Fuck yeah cpma

Although I think QL's netcode is better personally

atmo wrote:

Fuck yeah cpma

Although I think QL's netcode is better personally

Rate 50000
cg_xerpclients 1
Cl_packetdup 1
Cl_maxpackets 125
Snaps 40
Cg_optimisebw 1
Cg_laghax -1

Best netcode possible experiment with laghax -1 or 0

Oops should be cg_xerpclients -1

cpma is the best lets 4v4 CTF

we bouncing to some cpma in LG mumble if anyone wants to join

Is that for bad connections Jazzy?

cg_laghax -1 is for everyone
cg_xerpclients 1 is for everyone(not -1 i was wrong)

make rate 30000 on weaker connections
maxpackets should be 125
optimisebw should be 1 no matter what

snaps doesnt actually do anything in cpma so ignore that

cl_packetdup 1 is for everyone, make it 2 if your connection is extra shitty

i forgot this exists

http://www.esreality.com/post/1888774/pro-installer-2-0-released/

way simpler than guides

also hooneymode(callvote mode HM) is a lot more approachable if you want to do 1v1s with a skill disparity between two players. it's the same as a duel but it gives a point on first kill and restarts, first to 5 wins. you learn/practice duel skills while reset to an even pacing repeatedly, which gives a weaker player a better chance for kills

The only issue I see with that oreoz is that most CPM duel's aren't determined the way QL duels are. There are ten's of frags throughout the match, the game doesn't often end up like, "2-1" in quakelive.

Magus^ wrote:

The only issue I see with that oreoz is that most CPM duel's aren't determined the way QL duels are. There are ten's of frags throughout the match, the game doesn't often end up like, "2-1" in quakelive.

thats because people don't play ztn in cpma

idk what to say if youre going to argue it isn't an accurate enough representation of a cpm duel. ive played long enough to know that people dont like getting beat 40-0 all day to learn the game, it's more approachable to go 5-0 and be able to easily understand why you die

I guess I understand.

Deep 1v1 with lots of facets of play will always have this hard to get into property. Fighting games you will feel helpless, starcraft you will feel helpless, and quake duel you will feel helpless. I really don't know a way of "getting" into the 1v1 format without just purely focusing on mechanics so then you actually get into the rest of the game. If you have good aim you can do well in duel so you can start learning the strategy.

recently installed this. it's good

can someone give me a list of maps that are still popular to duel/ctf/ca today

also, warsow 0.7 aka 1.0 will be out within the week and i'll have a chicago ca/duel server set up if anyone wants to try it. they removed weak ammo if that is any motivation

sc2 and fighting games feel a lot different. being just slightly better than someone else is the difference between getting 20-0'd or having an even game. that an the fact that there arent enough people playing to get constant even games.. D:

cpm24 cpm22 cpm3a pukka cpm1a

tehoreoz wrote:

sc2 and fighting games feel a lot different. being just slightly better than someone else is the difference between getting 20-0'd or having an even game. that an the fact that there arent enough people playing to get constant even games.. D:

cpm24 cpm22 cpm3a pukka cpm1a

It feels like that at lower levels in fighting games i will admit, but once you learn the games system the games are pretty close(though often the scores don't represent it, a 3-0 can have very very close games). I'm not good enough at SC2 or BW to say what happens once you get near the top. A lot of times just knowledge holds you back in fighting games and starcraft, you have to know exactly how to respond to certain situations. Just remember you have gotten over the hump of transition into a competitive FPS player and probably haven't gotten over the hump in the other games, so your perspective on player skill may be slightly skewed.

