Comp Mode (we need your input again)

12467

Comments

  • SoldierBobSoldierBob Posts: 76Player
    edited June 2015
    SoldierBob wrote: »
    It's quite sad you got 6 likes on this post 1 of them even being a developer

    He got 7 now, who are you? the 'like' police? :)

    Game needs more players and bigger maps to accommodate them, 12v12 FLO are the most played! it would be crazy to go changing something that works for the players who do play. Game will end up with nobody left playing.

    Leave the 8v8 for this comp thing.

    If you actually read his post he quoted doogle and then went on to say all that stuff about him...Doogle plays this game. But you on the other hand fall into deamons list's. Just because you don't like 8v8 doesn't mean other people wont like 8v8...you will still have your 12v12...Basically what your saying is if 8v8 came it will kill 12v12 and that would upset you and make you not want to play?

    No what I'm saying is they dont take something that works (12v12) and change it. Someone somewhere in the thread said 8v8 should be made the de-facto FLO, matters little who said it it was picked up on several times by different people. Which might I add, is un-related to what the thread is asking. I was just agreeing with him and then adding to it my own thoughts, before the devs may do something crazy.

    I don't fall into anybodys lists, I dont think you can read as he already said he didn't aim it personally at the doogle guy.. 8v8 can come, just leave it to the comp mode because I enjoy playing with more players in a server, not less. Is that OK that I like that, Sir? or must I agree? :)
  • SSKnecaboSSKnecabo Posts: 2,721Player
    edited June 2015
    What indicates that 12v12 "works"? Especially on inner getting killed by spamnades every second round indicates that with less players you might enjoy the game more but maybe that's just me.
  • -pR|Arkeiro-pR|Arkeiro Posts: 751Player
    cK^KILL@ wrote: »
    What indicates that 12v12 "works"? Especially on inner getting killed my spamnades every second round indicates that with less players you might enjoy the game more but maybe that's just me.

    In popular games just like BF3/4 theres no such maps get 12vs12 and other ones 24vs24. Theres gamemodes, and theres a server option (just like here): editing max players and spectators. If you like more 8v8, than get a server and edit it so. But whats the idea of making inner 8vs8 after playing slums 12vs12 (that would make 8 people quit).
    The ideal to accomodate everyone's tastes would be making diferent gamemodes.
    But before all of that, let's focus fixing the game, than we add new features... ok?

    Over 1.3k Golden Hawkeyes.
  • SoldierBobSoldierBob Posts: 76Player
    I don't know? maybe all the full 12v12 servers when compared with partially full 6v6 ones :)
  • .dcG-Colts^.dcG-Colts^ Posts: 1,973Player
    edited June 2015
    SoldierBob wrote: »
    I don't know? maybe all the full 12v12 servers when compared with partially full 6v6 ones :)
    Is there 7v7 8v8 9v9 10v10 11v11 servers as well too prove your theory? nope. Alls your saying here is people prefer FLO maps over BDX maps...Congrats.

    Pie charts + Graphs= Very Bad.



  • SSKnecaboSSKnecabo Posts: 2,721Player
    cK^KILL@ wrote: »
    What indicates that 12v12 "works"? Especially on inner getting killed my spamnades every second round indicates that with less players you might enjoy the game more but maybe that's just me.

    In popular games just like BF3/4 theres no such maps get 12vs12 and other ones 24vs24. Theres gamemodes, and theres a server option (just like here): editing max players and spectators. If you like more 8v8, than get a server and edit it so. But whats the idea of making inner 8vs8 after playing slums 12vs12 (that would make 8 people quit).
    The ideal to accomodate everyone's tastes would be making diferent gamemodes.
    But before all of that, let's focus fixing the game, than we add new features... ok?

    Sounds like a server admin issue to me if you switch from a 12v12 map to an 8v8. I'm not suggesting to make inner 8v8 instead of 12v12 but as an addition to what we have now 8v8 could be very interesting.
  • TheTotsTheTots Posts: 2,279Player
    Let's try to keep this more on topic.
    The game wasn't made exactly to my specifications, so I feel it's broken.

