01-11-2019, 01:45 AM
I object to the argument that "Ice should exist because it is part of the game" because it wasn't always there. It really hasn't been a part of the game for the majority of CTF, and with the unique community we have in CTF, we can decide exactly what game we want to play. It was not an intentional patch or update of CTF - it was a result of changes to the classicube client that are unlike the original Minecraft Classic. Since we have the ability to take it out, each player should evaluate if they think Ice makes the game interesting, fun, and fair, not just because it exists. I believe that these three criteria best describe how we should evaluate what we want as a part of this niche game that we all play.
I personally don't think it adds to my personal enjoyment, or "fun factor", partially because I find TNT fights the most skillful part of CTF and ice incentives running away more than actual combat. It has been used for tagging, but very few people do that on a consistent basis because it is about as effective and completely dependent on player mistakes as tagging with purple blocks was in the pre-ice era. Ice is used for avoiding fights. It doesn't make the game faster. It makes the players movement variable so that they can more easily avoid one another. I enjoy a game in which I have to play against the enemy team instead of everyone trying to move away from eachother.
Ping differentials can allow players to abuse the powers of ice more than others, making the tool inherently more unfair than the base rules of the game.
I think the strongest argument for ice is that it makes the game more interesting, as it adds an element of skill in how fast players can move across the map. I personally don't think this is the case, but I understand this point of view - I find myself looking for a different set of skills in CTF. In my opinion, ice masks the more important elements of traditional CTF skill, such as TNTing and actual quality mine placement (people don't look around when they use ice so it is really much too easy to just place a mine on the ground and kill someone), as it promotes noninteraction, which is less interesting in my opinion. The strategic diversity that it adds in the chasing and running aspect of CTF already existed with pillaring, except It helps to slow down the game, as it can create near impenetrable flag defenses on certain maps. I also believe that Ice hinders coordinated teamplay by making it extremely difficult to reliably execute on plays due to the extreme variance with which people move.
Those are my gameplay reasons, and I understand that we may have some different opinions, especially on the topic of "interestingness". I think that the removal of ice would help the community in two important ways - making the game easier to understand for new players and making it more nostalgic for old players. Lets be honest - if you were some archaic CTFer returning from the depths of the internet to play this old game on Jacob's CTF, you would not want to play with ice. You would want to play the game you know and love. Additionally, the deceptively simple game has an already enormous learning curve since we are all already quite good at it after playing for years on end. Learning ctf would be significantly easier for new players if the game did not have the mechanic of Ice (as I mentioned before, Ice complicates and promotes non-interaction).
I have read all of the arguments for ice, and have a few counterpoints. Don't pay attention to these as much as my above points.
@Xenon
-This was not an intentional change. Ice was not implemented to stop certain players from being too powerful or to balance certain elements of the game. This relates to my initial paragraph, so I guess look at that. I could have misinterpreted what you meant, so ignore this if that is the case. Sorry
-Styles are not dependent on Ice. Cheesse and Waffle both were able to play extremely similar styles before the era of ice. Your point about more tools allowing for more individualistic expression is a good one and I agree with it in the larger sense (which is why I support the flamethower changes), but in this specific case it doesn't follow. Ice is largely used outside of player interaction and to avoid player interaction. It does not allow people to express a specific play style that they otherwise would be unable to (Waffle and Cheesse both incorporated Ice into their previous play style, as we all had to do), it changes the very nature of the game by incentivizing noninteractive tactics, which are already a significant part of the game through pillaring.
@Steg
- Correct me if I am wrong, but I see two sentences in your post describing why Ice should be in the game.
"We've had the same ways of killing: tnt, mining, tagging. Now introduce ice. More strategies are developed on how to counter it, how to use it effectively, etc. I get that some of you play ctf for the "nostalgia" feel when ice wasn't a thing, but now there's a new game changing block."
• I would like to reiterate my first paragraph in case that is what you mean. We can decide what game we want to play, ice is not an intentional change, etc.
• It is important to distinguish that Ice is not really an alternative to the other aspects of CTF. It does not serve as a 4th kill option. It fundamentally changes all three of those in different ways. I can go into more detail on how for each, but this is a long post and I feel like it is pretty evident if you think about it.
• Ice is a movement tool more than the combat tool. And the only actual counter to ice is really more ice, especially in movement, so I do not believe effective strategies to counter it exist.
• You might make a counterpoint about "icejumping" in combat (jumping off an ice block to increase your tnt reach), but Classic was doing that with purple blocks well before ice was in the game to great success. Most strategies using ice in combat can and were done without ice in the past.
"I don't know about you, but I'm not a fan of games that tend to last a hour or more."
• I don't think games are faster because of ice. I touched upon this above so I won't get into it, but if you still think this, we can discuss it. After all, its kind of difficult to confirm hypotheses about game length.
I hope that you all read my post with an open mind and make your own best judgements based off of my argument and others (sorry mine is so long). As stag said, let's be friendly and not prideful about this.
