This sounds far better than the tic tac toe we have got now, and I have thought of this concept before, and probably many others as well, but never written a detailed gameplan of how it could look like. I absolutely think you should forward this as a suggestion to the devs.

I think it could be a good idea to change the times on the heavy pick-ups as well so it rotates a bit better, like mega 30 and heavy armor 20, or mega 40 and heavy armor 30?

I don't think that benefits from this change would be bigger than disadvantages.

30 seconds for both mega and heavy armor is fine as far it is easier for anyone to time the items. I think it worked in Xonotic duel nicely, and now it works for QC duel.

ha ha

Champions ban?

Ne-ver !


tl 10 fl 0 - ok. Waste of time(3 sec) after death-ok


My conception is a way better to "old spirit of duel"

All, ALLLLLLL like in QL+champions+selectable spawns.



But they not want to change it. Because they known better that current format is what we wayting for. They know that we hate GL, and armors, thats why they made such progressive gameplay decisions and removed them.

timelimit 5 and fraglimit 3 duels- thats it! stand on your knees and
bow down

The beauty of Quake duel was always in its simplicity and raw skill.
What youre suggesting sounds better than the current duel format, but there would be too much happening outside the game itself.

I'd build on the only good thing in QC - having movement from other quakes in one game. It could bring back the good old Q3 times, when everyone in the top16 had completely different movement and playstyle. Problem is, champions restrict players and the games became more boring and bland than ql's unistyle.

So besides the obvious (such as removing rounds, having timelimit and uncapped movement speed) I'd remove the champions as well and gave players the choice of "movement loadouts" - you could pick q1/crouchslide/walljump at the cost of max health/armor. Either just one, of all of them. In reality we could see a vq3 200/200 player against someone using q1 movement + crouchsliding with, say, 125/125.

Removing champions will never happen in QC.

Hmmm, Quake Champions - Champions = Quake? :D

All we need is an engine now. : D

10 min, 10 champs.
or 10 min, 3 champs cycled 3 times (9). if a "10th" is needed... randomly picked out of the remaining 7 champs.

so that basically means people will ban 2 out of 3-4 meta champions :D

but also they can ban champions during the match itself, so it's all depends on the players - if they want to play one champion during 10 minutes match or if they wanna try every champion.

dont inteligent.

intelegent*

i think it would be better to have a halftime where the start spawns are reversed, and after two 5 minute rounds if the game is tied then it goes into a 2 minute overtime like it used to

That's actually a good idea for balancing spawns! But I don't think that starting spawns mean that much in QC in compare with QL or Q3.

I like the idea of more than 3 champions in one map, that arbitrary limitation needs to be tested.

What we should have is a round system, a buy weapons menu

oh wait

take a look on Warsow's Bomb'n'Defuse, in general it is similar to CS, but with Quake-like speeds and players don't need to buy weapons, as they have load-outs with 3 weapons.

Yeah but is Warsow still active anymore? I'd install it again if it was

Just play all champions, first player who run out of champs loose.

That was one of ideas during thinking about what duel could be... but there are 2 main problems:
1) We don't know how much champions are going to be in QC and that makes the length of the match too unpredictable. I mean that is fine for team games like Dota2, but I don't think it could work for 1v1. So that's why I think there should be timelimit for sure.
2) Another case, for example player A got 6 frags, player B got 5 frags, and player B has fragged the last champion. What's going to happen here at the end? Is it a draw or player B is a winner?

Also id stated that they dont want something like this as f2p Players only get ranger. So they would need to Rent all the champs.

The number of champions will increase over time. You don't want duels to become longer because of that.

The game is so fundamentally flawed now compared to past Quake games that nothing can really be done about it. They decided to make Quake duel for casuals and you're just going to have to accept that. This will be dead quicker than Quake 4 due to the lack of mods.

- 10 minutes duel
- all champs
- cooldown of 3 minutes (or 2 or 5 or smth) each time a champion dies before you can pick it up again

I mean cooldown sounds cool and is in the spirit of the game with champions' abilities with their own cooldown...

If you really want a banning phase, maybe it could be interesting to force one of the enemy player's champion to have a cooldown right off the bat.

This way, even if there is a meta of champions you still can say well anarki is op and you're damn good at it but here's a 3 min CD before you can even pick it up.

EDIT : ofcourse in a scenario where a player loses all of his champions (that's gonna be more and more unlikely with the addition of more champs but whatever) there are a few workarounds that come to mind, you could just lose the duel altogether if all 12 of your champions have died within 2-3 min. It's a blowout anyway so everyone gains time. Or automatically remove your earliest champion off its cooldown... Anyway I'd deffo appreciate QC duel more like that.

EDIT 2 : and it could really add depth and strategy to the game. Imagine you are ahead of vo0 in the game with 2 minutes to go and you know you killed his anarki 3 minutes ago, you can time that and play around it.

-10 minute duel.
- 5-7 champs
- cooldown of X minutes for champion.
- whoever gets more frags wins

or

by sets, bo3 or bo5.

- 10 minute duel per map.
- 3 champs.
- cooldown of 2 minutes.
- whoever gets more frags wins.
- after each map that has been played you can't pick the champs that you've picked in previous maps :o), that means if you pick ur best champs in first map u won't be able to use them in the next maps.

notes/suggestions

you lose all ur champs you lose the game, just like now, that'd mean if you're winning 10-0 and you get all ur champs fragged u'd lose the map even if u had more frags.

there could be some sort of "main pick", it would take more cooldown or simply u won't be able to resurrect it... obviously the opponent choses what's your main pick and viceversa

you can't use your main until you get fragged first time.

show cooldown to both players in the champion icon on top ( just like abilities cooldown or something), so maybe someone who is leading will still decide to go agressive to avoid you resurrecting a champ etc.

