Author Topic: League concept  (Read 19458 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ~SJ~MausGMR

  • Apprentice Dev
  • Star Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 1644
  • l33tp0intz: +83/-7
  • Oh snap...
Re: League concept
« Reply #120 on: August 03, 2010, 06:22:37 PM »
They way I look at it, being able to disable the turrets is going to save us a lot of heartache as Admins. The fact of the matter is, the current league setup does not promote gameplay that is the same as what public players experience on any standard SA server. With specific rules about repairing, respawning, and ejecting, we are already running a game that is very dissimilar to the MWLL public experience. Disabling turrets in game is just another tickbox between what makes league play, league play, and what makes public MWLL, public MWLL.

Now as much as you guys aren't in agreement with mods to LUA files, the fact of the matter is that it's quite blatantly already possible. Regardless of whether or not the league was permitted or decided to run a custom games experience with modified LUA files and turned off turrets, it isn't going to change the fact this kind of thing is already plausible within MWLL. If someone wants to run a dodgy server with modded LUA files that change the way the game works to such a degree that could be considered harmful to the project, then it appears to me that they already could do that, and it wont make an ounce of difference whether or not the league does it or not. The only alternative is that we run custom maps with turrets removed, but this of course means making everyone download map packs prior to playing, which is a tedious task and often an administrative nightmare. If you guys are willing to put some options together for us, that's great, but it'd be nice to get them soon, because things are already kicking off.

Square in regards to TC, we currently have no plans to integrate TC within legends arena, but this ofc will be something that will be discussed when it's released.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2010, 08:23:55 PM by ~SJ~MausGMR »


<Freeborn_Toad> what's a Maus?
<Razorin-Faust> It's what you get when Chuck Norris and Natasha Kerensky have a kid : Maus



The prodigal son has returned

Offline ~SJ~ Blhurr

  • Living Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 2529
  • l33tp0intz: +79/-2
  • ~SJ~
Re: League concept
« Reply #121 on: August 03, 2010, 08:35:04 PM »
I think their argument is that prolific modification of lua scripts would be their administrative nightmare.  They've said they could enable cheat protection server side which would completely tie our hands on the matter and we would just have to deal then.  Hopefully a compromise can be reached in the interim here because I would rather see them spending time to incorporate our needs than spending time sealing all modification possibilities.  Afterall, The last thing we want is for league-specific needs to trump development of the mod core.
"Damn these RCTs! 'Mech combat is bad enough, let alone the  combined arms of 'Mechs, vehicles, infantry, and fighters." - Loren - Death Commando - Highlander's Gambit

TC_ThermoCline - TC_Woods - TC_CastleHill - TC_00_Dam - TC_FeralFangs - TC_Breadbasket

Offline KingLeerUK

  • Hawkmoth D arise!
  • Project Director
  • Living Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 3790
  • l33tp0intz: +534/-19
  • Hawmoth "D" Ascendant
Re: League concept
« Reply #122 on: August 03, 2010, 09:06:35 PM »
Enabling cheat protection checks on the server-side is basically a flip of a switch.  This hasn't been done until now because the hope was that server admins would be a bit more restrained than the public at-large.
 
Some of the basic league requests are relatively easy to do per a discussion with Ingrater, an hour or two at most plus whatever time is needed to test them.
 
I'll post below some of my snippets of an internal conversation we are having on this topic:
 
Quote
Both Toth and I have already stated that we will not be enabling a public flag to disable entire classes of vehicles, league or not.  This opens a very nasty door to MechWarrior IV: Redux wherein certain segments of the playerbase decide that they hate everything that doesn't walk on two legs and disable them from the game, never to look at everything else that has been built with the teams blood, sweat and tears.  Our game is not balanced for this.  Toth and I have stated that we might allow this after a full 1.0 release state.

Quote
And for the moment I'm content to have leagues use an honour system to self-limit their vehicle purchases based on agreed upon league or match rules.  Having a hard function to limit vehicle classes available for purchase WILL be abused and there is no way to validate that it is being used for league-only purposes.
 
What sort of impression do you think that would make on a new player that joins a server expecting to see combined arms, but instead sees only 'Mechs?

Quote
I guess I'm not completely understanding why leagues cannot properly self-regulate their member purchases.
 
If you are playing in a closed-invitation, league match, and your current league is Mech-only, then the expectation is... only buy 'Mechs.  If someone buys otherwise it is a failing of them being unable to follow directions, not that the game itself is flawed.  It's as simple as not choosing anything on the VEHICLE tab of the Buy Menu.
 
To take an example from Line of Contact, we would often play games that had rules like "no railguns" because many of the community found them to be unbalancing.  It was up to players in the session to be bound by that gentlemens' agreement because the game did not support that sort of limitation at the server or client level.  This worked out just fine, and we had several tournaments using that sort of a custom, agreed ruleset.
Proud vendor of Soon™, brought to you by the makers of Someday™, Make Me a Ticket™ and Let's Talk About it Later™

Never mistake "the audience" for "the community".

