Spawn Time Questions

A lot of teams have come to me in private, via IRC or e-mail, with concerns about the length of matches in the league and possible solutions to that problem. One of the most viable (and easiest to implement) solutions that has been proposed has been a slight modification of spawn times for the offensive and defensive teams on each map. It has been posed to me by several teams that slight weights toward the offensive team in spawn times would help many maps finish quicker and therefore shorten the overall match times, as well as remove some of the frustration that comes from extremely long matches.

There are also several rule provisos due to this problem, such as the four round sudden-death rule. Modification of the spawn times on the maps would likely serve to reduce or possibly even eliminate this situation from occuring. Before I pose it as a formal vote to the community, I felt that an "open quoroum" on the subject was necessary. Many teams feel this change would be beneficial, but there are several that oppose changes of that nature.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly why this thread exists. Let's get the community talking on this subject and see what the popular opinion is... that means you guys.

So start discussing already!

edit: Just as a baseline, these are some of the times that have been suggested to me. Feel free to discuss and/or suggest your own.

Oasis: Adjusting Allied spawn time down to 15 seconds from 20 would make this already great map more fluid in offensive pushes and would hopefully serve to reduce or elminate the marathon matches.

Railgun: Adjusting the Allied defensive spawn time to 25 or possibly even 30 seconds would serve to reduce the ease of locking down the yard on defense and give the Axis offensive more of an opportunity to capture the yard, load the ammo, and ultimately fire the railgun.
Post edited by Rabid at 1/23/2004 12:26:11 AM


suave>>Rabid
TeamWarfare Competition Staff
#x-cast on ETG / x-cast.net
#suave on GameSurge / suavesports.com

http://www.teamwarfare.com/forums/showthread.asp?forumid=40&threadid=101774

^ see that for a small discussion on all of this!

In my opinion, the competitive edge of Enemy Territory needs serious tweaking. I realize that most people tend to resist changes, especially in competitve issues, however I encourage people to have an open mind and realize that sometimes change is good. I have spoken with many top teams and players, most of whom have played RtCW since it was released over two years ago and who are now playing ET. All of them, including myself, agree that ET competition suffers from several things and will become stale and cliche if measures are not taken soon. The single most important issue that I will address here is the lack of good competitive maps that tend to result in double full holds in evenly, or even sometimes unevenly, matched teams. The way to resolve this is by either by: a) Finding new custom maps that would be suitable for competition play--like supplydepot b) Tweaking the existing maps (shorter spawn times and/or modifying issues like tank speeds, spawn points, etc) to make offense a bit easier on many of these maps. I believe it would be best for the ET community to adopt a mixture of these changes. I realize that right now some ET players may be accustomed to LONG and drawn out defense holds and the like, however I can tell you from experience that these changes will make the ET competition much more colorful, exciting, and dynamic. Refer to Apoc's post on specific ideas for the map tweakings. Happy hunting!

suave>>DezaraX <> #suave on Gamesnet and ETG <> Sponsored by: http://www.playdedicated.com

I will state that I personally support minor tweaking to both Railgun and Oasis. I like the idea and think it is worthy of adding to competition. I would like to see what more people thought of this.

Maybe we could do limited lives for the defense or even better have no defense at all. Make it a raceing game where you hurry and finish the objective, in the fastest time, without opposition. We could lay an axis uniform on the ground and have a big green arrow pointing to it, can't make it too hard on allies, so covert actions can be used if wanted.

Apparently gohst has little or no understanding of what a productive forum thread consists. Gohst, your sarcasm is fruitless and it is quite obvious that your insight on this matter is very limited. We are here to improve the Enemy Territory competitive scene, not waste time making childish remarks that have nothing but negative effects. I suppose you think your post is clever and humorous, however this is an important issue and I suggest that in the future before making posts with such an obviously apathetic attitude you ought to think about how people will react when reading such ridiculous text.

suave>>DezaraX <> #suave on Gamesnet and ETG <> Sponsored by: http://www.playdedicated.com

I am against implementing either of these changes.