I never had to get over a hump playing FPSs, everything is pretty simple. Quake Live's FFA is about denying item pickups to the resident slummer, for example, or else you're never going to be able to get any kills. CA on the other hand is taking advantage of free flanks while your team keeps a good position. Just watching someone do an FPS for a short while teaches me enough about it that I don't need to get over any serious hump, and at a certain point the DM stops being important and complex strategy starts taking reign - that's when FPSs actually get interesting. For TF2, ESEA's high IM is at that point. You don't have a hump to get over before you start getting to that point, because the objectives, and what you should be doing, and how to go about it, are all totally intuitive. They make sense. It's not like DotA were you have something obvious to do but you need to spend a week of playing to figure out how to even do it, against people who aren't total shit. Games like quake and TF2 are different, you can hop in with marginal competitive experience in anything, and granted that you have the mechanical skill for it, learn how the game works and why in a really short time.

If you're playing a fighting game, you won't be able to do anything half the time as a newbie, because you're probably going to be in a lock, or in starcraft you're going to be massively out-played or at a massive unit disadvantage. In TF2 and Quake you're a single unit with a single position and it's hard to lock you out of being able to do anything at all. Getting juggled in the air is hard, and for the few situations where it's really common (bhopping into someone with the LG at high speed, or in TF2, letting a pyro get near a corner and you) you learn really fast that it's not a good idea to do that. By the very nature of the games, a slight skill disadvantage at low levels is going to have a large effect, because the skill curve is really high (easy to progress) early on. It's when you get to higher skill levels that things start plateauing. Because the game's so easy to get good at when you don't know what you're doing, the "hump" isn't when you start playing, it's when you start understanding that the game is tactical at its core.

Picking up on mechanical things is easy. Games that are extremely mechanically punishing like fighting games, or games where the mechanical is just about how case you can execute commands, that's hard to pick up? They're really hard to learn, because strategy is learned from experience and when you need to know how to work your mechanics for your strats to work, or your strategy is /in/ the mechanical part of the game, you can't even pick the game up enough to be immersed before you have to start getting good at it. With FPSs like quake, the mechanical skill is at the forefront, and lets you dive in and get a feel for the game and start messing around and having fun, before you have to be any good at the meta.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the games are just mechanical. You can't win serious quake games with just an aimbot. You have to understand what you're doing. Oh, I know exactly where that guy's going! I'm going to shoot a rocket across the map and get a direct hit on him - the moment that he enters my line of sight. Oh, he's going for the red armor! I'm going to get the two yellows and lay a grenade trap at the teleporter exit, then get ready for an LG gith - if I lose I can jump away and pick up the armor shards and health above me, because I have the position advantage! I'll have to go back down there soon, though, because the mega's spawning! Things like that are what make Quake the game it is, it's not about combo locking or countering enemy strategies. It's about predicting what's going to happen, knowing who controls what, and what battles you can get away with fighting.

That all comes from experience, and it's really easy to get experience. You don't even have to be playing. You can watch someone else, and understand what they're doing, and learn from it - even if you're totally horrible. Even if you have not even the slightest bit of skill or experience, you can spectate a high level player, and understand what's going on, and learn for you own playing like that. Even if you're fighting a horribly losing battle in quake Duel, you can learn a lot from it. Fighting games aren't like that. Fighting games are hard and punishing, because they're not intuitive and they're not open. You can't learn a lot about fighting games just by sitting there and watching someone else, or watching someone beat on you. Well, maybe SSB.

PS this thread is about quake not fighting games

wareya wrote:

I never had to get over a hump playing FPSs, everything is pretty simple. Quake Live's FFA is about denying item pickups to the resident slummer, for example, or else you're never going to be able to get any kills. CA on the other hand is taking advantage of free flanks while your team keeps a good position. Just watching someone do an FPS for a short while teaches me enough about it that I don't need to get over any serious hump, and at a certain point the DM stops being important and complex strategy starts taking reign - that's when FPSs actually get interesting. For TF2, ESEA's high IM is at that point. You don't have a hump to get over before you start getting to that point, because the objectives, and what you should be doing, and how to go about it, are all totally intuitive. They make sense. It's not like DotA were you have something obvious to do but you need to spend a week of playing to figure out how to even do it, against people who aren't total shit. Games like quake and TF2 are different, you can hop in with marginal competitive experience in anything, and granted that you have the mechanical skill for it, learn how the game works and why in a really short time.

