Beta 1.3

[Hylis]

please do a report with a log please. It is the second player I see to have this.

[jS-]

Agree with one opinion here too:

Railgun destroying rocket must be removed, nice teoric, but bad on gameplay.
A lot of times you can't hit the opponent because is comming a rocket front you.

The games becomes a little random with this.

[sheaf]

I think it's great, it gives defensive players a way to defend themselves against a sure-fire rail shot at the expense of wasting a few rockets. It's really a great addition. It would be nice if there was a small sound that was played though, it takes a bit of getting used to otherwise, you don't expect the instant reload.

[djpweb]

Railgun destroying rockets simply have to be removed. Way too often you end up hitting rockets instead of the opponent. Makes for too much randomness in my opinion. Seen so many times defenders being saved from spamming rockets near end of capturetime and attacker hitting rockets instead of defender. In theory a good idea, but put to practice it doesn't work. This could have to do with hitboxes on rockets being huge, but I don't think it'll work out in the end.

Maybe the answer is not to remove it, but also add the fact that the railgun not only destroy the rockets but also pass through them so you can :

Destroy aligned rockets (could stop a rocket spammer)
Destroy a rocket and the player behind it (should remove the "rocket as a shield" effect)

It's just an idea, but why remove a great concept when it just need to be polished / improved. Maybe the hitbox should also be corrected a bit too ...

[PapyChampy]

I think defenders were nerfed as much as needed with 3 rockets instead of 4. The instant recharge provided by a rocket denying is more than enough in my opinion about general balance.
By allowing the attacker to shoot through rockets, I fear that he would be tranformed into an unstopppable fragging machine.

More generally about the update, I find all of the modifications excellent.

What I really like about rocket denying is that it creates "mini epic moments" during a round.

Mainly, big plus about the Checkpoints. Makes much more happening during a game. New things to comment for shoutcasters. When building a map accordingly (with the idea of integrating CPs at the start of map building), it is really efficient and enjoyable, to build and to play.

As others said, it would be great to have a little sound when denying a rocket. (A visual indication might be confusing, I don't know what's best.)

Walljumps aren't that easy to chain, but seems okay to me. =)

[_jordan_]

Do not you think that the new bridge is casle intruders in the pack?

I've never seen this building and if it exists it is rare. Why and how during the medieval times and things would be created?

[Gillz]

Don't like three rockets instead of four, a common situation is one attacker vs one defender, the attacker having full hp (3hp). With 4 rockets, if you played smart at the pole, you could have one to spam, and always have three in your reserve. If you were good with the rockets, and your attacker missed, you could get a good chance of killing the attacker.

With 3 rockets, you can't spam any while at the pole, because even if you hit two after, you're recharging and are frantically waiting for that third. Four rockets is good for elite, lowering it to three means the defender doesn't have a chance to spam any rockets or keep the attacker away, meaning the attacker has a free walkway to the pole, almost all the time.

Just my thoughts.

[Hylis]

This additional rocket to keep the attacker under control is a good analyse. Thanks.

We played with two lasers at the studio, with a first cool down time before it starts to reload. It was done to make it more efficient to fire 2 lasers in a row and then reload, instead of firing one and then another. But, the additional laser was, of course, keeping too much the opponent at distance because of the case you describe with the rocket.

I don't say I will revert to 4 rockets, but it is a point in favor of 4 rockets. I will see in a week how it goes.

[Mariomarco]

Don't like three rockets instead of four, a common situation is one attacker vs one defender, the attacker having full hp (3hp)...

The server owner could adjust that if he has some programming skills ^^

if you played smart at the pole, you could have one to spam,...

or if the mode is royal he could adjust it easy with "TEM" (The editable Modes)

[sadzealot]

Don't like three rockets instead of four, a common situation is one attacker vs one defender, the attacker having full hp (3hp). With 4 rockets, if you played smart at the pole, you could have one to spam, and always have three in your reserve. If you were good with the rockets, and your attacker missed, you could get a good chance of killing the attacker.

With 3 rockets, you can't spam any while at the pole, because even if you hit two after, you're recharging and are frantically waiting for that third. Four rockets is good for elite, lowering it to three means the defender doesn't have a chance to spam any rockets or keep the attacker away, meaning the attacker has a free walkway to the pole, almost all the time.

Just my thoughts.

Yes, but if an attacker kills 2 defenders without taking a single hit he should have a big big big advantage. By giving one defender a chance to mass spam rockets (have to take into account that with 4 rockets that tends to end up being 5 because by the time you've fired 4 rockets you've almost reloaded another) he pretty much stands on equal footing with the attacker (apart from 1 life vs 3 ofcourse).

Also, knowing when you can spam off a rocket or two and not, is a judge of skill. I wholeheartedly disagree 4 rockets should be brought back to all defenders from the start. If anything I'll rather like to see another tweak to such a situation to compensate if it turns out the current system is too in favour of attacker all the time.