Poll

Which items should be banned from zone battles?

Potions
3 (9.4%)
Armor enchants affecting protection stats
4 (12.5%)
Weapon enchants affecting attack stats
4 (12.5%)
Diamond swords
4 (12.5%)
If yes to option 4, additionally ban iron swords
1 (3.1%)
Diamond armor
4 (12.5%)
If yes to option 6, additionally ban all other armor
0 (0%)
Tool enchants affecting block destruction speed
2 (6.3%)
Ender pearls
5 (15.6%)
Lava
1 (3.1%)
TNT
1 (3.1%)
Vote yes here if you want items/xp to drop on death
1 (3.1%)
Nothing should be banned
2 (6.3%)

Total Members Voted: 8

Author Topic: Battleground Information  (Read 855 times)

b-ong

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #100 on: 2014 03 09, 02:15:29 »
http://dev.bukkit.org/bukkit-plugins/bettercombat/
i found it
the only problem was it would mess up our pvp habits on other servers
damnit only version 1.5.1
« Last Edit: 2014 03 09, 02:19:10 by b-ong »

Bla

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Not to be confused with lapis lazuli.
  • Location: Sikrit Blabunker Blasement
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #101 on: 2014 03 30, 01:23:24 »
I removed the rule saying that you have to be on a team to be able to place the flag of the team. I had forgotten about this rule during our last battle, and imo it doesn't really seem to help make the BG more fun, it just means another rule you have to remember. I think we're better off without it, but if anyone think we should keep the rule, they can say so.

Also changed the DeathChests option in the poll to "Vote yes here if you want items/xp to drop on death" because we abandoned DeathChests.
« Last Edit: 2014 03 30, 01:26:35 by Bla »

Bla

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Not to be confused with lapis lazuli.
  • Location: Sikrit Blabunker Blasement
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #102 on: 2014 04 02, 19:41:01 »
The rule saying that you get all of the enemy bases from conquering the enemy base zone seemed a bit unfun, so I think I'll change it to getting something like
- A percentage of enemy zones (balanced for all front sizes)
- A specific number of enemy zones (favors large fronts)
- Each zone adjacent to the conquered base zone owned by the team that lost their base (favors large fronts)

I'm not sure which one of the options it should be yet, so tell me if you have any ideas or alternatives, I think a percentage seems most fair, but rounded down so you always get at least one bonus zone, and I'm not sure how big the percentage should be yet. There'd also be a rule that all the enemy zones you choose must end up connecting to your front.

The front that lost its base zone would need a new zone. Should they be able to pick it themselves, or should it be relocated automatically, such as to the closest zone they own to the one they lost?
« Last Edit: 2014 04 02, 19:43:04 by Bla »

Komrage

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #103 on: 2014 04 14, 20:19:19 »
Quote
<osmotischen>blabla44 is a piston mechanism that rebuilds the flag when it is mined legal in the battleground?

Bla

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Not to be confused with lapis lazuli.
  • Location: Sikrit Blabunker Blasement
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #104 on: 2014 04 14, 20:48:47 »
Quote
<BlaBla44>A piston mechanism that interacts with the flag sounds pretty messy so I'd say keep it out of the battles. "Building at or above the height of the bottom block of the flag on a zone is not allowed by either team during or before a battle." and "The flag should not be surrounded by blocks such that it isn't visible from most of the surface."

The current rules don't really forbid them I guess, depending on how you make them.

b-ong

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #105 on: 2014 04 15, 15:57:01 »
it has to be below the flag which would make it really easy to break though

Komrage

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #106 on: 2014 05 09, 10:42:51 »
tnt mines lower the ground level and effectively raise the flag height. is it legal for the defending team to place mines to deliberately lower the ground level so that the flag is harder to reach?

Bla

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Not to be confused with lapis lazuli.
  • Location: Sikrit Blabunker Blasement
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #107 on: 2014 05 09, 13:15:00 »
The rules don't mention it. Do you think it should be allowed or not?

I think it's a cheap move that I'd discourage but I don't really see a way to define when it's not allowed and when it's legit use of tnt. Maybe a rule about keeping tnt away from the flagpole.
« Last Edit: 2014 05 09, 13:16:42 by Bla »

Bla

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Not to be confused with lapis lazuli.
  • Location: Sikrit Blabunker Blasement
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #108 on: 2014 06 28, 16:39:42 »
In the battle for Zone 26 yesterday, I think the Red Front's defenses were too strong to make the battle fair. Yqt said it was mainly the obsidian. The design I had used (ignoring the new terrain obstacle design) was based on the other obsidian bases I had made, but this one, unlike the others, had no lower section near the flag with a ladder leading up to the flag. Only our spawn base had a ladder to ground level. As a result, the enemies had to go through the spawn base or had to pillar up along the sides, and that made for too strong defenses.

1) I think the problem can be solved by making the rules say that at least one of the four blocks adjacent to the flagpole (all the way up from ground to flag) may only be air or ladder. That way the base I made yesterday would resemble the other obsidian bases I had constructed that we had more fair fights for.