TL;DR: Ice was not an intentional change. It is mainly a movement tool used for non-interaction between players. Ping differentials are exacerbated. Its combat uses can and have been done in the pre-ice era. Ice makes the game less appealing to new and old old players. Be nice; think with an open mind.
I personally don't think it adds to my personal enjoyment, or "fun factor", partially because I find TNT fights the most skillful part of CTF and ice incentives running away more than actual combat. It has been used for tagging, but very few people do that on a consistent basis because it is about as effective and completely dependent on player mistakes as tagging with purple blocks was in the pre-ice era. Ice is used for avoiding fights. It doesn't make the game faster. It makes the players movement variable so that they can more easily avoid one another. I enjoy a game in which I have to play against the enemy team instead of everyone trying to move away from eachother.
Ping differentials can allow players to abuse the powers of ice more than others, making the tool inherently more unfair than the base rules of the game.
I think the strongest argument for ice is that it makes the game more interesting, as it adds an element of skill in how fast players can move across the map. I personally don't think this is the case, but I understand this point of view - I find myself looking for a different set of skills in CTF. In my opinion, ice masks the more important elements of traditional CTF skill, such as TNTing and actual quality mine placement (people don't look around when they use ice so it is really much too easy to just place a mine on the ground and kill someone), as it promotes noninteraction, which is less interesting in my opinion. The strategic diversity that it adds in the chasing and running aspect of CTF already existed with pillaring, except It helps to slow down the game, as it can create near impenetrable flag defenses on certain maps. I also believe that Ice hinders coordinated teamplay by making it extremely difficult to reliably execute on plays due to the extreme variance with which people move.
Those are my gameplay reasons, and I understand that we may have some different opinions, especially on the topic of "interestingness". I think that the removal of ice would help the community in two important ways - making the game easier to understand for new players and making it more nostalgic for old players. Lets be honest - if you were some archaic CTFer returning from the depths of the internet to play this old game on Jacob's CTF, you would not want to play with ice. You would want to play the game you know and love. Additionally, the deceptively simple game has an already enormous learning curve since we are all already quite good at it after playing for years on end. Learning ctf would be significantly easier for new players if the game did not have the mechanic of Ice (as I mentioned before, Ice complicates and promotes non-interaction).
I have read all of the arguments for ice, and have a few counterpoints. Don't pay attention to these as much as my above points.
@Xenon
-This was not an intentional change. Ice was not implemented to stop certain players from being too powerful or to balance certain elements of the game. This relates to my initial paragraph, so I guess look at that. I could have misinterpreted what you meant, so ignore this if that is the case. Sorry
-Styles are not dependent on Ice. Cheesse and Waffle both were able to play extremely similar styles before the era of ice. Your point about more tools allowing for more individualistic expression is a good one and I agree with it in the larger sense (which is why I support the flamethower changes), but in this specific case it doesn't follow. Ice is largely used outside of player interaction and to avoid player interaction. It does not allow people to express a specific play style that they otherwise would be unable to (Waffle and Cheesse both incorporated Ice into their previous play style, as we all had to do), it changes the very nature of the game by incentivizing noninteractive tactics, which are already a significant part of the game through pillaring.
@Steg
- Correct me if I am wrong, but I see two sentences in your post describing why Ice should be in the game.
"We've had the same ways of killing: tnt, mining, tagging. Now introduce ice. More strategies are developed on how to counter it, how to use it effectively, etc. I get that some of you play ctf for the "nostalgia" feel when ice wasn't a thing, but now there's a new game changing block."
• I would like to reiterate my first paragraph in case that is what you mean. We can decide what game we want to play, ice is not an intentional change, etc.
• It is important to distinguish that Ice is not really an alternative to the other aspects of CTF. It does not serve as a 4th kill option. It fundamentally changes all three of those in different ways. I can go into more detail on how for each, but this is a long post and I feel like it is pretty evident if you think about it.
• Ice is a movement tool more than the combat tool. And the only actual counter to ice is really more ice, especially in movement, so I do not believe effective strategies to counter it exist.
• You might make a counterpoint about "icejumping" in combat (jumping off an ice block to increase your tnt reach), but Classic was doing that with purple blocks well before ice was in the game to great success. Most strategies using ice in combat can and were done without ice in the past.
"I don't know about you, but I'm not a fan of games that tend to last a hour or more."
• I don't think games are faster because of ice. I touched upon this above so I won't get into it, but if you still think this, we can discuss it. After all, its kind of difficult to confirm hypotheses about game length.
I hope that you all read my post with an open mind and make your own best judgements based off of my argument and others (sorry mine is so long). As stag said, let's be friendly and not prideful about this.
TL;DR: Ice was not an intentional change. It is mainly a movement tool used for non-interaction between players. Ping differentials are exacerbated. Its combat uses can and have been done in the pre-ice era. Ice makes the game less appealing to new and old old players. Be nice; think with an open mind.
-
x1
-
-
x1
- Classic
-
