments. All that is much more fun and more effective thing to do than wasting your time discussing things with the whole scene. I wish I could go back in time and tell this to myself years ago.

By the way, "QW is good the way it is." Which QW are you referring to? 1996 QW? 2000? 2005? 2015?
2015-10-08, 14:25
Member
172 posts

Registered:
Mar 2012
i agree with jhony
2015-10-08, 15:34
Member
69 posts

Registered:
Aug 2014
So should we spawn like 5 servers where LG does 27 damage per hit instead of 30, and then play like a handful of games on them and draw a really weak conclusion from that? Not sure what you're expecting here..
2015-10-08, 17:06
Member
184 posts

Registered:
May 2007
BREADLORD420 wrote:
So should we spawn like 5 servers where LG does 27 damage per hit instead of 30, and then play like a handful of games on them and draw a really weak conclusion from that? Not sure what you're expecting here..



No conclusions. Just start doing it, if it's better the community will follow your idea, if not, then not.
2015-10-09, 00:08
Member
60 posts

Registered:
Nov 2010
Finding and agreeing upon a change in QW, haha. That's not even touching on who's gonna implement it. But who doesn't love a pointless argument, so here we go:
  • Teamoverlay. So if it was up to me teamoverlay with autotook and autolost would've been the standard, lol. It just seems to me like a more elegant solution to delivering information while teambinds are an archaism and a hot mess in general. But I get the old schooler's angle on this just as well. Moot point.
  • Pitch limit. Well, kinda annoying considering it's probably the only fps that doesn't have +/-89. Oh well, not a big deal.
  • Weapon damage. Whatever, fine as it is.
2015-10-09, 01:50
Member
278 posts

Registered:
Jan 2015
JohnNy_cz wrote:
Friendly suggestion to anyone who thinks about doing changes to QW: Do not ever waste a single second on trying to reach an agreement accross the community. Will not happen, ever, forget about it. QW community is a reflection of the real world: people will never ever agree on one single thing.

If you want to get things moving, create your own branch of QW today, find your own developers today, do changes today, test changes, reflect on your tests, do more changes, find server admins who will run your modified game, run tournaments in your modification. Nothing stops you from doing this, everything is available to you. Also this is how people will vote on your changes: by changing the code for you, by installing servers for you, by participating in your tournaments. All that is much more fun and more effective thing to do than wasting your time discussing things with the whole scene. I wish I could go back in time and tell this to myself years ago.


This was supposed to be a "brainstorm thread" not a ideological war.

Quote:

By the way, "QW is good the way it is." Which QW are you referring to? 1996 QW? 2000? 2005? 2015?


The game didn't really change during the years, it was just the players improving their skills. And that is what makes this game so unique: you can break it's limits, do new things and have a new perception about it even if you never change a single byte.
dev
2015-10-09, 02:53
Member
148 posts

Registered:
Sep 2013
sned wrote:
Team overlay as a vote rather than a toggle - because few things are more pathetic than a toggle war killing a mix.


JohnNy_cz wrote:
If you want to get things moving, create your own branch of QW today, find your own developers today, do changes today, test changes, reflect on your tests, do more changes, find server admins who will run your modified game, run tournaments in your modification. Nothing stops you from doing this, everything is available to you.


Pull request to ktx to make /teamoverlay a vote.
2015-10-09, 09:40
Administrator
1246 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
i fired up Quark and tried to make the changes on the entities on tb5 maps. only managed to do it on dm6 without the new map crashing. maybe someone else with more experience with maps/entities can do it ?
never argue with an idiot. they'll bring you back to their level and then beat you with experience.
2015-10-09, 10:53
Administrator
263 posts

Registered:
Sep 2015
mushi wrote:
i fired up Quark and tried to make the changes on the entities on tb5 maps. only managed to do it on dm6 without the new map crashing. maybe someone else with more experience with maps/entities can do it ?


The entities are stored as a single string in the .bsp file, you can just open it up (even just in notepad) and search for worldspawn, that should get you somewhere in the string. You can copy & paste out to a .ent file and modify there? In spectator mode, cam_pos will give you the current co-ordinates, if you need to move things around.
2015-10-09, 15:37
Member
371 posts

Registered:
Sep 2009
JohnNy_cz wrote:
Friendly suggestion to anyone who thinks about doing changes to QW: Do not ever waste a single second on trying to reach an agreement accross the community. Will not happen, ever, forget about it. QW community is a reflection of the real world: people will never ever agree on one single thing.