Offline Aidan

  • Living Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 2308
  • l33tp0intz: +47/-6
Re: League concept
« Reply #123 on: August 03, 2010, 09:47:11 PM »
King,

These comments are fair. The only reason I have asked for this feature is to have software enforcement of restricted vehicles. But I am sure NBT can, and has in the past formed gentleman's agreements for how the game of choice is played in the NBT style.

Your concerns appear to be about first impressions new players would have on public open servers when expecting combined arms and not getting it for a given server. From the new players point of view, if they are unhappy they are free to change servers.

Enough said from me on this subject. If you all decide to implement a vehicle restriction server side switch, that would be great. If you decide against it, that is fine too. Its all good !!!! Just make sure we have a Mech Lab.

NBT right now has its hands full in re-writing the Planetary Resource web based application that will be the back end game for the units in the NBT league. That in itself is a big project and hopefully the league will come up with something very modular so NBT can "plug in" different game platforms. Nothing would please me more than to see NBT offer Planetary leagues using MW4 Mercs with Mektek mods, the MWLL Mod, MW 3015, and a turn based online implementation of the Classic Battle Tech board game. The only thing NBT has never done is a Ladder league and that is because MWL does this already.


Intel Core i7 @ 3.50GHz, AMD/ATI HD6990 LCS, Catalyst Control Center V12.8, 6GB Tri-Channel Dram, 640GB HD, 128GB SSD, DirectX 11,  Windows 7 Pro (64 bit), Corsair 1200 Watt Power Supply, Liquid Cooled GPU and CPU.

Offline Rampage

  • Lance Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 687
  • l33tp0intz: +26/-0
    • Rampage Computers
Re: League concept
« Reply #124 on: August 03, 2010, 11:04:30 PM »
KingleerUK and Ingrator,

The Admins that are working on the ladder respect everything you have created in the MWLL Mod and appreciate your support of the ladder and future league play. We will not make server side changes to disable the turrets. We will put in rules that will minimize the chance of the turrets interfering in a match by requiring the teams to move at least one map block away from their spawn base or secondary base before setting up defensive positions. For the most part this should solve the problem until there is an official way to disable the turret defenses for ladder matches.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2010, 12:36:42 AM by CHHš Rampage »

Offline ~SJ~ Tajin Nevversan

  • MechWarrior
  • **
  • Posts: 209
  • l33tp0intz: +9/-0
  • SteamID: Tajin
Re: League concept
« Reply #125 on: August 03, 2010, 11:36:03 PM »
Quote
For now, I would encourage you to share your custom LUA rulesets on the forums for review and possible inclusion via a league cvar control.

Right, I'll only post the bare functions for it however, no complete scripts. I don't know how far away the next patch is, but since those luascripts are still possible right now, I wouldn't want to give anyone funny ideas by posting the whole thing here.


The turret-thing is rather simple really (no surprise) and the same would prolly work with disabling them, however I took the easier approach of deleting em.:
Code: [Select]
function delturrets()
local ents = System.GetEntitiesByClass("Turret_Calliope");
for i, ent in pairs(ents) do
ent:DeleteThis();
end

local ents = System.GetEntitiesByClass("Turret_AMS");
for i, ent in pairs(ents) do
ent:DeleteThis();
end
end

some other things include for example different sorts of servermessages (sv_say is so hard to notice)
Code: [Select]
function SayAllTop(msg)
g_gameRules.game:SendTextMessage(TextMessageInfo, msg, TextMessageToAll);
System.LogAlways("All-Top:"..msg);
end

function SayAllCenter(msg)
g_gameRules.game:SendTextMessage(TextMessageCenter, msg, TextMessageToAll);
System.LogAlways("All-Center:"..msg);
end

Another thing we've been using for scrims and trials (because TestofStrength often has that nasty bug where people end up with 0 cbills) is the ability to adjust the cbill amount of all players on the server instantly.
This obviously helped alot in reducing the setup time before a battle. Not really a must-have feature, since it's more of a workaround for a bug.
Code: [Select]
function SetMoney(amount)
local select = g_gameRules.game:GetPlayers();
for i,player in pairs(select) do
System.LogAlways(player:GetName() .. " set " .. amount .. " CBills");
g_gameRules.game:SetSynchedEntityValue(player.id, 200, math.floor(amount));
end
end




I've also done some testing, trying to implement a team-cbillaccount, haven't finished that one though.
I think it would be an very useful thing for scrims especially. Saves people from having to worry about transfering money around or disallowing reconnects or whatever. The team-cbillaccount would effectively limit a whole team to a set amount of cbills, which is just perfect for a scrim.