If you're playing a fighting game, you won't be able to do anything half the time as a newbie, because you're probably going to be in a lock, or in starcraft you're going to be massively out-played or at a massive unit disadvantage. In TF2 and Quake you're a single unit with a single position and it's hard to lock you out of being able to do anything at all. Getting juggled in the air is hard, and for the few situations where it's really common (bhopping into someone with the LG at high speed, or in TF2, letting a pyro get near a corner and you) you learn really fast that it's not a good idea to do that. By the very nature of the games, a slight skill disadvantage at low levels is going to have a large effect, because the skill curve is really high (easy to progress) early on. It's when you get to higher skill levels that things start plateauing. Because the game's so easy to get good at when you don't know what you're doing, the "hump" isn't when you start playing, it's when you start understanding that the game is tactical at its core.

Picking up on mechanical things is easy. Games that are extremely mechanically punishing like fighting games, or games where the mechanical is just about how case you can execute commands, that's hard to pick up? They're really hard to learn, because strategy is learned from experience and when you need to know how to work your mechanics for your strats to work, or your strategy is /in/ the mechanical part of the game, you can't even pick the game up enough to be immersed before you have to start getting good at it. With FPSs like quake, the mechanical skill is at the forefront, and lets you dive in and get a feel for the game and start messing around and having fun, before you have to be any good at the meta.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the games are just mechanical. You can't win serious quake games with just an aimbot. You have to understand what you're doing. Oh, I know exactly where that guy's going! I'm going to shoot a rocket across the map and get a direct hit on him - the moment that he enters my line of sight. Oh, he's going for the red armor! I'm going to get the two yellows and lay a grenade trap at the teleporter exit, then get ready for an LG gith - if I lose I can jump away and pick up the armor shards and health above me, because I have the position advantage! I'll have to go back down there soon, though, because the mega's spawning! Things like that are what make Quake the game it is, it's not about combo locking or countering enemy strategies. It's about predicting what's going to happen, knowing who controls what, and what battles you can get away with fighting.

That all comes from experience, and it's really easy to get experience. You don't even have to be playing. You can watch someone else, and understand what they're doing, and learn from it - even if you're totally horrible. Even if you have not even the slightest bit of skill or experience, you can spectate a high level player, and understand what's going on, and learn for you own playing like that. Even if you're fighting a horribly losing battle in quake Duel, you can learn a lot from it. Fighting games aren't like that. Fighting games are hard and punishing, because they're not intuitive and they're not open. You can't learn a lot about fighting games just by sitting there and watching someone else, or watching someone beat on you. Well, maybe SSB.

just gonna say you haven't played enough fighters to know that. Go play some Super turbo, that game is not mechanically demanding, hell, play SSF4, and pick a character like T. Hawk. Not every fighting game is marvel or guilty gear and requires crazy execution. Learning why things work is also part of the shit you learned and passed in your fps's.

Rocket jumping isn't this super intuitive thing, but you probably do it like second nature now. So it plinking, double tapping, tiger kneeing, tons of motions. You act like you can't play a fighter unless you know all the crazy combos. Well last i checked you can't play quake worth a shit unless you can move around properly, you can't even duel decently unless you can strafe jump. You won't get anywhere in quake without some time to learn the movement and learn the timings, same thing with learning move properties.

Your essentially saying fps are easy to learn for you cause you put hundreds of hours learning how to aim and move in other games and trying to apply it when you have to learn a completely new control scheme and system. And you can't learn from getting your ass beat in fighters? I'm sorry, but what the fuck are you talking about? You want to know what happens if you duel some players that will fucking smash your face in quake? they can literally beat you brain dead with just aim and literally the only response to even GET to the actual strategy is to get better aim. You know how many execution training lab freaks that suck shit in marvel cause they don't understand strategy? don't know how to setup the hit? Execution is barrier for fps and fighters, about equally as well, hell its more skewed torweds fps games actually. Do you know how many really really good ssf4 players that have pretty poor execution?