ET is a different sort of game than RTCW and yea, sometimes that means you're gonna play for 15 minutes and not pull off a cap as opposed to RTCW where one player on the defending team can make one mistake and you cap in ~2 minutes.

I don't want quick matches, I don't want 2 minute caps, I don't want spawn times adjusted, and I sure as hell don't want to be playing base/beach in ET.

This comes from someone who didn't play RTCW and isn't longing for the "good old days" of 1 minute caps on beach every time he fires up ET to play Goldrush.

There are a lot more people in ET who aren't in reality converted RTCW players than not, and I think you'll find a great deal of resistence to most of the changes a few of the RTCW vets seem to want as of late.

These changes have nothing to do with the fact that some of us may have played rtcw. I agree its a much different game, but to deney that maps need changing is pretty damn stupid. The changes to these maps wouldn't elminate ALL full holds I'm pretty sure of that, but it would keep a match between two even teams from going to multiple ties. The idea isn't for someone to be able to cap in 1 min whitefire.. the idea is that when 2 evenly matched teams play someone should cap. Also to deney maps just B/C they were used in a previous game is just plain SILLY! I don't care if someone remakes dust for et, if it plays good I'll play it in competition.
Post edited by Apoculos at 1/23/2004 2:05:54 PM

I'd just like to mention that I never played RTCW competitively but I still agree that ET needs a few minor changes. In a nutshell, ET has one problem - it is TOO DEFENSIVE FOR STOPWATCH.

First off, there are a few things about ET that make it good. The XP system is mostly good. The ideas behind the maps (more complex objectives than RTCW) are good. Playing a map with a slightly longer timelimit is fine, as long is its cappable.

Anyways, the defensiveness stems from 2 things:
- map logistics/layout (not all maps, just some)
- spam (in particular, level 1+ panzers and high level fieldops)

Small changes to maps such as spawn times and XP given for damaging vehicles, along with a slight tweaking to the soldier and fieldop XP benefits would be great.

Oasis: make allied spawn 15 seconds
Railgun: make allied spawn 30 seconds
Fueldump: make allied spawn 15 seconds, add CP spawn, lower XP for damaging tank to 3
Goldrush: make allied spawn 15 seconds, lower XP for damaging tank/truck to 3
Radar: its good \o/
Battery: this map needs alot of work, just changing spawns wont work

Soldier: swap level 1 and level 2 XP benefits, make the higher level panzer take 75% charge
Fieldops: make level 2 spam take 75% charge, make level 3 spam take 100% charge for double spam and 50% charge for single spam

Post edited by God Incarnate at 1/23/2004 5:26:23 PM

Originally posted by: White-Fire

I don't want quick matches, I don't want 2 minute caps, I don't want spawn times adjusted, and I sure as hell don't want to be playing base/beach in ET.

So you like playing 3 hour matches? And why don't you want to play beach/base? Because they were played in RTCW? Let me tell you, thats some sound reasoning there. Just discard 2 maps that have been proven to be competetion worthy because they were played in a different game.

I do like 3+ hour long matches actually.

I don't like playing beach/base because I don't like seeing one team cap in ~3 minutes and the other team capping in ~2 minutes.

That's barely a game at all.

i dont like any of the proposed changes in the past, but a couple maps need some changes(not radical ones). ET is a different game, get some new maps. no old ones that everyone has played over and over again.
changes i like are:
lower xp for damaging tank/truck(nades, hw and fo)
railgun: allies spawn 30(its the only map with 20/20)
oasis: allies spawn 15(too many full holds)
fueldump: make cp spawnable after tank has blown main doors.

dont mess with
goldrush: is fine(maybe speed up tank)
battery: love that map(fine in my opinion)
radar: sweet
new maps not old played out ones(they are great but lets see some new ones)

also, get rid of omg_caen

15 second allied spawns on Oasis and 25 second allied spawns on railgun are fine ideas IMO.