2) Another idea I've had is to make a rule saying that the defenders' (or both teams') spawn must be at ground level, as well as being 20m from the flagpole. That should stop skybases.

3) Additional ideas I've considered are banning water and lava before the battle, because they probably cause a lot of lag when we have so much flowing water as in The Blue Front's zones. Natural water and restoring natural rivers would be allowed, though.

What do people think?

Komrage

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #109 on: 2014 06 28, 18:53:30 »
if you take the effort to build a unassailable base then you should be allowed to. no one else seems to be doing it. battles don't seem to be much slanted towards defenders or attackers.

of course, adding more restrictions lowers entry cost, but i think there's a line to draw here. if a player can't improve their chances by spending effort on a better base, should players be restricted from honing their skills?

moreover, restricting creative bases on the battleground narrows the field of people who are interested because of the construction aspect.

if the lava and water actually increase lag by a significant fraction, maybe something can be done. but they also allow somewhat of a "gradient" -- if you can't afford an obsidian base, a coating of lava is almost as good, and water is pretty effective too.

banning water isn't as bad -- lava doesn't flow nearly as much and is way harder to collect, so i think it is balanced.

---

if it actually turns out that after a few battles involving both fronts attacking, that obsidian bases are utterly impenetrable, maybe lift restrictions instead -- maybes team can use enchanted diamond pickaxes to mine,  or 10 enderpearls permitted per person per battle etc.
« Last Edit: 2014 06 28, 19:05:26 by Mudkipz »

b-ong

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #110 on: 2014 06 28, 19:08:03 »
or 3 hit explosion so tnt will be useful
edit http://dev.bukkit.org/bukkit-plugins/obsidiandestroyer/
i read they have like /ob [value] and /ob toggle
so you can like do it only for battltes
« Last Edit: 2014 06 28, 19:26:48 by b-ong »

Bla

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Not to be confused with lapis lazuli.
  • Location: Sikrit Blabunker Blasement
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #111 on: 2014 06 29, 19:56:28 »
if you take the effort to build a unassailable base then you should be allowed to. no one else seems to be doing it. battles don't seem to be much slanted towards defenders or attackers.
I agree that in our previous battles, they haven't been slanted too much in our battles for Blotz' zones and the obsidian forts I've built. We've seen many people get to the flag, burn it down, etc. But in the battle with Yqt and TMC, some improvements to the design made the base too strong in my opinion:

1) I dug out the terrain in a checkered pattern with lots of holes, which made the ground much harder to move across. This might be op and I'm open to considering banning it, although I like the idea of making the terrain hard to navigate. But if it means people would have to use skybridges to win, I'd prefer to ban this defense system.
2) The defender spawn was at the same height as the upper segments of the flag, and we had a skybridge directly to it. Additionally, our flag base had no lower segment and no ladder to the top, but had its bottom filled with lava. This meant TMC and Yqt pretty much had to use pillars to get up there (and they got shot down every time they tried), or use the ladders leading up to our spawn to get to the flag.

I think 1 would be a bit hard to make rules against. 2 on the other hand, could be solved by the rules I proposed above. Basically that would revert the fort here to one on the same level as the others we've had challenging fights for, but with the terrain obstacles still making it harder.

of course, adding more restrictions lowers entry cost, but i think there's a line to draw here. if a player can't improve their chances by spending effort on a better base, should players be restricted from honing their skills?
No, players should of course be allowed to use their skills as much as they can. Spending effort on a better base, I'm not sure - you can make a floating obsidian fortress at y = 220 with 20 layers and a flag inside, with a bed right next to the flag, and wait to see the attackers trying to get through... We really need rules to say how you can spend effort without making bases that there would be no reason to even try attacking.

moreover, restricting creative bases on the battleground narrows the field of people who are interested because of the construction aspect.
I think rule 1 and 2 takes away only a tiny portion of creative solutions for bases in the BG, so I don't think they should affect that. The older of my obsidian bases would still work, for example. Having spawn on the ground can also require new creative solutions, like how the defenders can make a base that ensures they can get to the flag easily, without letting the enemies get there too easily.

if the lava and water actually increase lag by a significant fraction, maybe something can be done. but they also allow somewhat of a "gradient" -- if you can't afford an obsidian base, a coating of lava is almost as good, and water is pretty effective too.

banning water isn't as bad -- lava doesn't flow nearly as much and is way harder to collect, so i think it is balanced.
It's not hard to gather a lot of lava due to its abundance in the nether, but I'm not sure if it's really overpowered for battles. It might be, I mean, you can also construct a cliff that makes a single source block flow down to a lot of blocks, and I don't think it'd be that hard to cover all the zone in lava, it'd probably take shorter than mining all the obsidian I've used in the bases and the ~4 hours I guess it took to construct them.
We had a pretty cool fight for one of Blotz' water bases and I actually liked moving forward and pouring lava to stop the water, and we managed to win the battle, so I suppose water isn't that op. But once you have to go up a high drop with water or lava, it starts to get hard.
I'll leave water and lava allowed for now.

if it actually turns out that after a few battles involving both fronts attacking, that obsidian bases are utterly impenetrable, maybe lift restrictions instead -- maybes team can use enchanted diamond pickaxes to mine,  or 10 enderpearls permitted per person per battle etc.
I think enderpearls is a bad idea to introduce, enchanted diamond picks sound like a better solution, and Blotz' plugin also looks like a pretty cool addition (even though it's also nice to have the flagpole made out of obsidian to ensure it stays intact). I think 1 and 2 would be a better way to roll the battle balance back to the old obsidian base designs, though.



