Print

Add to Reputation:  

What do you think of this post?

I agree I disagree  
Comment:

[liamcadhain]

I think we should keep the naming convention of naming the scenario after a Bond film... also, I think whoever is selected as the hacker should have their playermodel changed to Boris.

I agree.

Sounds like an interesting game mode. Good luck with it KM

[killermonkey]

Both ssl and vc need to reread my proposal.

I think most of you understand, but to be clear : only 1 team is hacking per round. This role switches to the other team on the next round.

[The Cy]

I think we should keep the naming convention of naming the scenario after a Bond film

The Spy who hacked me

Codefinger

For your codes only

Hackers are forever

[coolDisguise]

I actually really like this idea.  Allowing it to be used by anyone but having it possible to lose to the other team makes it a coveted game-changer worth protecting until the end of the round.  I'm still unsure how distribution should be handled; should it simply spawn towards the center of the map, or be given to the attackers at the start?

Assuming you will also get an ego boost by hacking with the tool, I'd use it on the first console respectively the first where a lot of enemies are nearby. The ego boost KM described lasts very long, so basically you can win a round on a ego-streak if you (and your team) is doing it right. Though dropping gameplay tokens might sometimes be a good idea I've got to ask: what prevents the hacking player from dropping the tool prior to death near the console?

There's only two viable ways to handle this: not allowing for the tool to be dropped or if it's dropped having it respawn in its original location. But remember you can't drop flags or the intelligence in the other gameplay modes, so it'd be consistent if you you can't drop the tool.

How's the hacking going to be? Just standing near the console waiting for some bar to fill up or more interactively? (like some sort of mini-game which will require some skill and distinguish good hackers from bad ones)

[killermonkey]

I didn't plan for any dropping of the tool. Once you pick it up you better use it before you die or else its gone for the rest of the round.

This makes using the tool a strategic move, as in do I use it early and go for the ego rush or save it and try to make it into enemy territory to instant hack the last terminal (do or die kinda scenario)

Btw, I kinda like codefinger

[Mangley]

I like the changes, so far so good.

As for the Hack-O-Matic I think instead of being used by the !voodoo key it should be an actual weapon which behaves like a Mine and parents itself to the surface it's thrown at, if it parents to the terminal then it's successful (Behaves like the Covert Modem/Tracker Bug from GE64).

Though I don't like the Hack-O-Matic's name, I feel it would be more appropriate if it was along the lines of 'Terminal Override' or 'Circuitry Bypass', which is more in-keeping with the names of items found in GoldenEye.

As for the title, 'Launch Code' is the only acceptable name I've seen so far, as for movie titles I don't really like seeing Bond movie titles arbitrarily applied to game modes that don't have anything to do with the gameplay concept.

[RobbeR49]

Shouldn't it be an EMP pulse instead of a lazer?

I think the hacker should get some sort of weapon, even if it's only slappers or a whack in the face with the hack-o-matic thing.

[VC]

If the tool is absolutely-committed and often a zero-shot, it feels more like chaff than a gameplay mechanic.

Having only one pro-active player in the server seems very boring to me.  That is why we allow non-AuG holders to earn points in MWtGG, why Living Daylights spawns multiple flags, etc.  This would be like TDM except one guy has no guns and is off doing something over there...why does he keep bitching about wanting someone to cover him, anyway?  At best, it turns into Escort without the sense (and guidance) of linear progress, and at worst will become something as dull as a 25-minute defense on TF2's Dustbowl Stage-3.

Covert Modem ftw.

Since we abbreviate scenario names obsessively, Launch Code is superior to Codefinger because it has initials, if for no other reason.

Hacker should be armed with DD44, as the scientists were in the game.  Ammo would be limited to something like 8|8 and no ammo pickups to ensure it's defensive-only.

[killermonkey]

VC this is not a mwgg type scenario. The hacker is supposed to be vulnerable, without him succeeding the team earns no points and the other team racks them up. So it is necessary for the hacking team to run hardcore defense for the hacker.

The tool is still a discussion point, but you can't poo poo the potential strategic possibility it plays.

