Sounds interesting xO

cool logo

What are you going to play, 2-3xctf2?

3) Mappool

Troubled Waters (ctf2), Stronghold (ctf3), Ironworks (ctf7), Scornforge (team4), Inner Sanctum (team3).

What the hell? They've mixed CTF/ACTF together with that map pool. Scornforge is a terrible map too. :/

What I meant, Mr. Anon, was that ctf2 is the only playable map out of the ql spread, and a boring one at that.

Ironworks (ctf7) is nice. The best map there imo.

Yeah, it's ok.

I want to see some 3w maps damn it! :D

I hope threewave style maps will never make it to QL. They are probably one of the biggest reasons why vq3ctf became boring 0-0 aimonly at the end. Well... That and the fact that vq3ctf is utterly stupid with 7dmg/100ammo and 125hp on spawn.

(besides, out of the 24(?) threewave maps there are only 3-4 playable maps)

Well... I guess there is still some space for gameplay tweaking that could change qlctf for the better, and I was speaking of the map pool as it is now + habits i.e used to the 3-4 threewave maps.

Do you see better ctf maps rising out of the id primordial soup?

Unfortunately no I do not, and you're probably correct that unless id have hired a more competent map maker they'll never provide any quality ctf maps. Q3ctf1 was 2v2, q3ctf3 a 0-0 map, q3ctf4 spacemap. q3ctf2 had some nice ideas but essentially got ruined by the railonly mid.

BaseQ3 has +10 tdm maps, 7 1v1 maps and 4 ctf maps (all but q3ctf2 are crap)
OSP has 11 tdm maps and 2 ctf maps (both crap)
CPMA has 29 1v1/tdm maps and 5 ctf maps (only cpmctf2 is playable)
Which leaves ctf'ers playing big open raceway threewave maps made for threewave ctf.

I don't know why ctf maps are so few. It might be that ctf always had this (slightly unjustified) reputation of being a lesser skilled gamemode than 1v1/tdm, thus mappers might think making ctf maps is less prestigious. It's certainly a fact that ice climbers are more "famous" than cloud9 and deathrow+clan9 more famous than... eh.. dunno?

It might be that it's relatively easier to make a 1v1/tdm map. If you fuck up ANY location on a ctf map and make it overpowered, the entire map could be ruined. There are plenty of examples in the threewave map pak of maps with potential, that ultimately fail because of a few overpowered positions that create stalemates. Cpmctf3 mid is also a prime example of a stalemate.

The margin of error is much smaller on a ctf map. Make one superfast route or one superstrong defensive position and it will be abused over and over.

Mapping ctf is also more complex than 1v1/tdm since you have to take speed into account. In 1v1/tdm it doesn't matter that much if route1 to YA is 2sec faster than route2 or how fast you can run away from YA. But in ctf, speed has to be taken into consideration constantly. The time a defender has from a weapon/armor spawn to flag. The time of a certain route vs the risk of that route vs the reward and so on. q3wcp18 is a perfect example of routes that make no sense.

You kinda also have to double your testing in ctf. You have to think of the map both from the attacker and defenders' pov. And the changes done to make a ctf map easier/harder to defend/attack have much more effect than making YA easier/harder to defend on a 1v1/tdm map.

Player spawns are also much more important in ctf. In tdm/1v1 you can basically just scatter spawnpoints on the map (grossly simplified ofc). But in ctf you can't do that. Good examples of player spawns ruining maps are q3wcp1 (hello spawning at ENEMY pu), q3w3 (hello spawning high in ENEMY base), q3wcp5 (hello 15 spawns low, but only 1 spawn high).

Obviously it's also much more difficult to playtest a ctf map than a 1v1 map since you need 8/10 for ctf and only 2 players for 1v1.

It's arguably much easier to locate flaws in 1v1/tdm maps than in ctf maps. Oldschool q3tourney4 with RA+RG high and only jumppads to get there, is a prime example of an obvious flaw.

All in all, it seems the workload for a ctf map is much larger than for 1v1/tdm and that it might be the main reason for the lack of ctf maps.
Whatever the reasons, it's a bit sad that a gamemode as popular as ctf gets so little attention from mappers.

Yeah, it's weird how ctf has always been the "bastard child" of the game modes :D

Anyways, good post.

As you guys said ctf2 & ctf7 are nice maps. Some of the rest are considered playable, and some just bad.

We're not claiming that the Mappool is perfect, neither do we like the idea of not being able to host private servers. But we want to compete, and play this game enough to endure the waiting for all those things QL is lacking.

We're just trying our best with what we've been given right now.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not hating on your effort, it's just that I feel that ql won't, at this stage anyways, provide very good ctf matches.

I appreciate what you guys are trying to do Jeibo, but mixing rune maps into a league is never going to attract teams

Well 8 teams on the first day after the announcement is pretty good. in my opinion. Even if we don't get a similar number tomorrow, at least it shows how eager CTF teams on QL are to compete.

If we manage to cover that need of theirs, rune or no-rune maps, 5v5 or 4v4 won't matter, for now.

if you must insist on having 2 rune maps, please switch scornforge with rebound

scornforge is utter shit (hallways to mid are too cramped, map is way too large and bases are too open)
rebound = fun and its an aggressive map with lots of action

thanks!
i signed us up

Totally agree. [+]

"sconforge is utter shit" .. and rebound isnt (base -> base with 1 rj) ........ sure.

explain

I think he means if you drop low to the railgun area and rj off that jump pad, you fly towards your doubler and can cap in seconds.

I'd rather have that than scornforge tbh.

BTW new ctf map sneak peek:
http://tinyurl.com/pqy6l9

I could forgive the use of the shit rune maps if the tournament was 4v4 instead of 5v5.

Can the Euro scene take a hint from the US and start playing CTF 4v4. It's alot more fun, less spawn luck and defensive play.

once more non-rune maps are available the rune ones will be gone pretty fast...

And if both teams decide not to play rune maps, no rune maps will be played...

Can NA teams apply? We're having a bit of a shortage here :(

Go ahead and apply, if interest is big enough we'll make it both EU and NA!

yeah xero, im sure you can but you will have to accept to play on european servers as its an EU league

Makes sense

Hey there,

We've had an unexpectedly good response those first couple of days after the League's announcement, and I think I'm speaking for all BiBS - Organization when I say this: Thank you.

However, we noticed that there's interest towards BiBS from overseas (Teams from Canada, Chile and the US), therefore we'd like to make it clear, that if sufficient amount of teams would show up, hosting a separate Division for all the teams from across the ocean is, indeed, possible.

If any of you out there would like to join in, but are discouraged by the idea of playing on EU servers, let us know.

I am actually a little concerned at this stage after reading that each team needs to play 2 matches a week. I think there's a good reason every other league plays 1 game a week.

The majority of quake players aren't kids like in other games. We don't have nothing to do but play quake anymore.

It's hard enough getting 5 guys to be definitely available for 1 specific time each week. 2 is going to be a nightmare and I forsee a lot of defaullts wins/losses due to this.

It is a valid point you're making.

There's no point in trying to hide it - none of us expected as a big response as the one we've had the pleasure having during the past 4 days :)

Rest assured though, most of the Rules are being re-discussed and soon adjusted to what is now required for all of us to enjoy a successful competition.

Stay tuned on BiBS website, for updates.

Your time and consideration is appreciated Jeibo