So far, a sketch of the rule changes I'll probably make are:

1: Skybridges that are longer than 5 meters are banned.
2: Attacking and defending bases now play both roles, so either side may change the other's flag, and both sides can gain or lose their zone. Battle stops after 20 minutes, or once either side has changed the flag on the other zone. The Start zone is an exception, as it cannot be conquered.
3: The spawn of defenders must be at least 20 meters from the flagpole, and additionally, not higher than the ground level of the flagpole (bed may be placed at same height as bottom block of flagpole).
4: At least one column of blocks directly adjacent to the entire flagpole, must not contain obsidian or liquids.
« Last Edit: 2014 06 29, 20:09:57 by Bla »

Komrage

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #112 on: 2014 06 29, 20:48:28 »
what's a sky bridge? does a bridge above a river of lava count? what about a bridge between two high walls? can defenders connect parts of their base with sky bridges?

Bla

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Not to be confused with lapis lazuli.
  • Location: Sikrit Blabunker Blasement
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #113 on: 2014 06 29, 21:20:54 »
what's a sky bridge? does a bridge above a river of lava count? what about a bridge between two high walls? can defenders connect parts of their base with sky bridges?
Thanks for the questions. I'll suggest this more precise version of 1:

1: Skybridges that are longer than 5 meters are banned. A skybridge is a bridge constructed more than 5 meters above the ground (or liquid surface) that does not have supporting pillars reaching the ground more than every 5 meters.

So a bridge above lava does count, but if it's constructed sufficiently close to it, it is allowed. The rules apply equally to attackers and defenders, and the high walls should be covered.
Then again, you could pour water on the lava to put it out, so I suppose we wouldn't actually need to allow them for this.

The intention of the rule is mainly to avoid attackers building a bridge in the air around the flag height, such as in battle 14 (and earlier battles from e.g. before the max build height was defined where they were used to jump down upon the enemy base and again render the terrain completely irrelevant in battle), as this is overpowered and goes against the intents of having the battles going on near the surface of the zones.
Maybe 10 meters would be more suitable. Idk. The problem is basically when the battles end up on things like these:

« Last Edit: 2014 06 29, 21:24:48 by Bla »

Komrage

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #114 on: 2014 06 29, 21:30:39 »
won't they just drop a sand pillar down and call it a support? or some lava/water cobble magic.

b-ong

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #115 on: 2014 06 29, 22:29:26 »
Heh, it'd be cool if the battle ground was made of giant bridges with sand bridges. We should require bridges over 30 meters to be like 2 or 3 wide.  That would look really cool.

Bla

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,308
  • Not to be confused with lapis lazuli.
  • Location: Sikrit Blabunker Blasement
    • View Profile
Re: Battleground Information
« Reply #116 on: 2014 06 30, 00:50:50 »
won't they just drop a sand pillar down and call it a support? or some lava/water cobble magic.
Interesting, it might happen, although having to drop several sand pillars while building such a thing would make it take significantly more effort to build. I'm not really sure if people might still choose it over focusing on the ground level.
Do you have any other ideas for how to prevent sky pillars? To me it seems like it's pretty easy to see a sky pillar when you see it, but it's also a bit hard to define and prevent them at the same time.

I could add that only solid blocks not affected by gravity count as support. That should at least solve the problems you mentioned there.

Heh, it'd be cool if the battle ground was made of giant bridges with sand bridges. We should require bridges over 30 meters to be like 2 or 3 wide.  That would look really cool.
With sand pillars I asssume, I don't really agree. Sky bridge battles simply aren't the point of the BG. The region was chosen for its varied terrain with snow, forest, mountains, rivers and flat land, so we could have battles in many different terrain types, with strategic points to build bases, etc. It's the intention that the battles should resemble semi-realistic warfare (not with modern weapons ofc), where people use the terrain and fight at ground level, inspired by a gameplay experience that could be a bit similar to FPS games like Day of Defeat: Source. I try to define the rules so that we can keep the experience in this direction at the same time as either side doesn't get too overpowered.

Edit: The BG rules on the wiki have been updated now.
If we arrange a battle for Red Front zones, I'll downgrade the defenses so they follow the rules if they currently don't.
« Last Edit: 2014 07 01, 18:26:37 by Bla »