Hers a good example of something really simple like your strategy rant. Hey this rufus is always grabbing after blocked divekicks. Guess i should shoryuken or tech to counter that. Hey this zangief is doing alot of neutral jumping. Maybe i should jump hk out of the air with ryu. Not intuitive and open? Well I don't what open means, but i think you may have lost what intuitive means, rocket jumping isn't intuitive, air strafing isn't intuitive, bunny jumping isn't intuitive. It may be intuitive since you have been doing it so long, but go explain doing strafe jumping to your average pc gamer and see if they think its intuitive. You can just look at a quake game with no experience and understand what is going on? wtf im sorry. But how many pub tf2 players have spectated a TF2 match or quake match and have come to drastically wrong conclusions of how to play. How many open 6v6 players are playing sort of incorrectly from a strategic point of view? I think your confusing your solid amount of fps experience with intuitiveness. Oh yeah, there is a player, by the name of snakeeyes, he started playing Super street fighter turbo: HDR 6 months before the first evo it was held at and he won the whole thing, with the worst character in the game with an xbox 360 fightpad, this was his first fighter that he took seriously and beat players that had been play super turbo for over a decade, oh yeah, it was also his second tournament. read about it here: http://www.sirlin.net/blog/2010/7/12/evolution-2010-the-miracle-man-with-zangief.html

You know how many people learn fighters by watching better players? my painwheel got so much better by watching severin play in tourneys. Hell, you can probably learn MORE in fighters than from watching fps cause there is less hidden information. Hey, why is valle throwing out standing heavy kick against rufus? ask questions of what standing heavy kick covers and you probably have your answer.

Don't confuse your hundreds of hours in fps as if fps games are intuitive. They are not, you went through a lot of muscle memory and general basic strategies memorized very early on in your pubbing days. You played with people bad over and over till you could get your mechanics to become a pub star at one point. Fighters have to be played properly to learn from them. Playing fighters without understanding basic concepts of 2d fighters is like playing quake duel without trying to even get armor. You have to understand the basics of ANY game to understand why your losing

all your arguments about prior skill making FPSs easier for me are null because quake live was my first arena FPS and i got good enough to get better at it and understand why i'm losing by the fourth time i sat down to play it
super monday night combat was the same with mobas

wareya wrote:

I never had to get over a hump playing FPSs, everything is pretty simple. Quake Live's FFA

stopped paying attention when you bring up ffa, thats like talking about tf2 skill and bringing up a pub arena server or something

wareya wrote:

CA on the other hand is taking advantage of free flanks while your team keeps a good position.

talking about pub again?

wareya wrote:

Just watching someone do an FPS for a short while teaches me enough about it that I don't need to get over any serious hump, and at a certain point the DM stops being important and complex strategy starts taking reign - that's when FPSs actually get interesting. For TF2, ESEA's high IM is at that point. You don't have a hump to get over before you start getting to that point, because the objectives, and what you should be doing, and how to go about it, are all totally intuitive. They make sense.

Tf2 is extremely DM oriented, you literally cant perform in the game if you dont hit shots, look at the top players of the game that everyone knows, they aren't expert strategists, they're just dm gods (granted both strategy and dm are top notch for most/of the known players)

wareya wrote:

It's not like DotA were you have something obvious to do but you need to spend a week of playing to figure out how to even do it, against people who aren't total shit. Games like quake and TF2 are different, you can hop in with marginal competitive experience in anything, and granted that you have the mechanical skill for it, learn how the game works and why in a really short time.

it takes way longer to learn how to be remotely competitive in quake duels/tdm than in dota, because both the mechanical and mental skillset required is much higher

wareya wrote:

in starcraft you're going to be massively out-played or at a massive unit disadvantage.

in starcraft its VERY easy to tell why you lose in certain situations, like as a someone who is relatively new to the game, you can easily look at your replay and be like "oh hey i wasn't making drones constantly, so my economy fell behind" "oh hey he took a 3rd and i didn't notice, i should scout that" "oh hey im floating 800 minerals at 52 food, that could be 16 marines that are not in the game, okay work on spending minerals". etc

wareya wrote:

