Powerup sound

Everything about Death Ball.

Moderators: Jay2k1, DavidM, The_One

Is it good that you HEAR the EMEMY player's POWER UP their shots?

Yes, I'm European.
53
61%
No, I'm European.
7
8%
Yes, I'm not European (Aus. NA..).
10
11%
No, I'm not European (Aus. NA..).
17
20%
 
Total votes: 87

User avatar
uberslacker
Posts: 140
Joined: 09-03-2003 00:46

Post by uberslacker »

R3L!K wrote: not sure if my rusty memory still works...

the problem we had in the days before the shot charge sound was that good attackers would take a hit before charging their shot. The shield gun refire rate was too slow to get a second hit on the attacker before they fired at near full power by which time the shake had worn off and the defender was basically left useless.

A return to this style might lead to an INCREASE in pbox camping as the safer bet would be to wait for the one shot kill rather than take them on early.

Now, unless there have been changes to the shield gun refire rate, the shake time etc that I'm not aware of, I think we should all think more carefully whether we want the charge sound or not.

um, thats what all attackers (that still try and shoot normally) have to do now with pbox camping, they have to hope that the defender will hit them early and then get a shot off, but this is the only thing attackers can do right now. again, defenses should try and keep the offense away from the pbox, not just camp inside it. what getting rid of the chargeup sound would do would create better defenses
that wouldn't need to pbox camp because they would for the most part keep the offense away from it, which in turn would create better passing and teamwork on offense to try and get through the d.
User avatar
R3L!K
Posts: 1274
Joined: 09-03-2003 01:03

Post by R3L!K »

most clans keep a high defense when on the attack.

but i've yet to see a single clan that would try and maintain a high line when the roles are reversed. It's simply too dangerous. I'm guessing thats what you mean by keep attackers away from the pbox. Because in reality thats very difficult.

I doubt we'll see an end to pbox camping in 1.7. But giving strikers more range would definately even things up a little.
User avatar
uberslacker
Posts: 140
Joined: 09-03-2003 00:46

Post by uberslacker »

keep attackers away from the pbox AKA having defenders outside of the pbox trying to not let attackers get close to get a good shot off

this doesn't mean that the defense stays on the half-line, this just means that the d is somewhere around the half of their half of the field, and not all cramped up inside the pbox
User avatar
R3L!K
Posts: 1274
Joined: 09-03-2003 01:03

Post by R3L!K »

I didnt think u meant keep defense at the half way line all the time. I'm not totally dense. O_o

i know the style of play your talking about, but surely u realise how fragile that kind of defensive line is.

Wall passes would work a treat against a high defensive line. Thats just one example, there are others.

As soon as an attacker gets behind your last man (eg a boost) you know your in trouble because your defense is playing catch up.

Like I said, pbox camping is going to be hard to eradicate.
User avatar
uberslacker
Posts: 140
Joined: 09-03-2003 00:46

Post by uberslacker »

wall passes? lol, that would have to be some sort of 'davidm' defense for that to work

pbox camping will be hard to get rid of, but getting rid of the chargeup sound/toneing it way down will go a long way to get rid of it
theberkin8or
Senior Member
Posts: 794
Joined: 09-03-2003 20:41

Post by theberkin8or »

with a 3 man d you don't have to worry about wall passes(with boost that isn't exactally hard to get) play two marking backs and a sweeper, plus wouldn't be kewl if you could actually do an effective one two pass in db like you can in soccer?

as for the less than intelgent ppl that think ppl are actually going to be able to pull of a bind to tell when they are going to hit, with the delay that you get the amount of reaction time left for the person to hit them and the payceince they would have to have.... you would have to be godlike to pull it off a meaningful amount of times.

no pbox camping will not go away completely but it will be spread out more becuase you will no longer be able to leave 3 D in the box and have a good chance of not geting scored on.

also the whole they O will just wait thing would work sometimes but the best D would still be able to own the best O a good % of the time.... just like in soccer

the more powerful shot wouldn't really stop pbox camping though cuz geting it through 4 ppl in the box even with a largly increased power would be way to difficult to make it useful for most
User avatar
R3L!K
Posts: 1274
Joined: 09-03-2003 01:03

Post by R3L!K »

3 man D. plus a keeper? and a lone attacker.

lmao.
beefsack
Posts: 921
Joined: 09-03-2003 22:57
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

Post by beefsack »

i like the idea of stronger shots. it would force the defence to come out of the box. maybe smaller pboxes could also be handy...
User avatar
R3L!K
Posts: 1274
Joined: 09-03-2003 01:03

Post by R3L!K »

not sure about the smaller pboxes. Right now the dodge jump length from the base line is about right.

if it was smaller, the keeper might hit the attacker outside the pbox and end up giving away a pass shot goal.

tbh, i'm not 100% sure about the lengths involved. maybe the pbox can be reduced a little without it affecting the keepers ranging.
User avatar
Surge
Banned
Posts: 920
Joined: 09-03-2003 00:34

Post by Surge »

why not smaller Pboxs?

They have no value anymore now that the keeper has powers in the entire box which is still f'n retarded, just let him dodge in the whole thing at 30%+ speed... its not called deathball cause you can shell it to the keeper at the top of the Pbox cause hes invincible.

Smaller Pboxs wouldnt change anything except maybe force the D to stay out of it and not abuse the insta-gib.
User avatar
Chrisfu
Posts: 387
Joined: 10-03-2003 00:51

Post by Chrisfu »

A smaller pbox would just pack the campers tighter, nothing more.
User avatar
Surge
Banned
Posts: 920
Joined: 09-03-2003 00:34

Post by Surge »

not if the attackers get a range increase and the defenders are barred from the interior keepers box with a blocking volume.
beefsack
Posts: 921
Joined: 09-03-2003 22:57
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

Post by beefsack »

i remember someone throwing up the idea of having defenders lose health in the pbox, dont remember what happened to the suggestion, the guy prolly got flamed :p but what if you lose health depending on how many others are in the pbox? maybe just 1 person in the box and he loses a little bit of health, but 3 in the box and the defenders are dead in seconds :p prolly wouldnt work at all tho...
User avatar
R3L!K
Posts: 1274
Joined: 09-03-2003 01:03

Post by R3L!K »

I can just see it now.... attackers pushing defenders back into the pbox to kill them off! LOL

Would be hilarious to fire a shot at goal and see the intercepting defender explode just before he catches it.

Oh and btw Surge, giving keeper's more mobility and power in the pbox has been one of the most successful and useful introductions in DB. Keeping used to be a real chore, now its fun because it uses (get this) intelligence. Knowing when to rush out and when not to takes experience and a certain level of intellect.

And creating a blocking volume to prevent defenders entering the keeper zone is also d-u-m-b. Defenders are there to cover a keeper in case the keeper rushes out and gets caught with his pants down so to speak. I 've lost count of the number of times I've been boosted back towards defense, land on the goal line and saved the goal.
User avatar
DavidM
Posts: 6795
Joined: 08-03-2003 20:35
Contact:

Post by DavidM »

somehow I think pbox campers can easily be beaten with volleys, because teammates have no volley latency, and if they really camp in the box they cannot prevent the volley at all
Locked