Nerfing vehicle destruction XP was my idea, I just don't know if you can do that without simultaneously nerfing the construction XP - that's bani's department.

Implementing a 1 panzer limit and moving level 1 panzer to level 2 is also a fine idea.

I'm not against changes to ET, I am against making ET into RTCW + goldrush/oasis/radar.

ET is ET and not RTCW. I have 1 TWL-SW match a week, with 6 days to prepare for it, so spending something over 60 minutes is fun to me. As it has been in other threads it's again suggested that my match playing time not only be reduced, but that I should spend more time in limbo when I'm defending. ET has a page full of stats that could be used as a tie-breaker (game points, kills, XP, damage given, ect: ect while keeping ET, ET and not making another game out of it. 5 minute matches are for CoD not ET.

DezaraX, you seem to want to tell people how the game should be, how long it should last, how the game should be played, how to reply, what words to use, and what thread they should reply in. Seems to me that you've failed to learn that the purpose of debate is to see both sides, not just yours. Open your mind and your heart, my young friend, and you'll see that the world isn't being played by your rules only.

Full holds on maps as large as Oasis and Goldrush should not be so easy to accomplish, period. The simple fact of the matter is that they are, as is plainly evident when two evenly skilled teams face each other and repeatedly produce full holds.

In many cases, a small spawn time tweak would do wonders to cut down on this full hold nonsense.

Originally posted by: gohst
ET is ET and not RTCW.

It isn't hard to see that many ET maps are lopsided, strongly favoring the defense. I'm a bit tired of seeing this "ET is not RTCW" rhetoric spewed every time a small adjustment is proposed, especially when we're dealing with such an obvious flaw. Please try and focus on the real issue here (which, again, is the unbalanced maps) instead of sidestepping it and making baseless accusations claiming that people want to "change ET into RTCW".

Originally posted by: gohst
DezaraX, you seem to want to tell people how the game should be, how long it should last, how the game should be played, how to reply, what words to use, and what thread they should reply in. Seems to me that you've failed to learn that the purpose of debate is to see both sides, not just yours. Open your mind and your heart, my young friend, and you'll see that the world isn't being played by your rules only.

Check your original post. You sidestep the issue and respond with sarcasm, and when Dez tries to reason with you, you try and twist things around on him. Nice try, but come up with an actual argument before you post again.

Originally posted by: White-Fire
I don't like playing beach/base because I don't like seeing one team cap in ~3 minutes and the other team capping in ~2 minutes. That's barely a game at all.

So you believe that a good match must take an extended period of time? That's fine, but it doesn't mean that proven maps should not be given a chance. Perhaps, on smaller maps, play best of 5 or 7 instead of best of 3.
Post edited by Seed at 1/24/2004 2:07:31 AM

I fail to see how making ET more like the dying RTCW would improve the game, otherwise all the X-RTCWers would be there playing full time. Maybe ET is more about defense than RTCW? Even though I choose allies 95% of the time, while pubbing, I still appreciate a well played defense. I feel there is another way to break ties or full holds. The spawn tweaking on Caen speaks for me when I think about how far TWL will go to ensure that maps are capped. There has been spawn tweaking, defenses will continue to improve, we'll tweak again. Continue to make people sit in limbo, while on defense, will remove the fun, IMO. Let's find another way to shorten matches and determine full hold winners other than sitting in defensive limbo.

The personal attacks won't shut all the opposition up my friend. My opinions are mine, sorry you don't share them.

do you even play in the competitive league gohst?

Would've been easier to click on the "Profile" thingy by my name than to make that post my friend.

Like I care enough. My point was stop filling this thread with your "points" when you are using examples from PUB play and not even on a team competiting. This is for competitive league players to decide, not pubbers.
Post edited by Apoculos at 1/24/2004 1:51:44 PM

None of these threads need to turn into personal attacks from either 'side' of the debate.