  • SSKtidididiSSKtidididi Posts: 171Player
    edited June 2015
    TheTots wrote: »
    Let's try to keep this more on topic.

    Exactly.

    Let use the possibility of coopeartion with DEVs, which we wanted and expected before, instead of off-topic.

    8v8 is bad for current maps size. I can not imagine Siege or Breach 8v8. The only one competition mode should be 5v5 without any changes. For example we will not recruit any new guys with low level specially to play competitive 8v8. Please...

    All above 5v5 is just a better organized pub. It should not be called "competitive" gaming. And bigger pub teams which wants to participate in competitions should stick to present 5v5 and then just maybe divide themselves on 2/3 sub-teams. We don't have tanks or planes or helicopters here, and we don't have huge maps in this game.

    And one more about pub. Players number should not be restricted. Lets say, for example, AA2- Pipeline. Max player number was 26 (13vs13), but a lot of servers used to run on lower number of slots (20) to handle 10v10 or 16 (to handle 8v8). Go this way.
  • SSKtidididiSSKtidididi Posts: 171Player
    edited June 2015
    The ideas for competitive mode from the beggining of this topic:

    1) nade drop (drop for teammate),
    2) disabling global voip
    3) player count off (already done)
    4) limiting number of fogs per team
    5) limiting any zoom optics per team
    6) get rid of shadows
    7) get rid of red dot in the mini map that shows enemy shooters
    8) get rid of friendly 3d icons through walls and instead make a larger mini map (SAI) to replace that necessity/crutch
    9) get rid of supported positions

  • K!Dz.applePIEK!Dz.applePIE Posts: 1,050Player
    TheTots wrote: »
    Let's try to keep this more on topic.

    Exactly.

    Let use the possibility of coopeartion with DEVs, which we wanted and expected before, instead of off-topic.

    8v8 is bad for current maps size. I can not imagine Siege or Breach 8v8. The only one competition mode should be 5v5 without any changes. For example we will not recruit any new guys with low level specially to play competitive 8v8. Please...

    All above 5v5 is just a better organized pub. It should not be called "competitive" gaming. And bigger pub teams which wants to participate in competitions should stick to present 5v5 and then just maybe divide themselves on 2/3 sub-teams. We don't have tanks or planes or helicopters here, and we don't have huge maps in this game.

    And one more about pub. Players number should not be restricted. Lets say, for example, AA2- Pipeline. Max player number was 26 (13vs13), but a lot of servers used to run on lower number of slots (20) to handle 10v10 or 16 (to handle 8v8). Go this way.

    I really do not understand why some of comp teams and players are so fixed on 5vs5 being the ultimate and only comp solution. I understand this makes sense for current bdx maps (although they were originally designed for 6vs6 by devs) since some of them get overcrowded with more than 5 players on each side.
    However there are also flo maps, UMMs etc. Why restrict comp scene to bdx only? Why not give the option to all to decide if you wanna compete on flo or bdx etc..?

    Take inner hospital for instance, it is currently on ESL map pool and it can be played with 5vs5 but this map would open much better option if played 6vs6. With 4 possible routes to attac and defend, you could do alot more tactics. Even defense could shift from 90% static to some rushes and suprises without gambling that the flag might run on the side with 1 or less player.

    I remember having SF Courtyard tournaments back in the day with 7vs7 and we used to have 10+ clans competing. It was lots of strategy and fun games. It was not about being the fastest gun on 1vs1 situations.


    To the points:

    1) nade drop (drop for teammate) -- yes makes sense
    2) disabling global voip -- makes sense if global chat is still active
    3) player count off (already done) -- yes
    4) limiting number of fogs per team -- only relevant for bdx maps
    5) limiting any zoom optics per team -- not important IMO
    6) get rid of shadows -- I dont agree.. optics are better and knowing your own shadow position is game sense
    7) get rid of red dot in the mini map that shows enemy shooters -- yes yes double yes
    8) get rid of friendly 3d icons through walls and instead make a larger mini map (SAI) to replace that necessity/crutch -- yes, ppl learn to report positions again and communicate.
    9) get rid of supported positions -- I dont mind either way


    10) make all maps open the comp -- and limit it to 8vs8 max (like on a map like slums or cold front)
  • SSKtidididiSSKtidididi Posts: 171Player
    edited June 2015
    In AA2 only one mode which was used to high level competitive play, specially during the most important cups and tournaments like EMS, was 4v4 only. Here we should go 5v5.