In TF2 and Quake you're a single unit with a single position and it's hard to lock you out of being able to do anything at all. Getting juggled in the air is hard, and for the few situations where it's really common (bhopping into someone with the LG at high speed, or in TF2, letting a pyro get near a corner and you) you learn really fast that it's not a good idea to do that. By the very nature of the games, a slight skill disadvantage at low levels is going to have a large effect, because the skill curve is really high (easy to progress) early on. It's when you get to higher skill levels that things start plateauing. Because the game's so easy to get good at when you don't know what you're doing, the "hump" isn't when you start playing, it's when you start understanding that the game is tactical at its core.

and yet If I were to duel carnage or whaz or any actual good dueler, I would get crushed like 20-0 unless i +backed with rockets for 10 minutes straight, then maybe it'll be 18-0. while I can take a dump on most other quake duelers. I'm pretty sure you just have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, because when there's a skill gap in a quake live duel, you are getting raped so fucking hard in every aspect of the game that there's about 50+ things you are doing wrong per game and they're almost entirely decision making. and even then, if you are talking about a raw mechanical perspective, it is MUCH harder to reliably improve your aim, compared to improving mechanics in other games. you are basically just born with either having good reaction time or not. and thats the difference between a yz50 and a drdonutman. also you don't take the movement of quake into your mechanics for some reason. this is less true in quake live because the movement is easier, but its still rather difficult to do perfectly (I still mess up bridge to rail jump after dueling on that map like 1000 times)

wareya wrote:

With FPSs like quake, the mechanical skill is at the forefront, and lets you dive in and get a feel for the game and start messing around and having fun, before you have to be any good at the meta

quake live dueling, mechanics = like 30% of the game. in tf2 mechanics = like 80% of the game. I think thats something you aren't understanding.

wareya wrote:

Even if you have not even the slightest bit of skill or experience, you can spectate a high level player, and understand what's going on, and learn for you own playing like that.

If you don't have any experience at all in the game this is really untrue, the only thing that lets people tangibly understand what is going on in a game like starcraft, (im talking about decision making and any of the remotely in-depth stuff) is because you have something called a caster that is explaining what is going on for you the entire time to make it make sense.

wareya wrote:

Even if you're fighting a horribly losing battle in quake Duel, you can learn a lot from it.

im pretty sure when you fight a game that involves you losing horrible enough in quake, all you really learn from it is how much you still suck dick at the game. You can only really learn from someone who is moderately better than you, because someone who is significantly better will be putting their dick in your butt while theyre 200/200 for the next 8 minutes, which really doesn't teach much, just how to escape. you end up getting raped so hard that you can't even keep track of the mega or ra because of how long its been since you've seen them even spawn. at that point you might as well restart the duel because the learning expierience is over.

wareya wrote:

Fighting games aren't like that. Fighting games are hard and punishing, because they're not intuitive and they're not open. You can't learn a lot about fighting games just by sitting there and watching someone else, or watching someone beat on you. Well, maybe SSB.

I'm pretty sure you just have some really autistic brain that makes understanding fighting games really difficult for you, compared to fps games

I'll tell you part of the reason why I quit TF2 is because I realized no matter how smart I play, and no matter how well I understand the TF2 strategy, the fact that i am inconsistent as fuck makes it so I won't ever be the best scout in the game, so me quitting after half a season at the bottom of invite, compared to being the best scout in the world was PURELY a mechanical issue.

wareya wrote:

all your arguments about prior skill making FPSs easier for me are null because quake live was my first arena FPS and i got good enough to get better at it and understand why i'm losing by the fourth time i sat down to play it
super monday night combat was the same with mobas

"because they're better than me" is not understanding why you lost

tl;dr be happy you play tf2 because it is a simple enough game for you to understand, since every other competitive game goes completely over your head apparently. but since you seem to think you understand every aspect of every game because its so simple and intuitive for you, then why aren't you top level in any of them?

