From Goldeneye: Source

YOLT Discussion

Since the number of respawns will be from 0~3, I think a graphical indicator would look best. Like, three 'lights' on the scoreboard or the hud. Code-wise, at the end of the round, everyone dead comes back with at least one respawn, and the survivor gains +1 from what he had after that adjustment. Hence the winner can build up to three respawns by not getting waxed. The problem in this is the rich-get-richer problem. If two people are playing, it becomes pretty much impossible for the weaker-skillwise player to stand a chance at all, since the good player builds up a huge supply of respawns that keep replenishing, which the other guy just gets waxed again and again. The extra lives should be a server option...You Only Live Twice+ or something. It's fine in a big match, but with few players, it breaks the gameplay as well as the Scenario title.
Viashino Cutthroat 21:18, 13 July 2006 (PDT)

What about a server cvar to make it so that if playercount is above a specified amount then You Only Live Twice+ comes into effect and once playercount goes below that point You Only Live Twice comes back into effect? The other option being that You Only Live Twice is the only version run by the server. - nowhere

That might work okay. But I'm still not a fan of the premise. How about the victor respawns with health increased to full, and retains any armor and weapons? That should be plenty enough a reward for winning a round. Viashino Cutthroat

Health increased to full? You mean everyone who lost wouldn't be starting with full HP? I doubt the victor will have that much armor left over and starting with weapons if everyone else is starting with just slappers would be an incredibly advantage even more so if you were playing YOLT and MWGG. It would be an even worse case of the rich-get-richer as you called it. - nowhere

No he means since the victor doesn't die, his health is refilled. --Weclock 13:27, 4 August 2006 (PDT)

There isn't much difference between armed and not armed, and it's not like the new spawned players would have a hard time finding a gun. Keeping equipment is a small boon, and retaining armor, as you said, won't always matter, so I don't see my proposal causing much trouble. Testing would tell, anyway. Viashino Cutthroat 14:27, 4 August 2006 (PDT)

Right now mp_timelimit interfers with the rounds so that if mp_timelimit runs out then the round ends prematurely. This needs to be coded differently so that the round continues even after mp_timelimit runs out. - nowhere

We need the classy time-warning Klaxons. Those things were cool. Viashino Cutthroat

I'm not really into time warning Klaxons myself, but I'm not against them being in. I can just replace the sound with something else. --Weclock 13:27, 4 August 2006 (PDT)

Well, we need something to indicate time remaining. Even UT gave us a countdown. Viashino Cutthroat 14:27, 4 August 2006 (PDT)

Some kind of alarm would work, or someone with a Germanic accent going "THREE MINUTES UND COUNTING". Fro 16:14, 30 November 2006 (PST)

Team YOLT?

So is team YOLT a green light or not? I think it has the potential to work pretty well...maybe some sort of objective is needed. The only reason I would say no to team based spawn points is that entire teams might camp that area. Escort and regular team deathmatch is cool, but team YOLT should differentiate in more ways from regular team deathmatch. - Xanatos

That's why I favored multiple teams. 6v6 would be campy. But 4v4v4 would still have some strategy in it. Viashino Cutthroat

I like multiple teams as well, as long as there's some sort of auto-balance so as not to have 3v1v1. - Nowhere 00:26, 14 August 2006 (PDT)

Autobalance screws things up if it doesn't give warnings before it happens. One of my greater hatreds is reserved for autobalance in CS:S that just has to keep putting me on the wrong team. No, I joined the side I joined because I'm playing with that guy and I will go back over even if I have to TK repeatedly to get my score down so I won't be a switch candidate. And some people might want to play 3v1v1. You might have two aces wanting to trial-by-fire their clan kids. Viashino Cutthroat

Then, like Wake said you make it server side. If you want to have two aces trial-by-fire their clan kids then they can turn it off. I just hate it when on CS:S you get one team with 5-6 more people than the other. - Nowhere

MI6/Janus Team YOLT is already implemented --Scott

Auto-balance Server-side would take care of what ViaC said, just like jumping servers then people would get to choose which extreme they want a)chance to get teamed by assholes b)chance to get pushed around by auto-balance's will - either isnt the best thing, but then you can hope clients/servers will be run and played honorably, hah --Wake[of]theBunT