tain.totalcodex.net

ozone wrote:what information? You quote VR then ask me where I got MY information?

If your talking about the STAMPEDE! thing I posted... thats C/P from the Myth II Manual

Yes, I was referring to that, sorry I made 2 posts.

ozone wrote:So since you guys know so much about WHAT BUNGIE INTENDED let me ask..

In Assassin... you both have 5 targets. Team A kills one of Team Bs targets. Then by accident Team A kills one of there own. Score is now 0 - 0 ...Time runs out. Who should win?

Team A should win, but you're right here Ozone, team B wins. I've experienced this myself, and I think it's a bug that should be fixed.

ozone wrote:In Terries... there are 10 flags. Team A holds 6 flags, Team B holds 4. Team B takes 2 flags from Team A. So now Team A has 4 and Team B has 6. Then right before time ends... Team A gets another flag from Team B... the score is now 5-5. Who wins?

Team B had 6 flags first, then 5. So they were the first to get their flags, team B wins.

ozone wrote:FLag Rally... Team A gets 8 flags out of 9. Team B has none. Team B kills Team A... 1 second before time ends. Who wins?

Team A SHOULD win, but team B wins. This means you should just run in case you're team A, because this happens more occasionally.

Thanks for the fix Melekor! But I think the discussion isn't ended with it
Killerking

One thing Id like you guys to know...

I have known this was fixed for a week and Im totally fine with the fix. My opinion is just that and to be honest I dont have to be right but I felt I should try and express how I think it should be so maybe there could be some discussion about this stuff. There has been discussion about it that I think has gone pretty well for the most part....

You guys think making the first team to have the tying pig in should always win. I dont. I think the way I say it should work makes for a better game. Makes it more fair. I have tried and tried but you guys dont see my logic. Thats fine. I just think any of you have thought about it all that much...you have it in your heads how it should be and nothing I say will change that. But nione of you can say I didnt try

Oh and VR... Dont get mad I said you were wrong man... maybe I should have used a different word or something but I knew you werent saying how IT IS but more how you thought it should be.

I will let this go though... well mb....

hey Oz, no worries, thanks for the calm rational discussion.

In thinking about it more there are at least two overlapping issues we've been discussing.

1) what should be used to determine the winner when all teams have achieved the same # of targets (points) when the timelimit of the game has been reached?

2) under what circumstances should eliminating the other team(s) result in an automatic win?

viynlrake wrote:1) what should be used to determine the winner when all teams have achieved the same # of targets (points) when the timelimit of the game has been reached?

Well I think this should go to the one who got the tying one first. Especially for a gametype where your score cannot go down.

viynlrake wrote:2) under what circumstances should eliminating the other team(s) result in an automatic win?

So you know I dont think killing the other team should be an automatic win in stampede...only if you are able to tie the score AND kill the other team. If you cant tie the game then you shouldn't win. The reason for this is because lets say TEam A has 2 in and TEam B has 1 in and 1 still in play. Team B cannot win even though they may have killed just as many if not more then the other teams stamp targets. If they get that last one in they would lose the tie breaker. All Ive been saying is they should have a chance to win and the only way I see them having a chance is keeping their Pig alive (not tagging) and killing the other team.

ozone wrote:

vinylrake wrote:2) under what circumstances should eliminating the other team(s) result in an automatic win?

So you know I dont think killing the other team should be an automatic win in stampede...only if you are able to tie the score AND kill the other team. If you cant tie the game then you shouldn't win. The reason for this is because lets say TEam A has 2 in and TEam B has 1 in and 1 still in play. Team B cannot win even though they may have killed just as many if not more then the other teams stamp targets. If they get that last one in they would lose the tie breaker. All Ive been saying is they should have a chance to win and the only way I see them having a chance is keeping their Pig alive (not tagging) and killing the other team.

So, as long as not more people participate in this topic it will stay a personal preference (in my case: first to score should always win). I think we've given our best arguments by now - other people should share their view on this with us.

Also..just to clarify...my thoughts/ideas are for 2 TEAM only. I think FFA is a totally different entity unto itself and Im not sure I think some of the same rules should apply.

***Though in saying this I dont think the rules should be different for 2 team vs FFA I just havent thought about all possible outcomes when adding a third team or even more for that matter.

ozone wrote:So you know I dont think killing the other team should be an automatic win in stampede...only if you are able to tie the score AND kill the other team.

Ah that sounds much more 'moderate', I thought you were advocating that killing other team should take precendence over actual goals of gametype - which is my objection to the team who doesn't do anything but kill the other team winning ANY game type where there are non-BC goals needed to win. (flag rally? think that was the example you gave)

vinylrake wrote:

ozone wrote:So you know I dont think killing the other team should be an automatic win in stampede...only if you are able to tie the score AND kill the other team.

