What's wrong with CTF?

[Whatsit]

So I've noticed that ctf maps get played less and less these days. Not just on MKWEA, it's rare for any server with more than a handful of people playing a ctf map, with the possible exception of ctf_turbine.

Anyone care to speculate on why it's so unpopular?

[pneuma08]

Jun 10, 2009 22:17:22 GMT -5 Whatsit said:

So I've noticed that ctf maps get played less and less these days. Not just on MKWEA, it's rare for any server with more than a handful of people playing a ctf map, with the possible exception of ctf_turbine.

Anyone care to speculate on why it's so unpopular?

In my experience CTF promotes severe turtling, sometimes with 3+ engies on a small, enclosed space - and taking out 3 sentries with one or two engies guarding them at all times is unpleasant. It's basically all the difficulty of the last point of a cp-map only you have to get out once you get in and you have to do it every single time you want to get a point.

Plus a lot of time people ignore the objective because it's hard and unrewarding.

I think 2docks tries to open it up a bit, but perhaps overcompensates a bit.

Oh, and it appears there aren't that many ctf maps on the server (especially compared to the other map types). Perhaps we should try to include more of them.

[rhench]

CTF is a problem because it promotes several factors that don't necessarily mix well:

1. Engineers. They're one of the best defensive classes for a single point, and there's always going to be a need to defend the intelligence's spawn point. Possible fixes: class limits (poor solution), Intel that spawns in multiple locations (i.e.- 3 different options to spawn in, chooses a random one each time intel is capped? But that map would be huge and confusing and problematic on its own).

2. Team Deathmatch-style gameplay. With intel in the hands of a select few for a majority of the time (Scouts, Spies, the occasional Soldier/Demo), Heavies, Snipers, etc. end up killing people on the pathways. Which is all they ever do.

3. Boredom ensues. Unfortunately, the way our server does CTF, one team getting stomped gets repeated, and it's hard to get even team balance when a lot of pubs are around. Even in close matches (high-scoring ones, that is), it still gets to be routine. Our Medic/Demo combo blows up your sentries, the Scout grabs the intel, the Spy saps the remaining buildings, and we get a point. Yay. Let's do that again.

2docks is different in that it's really hard to get an effective Sentry emplacement on the intelligence, there's short but violently deadly paths to the intelligence, and there's about 5 paths to choose from, not counting combination paths. But I always end up Deathmatching on 2docks anyway. I think it's just a flaw in the CTF game-style when it's not to a certain number. I would almost say we should institute a 5 cap limit on CTF to make it more important that we focus. 3 can be over instantly, so I wouldn't say go back to that.

[carbad]

I think TF2 is just loads better with CP styles of gameplay. in CP, you're trying to progress through a map, moving from area to area, but in CTF, the map is essentially static.

[pneuma08]

Hm, looking at the responses, it seems like the major flaw in CTF is that it gets repetitive very quickly. It's the same enemies defending the same point, and never really changes - when you get a point, you have to do it again, in the same location. All the other maps change location in one way or another, and when they don't change all that much (like in say, donkey kong, which is basically just long corridors) it winds up being lacking.

[dbone]

So this thread has really gotten me thinking. (which is helping me avoid work today, so thanks everyone!)

In addition to the repetitive nature of the CTF maps, I think part of the problem is that both teams are attacking/defending at the same time which leads to the deathmatch scenario. Being able to focus on attack or defend really makes for better gameplay and teamwork.

A question for those who are familiar with the map building tools, is it even possible to change the location of where the intel spawns and where it gets captured?

If so, here is a thought to play around with...

A single intel on the map so one team is trying to capture and one is trying to stop them. Also, the intel spawn and cap point migrates with each successful capture. Think of a PL type map where you have cap point 1, 2, and 3. The intel spawns near the red base. Blue team must retrieve intel and bring back to cap point 1. Now the intel spawns a little bit further out from red base and cap point 2 is now active. Intel spawns again closer to final cap point which is now active. The action gets more intense as the cap points get closer to the red base. I do think the map would need to be fairly wide open around the intel spawns however.

It kind of makes it a hybrid of CTF and PL. Here is a quick 30 second image file to help illustrate the concept.
www.dzweb.net/tf2/ctf_idea.png

Just a thought, might be cool, might be crap. If its even possible I would love to see a rudimentary map just to test the gameplay on it.

[FadedOasis]

There's a map, I forget what it's called, where blue tries to push the intel through the map. Each capture area is the next spawn point, basically. I'd be happy to put it on the map to try it out (along with the twenty other maps we have to try...)

[Whatsit]

Jun 11, 2009 16:45:28 GMT -5 dbone said:

If so, here is a thought to play around with...

A single intel on the map so one team is trying to capture and one is trying to stop them. Also, the intel spawn and cap point migrates with each successful capture.

I like it! :D

I couldn't work out why the cap point would move for a bit, but finally figured it out -- a cap point that starts further away means that it takes longer for BLU to cap the flag which gives RED some extra time to move their defenses to the next spawn. It also makes it harder for BLU to camp the next spawn and just grab the intel again as soon as it appears, but without introducing any artificial limiters like timed gates (e.g. the A->E and B->C gates on steel)

One problem though -- usually the defensive team gets bigger bonuses as time goes on, as a way to stretch out the skill-points assignment. That is, as a team's overall skill increases, so should the number of points they get. Giving the defenders less time per cap to set up means that it gets easier for the attackers, which means scores will tend to be an all-or-nothing affair. So if we reverse the order of the cap points, we get a much more goldrush/dustbowl type experience.

It also lets us construct the map in such a way that the flag carrier has to pass obstacles on the way to the cap point. On your concept map, we can add a red-only passage from the red base to just behind cap point 2. Not too useful for stopping the flag getting to cap 2, but convenient for stopping it getting to cap 3. This gives the RED team a last-ditch chance to stop the final cap, rather than just waiting for the round to end. It shouldn't completely stop the cap attempt, but should be just workable enough that RED don't feel cheated when it finally slips through.

[Whatsit]

Jun 11, 2009 17:15:18 GMT -5 FadedOasis said:

There's a map, I forget what it's called, where blue tries to push the intel through the map. Each capture area is the next spawn point, basically. I'd be happy to put it on the map to try it out (along with the twenty other maps we have to try...)

Sounds like fun. I'd like to give it a go if you can find it.

[docsfox]

There is a version of turbine that only has one intel that spawns in the center of the map. I've only seen it played on Japanese servers though and it just ended up with one team bashing the other hard for however long that map was on. Not fun, not fun at all.

I know of the map faded is talking about. It's a remake of a TFC stock map but I can't remember the name either. I'm not sure if I like the map or not because I played it on a slaughterhouse server and if you've ever played on one of them you know it's a 32 person server filled with a bunch of bads griefing. I support the testing of the map. >.>b

[pneuma08]

It also shouldn't be hard to make a "football" style map where the red intel spawns where blu does, but their cap point is over where red spawns. I imagine it would be similar to a single cap point map, only with more vip-flavor (i.e. only one person can cap, but it's an instant cap), and progress similar to a payload map, only with multiple paths (with sufficient delay time on the intel).

I am somewhat curious to apply this style to 2fort, to see what happens. (Perhaps we can bring the objective to the deathmatch, and not the other way around?)

[thechurch]

i like pneuma's idea in the last post. its verry civil war, bring your flag and raise it over your enemies base. would be cool on a map with a single long uphill push, like the last part of pipeline but longer. flag carier runs up & gets shot down, anoputher teamate picks up flag and runs with it. be even mor exciting if flag carier couldnt attack while with flag.