~ SJ Droplist generator is updated and back online. ~

Offline ratbuddy

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1349
  • l33tp0intz: +76/-1
Re: League concept
« Reply #126 on: August 04, 2010, 05:33:16 PM »
Please consider that a difference in game files between server and client could lead to instable behaviour. Anything caused by modified server files will not be fixed and/or supported by the mod team.

Instead of a mod of the mod, we would like to see a list put together by league players that contains everything you need for league games. We are willing to implement neccessary features if they are compatible to the general mod guidelines and do not cause to much work hours.

If you could go ahead and make legs undamageable, that'd be great. That's obviously the way they should have been from the start  ;)

Offline SquareSphere

  • Living Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 5176
  • l33tp0intz: +228/-6
  • pancake slinging, Square (care) Bear of MWLL
    • 12th Vegan Rangers - Boards
Re: League concept
« Reply #127 on: August 04, 2010, 05:44:16 PM »
^ NO I refuse to have the MW4 Leg Armor "work around" implemented in  MWLL.  All that lead to was people stripping all armor off their legs in MW4 to have more tonnage for other things.

Offline Stormin'

  • 2D Contributor
  • MWLL Contributor
  • Star Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 810
  • l33tp0intz: +46/-1
  • Web Developer
    • Lance Command
Re: League concept
« Reply #128 on: August 04, 2010, 06:35:49 PM »
^ NO I refuse to have the MW4 Leg Armor "work around" implemented in  MWLL.  All that lead to was people stripping all armor off their legs in MW4 to have more tonnage for other things.

QFT, although, as i recall custom armor values in MWLL will not be region specific, but an overall total.  When I was working on the HUD, that was the reasoning I was given for damage to parts being given a percentage instead of points (I pushed for the latter as it was a big part of former mechlabs).  But that was a long time ago and lots of things have changed, including most of the HUD development team.  Could be completely irrelevant now, and I have no clue what those plans are at the moment.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2010, 07:57:48 PM by CHHš Stormin' »


Stormin' (a.k.a. Xtrekker/Zensai @MWO)
Project Lead Developer
www.lancecommand.com

Offline ratbuddy

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1349
  • l33tp0intz: +76/-1
Re: League concept
« Reply #129 on: August 04, 2010, 06:58:58 PM »
^ NO I refuse to have the MW4 Leg Armor "work around" implemented in  MWLL.  All that lead to was people stripping all armor off their legs in MW4 to have more tonnage for other things.

Wait, they actually made legs immune to damage in MW4? Ugh, guess the whiners won.. Hope that doesn't happen here  :-\

Offline SquareSphere

  • Living Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 5176
  • l33tp0intz: +228/-6
  • pancake slinging, Square (care) Bear of MWLL
    • 12th Vegan Rangers - Boards
Re: League concept
« Reply #130 on: August 04, 2010, 07:06:05 PM »
They legs weren't made immune, it was more like 1 point of leg armor was actually worth 5x the amount.  but the the given effect was basically making them immune, and min/maxer just stripped the armor down 3-4x the normal amount for the extra tonnage.

Jason dinAlt

  • Guest
Re: League concept
« Reply #131 on: August 04, 2010, 07:16:08 PM »
 :o

I murder mechs a lot, I have ok aim and I usually hit CT or legs, they both seem to take the same multipliter... and btw, I ALWAYS put full/almost full armor on the mech. i end up with slow mechs, thouh.

Offline ~SJ~ Tajin Nevversan

  • MechWarrior
  • **
  • Posts: 209
  • l33tp0intz: +9/-0
  • SteamID: Tajin
Re: League concept
« Reply #132 on: August 05, 2010, 12:57:15 PM »
:o

I murder mechs a lot, I have ok aim and I usually hit CT or legs, they both seem to take the same multipliter... and btw, I ALWAYS put full/almost full armor on the mech. i end up with slow mechs, thouh.

Wait? What?
What are you even talking about?

MWLL ? Armor ? Slow mechs ? Murder ? How can you talk about multipliers when you do not even seem to be talking about about the same game? In fact I'm not even sure WHAT game you're talking about, nor am I sure if you know that uself.

~ SJ Droplist generator is updated and back online. ~

Jason dinAlt

  • Guest
Re: League concept
« Reply #133 on: August 05, 2010, 03:28:09 PM »
Im sorry, talking about MW4... MekPak 3.1

Offline 4204ME

  • MechWarrior
  • **
  • Posts: 339
  • l33tp0intz: +38/-0
    • MWBU
Re: League concept
« Reply #134 on: September 05, 2010, 01:34:37 AM »
I feel spending time trying to stop people from modifying things server side is a gross waste of time at this stage. These modifications could be a huge asset to a dev team. For example if one server removes turrets and suddenly its always where people are playing something will be learned. If another server removes micro heavies etc....
This BETA is not just a BETA. Its the GAME we play and have been playing for hundreds or even thousands of hours. As a guy that loves to play this GAME I pine for ways to change or improve the experience.