Obviously, there are lots of people that play this game that think that some adjustments need to be made to improve ET competitive play. Adjustments have already been made to the default game thru such means as the cvars set by ETPro, dyno only ramp for SW, spawn times changed, etc, etc.

Does that mean that all the suggestions that are being made in this thread or others are good ideas? Of course not, but it would be foolish to completely dismiss any idea because it's one you might disagree with.

The more that we all try to work together to try to develop some consensus on first, do we need changes and two, what those should be, the better for this game. Whether the idea comes from an established top level clan or a relatively new one, everyone has a right to voice their opinion. This can be done without the personal attacks.

ND80
TeamWarfare Competition Staff
#ND80 on Gamesnet

I'd just like to mention a few changes that I DON'T want in ET.

Short maps: I don't want maps that can be won in under 3 minutes (i.e. doc run only maps with no other objectives). In RTCW you played at least 3 rounds, so this was ok. In ET you can win after 2 rounds, so naturally the minimum cap times should be longer. Basically, what I mean is that more complex objectives is what makes ET different from RTCW, and this is a good thing. Things like dyno this, dyno that, THEN do a doc run.

Longer spawn times: In particular, I don't want to see the defense's spawn times go beyond 30 seconds. Lower the attacking team's spawn time instead. Having a long defensive spawn time makes for more waiting to play, and makes spawn camping a more effective tactic. Sure, spawn camping is part of the game, but it's not fun. If the defense has a spawn of 40 seconds, you'll get more panzers camping the spawn, hoping for an easy way to shut down the defense and make them wait for 36 seconds.

Soo... here are some GOOD methods that I support for making ET less defensive:
- Lower spawn times for the offense
- Less constricting chokepoints for a more free-flowing game
- Reduce the amount of spam from panzers/fieldops
Post edited by God Incarnate at 1/24/2004 3:59:19 PM

Nice Mr. Nate.

I tend to agree with ginc on most points. Yes we all love capping and all, and obscenely long matches are bad and annoying. But at the same time a really short match is also in a sense annoying.

Winning a match in 30 minutes total isnt all that big on many people. At the same time neither is losing a match in 3 hours. But there has to be a way to find a healthy medium.

Would we all be happy if oasis times were capped in like, 13:30, 14:21, etc., with the occassional full hold WITH EVEN TEAMS. I mean yes constant full holds are bad, but whats wrong with one here and there even if the teams are evenly matched?

Maybe this is how I feel because of the lack of exposure to an exciting yet short match, because in et a short match is a dominating 1 sided match, but even if it wasn't dominated by one team, a short match still leaves something to be wanted. Maybe after we test changes we can make it best of 5 to in turn keep match times healthy and exciting? Or who knows maybe the majority wants a match that maximum will last ~30-40 mins, using radar as an example, 8 mins + 7 min cap, then 6:45 and full hold, say its a 1-1 game then u get another MAXIMUM of 20 minutes in the 3rd deciding round and bam, your match is done in << 1hr

ET will NEVER be best of 5 as long as goldrush, railgun, and oasis (you know, the core ET maps) are played.

IE: ET != RTCW so we won't be seeing best 3 of 5 any time soon.

whats wrong with doing best out 5 on some maps? nothing I'd say.

Here are some specific things I support in ET SW Competition:

Railgun: Increase allied spawn time by 5 seconds. The problem with this map is that it is too easy to camp the depot yard with the allied team. Any reasonable team with a decent strategy should be able to hold just about anybody for full time every time under current regulations.

Battery: rather than forcing the team to use dynomite to blow the ramp, limit the team to 1 covertops. If map modding is possible, allow an engineer to blow the back garage door. The problem with this map is that it is impossible to get up the beach when the other team has 2 covert ops. Sometimes you can get up there, but its pretty easy on defense to prevent it with 2 fieldops, 2 coverts, 2 mortars and a medic and still be sure to never get stuck on the beach.