Ah that sounds much more 'moderate', I thought you were advocating that killing other team should take precendence over actual goals of gametype - which is my objection to the team who doesn't do anything but kill the other team winning ANY game type where there are non-BC goals needed to win. (flag rally? think that was the example you gave)

No not at all...not at all.. ONLY in a tie would the DEAD team lose See to me that seems obvious. The score is tied and you're dead... why should you win?

Ill state how I think it should work one more time since maybe I havent made myself clear in my 3000 posts in this thread:

1. TIE WHEN GAME ENDs DUE to TIME LIMIT: the team that gets the tying pig in first wins. Pigs left on map do not get added to final score.

2. TIE WHEN GAME ENDs DUE to NO REMAINING STAMP TARGETS on MAP: Tie breaker goes to the team who got the tying PIG in first. NO pigs left to add to final score so this is moot.

***This next one is the one we have different opinion on****
3. TIE WHEN ONE TEAM KILLS OTHER TEAM BEFORE TIME LIMIT RUNS OUT: What usually happens here is one team has some # of PIGS in and is leading the game but they have no more PIGS to get in. The other team could have got some in but if they were to get all of their remaining pigs in their total would only be enough to tie which would put TIE BREAKER #2 into effect. Now if the team in the lead KILLS one more pig they win because the other team can no longer tie. If the time runs out they cant tie because remaining pigs on map dont count towards final score.

So with a game such as the film that started this thread...one team had 2 pigs in but no pigs left. The other team only has 2 pigs left and none in but if you think about it they have KILLED just as many of the other teams pigs as the other team ... SO basically they have kept just as many pigs SAFE at this moment in time and they have killed just as many targets as the other team. But see its its impossibel for them to win because they cant bring them to flag or it s a loss. They cant let time run out its a loss and now they cant kill the other team because its a loss.

ozone wrote:No not at all...not at all.. ONLY in a tie would the DEAD team lose See to me that seems obvious. The score is tied and you're dead... why should you win?

Ill state how I think it should work one more time since maybe I havent made myself clear in my 3000 posts in this thread:

1. TIE WHEN GAME ENDs DUE to TIME LIMIT: the team that gets the tying pig in first wins. Pigs left on map do not get added to final score.

2. TIE WHEN GAME ENDs DUE to NO REMAINING STAMP TARGETS on MAP: Tie breaker goes to the team who got the tying PIG in first. NO pigs left to add to final score so this is moot.

***This next one is the one we have different opinion on****
3. TIE WHEN ONE TEAM KILLS OTHER TEAM BEFORE TIME LIMIT RUNS OUT: What usually happens here is one team has some # of PIGS in and is leading the game but they have no more PIGS to get in. The other team could have got some in but if they were to get all of their remaining pigs in their total would only be enough to tie which would put TIE BREAKER #2 into effect. Now if the team in the lead KILLS one more pig they win because the other team can no longer tie. If the time runs out they cant tie because remaining pigs on map dont count towards final score.

So with a game such as the film that started this thread...one team had 2 pigs in but no pigs left. The other team only has 2 pigs left and none in but if you think about it they have KILLED just as many of the other teams pigs as the other team ... SO basically they have kept just as many pigs SAFE at this moment in time and they have killed just as many targets as the other team. But see its its impossibel for them to win because they cant bring them to flag or it s a loss. They cant let time run out its a loss and now they cant kill the other team because its a loss.

Wow -- great debate. Love to see it. Reminds me of the good ol' days.

I've read through all of the above and my head is spinning, but here's my two cents on the subject:

I agree completely with ozone's points (1) and (2) listed here. Makes perfect sense to me and I agree "remaining targets" should be irrelevant to scoring (contrary to the Myth II Manuals original text) -- they're only relevant in that they give you the possibility to get more targets to the flags. It's a trading gamble (and very cool imo on the maps which allow it).


Point (3) is definitely the tricky bit.

In my opinion Stampede is a different beast (pardon the pun) from other game types, although in my mind it is actually most similar to Assassin -- because you can have a varying # of targets from game to game depending on the map and trading.

I think the overall goal of Stampede should be: get the most targets off the map. Period. Everything else is secondary.

Using Myrd's excellent Myth Rule:

Myrd wrote:A team should never be able to get ahead of another team by matching that team's score. It should only be able to do so by getting a higher score.

I think killing another team should not allow a team to win a tie-breaker in Stampede. Otherwise it just digresses to Body Count.

Here's the example to elucidate my point (based on the current example):

Two team game, two pigs each team. Team A gets their two pigs off the map first. Team B can't be bothered to move their pigs so they camp them in a corner with some guards and hunt down Team A. They manage to kill Team A before time runs out. Team B wins. WTF? The game degrades to Camp & Kill.

In my opinion: You MUST get more of your targets to the flags and/or kill enough of the enemy targets and/or delay the enemy (guard flags, attack/engage them) to prevent them from doing so before you. Otherwise it's just Body Count with targets as decoration.

Thus, I think in the example it should end as a tie, with the tie-breaker going to Team A -- because they got their final pig off the map first. Team B loses. That's life.