    Of course I remember the times of different TWL ladder competitions, with 3v3, 4v4, 6v6 and more. But compare the AA2 OA maps (Border, Mountain Ambush/Mountain Pass maps and more) to only CQB maps in AA:PG.

    8v8 in comp is bad. We, SSK, are 6. We will not find two more decent players, because there are no players who might fit with us. And we will not want to look for another 2- for what? It was even hard to find decent 6th to rotation. I am 100% sure that all of current top EU and NA teams will not want to go over 5v5. Of course, there could be some 8v8 ladder, but for sure not as a main comp option. Just for better organized pubbers, what I mentioned above. For clan clash, not for competitive. And this is huge difference.

  • K!Dz.applePIEK!Dz.applePIE Posts: 1,050Player
    edited June 2015
    We, SSK, are 6. We will not find two more decent players, because there are no players who might fit with us. And we will not want to look for another 2- for what? It was even hard to find decent 6th to rotation.

    Well I understand why its a problem for you and SSK, but this goes both ways if we do it so individually. Take Blacklist Clan for instance.. they are only 4 and still trying to find a 5th guy which fits them, and cant compete at the moment on EU ESL.

    For bigger clans, you have the problem that many would like to compete but you have to divide teams and at some point and need to tell some others clan members that they didn't make it to 1st squad etc.. Either way it will always cause problems to come up with a definite number of players to each clan.

    But my initial point is not the problems of individual clans, but how to make this game attractive to the masses. If you stick with 5vs5 only, and have your 10-15 clans competing each other solely, at the end you have like 50-75 players who are active together, win against most new coming clans, so those clans quit the tournaments prematurely (as seen in NA or EU ladders)

    If you open the comp to more general players (which at the end make the large sum of player base) and make them part of ladders, tournaments, cups etc.. you will at the end have more loyal and larger playerbase.

    Well either way I hope the game makes through..
  • SSKtidididiSSKtidididi Posts: 171Player
    edited June 2015
    We, SSK, are 6. We will not find two more decent players, because there are no players who might fit with us. And we will not want to look for another 2- for what? It was even hard to find decent 6th to rotation.

    Well I understand why its a problem for you and SSK, but this goes both ways if we do it so individually. Take Blacklist Clan for instance.. they are only 4 and still trying to find a 5th guy which fits them, and cant compete at the moment on EU ESL.

    For bigger clans, you have the problem that many would like to compete but you have to divide teams and at some point and need to tell some others clan members that they didn't make it to 1st squad etc.. Either way it will always cause problems to come up with a definite number of players to each clan.

    But my initial point is not the problems of individual clans, but how to make this game attractive to the masses. If you stick with 5vs5 only, and have your 10-15 clans competing each other solely, at the end you have like 50-75 players who are active together, win against most new coming clans, so those clans quit the tournaments prematurely (as seen in NA or EU ladders)

    If you open the comp to more general players (which at the end make the large sum of player base) and make them part of ladders, tournaments, cups etc.. you will at the end have more loyal and larger playerbase.

    Well either way I hope the game makes through..

    I understand your point of view very correctly.

    If the Clan X have a problem with one player, we will not change the competition format to 4v4 just because one clan can not grab the 5th guy.

    The problem with new clans is another problem. In other topic I mentioned about one situation, when one clan faced us with no problem, and another denied the challenge after 5 minutes. But in this case the competition format is not about number of players, it is about format how compeptitions are structured. League system with "premier division" (8 top clans) and lower divisions with promotions and relegation system, and the cup system in the meantime with all of the teams from all of the divisions is the best to avoid and fix this problem, but this is a talk not in this topic.

