Bounces and their place in Momentum Mod

modeass

I'm in favour of jump bounces. I don't think its possible to make bounces interesting without some amount of rng. Also that feeling of random bounce is like crack to me don't take it away.

Rellort

If possible I think the best option would be to remove all random bounces and all angled setups, while keeping jump, walk-off, etc. Allowing for new strats to be developed is (usually) better, and bounces usually improve a run by removing slow wallpogo. If its too much work to implement then the trigger is probably the second best option.

CaWU

Mac I agree that less RNG is better. But with a setup, it stops being random and becomes a skill. Some maps require bounces, and many bounces have multiple setups, to the point where mapper intent doesn't even matter.

With that, here would be my requests
A) Bounces cannot be removed as a whole
B) Mapper intent should not determine if a bounce is possible.

Consistent setups remaining consistent would be the best option imo. Angled bounces being removed is mneh, and randoms being removed is good. If that means adding multiple possible bounce "triggers" into a map before its ported, so be it.

ILDPRUT

This is a thing I've been meaning to do, but I never properly got to work on it. I already made some stuff that would make removing random bounces pretty straight forward, meaning only consistent non-knockback setups would work.

My idea was to make a bounce trigger that mappers could customize. This would include what kind of setups could be done, or maybe the mapper allows you to land of it however you want, like from a walljump. For extra leeway there could also be an option for how long they have to bounce.

Already made this proof-of-concept some time back.
[upl-image-preview url=//i.imgur.com/PV7AmAW.png]

resistanceisfutile

If they're taking up too much dev/discussion time for the teams liking, I'd say just drop them completely, at least for now. I wouldn't imagine they're worth the effort.

Add them in later if people REALLY want them, but I'm fine with them being removed completely. I've probably failed pogo jumps thanks to a random bounce more times than I've found a bounce jump particularly interesting.

Klwwd

Mac This also creates the problem of not knowing which bounces were intended in maps where the map maker is no longer around, and adds more steps to the map porting process.

I feel like it's not too hard to determine where mappers intend for bounces to be used, except in the case jumps where you can either downpogo, bounce, or bhop. In the case that downpogo is possible (like that one level in sketchy2), I think bounces should not be possible.

resistanceisfutile I don't think removing them completely would be fair. Speedshots have very similar timing and they are an intrinsic part of jumping. I originally thought the same thing but that would just mess up well made maps that have a single bounce jump.

Mac

I might as well throw my own 2 cents in here as well, but I would rather not use the trigger method. I personally like finding unintended ways to do jumps as long as it is consistent. If mappers don't want bounces they can always use a 2 unit teleport trigger. It would be a shame to lose out on more strats on maps by removing bounces like that.

CaWU

Mac Worth noting for mappers to remove bounces you can basically make phase with a teleport trigger wrapped around it instead of a 2hu trigger. Same exact thing as a normal floor, but not even possible to bounce on. I believe jump_areae does this. Having this "officially" as a thing in mmod may help. I very much agree with the sentiment though.

Lumia

I think there are 3 types of bounces to consider:

Mapper intended bounces with consistent setups
Unintended bounces with consistent setups
Any type of bounce with random setups

The first one should be kept and in my opinion, they should act exactly the way they do in TF2 from a player's point of view. The second type should probably be gotten rid of, it creates cheesy strats that introduce more QTEs into a map, and are unpredictable and not very interesting. The third type definitely needs to go.

The first problem is that the first type can also be the third type, since you can do a random setup even on a bounce with consistent setups. This leads to cheesy speedrun strats that are frustrating to replicate, so it needs to go. To do this, we need some kind of bounce trigger or something that can detect when the player used the correct setup for that bounce. ILDPRUT seems to have something working, so if that pans out I think we should use it.

The second problem is adequately explaining to players how to do a specific bounce. I think that this is just a problem of visualization. A solution that I think would be elegant and useful is to have a tool like the one shown in this video:

The code behind Quake 3's overbounce bug

Different types of bounces would show different colors or patterns, and could even show text indicating what type it is when moused over. This would of course be toggleable, but it's basically a much easier to use, automatic version of bcheck. It could even highlight the surfaces used in ceiling bounces as well.

fishy

Lumia Unintended bounces with consistent setups

issues arise here. unintended bounces with consistent setups, are still consistent. if the aim is to remove RNG, then this is not the answer. this should probably be case by case

Lumia

fishy
I'm not sure what you mean. Even if all bounces were consistent, unintended ones are kind of dumb. Whether they are removed in porting with higher teleport triggers or through some magic bounce trigger being absent, I think they should not be in our maps. The aim is not only to remove RNG, but also unfun stuff, and I personally don't think they're that fun.

fishy

fishy this should probably be case by case

Mac

Lumia This should be the mappers responsibility in my opinion. If they decide not to actively de-cheese their maps, that's their problem.

CaWU

Lumia Who can determine if a bounce is intentional other than the mapmaker? That doesn't work, especially with older maps. Additionally, "obvious"-ness depends on who you are. I bcheck when I think that a bounce may exist, so a bounce will become obvious to me before it becomes obvious to someone who's never jumped before.

fishy

i dont think bounces should be removed based on individual opinions. by that logic, all bounces should be removed, because functionally there is no difference between an intended bounce and an unintended bounce

Lumia

there is a huge difference, being that unintended bounces usually aren't discovered for a while until after the map comes out, while intended bounces are obvious from day one

fishy

many strats take time to be discovered in all gamemodes. this is not a useful mindset

Lumia

fishy It's a perfectly useful mindset. at some point you have to decide whether a strat is a cool new thing or a glitch that needs to be fixed. In my opinion, unintended bounces are closer to glitches. and yes, I know they are executed the same way, but they aren't obvious like intended ones with given setups.

Rellort

unintended bounces are found day 1 as well, its as easy as /bcheck on every wallpogo jump.
The cooler ones might take longer, but 95% of them just skip downpogo

Mac

CaWU Also finding bounces on your maps during testing will be much easier, as you will have an offline bchecker, which most people running local servers in tf2 do not have.

Lumia

older maps can mostly be decided by the community. new maps have to be decided by the mapmaker because who else would do it? but whatever, if the jump community wants unintended bounces that's fine. I just don't like it as a mechanic.

fishy

the issue is that it is the same mechanic as an intended bounce. which is why i explicitly stated "no functional difference"