Preferred Ball Team Size


#1

I am trying to get an idea how people think they feel about Ball team sizes and maps. I will only loosely go by the results of this poll since I think none of us really know without trying them out, and there likely won’t be many votes anyway. However, I’m also looking to figure out if people prefer we focus on a single ball mode or try to support two different team sizes, with the smaller primarily to hep when there are less players on.

Some of these maps may have a crease, which is a box in front of the goal that the attacking team can’t enter (protected by turrets).

The different map options are:

  1. 4v4 - We would likely take current maps, but reduce overall map size/border reduced. The objects/layout won’t simply be shrunk like the border as from experience with the last version of 4v4, that doesn’t work. I will try to keep the layouts similar, but they won’t be exactly the same. Compared to 2v2 or 3v3, this would feel much closer to 6v6 ball. Initially there would be no crease in front of goals, but if scoring is too easy after testing a small crease will be added.
  2. 3v3 - We would have a base map or possibly up to a few different base maps and map makers would add their graphics/objects on top of the base maps (primarily to speed up map making). I and/or any other active map makers would convert a lot of the existing 6v6 maps to 3v3. There is a small crease in front of the goals and the goals would likely be a bit larger than normal (based on feedback from testing my initial 3v3 maps). Spawns would be in the corners of the map rather than a dedicated spawn area. Team comp with 3v3 is simpler than 4v4 as you would most likely only ever want one explodet and two lights. 4v4 you’d either have to pick a defensive comp with two explodets or go more offensive with only one explodet.
  3. 4v4 / 3v3 - Essentially the 3v3 mode as described above, but the maps would be slightly bigger than they would be for just 3v3.
  4. 2v2 - Definitely not the main ball mode, but hopefully interesting enough to pass the time waiting for more players to get on. Basically the 3v3 maps but a little smaller and the big change would be the ball resetting on change of possession. The team gaining possession spawns near the middle of the map and the defending team spawns in front of their goal. Might be either half court style, sharing the same goal and switching sides, or a normal two goal map (either way would play about the same).
  5. 5v5 - Keep the existing maps but use a team size of 5. The “main” mode would be smaller teams & maps, but this would still be an option when more players are online.

I expect most people would prefer 4v4 for main as it feels closest to 6v6. However, keep in mind the advantages of keeping teams as small as possible. If we can get 3v3 playing well enough, ladder should be significantly easier to start up and keep going much later compared to even 4v4. Also the smaller the team size the higher chance we can have multiple servers running, which can either group players by skill or location for better pings. Of course if we go 3v3 and don’t have enough for multiple servers the bad players will have more of a negative impact with the smaller team size than they would with 4v4.

Another thing to keep in mind when considering the maps is how significant the impact will be if a player disconnects and teams are down a player. Also in any case I can still host a legacy 6v6 server, but the main Ball mode will definitely be with smaller maps & teams.

  • 4v4 Only
  • 3v3 Only
  • 4v4 + 3v3
  • 4v4 / 3v3 (try to make maps that work well enough for both team sizes)
  • 4v4 + 2v2
  • 3v3 + 5v5 (using current ball maps)

0 voters


#2

Thanks for all your work Van!

If you end up going with 4v4 or 3v3, I think the spawn time would also need to be reduced significantly. If one or two team members die, it would be a certain goal for the other team. For this reason, I think people would end up kill whoring and ball play would dramatically decrease unless the spawn time is quick enough for them to get back into action.

Anyway, great job xD.


#3

We have no control over spawn time although I don’t see it as a problem for making ball teams smaller (definitely for TBD). Spawn time is already short in ball. Kill whoring is less of a problem than being able to score too easily with small teams by simply dodging fire from defenders or rushing/tanking to the goal in a heavier plane (as either of these become much easier the smaller teams get).

Regarding the spawn time issue, this shouldn’t matter much for my maps without dedicated spawns. The spawns are very close to the goal so players can get back to defend quickly. How close the spawns need to be to the goal, to balance defense and offense, will be determined after testing.


#4

After more testing it really seems like the 4v4 / 3v3 option is the way to go. So far too many goals are being scored, but I think that is more due to people pushing like it is 6v6. Adjustments will have to be made to make sure at least one person can cover the goal. Since the existing version was designed primarily for 3v3, I did slightly lengthen the map though. As with any map size change it affected the layout a bit. I also removed the long, skinny object from the bottom corners as it is too easy for randas to dance around.

3v3 and 4v4 play very differently. The map feels relatively empty on 3v3 and it seems more about positioning and strategic ball movement. With 4v4 it is more so about coordinating pushes on a more crowded map like 6v6.

This is what I expect to be the final version of asteroids for now. I plan to make 3 or 4 more maps from the “base” map this week, maintaining the exact same size, border, goals, creases, etc. These will be hosted in a pub server for additional testing while I work on my new server code. By the time my code is ready hopefully we will have a better idea how well this is working before committing to the format and creating additional maps.