Fueldump: If map modding is possible, add a select spawn point by the command post. If modding is not acceptable, decrease spawn time of allied team by 5 seconds. The problem with fuledump is that the allied spawn point is too far from the axis base, and its too easy for any reasonable team to hold the depot the entire game. I don't now any teams that give up the fueldump many times at all.

Radar: I would not change anything about this map except re-adding the grass (i know it will never happen ): The spawn times on this map are perfect, and most teams cap within a reasonable time. I think this map is one of the best in the game.

Oasis: The problem with Oasis is that the axis spawn right next to the tank guns. This basically means the only way to defeat the axis team is to spawn camp them. In other words, the current layout requires a spawn camp, or no cap. Either change the layout of the map (reverse the spawn/tankgun building orientation) or decrease allied spawn time. But honestly, using the tactic of spawn camping (which IMO sux) there really isn't any excuse in not being able to cap. I would vote to move the axis spawn point where the guns are, and the guns where the axis spawn point are. But that would take too much work, so IMO this map is unrepairable. Spawn camp or lose on this map.

Goldrush: Goldrush is a pretty powerful map. It is the only one where there isn't any clear linear progression to the map (save the direction of the tank). It is just one big arena with a buncha walls and ramps and ladders. The problem with this map is much like oasis. You can't cap unless you spawn camp. I don't like spawn camping, and it sux for it to be a REQUIREMENT in order to cap the gold. Lowering allied spawn by 5 seconds should fix this problelm a little, but I'm afraid that doing that will just make religious spawn campers cap it faster, and thus no improvement. The only real way to fix this map would be to position the axis spawn behind the bank insted of in front of it. This map suffers of the same map layout as oasis. There's not really anything easy you could to to fix this map. Teams must learn to spawn camp or lose when playing this map. Reducing the spawn time of allied team by 5 seconds MIGHT be beneficial, but I don't see it improving the dynamics of the map.

There are also a few more things that should be done in a SW competition to the classes:

- I think level3 fieldops should be swapped for level4. This would make spawn camping a lot harder. If this should happen, some of the spawn camping maps (oasis, goldrush) would have to give the allied team shorter spawns. Another poster suggested taking more powerbar on level2 and level3 fieldops, this might also be a solution.

- Cap the panzer levelups (im not sure where to cap) or make higher levels use up more of the power bar.

- Start eveyone with level1 small weapons, or swap level1 with level2, and level3 with level4. This would make the SMG's more powerful and reduce the desire to spawn camp with panzers/mortars. It would also give out dual pistols at level3 insted of level4. (some of this is just for pleasure sake, but also to help encourage SMG over spawn rape weapons).

Some have suggested to reduce team sizes. Don't reduce team size. The teams are already small for such large maps. Rather than reducing team sizes, it is better to cap the spam from fieldops, mortars, and panzers. This has already been done somewhat, but some of the maps require spawn camping, and so until these issues are addressed, there will always be too much spam and you will die out of spawn.

In short: if nothing else do this:

-reduce goldrush alied spawn by 5 seconds
-reduce oasis alied spawn by 5 seconds
-increase railgun allied spawn by 5 seconds
-consider boosting SMG usage by starting them out with higher levelup, or changing SMG levelup order.

Please remember, by reducing spawn times by 5 seconds, you are automatically giving Fieldops faster powerups. Just keep that in mind.

=/<=SuperGuppy

Desperately hoping not to derail this topic, but what's the point of readding the grass on Radar? How would that accomplish anything in terms of correcting any of the problems being discussed here?

suave>>Rabid
TeamWarfare Competition Staff
#x-cast on ETG / x-cast.net
#suave on GameSurge / suavesports.com

so lets put this to a vote before we play oasis or railgun :0

Originally posted by: Rabid

Oasis: Adjusting Allied spawn time down to 15 seconds from 20
Railgun: Adjusting the Allied defensive spawn time to 25 or possibly even 30 seconds

Yes and yes.

Railgun spawn times for defense are especially egregious.

