Mapping balance

[Kiech Bepho]

POLL EDIT: SOMETHING VERY BUGGY HAPPENED WHILE EDITING THE POLL. I DELETED IT AND YOUR VOTES HAVE BEEN ERASED. AT THE TIME THERE WERE 4 VOTES 'YES' AND NO OTHER VOTES. PLEASE RE-CAST YOUR VOTE.

Ok.

We understand that the TUT Dev team didn't devise a 'special' balance when it comes to 1 thief dominating a map. Case closed.

HOWEVER. With 1.3 comming out and many players making new maps for TUT, the question arises:

Should a thief, ALONE - no other team members - be able to REASONABLY COMPLETE any map availible? This is not to include SPECIFIC maps that would call for a thief to perform some map-created objective with another thief. NONE of the current TUT (that come with the game) would fall into this category.

The number of guards remaining or thief spawns availible does not matter for this discussion. Its ONE thief, that has a REASONABLE CHANCE of winning.

If you feel that the thief should have NO chance, or that he should be able to reasonably complete it are both valid for this discussion. If you believe there is a limit to the number of guards please state your reasons. Other opinions are subject to as much flame as the listed ones.

The end result for this is: How should future maps be made, and how should current ones be altered?

Please post your opinions below.

[Dalai]

I think this depends on how many human guards there are?

[Kiech Bepho]

I tried to leave my opinions out of the starting post to create a neutral setting. My apologies if it's not. Here is my opinion:

ANY map should give a thief a REASONABLE CHANCE to complete ANY map in the game. This is to say nothing about anyones playstyle or tactics, but it should be POSSIBLE. Teamwork is always to be encouraged, of course.

Kiech

[Kiech Bepho]

I think this depends on how many human guards there are?

The default is 1 additional either way, right? But I am trying to appease Mad Gerbil by opening up the topic to any amount of guards. The case could be Spiders where a large human guard force exists and all the other thieves dropped out. Or it could be as simple as one thief playing in a solo, offline game, neither of which MG thinks should be winnable by a single thief.

I will add your opinion to the list of choices.
Edit: The edit function for polls is not working properly on my machine. I will edit it when I can.

[Mad_Gerbil]

I think this depends on how many human guards there are?

The default is 1 additional either way, right? But I am trying to appease Mad Gerbil by opening up the topic to any amount of guards. The case could be Spiders where a large human guard force exists and all the other thieves dropped out. Or it could be as simple as one thief playing in a solo, offline game, neither of which MG thinks should be winnable by a single thief.

I will add your opinion to the list of choices.
Edit: Sorry...seems as if I can't edit my polls anymore.

Kiech,

The single player game is a training ground for online play. It can be fun but the obvious intent of the developer in this case is to take a single player game and put it online.

Let me word what you are asking in a different way:

Assume the entire guard team screws up so there is only one guard left but there are 6 thieves left. Would you consider it balance if those thieves, working as a team, could not beat the guard because the guard has to be able to win solo?

Of course not.

It's a TEAM GAME and if your entire team has been slaughtered and hasn't managed to significantly weaken the other team than you should loose. The code shouldn't make up for a waste of theif lives, lack of cooperation, or team play.

[Majarisan]

I dissagree totally and completely with MG. Just becuase you chose to play guard more doesn't mean the game should be tailored so you can win more often. A solo thief should ALWAYS be able to win somehow. It doesn't have to be easy, and it shouldn't be easy. The same goes for guards. Yes, I have won as the last guard before vs. up to 4 or 5 thieves. I've won on flats as a solo guard vs. 3 thieves before because my team mate got kicked in the 1st 30 seconds of the game. Guards already can win by themselves. If I can do it then surely the rlf can too. Team work should be used and encouraged, however yet again I say its a really bad idea to force a play style on the players. This game is supposed to be fun for everyone regardless of how they play, not just fun for MG and his playstyle.

[Kiech Bepho]

I agree that a single guard has very little chance of defending the map. I am changing my opinion from the previous forum about this specific '1 guard left' situatation to 'very little chance' because technically, a properly prepared guard could still win against all odds - especially if he is camping an objective item.

My point here MG is that skill and luck rule all. The game or maps should not be ammended to suit your fragile view to eliminate the 'One thief bug' or the 'One guard bug' at all. Not only that I am not sure if it is possible what you are asking without major modifications to the maps/game. Concesions can be made for either side to tip the balance, but luck and skill still rule this game.

Again, odds may be against. It may be VERY difficult. But still possible. You do not ABSOLUTLY require a team member to succeed at the maps.

Objectives have a large play in this as well. Thieves typically have 2 ways to win:
Get all the loot, the objective item, and get out. OR
Kill/KO all the guards.
As do the guards:
Kill all the thieves OR
Stall them until time runs out.

Currently all of these items CAN be completed by ONE LONE WOLF. It's not easy, but its POSSIBLE.

Kiech

[TheOutrider]

Just a quick opinion of mine to the topic: I say yes, a map should always be winnable by a single thief, as well as by a single guard. But I say no, it should not at all be easy for him.
What this means to me? There should be no objectives for either team that require multiple team members, ie. no "pull the switch here and, within five seconds, pull the other switch half a mile away at the other end of the map" objectives. As of now, there are no maps that do this, and this is a good thing IMHO (although that such objectives would be valid as well - if BOTH teams had such a "true multiplayer" objective in the same map, so the map isn't too heavily unbalanced).
It is absolutely valid for me, though, that if there's one thief and six guards left, the thief's chances of winning are slim. He's alone, after all, and not Super Garrett, just as much as the one guard left against a team of six thieves is not Super Benny. What I'm going for is that it should not be impossible for a single thief or guard to win a map against several players on the other team - but that, on the other hand, it's perfectly normal that it's gonna be freaking hard and need some serious skill.
[edit]
I've already seen several players - Omega is one that springs to my mind immediately - pull off some awesome stunts when they were left alone against multiple guards. Believe me, as of now, it's always possible to win a map as a single thief. You just need to be good enough.
[/edit]

[edit Mk2]
I found something to comment on:

... especially if he is camping an objective item.