If you want to get things moving, create your own branch of QW today, find your own developers today, do changes today, test changes, reflect on your tests, do more changes, find server admins who will run your modified game, run tournaments in your modification. Nothing stops you from doing this, everything is available to you. Also this is how people will vote on your changes: by changing the code for you, by installing servers for you, by participating in your tournaments. All that is much more fun and more effective thing to do than wasting your time discussing things with the whole scene. I wish I could go back in time and tell this to myself years ago.

By the way, "QW is good the way it is." Which QW are you referring to? 1996 QW? 2000? 2005? 2015?

mannnn...... JohNy_cz NAILED our fu***ing brains with this one!!!
That's it !!!
(QW Nickname: AL.Kernell)
2015-10-09, 19:23
Member
42 posts

Registered:
Sep 2014
Here's something I think we can all agree on. Remove the spawn on end that is furthest away.

Remove this from the .ent file.

{
"classname" "info_player_deathmatch"
"origin" "-392 608 40"
"angle" "90"
}

EDIT: I think this might already be standard on a lot of servers, just not the one I was playing the other day. Never mind.
IGN: sinistral
2015-10-10, 19:10
Member
232 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
One of the best things about end is that there's a far away spawn. I love slow spawning and then spawning behind someone waiting for me to come from the far spawn
vb.drok-radnik.com
2015-10-10, 20:16
Member
42 posts

Registered:
Sep 2014
vb- wrote:
One of the best things about end is that there's a far away spawn. I love slow spawning and then spawning behind someone waiting for me to come from the far spawn


http://i57.tinypic.com/28klvgp.jpg


Any news on Jawn Mode?
IGN: sinistral
2015-10-10, 20:43
Member
202 posts

Registered:
Dec 2006
Or just play endmm4.bsp
2015-10-11, 01:57
Member
232 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
haha sorry sed :<

KTPro used to remove that spawn, you'd have to explicitly add "localinfo k_please_dont_remove_end_tele_spawn 1" to your server config just to get it back

As for JawnMode, I've been concentrating on BMX while the weather isn't 150C, but here's one excerpt from the changelog that ppl might find interesting, new version of my spawnmodel:

"Telefrag on crowded start (no telefrags awarded for first 2 seconds of game). 50% change of spawning on occupied spots IF occupee spawned more than 2 seconds ago. 50% chance of last spawn being excluded from spawn pool"

I used to hate spawn telefrags, but DM3 4on4 firstspawn and camping RA spawns to exclude them had to be dealt with, so this model is a compromise between the OG JMode spawnmodel and KTPro/KTX ones
vb.drok-radnik.com
2015-10-11, 14:40
Member
367 posts

Registered:
Dec 2006
My ideas (just ideas for fun really, not overly-analysed as this is brainstorming). I don't actually expect any fundamental changes in QW. Most of my ideas are more around subtle changes in any case.

Map entity changes:
-I'd like to see a health pack in the water on dm3. Not a game-changer but it is kind of depressing being in that area with health so difficult to
-Additional spawn point on dm3 (water maybe?)
-Reduce size of a cells pack on ztndm3
-Replace NG with SNG on dm2
-Add some shells on dm2

Game changes
-Increase GA effectiveness to 40% or 50%
-Make LG marginally less effective (perhaps increase reload time to 12.5ms)
-Increase number of starting nails in an SNG
-Reduce max rockets to 50
-Possibly increase self damage from explosives
-Possibly change quad damage to tri damage (not sure about this one in case it discourages aggressive play)
-Possibly have a short (say 0.3s) 'prespawn' period after death where you can see where you are about to respawn but haven't yet, so that you can react quicker

Rule changes
-Tournaments with experimental team sizes e.g. 3on3

As for changing pitch-limit that might be annoying because you've have to relearn how to do certain shots (e.g. if you are stood at a certain place on the map, you know where a full vertical lock shot will end up.
2015-10-14, 02:35
Member
69 posts

Registered:
Aug 2014
HangTime wrote:
As for changing pitch-limit that might be annoying because you've have to relearn how to do certain shots (e.g. if you are stood at a certain place on the map, you know where a full vertical lock shot will end up.