Question/thought. ET works with split or double spawn cycles for each side (IE; 1st spawn 17 secs into game, 2nd spawn 13 seconds later or 30 seconds into game.) and you spawn according to when you died, maybe in 5 seconds. Would it help the SW leagues to complete caps if 1 of these were somehow removed and thus slightly interupt the supplyline of reinforcements?

Gohst, it seems like you're proposing randomly screwing the defense out of an entire spawncycle; that would be unbelievably horrible.

Ginc posted good ideas in this thread and others, and I agree with what he's proposed. I never played a single competitive round of RtCW. That said, I think ET clearly needs changes in order to continue drawing a lively competitive community.
Post edited by black.out at 1/29/2004 12:31:27 AM

That's true enough black.out, anything that adjusts the "spawn times" asks us to sit in limbo more or endure possiable "spawn camps".

Well, after playing a 3+ hour match on goldrush last night, the score is (Insert trumpet here) 0-0.

Now, I (as well as alot of people) love a good match that is hard fought and close. While some people may want to walk over another team in 30 minutes, I think the majority of people like a good hard fought match (whether they win or lose). But playing for over 3 hours only to end in a 0-0 tie is really no fun at all and any change we can make or recommend is helpful.

I think adjusting the spawn times down for the offense *slightly* would definitely help things become more offensively biased. As anyone who has been playing competitive ET knows, its much easier to complete whatever objective it is when the defense is on the run and dis-organized. This would definitely play to that fact and also let the better team have an advantage.

The game should better reward the offense when they make a nice clean sweep of the defense, which by default has the advantage by being able to set positions and focus on the points where the offense can comne in from. Maps like Goldrush, Fueldump and Radar would all benefit from this with the decreased offensive spawn time since defensive spawns being so close to the objective.

As far as spawn camping goes, its part of the game. If your team doesn't spawn camp (either directly or indirectly), im betting your record will reflect it. Ya, its no fun to sit in limbo after getting camped, but, isn't it really your fault for running out into a situation where you KNOW they are camping you? How do you think the offense feels when they make the long run from spawn, only to get nailed by a panzer as soon as they show their face around a corner? It goes both ways...

Anyway, im all for adjusting the spawn times down for offense. I can see no down side to it.... just more opportunies for me to kill..

for goldrush just speed up the damn tank... problem fixed for the most part. ( I feel there would still be full holds.. but nowhere near what we get now)

to make gr more offense oriented, just make the tank indestructable once it is built... that way you still have to build it once which buys the defense some time (or possibly a full hold if they are good).

to this point i agree with everything said by dez, apoc, and rabid. Also i dont see why people are agaisnt playing maps like Base and Beach for et, if they work whats wrong?

I love the way base plays for ET, I've only scrimmed beach once and I didnt like the feel of it in ET.

I like the idea of spawntimes changing for maps to help the offense a bit and maybe see less full holds. Also some xp tweaks sound nice like as WhiteFire said the destroying tank xp is too much atm and just promotes field op spam. Panzers and Field Op xp and level systems should be reworked somehow for competition and that smg level idea where one would start out with lvl 1 seems cool also.

after the et-open thing and scrimming base/beach a few times I feel that base plays ok, and beach I don't like.. but maybe my dislike of beach comes from the anal raping we recieved from one of rtcw's top teams . Beach feels weird in et and with its different spawntimes (25/35 instead of 30/40). In any case I don't feel that either play very well with 7s since its to crowded, so unless we do 6s I know beach won't work and base MIGHT.

I agree with apoc. I really dislike beach in ET. It already seems played out and stale. There just isn't any room for innovation, because the map doesn't really allow use of ET-specific features, like Base does. Mines, mobiles, mortars and even rifle nades allow for some new strategies. Base is an old map, but feels fresh with all of the new stuff you can do.

Yes to base, no to beach.

I agree with nothx. Yes to base and no to beach.
____________________________________________
Amish Eclipse+ #awo-gamesurge.net http://www.amishworldorder.org