This is why I think that guards should not know more about the location of the objective item as the thieves do - take the crypt gem on Korman, for example. I don't really believe that four of the seven guards would run down into the crypt to guard the coffins...
[/edit Mk2]

That said, I have to agree with Gerb. And no, I'm not a guard freak - in fact, I like thieving more than guarding.

[Slappy]

Majarisan: I don't see what you are disagreeing with. As far as I can tell, MG is asking a question.

Let's look at 2 cases, 1 thief vs. 5 guards; and 1 guard vs. 5 thieves.

In both cases, chances of the solo person winning are slim. However, I think the solo thief would have a better chance of winning than the solo guard.

Why? Because theives' items disable/incapacitate guards, whereas guards' items merely detect thieves.

If the solo thief gets attacked by 3 guards, he can flash all 3 at once and have a chance to get away. If a solo guard is set upon by 3 thieves, he gets KO'ed, or maybe flashed and then KO'ed. Shooting a firebolt won't save him, nor will tagging or para-bolt'ing one thief.

[-=V12US=-]

Majarisan: I don't see what you are disagreeing with. As far as I can tell, MG is asking a question.

Let's look at 2 cases, 1 thief vs. 5 guards; and 1 guard vs. 5 thieves.

In both cases, chances of the solo person winning are slim. However, I think the solo thief would have a better chance of winning than the solo guard.

Why? Because theives' items disable/incapacitate guards, whereas guards' items merely detect thieves.

If the solo thief gets attacked by 3 guards, he can flash all 3 at once and have a chance to get away. If a solo guard is set upon by 3 thieves, he gets KO'ed, or maybe flashed and then KO'ed. Shooting a firebolt won't save him, nor will tagging or para-bolt'ing one thief.

Hmm, one thief getting away from three guards is easy? Think again...
Flash only seems to work half of the time, and invis is negated by fire bolts.

Sure, it can be pulled off, but I wouldn't consider the chances higher than one guard up against three thieves.

[Slappy]

I didn't say it was easy - I just said you have more of a chance than a single guard does vs. 3 thieves. It's still not much of a chance, though.
The reason I think the solo thief has a better chance than the solo guard is the flashbomb. The thief might be able to remove 1 or 2 guards from the equation with one of those. Granted, flashes don't always work as well as they're supposed to... but it's a hell of a lot better than the NOTHING a guard has to help in this situation. Now, if the sword/mace could hit multiple people on a single swing, it might be different.

And to keep this on topic: the way the game is set up, it takes team-work on the guards' part to win (and I mean working together to win - NOT staying near each other). A solo guard has to guard everything by himself - it's just not gonna happen. The 5 thieves will have free run of most of the level, and if they just gang-rush the objective, one of them will get it.

When it's one thief up against 5 guards, the thief still has many places to hide. The maps are generally big enough that 5 guards can't cover everything. If the guards are all camping the objective, then the thief has free run of the rest of the level - but the objective will probably be a suicide run (of course, catfall/invis is a great advantage on suicide runs). If the guards are spread out guarding loot/objectives, then the thief only has to deal with 1 or maybe 2 guards at a time. I'm not saying this is easy, but given equal skill all around, I'd always place my bets on the solo thief instead of the solo guard.

It comes down to the basic difference between guarding and thieving. Guarding an area is an ongoing thing. Thieving an area is a one-time thing. Therefore, one thief can thieve multiple areas, but a guard can only guard one (patrolling allows a guard to cover a bigger area, but any given location within that area is less secure). This is why guards MUST use teamwork to be effective, and thieves don't have to.

[Mad_Gerbil]

Well said Slappy.

The real issue for me is this:
Although it is possible for a single thief to pull of a win by covering the entire map I believe these wins (lone thief vs. guard team) should be rare. I think poll numbers show most thieves approach the game from a 'lone wolf' point of view and that would easily explain the 75% loss rate.

Therefore,

Instead of tweaking thieves to the point where they can win 50% of the time with this 'lone wolf' style of play I'd like to see the thief community learn to use teamwork and communication to increase their winnings. I really do think if they leave the 'lone wolf McQuaid' style of play behind that they'll mow over the guards in a big way and we'll get some truly fantastic games.

Now that isn't forcing a style of play on anybody.

If Old_Joe wants to BJ whore the map while DarkBill ghosts why cannot Old_Joe let Darkbill know that "All guards in North Barracks are Sleeping" or DarkBill could innocently send a message to Joe like "Gosh I wish somebody could KO MadGerbil in the south barraks".

The RLF plays as a team, yet I don't tell them what style of play to use. Instead we coordinate our different styles.

There is absolutely NO subsitute for teamwork.

It can beat anything.

[Aggamemnon]

In online play i think its better to need more teamplay to "win"
most servers anyway have extended the timelimits to allow the lone thief style to prevail where say a "team" of "BJwhores"(tm) might fail.
Nothing is wrong with the balance imo (in respect to the topic )

[WildBill]

It's always going to be possible for a single thief to win on a map. It's just damn hard and the thief has to be very good. The balance should NOT be adjusted so thieves without skill can do it against half competent guards. If you don't like the challenge, either work as a team in the first place or play solo against AI.