15 minute duel like ages ago?

sudden death will happen if both players have the same amount of frags and they will stick to the champs they are using at that time. (the amount of sudden deaths in pro games is way too high, that's like something that is bound to happen in finals and very very close games like rapha vs evil in QL, atm we get sudden deaths every time a player goes overly defensive or when both are too scared to commit to a fight.


dunno, i think we already spoke about it at regionals and it's frustrating that they didn't try anything different so far.

idk about banning champs, because with it, you remove good gameplay of a particular player.

I just don't like all the intermissions with-in one match. That said, these intermission did bring us new players and removed top tier players dominating the scene, like it was in QL for the last 9 years.

One thing I learned being on the other side of the fence for some time, is that developers listen to the community for problems, but come up with their own solutions. That happens for a number of reasons, including that it's their job, they (think they) know better, and it's fun.

Also, very often the game implements only part of the design being worked on, and there are features and concepts waiting to come out. Those ideas are much more likely to get implemented and tested than anything suggested externally.

So if we want to help here, we should be vocal about duel being broken or not fun, and pin point what the problems are. If that's convincing enough, they may try and change things. Skipping this first step and jumping to proposing fixes can be really unsuccessful.

yes this is what communitys do not understand and/or forgets, you shouldn't expect companys will directly copy your suggestion. Pin point problems and report.

> but come up with their own solutions.

Yeah. Epic did this for two gametypes in ut4. Both are garbage.

For showdown they were doing weekly streams still and were quite vocal about why they liked it. The depth of their consideration was extremely limited. To the point of "hurr durr we like it because you can pick a gun".

I agree that pitching the solution without defining the problem is not going to fly because the devs want to create the thing themselves, but at the same time the devs are faceroll retarded and don't understand the game.

At leas QC has zero4.. or something.

If/when devs are facetarded, then there's no hope, and the whole thing is pointless. However, in general terms, it's hard to know if some devs are just bad, or if they have a different perspective / target audience, etc.

yes, it is generally a good prac to only point to engineers (especially software ones) the problems and not the solutions

but then again, the staff at id seem more like PR guys than software developers or designers (PR guys who also seem to know how to write few lines of code and/or design a map)

Your point is legit, but for some reason I have a strong feeling that developers are not that confident about their concepts and visions.

This is due to disbelief / unsatisfaction. It's a very well known problem when making online games. In my experience, (good) devs will look at the major problems flagged by the community, and address those, in order to win their heart back.

Thats all nice and good - in theory..

The reality is, you have a product to sell thats supposed to satisfy your customers.
The reality also is no matter what vision you have, if you cant reflect on your mistakes or on what people like vs what you like, youre going to drive these customers away. And that's whats happening here.

Its beyond me how this community is supposed to be more vocal. Since Q4, there have been the same discussions going over and over here, on qlforums, bethforums, reddit, youtube, irc. There have also been all sorts of polls and even petitions.
They just dont give a fuck and no reasonable theories are going to change that. Thats why theyre getting these numbers after all.

Yeah, this is probably the reality of the situation. Still I have to wonder why they have gone through this whole song and dance with "community liasons" etc... since QL?

We haven't really seen that in the last 8 years, now have we?

this is a long list of stipulations for a game.

how about this: you can choose whatever champion you want, any time you want, and you'll respawn as that champion. when you choose a new champion, your old champion is sent to the bowels of hell where he is tortured for eternity (which means you can't use him again in the match).

the game ends when all of the players' champions are in hell being tortured for eternity.

BUT for $5 you can pay satan to release a champion from hell so that you can continue fighting.

this, honestly, together with the abolition of the round system and just 10 minute duel. Like, the outside-of-gameplay mechanics do not require the amount of depth laid out by OP (or the ones in the current format). Make a simple straight forward mode which allows the players the freedom to create depth and narratives via their style of playing.

in fact thats a very good idea! buy triple jump for doom slayer is also good.

Just let them buy a new jump for doomguy for $4.99, quadruple jump, quintuple jump, sextuple... etc jump. All for more fun.

Similar to vanilla duel map/item control gameplay (imo it wasn't that bad as developers think)

offtopic, but outside of the decision to break duel, where have they expressed dislike with map control / item gameplay? Was there an interview I missed?

it is just my assumption based on the current duel shape where item control seems like the last thing in the duel as well as positioning.

You suggest to just BAN strong side of your opponent! this is not sportish!!!!!!!! instead of struggle!

And no one can accept that he can't play his favorite(in term of love) champion.

idiot

Slash and Anarki were terrible design choices for a game with aspirations of attracting the masses.

Made twice as worse by a game which struggles to register hits and keep a 1:1 sync between what you see on screen and what is happening.

Though sometimes it does have its advantages :)
https://clips.twitch.tv/SpeedySpikyOtterAMPEnergyCherry

dunno how you think you can maintain a 1:1 sync between what you see on screen and what is happening....
The fact that it's impossible to do so is what gives rise to choices in netcode design.

10 minute duel.
both start with ranger.
other champs spread around the map like items to be picked up.
if you die, that champ goes back as a pickup item.

something like that. like altered beast, but champs lol.

This should've been in from the start, but, the bigger issue is stacks.

They need to balance champions so that they can get 200/200 again (all of them).

It's fucking retarded how the control style of play just doesn't exist anymore, makes it extremely boring to watch.

But yeah, good luck with any of this happening with how stubborn and dumb the QC devs are.

Seems like developers aware of most issues explained here and they are gonna explore possible duel mods in the future: https://www.plusforward.net/quake/post/41248/...es-Nov-17/

I'm excited and looking forward to most of the changes, except nerfing the speed of Slash :(

Personally I would rather play as one champion per map. I don't like respawning with different physics.