[Entropy-Soldier]

going by uplink, i think people will actually understand the "defend this guy, go to this place" type of gameplay this mode offers.  While the hacker doesn't get to kill anyone himself, he plays the most important role and needs to stay alive for his team to succeed; i think this will be enough for most players to enjoy the position.

There are going to be some maps where the last few terminals will be a pain to capture; however, i think allowing the hacker to be indistinguishable from his teammates on the defender's radar and using the "less terminals = less hacking time" system would allow for more strategy when attacking the last few areas.

[VC]

it is necessary for the hacking team to run hardcore defense for the hacker.

Assuming anyone understands that.  My scenarios are testament to overestimation of the public's willingness to think.  OHMSS was supposed to be the even a caveman can do it scenario, but those shit-tards can't even comprehend "avoid dying so you don't lose your progress."

Honestly, if you want to go with this one-hacker setup, let's make it a practical example of the Bond/Natalya missions in Goldeneye that will be relevant to our single-player development.  Have the players managed so you have a Bond and a Scientist (because after six years we haven't figured out how to model Natalya's ass) doing the capture points, and the other team is a regulated Russian Soldier (Ouromov model) factory, with those player's health and arsenal regulated.  Obviously a large player count will require more MI6 members so it isn't just a dozen people in the respawn queue, but that's still manageable.  (Off the top of my head; MI6 team count limit = std::ceil(std::sqrt(playercount - 2)), four player minimum, or two with the proper boolean tests to ensure there's always one player on MI6, and in that case, the player is allowed weapons and toolkit to play both roles until other players show up.)

Since we discussed doing this sort of thing for Missions, let's get some in-the-wild playtesting done of the concepts so we can go into creating it with actual knowledge of what will and won't work (without further modification).

[killermonkey]

I thought you were concerned with LAN people all of a sudden. This game mode is directly enhanced by local room fighting because of the cooperative nature of it. It is also good for clan matches and tournaments (once the scoring system is ironed out).

I am proceeding with coding already, but I am doing it for v4.2 (it might make it to v4.1).

[VC]

That was over there. This is over here.

Over there, I'm thinking about what should be.

Over here, I'm thinking about what will be.

[kraid]

About the name for the Gamemode... Janus is trying to launch a satelite weapon while MI6 is trying to disable it... sounds somewhat familiar to a Bond movie i saw... i think it's name was GOLDENEYE.
So why not call this gamemode simply Goldeneye.

Here are a few suggestions from me:
 
For the gameplay, why not having the teams determin their Hackers themself?
e.g. picking up the hacker tool means you'll become the hacker.
if a hacker dies he drops the tool and other players can pick it up to become the new hacker.

It would be really cool if there would be a possibility to make the hacking a little more complex then just standing in front of the terminal and press a button.
Depending on how good the hacker will perform, the hacking process speeds up a little.

I also think there should be only one terminal at a time so the teams will focus on this.
Once a terminal was captured by a team the team will get 5 points and the next terminal will spawn at another location.
This will repeat till the round time is over. The Team with the most hacked terminals wins.

Going back to suggestion #1 i could also imagin there's only 1 hacker tool which can be picked up by both teams.
In order to hack the terminal your team has to get the tool either from picking it up at it's spawn location at round start or by killing the Hacker of the other team.
This way attacker and defender role could change several times during a round.

[killermonkey]

For the gameplay, why not having the teams determin their Hackers themself?
e.g. picking up the hacker tool means you'll become the hacker.
if a hacker dies he drops the tool and other players can pick it up to become the new hacker.

The idea is there is only 1 hacker allowed so you can't go on a continuous hacking spree, if the preventors kill that hacker they buy themselves at least 10 seconds of time before they have to worry about him again and can regroup, etc.

I also think there should be only one terminal at a time so the teams will focus on this.
Once a terminal was captured by a team the team will get 5 points and the next terminal will spawn at another location.
This will repeat till the round time is over. The Team with the most hacked terminals wins.

This removes the strategic element for the hacking team. They have to hack all the terminals regardless, why not give them the opportunity to hack them in a strategic order that they see fit. Plus its easier to see what your progress to a goal is if you can see it on screen (arrows) and in the radar.


And yes, it is based off the GoldenEye movie, finally someone realized it! But I didn't want to name it GoldenEye since thats kinda corny.