Uh, isn't the point that you can't look straight up or down (vertical) ?
Like, if you could look up past 70 degrees....to 90....
2015-10-14, 05:32
Member
232 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
He meant full vertical as in pitched up as far as it would go, not 90
vb.drok-radnik.com
2015-10-14, 10:24
Administrator
1022 posts

Registered:
Apr 2006
HangTime wrote:
My ideas (just ideas for fun really, not overly-analysed as this is brainstorming). I don't actually expect any fundamental changes in QW. Most of my ideas are more around subtle changes in any case.

Map entity changes:
-I'd like to see a health pack in the water on dm3. Not a game-changer but it is kind of depressing being in that area with health so difficult to
-Additional spawn point on dm3 (water maybe?)
-Reduce size of a cells pack on ztndm3
-Replace NG with SNG on dm2
-Add some shells on dm2

Game changes
-Increase GA effectiveness to 40% or 50%
-Make LG marginally less effective (perhaps increase reload time to 12.5ms)
-Increase number of starting nails in an SNG
-Reduce max rockets to 50
-Possibly increase self damage from explosives
-Possibly change quad damage to tri damage (not sure about this one in case it discourages aggressive play)
-Possibly have a short (say 0.3s) 'prespawn' period after death where you can see where you are about to respawn but haven't yet, so that you can react quicker

Rule changes
-Tournaments with experimental team sizes e.g. 3on3

As for changing pitch-limit that might be annoying because you've have to relearn how to do certain shots (e.g. if you are stood at a certain place on the map, you know where a full vertical lock shot will end up.


I LOL'd a bit "Mostly subtle changes", they just include changing weapons, ammo, spawns, powerups, damage
2015-10-14, 10:58
Administrator
864 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
HangTime wrote:
Map entity changes:
-I'd like to see a health pack in the water on dm3. Not a game-changer but it is kind of depressing being in that area with health so difficult to
-Additional spawn point on dm3 (water maybe?)
-Reduce size of a cells pack on ztndm3
-Replace NG with SNG on dm2
-Add some shells on dm2

These are actually really interesting ideas! Minor map balancing tweaks making for better gameplay. Thumbs up for this!
Other games like CS tweak their old core maps from time to time, why couldn't we.

HangTime wrote:
Game changes
-Increase GA effectiveness to 40% or 50%
-Make LG marginally less effective (perhaps increase reload time to 12.5ms)
-Increase number of starting nails in an SNG
-Reduce max rockets to 50
-Possibly increase self damage from explosives
-Possibly change quad damage to tri damage (not sure about this one in case it discourages aggressive play)
-Possibly have a short (say 0.3s) 'prespawn' period after death where you can see where you are about to respawn but haven't yet, so that you can react quicker

I think none of this should change tho. Too much of a gamechanger.
IRC went Discord -> join the chats @ discord.quake.world
2015-10-16, 00:58
News Writer
174 posts

Registered:
May 2013
HangTime wrote:

-Replace NG with SNG on dm2


Wholeheartedly agree with this. The standard NG is next to useless in pretty much any situation. SNG would allow for at least some reasonable firepower of the spawn.

HangTime wrote:

-Increase GA effectiveness to 40% or 50%


Again would love to see this as I'm sure many others would as well. With the exception of e1m2 where (in a fairly balanced matchup) you're not going to be facing too much heavy artillery, GA is pretty much redundant as is. Increasing its damage absorption slightly isn't gonna change the combat dynamics too much but may at least give a player a fighting chance of escaping from an unfavorable engagement.
2015-10-16, 05:41
Member
232 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
I always liked CPMA's armors: GA 50%, YA 66%, RA 75%. It makes the armour:health decrement ratio 1:1, 2:1 and 3:1 respectively .

For reference, QW armors are 30%, 60% and 80%...
vb.drok-radnik.com
2015-10-16, 15:02
Member
164 posts

Registered:
Apr 2007
RaggA wrote:
HangTime wrote:

-Replace NG with SNG on dm2


Wholeheartedly agree with this. The standard NG is next to useless in pretty much any situation. SNG would allow for at least some reasonable firepower of the spawn.

HangTime wrote:

-Increase GA effectiveness to 40% or 50%


Again would love to see this as I'm sure many others would as well. With the exception of e1m2 where (in a fairly balanced matchup) you're not going to be facing too much heavy artillery, GA is pretty much redundant as is. Increasing its damage absorption slightly isn't gonna change the combat dynamics too much but may at least give a player a fighting chance of escaping from an unfavorable engagement.


I use ng alot On dm2. IF u are in a disadvantage, you can stop nmy from rushing towards you with ng.
  142 posts on 5 pages  First page12345Last page