The name of the game is Stampede! Get the targets off the map. If there is a tie, it goes to the team who got that final target off first. Same for teams and FFA.

Baak wrote:Using Myrd's excellent Myth Rule:

Myrd wrote:A team should never be able to get ahead of another team by matching that team's score. It should only be able to do so by getting a higher score.

I think killing another team should not allow a team to win a tie-breaker in Stampede. Otherwise it just digresses to Body Count.

The thing is all gametypes include Body Count in a way, well more like LMOTH. Flag Rally and Scavenger Hunt deal with tagging the most flags/balls. Kill the other teams before they can tag them all and you win. Terries and Captures deal with owning the most flags/balls. Kill the other teams before they can own them all at once and you win. Even right now, if there is a tie in terries/captures, the first team to tag the most flags/balls does NOT win. It is the LAST team that had owned the most before the tie. In Hunting and Stampede if you kill all other teams, you automatically get the highest score possible for your team even if other teams had scored first. In KOTH, if you kill all the other teams and own the flag, you automatically are given the rest of the time. In LMOTH and STB, if you kill all the other teams, you automatically win. In CTF and Parade, you win by getting the most flags but there is no tie breakers. To capture flags, you normally have to kill other teams or get them off the flags. In Assassin, you can tie and still lose even if you were the first to score if you killed one of your own. The point is, killing is part of the game. Killing the other teams can mean winning even if you were going to lose before that.

Baak wrote:Here's the example to elucidate my point (based on the current example):

Two team game, two pigs each team. Team A gets their two pigs off the map first. Team B can't be bothered to move their pigs so they camp them in a corner with some guards and hunt down Team A. They manage to kill Team A before time runs out. Team B wins. WTF? The game degrades to Camp & Kill.

Just because Team B is camping, doesn't mean it will win. Team A could still manage to kill one of the stampede units from team B and therefore win for sure. Or team A could still kill team B completely and win by a landslide. Or they can all stay still and let the time run out and team A would still win because B didn't score. Even if stampede is made to give the win to the team that scores first in a tie, you can still have team B camp near the team A's flag and win. No matter how stampede is changed, there can still be camping and killing.

Baak wrote:In my opinion: You MUST get more of your targets to the flags and/or kill enough of the enemy targets and/or delay the enemy (guard flags, attack/engage them) to prevent them from doing so before you. Otherwise it's just Body Count with targets as decoration.

Thus, I think in the example it should end as a tie, with the tie-breaker going to Team A -- because they got their final pig off the map first. Team B loses. That's life.

The name of the game is Stampede! Get the targets off the map. If there is a tie, it goes to the team who got that final target off first. Same for teams and FFA.

Stampede is about getting the most targets to the flag(s). It mentions nothing about tie breaking, other than the incorrect information quoted from the myth 2 handbook.

after all these posts i have decided stampede really has too many inconsistencies to have any exact correlations with other games but the more i read the more i think stampede end-game should be more like flag rally and captures - if one player/team gets the max possible# of points the game should end. 2,3,4th places like FR and captures, whoever had the next most points when the winning team got their last point comes in 2, 3rd, etc.

the alternative almost forces a smart captain of a winning but potential tie-ing team whose is outmatched skill or % remaining to just hide units so the team survives until the end of the game. that's not really a very fun game for either team but a captain whose team scored max units off the map first would be stupid not to use that strategy as a backup in case his team's stampede hit squads were unsuccessful.

Pyro: The kill-the-other-team effects you talk about are mainly to prevent the other team from achieving a sweep first, not tie-breaking. We're *just* talking about the tie-breaker now!

And if someone accomplishes a "sweep" in many of the standard games (e.g. Flag Rally), they win automatically -- Stampede has the variable of differing number of targets which can change during the game (by being killed), so you don't have a "get X targets off the map first to win" -- you have to "get MORE targets off the map than anyone else" (which can trigger an automatic win).

The first thing that shows Stampede is different than other game types is the fact that the game does NOT end when someone gets all their targets off the map first as long as there are other teams who could do better. This is because you can remove enemy targets by killing them, so there is no fixed number of targets to end the game with. You can also start out with a different number of targets. Stampede is definitely different than the "standard" game types -- as I said, I think the only one that's close is Assassin.

And yes, Team A could kill one of Team B's camping pigs -- but that's not the point -- that would cause an outright (and just) win. The point I was making is that imo: relying on killing a team to determine the tie-breaker goes against the goal of Stampede, and as I showed: you can just camp & kill to win if you use killing a team to determine the tie-breaker.


So the team with the most targets off the map wins. If there is a tie in the number of targets off the map -- which could occur if Team B killed Team A (because you would then automatically count Team B's two camping pigs as getting off the map) -- then the win should go to whoever accomplished the goal first, which in this case would be Team A.

Boils down to:

(1) Team with the most targets off the map wins.
(2) If there is a tie, team with the most targets off the map first wins.

Seems very simple to me.