i don't even play tf2 competitively and understand that it's easy and boring to think about
you're taking my attitude in that post way too seriously, i can't even argue against your post because most of your points are supposed to counter things i didn't say or attack a support point out of context. yes tf2 is an extremely dm oriented game, much more than quake, but I never argued that it wasn't. The FFA and CA stuff was arguments about new players being introduced to items and zoning in an environment they can actually move around and stop, wait, think in. I agree with most of your points to begin with, especially with duel being massively mind oriented.
Maybe I do have some fuckery with my head that makes fighting games hard to understand, there have been things I've never managed wrapped my head around, that I should be able to. I still argue that arena FPSs are easier to pick up than fighting games because of my experiences and what I think about how I learned them.

I feel like fighting games are very straightforward to pickup, I really don't understand what you meant by them being unintuitive.

I imagine it'd look like this
first you find a character you like or enjoy, either picking a character that has an easier learning curve, or maybe watching a stream/reading up on the playstyles of each character.
then you work towards being able to execute each skill reliably
then you work towards combos and being able to chain the skills together, and should at this point probably learn the optimal range/speed for your character
then you learn how to deal with enemy playstyles/character choices and learning how to put yourself into situations that put your character at its strongest point
beyond that, the decision making ends up being deciding whether to fake someone out, or when to use a risky move, or when to play safe

I won't compare the difficulties between the games, because i have about 8,000 hours playing fps and maybe 30 playing fighting games, but if i were to pick up a fighting game competitively id probably follow that format, It just seems like itd be pretty straightforward. I feel like improving at a fighting game ends up being really linear, because the mistakes you make get punished almost instantly, while say in tf2, quake, starcraft, dota LoL, etc. making a mistake won't necessarily hurt you or show itself for a few minutes, with which a dozen other mistakes could get piled in a jumbled together.

I can't comment on picking up fighting games but it seems easy enough to me to understand when I make mistakes before they're shown to me. I don't know if I have some kind of crazy foresight and an inability to accept mistakes I'm immediately punished for, but if there really isn't that much of an issue with people learning fighting games, something like that has to be the case.

wareya wrote:

I can't comment on picking up fighting games but it seems easy enough to me to understand when I make mistakes before they're shown to me. I don't know if I have some kind of crazy foresight and an inability to accept mistakes I'm immediately punished for, but if there really isn't that much of an issue with people learning fighting games, something like that has to be the case.

Well that's only when its something blatant.

Say something like dota, theres scenarios where missing something on the minimap for half a second, could literally decide the entire game, because you aren't prepared for a certain item, for a fight that doesn't happen until 10 minutes later (maybe enemy teams carry buys a divine rapier and sits in the jungle out of vision until a fight starts). DotA and league of legends in their entirety are a collection of marginal errors that lead to a steady shift of power from one team to another.

quake is pretty obvious on the complexity of errors you can make, when you start a duel and jump to red armor late, then go to the wrong weapon, then look the wrong direction(expecting them from a different area), then you eat a rail and lose position for the next red. you will probably notice one maybe 2 of the errors but something like going to the wrong weapon will give you a disadvantage that doesn't present itself the way getting hit by a rail does (and you'd probably forget about it or something)

etc. like im sure you can catch the glaring mistakes, but the really obscure mistakes that only a top level player can even comment on are usually the big ones that take forever to figure out on your own. You'll notice it when you watch a top level sc2 player mentor a diamond sc2 player, every now and then the top level guy will point something completely obscure out to the diamond guy, that he probably wouldn't have caught on his own for another 2 months. (something like obscure placement of a 5th pylon in a pvz matchup.. you get my point lol)

I myself am way more of a brain player than a mechanical one and there are still countless things that go completely over my head, even though i consider myself good at analyzing scenarios

hey who cares lets play qw

wareya wrote:

i don't even play tf2 competitively

because I'm interested in competitive tf2 and care about the community

I'm all downloaded for q3cpma but my mouse speed seems to be fast as shit and the /sensitivity command doesn't seem to be working?

m_speed if youre using challenge quake3 exe