    Looking forward, I'm prediciting standard thing: the number of competitive teams (5v5) will grow up fast, and the number of pub teams looking for clan clash (more than 5v5) will grow slower. It is a normal thing on the games scenes. That's why we must focus on 5v5, and do what I mentioned previously- set the >5v5 ladder for big pub teams, but just on the margin, to be honest. There is some honey for everyone.

    On the other hand, I see no sense to keep the roster bigger than 6 players and to participate in competitions in 5v5 format. It is players wasting, and feeling of being out of main 5, what you said above. With the players from the teams who participate in, for example, ESL ladder actually, and that players do not play the matches (benchers of 2nd or 3rd choice) we might create another 5 or 6 teams. But it is about community mentality and it will not change I suppose.
  • K!Dz.applePIEK!Dz.applePIE Posts: 1,050Player
    edited June 2015
    TheTots wrote: »
    Sorry, mean to say it's currently 5v5. Looking at supporting 8v8 as well.

    well I hope I am also on the topic.. And I support the idea of 8vs8 for larger maps and the idea of ladders, cups with this options.

    Maybe SSK wont play on a tournament with 7v7 or 8v8 but does that make that tournament less competitive? I think not. I say we should definitely implement this option and let clans to decide where they like to compete.

    Also my initial point about 5v5 was the issue that you have to throw out lot of larger maps out of competitions to make it playable for 5vs5. Why put a limit like this?
    You say clan clash vs real comp.. I honestly believe this way of thinking is keeping the comp scene so small as it is at the moment.

    The ultimate never ending discussion of pub vs comp, pro vs. noob clans etc etc. Maybe you are right about the mentality of the game scene atm.. but I hope for it to get better with the implementation of new system for larger teams in competition. Take NA for instance.. they prefer 4vs4 over 5vs5.

    I really believe with adding more options to ladders we might be able to attract more teams to actually compete.
  • =IK=Doba==IK=Doba= Posts: 2,789Player
    Comp is still gonna be played 4v4 or 5v5 right now, nothing will change. But this is about comp rules for pub play, and I still think bdx should be 6v6 for pub play.

    I also agree that any private server that's running Flo maps should be able to play 12v12 with comp mode if he choses..
    _____________________________
    #Support Comp Mode

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
  • SSKnecaboSSKnecabo Posts: 2,721Player
    edited June 2015
    I'm not playing this game for too long but wasn't there 7v7 or 8v8 comp back then with the FLO maps?

    Besides that, the comp mode is gonna be a public mode in the first place while also being great for comp. That mode supporting 8v8 wouldn't mean teams are forced to play 8v8 right away, right? Before full release there won't be enough teams for that anyway.
  • SSKtidididiSSKtidididi Posts: 171Player
    cK^KILL@ wrote: »
    I'm not playing this game for too long but wasn't there 7v7 or 8v8 comp back then with the FLO maps?

    Besides that, the comp mode is gonna be a public mode in the first place while also being great for comp. That mode supporting 8v8 wouldn't mean teams are forced to play 8v8 right away, right? Before full release there won't be enough teams for that anyway.

    Yes, it was. Useless chaos with mixed teams.
  • =IK=Doba==IK=Doba= Posts: 2,789Player
    Not many teams participated as you can imagine
    _____________________________
    #Support Comp Mode

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
  • .dcG-Colts^.dcG-Colts^ Posts: 1,973Player
    edited June 2015
    =IK=Doba= wrote: »
    Not many teams participated as you can imagine

    We had how many teams TWL Season 1 vs how many teams participated in the 7v7 tourney? There was not much a difference in numbers. My team won it too :hushed:

    Pie charts + Graphs= Very Bad.



  • SSKbartSSKbart Posts: 125Player
    cK^KILL@ wrote: »
    I'm not playing this game for too long but wasn't there 7v7 or 8v8 comp back then with the FLO maps?

    Besides that, the comp mode is gonna be a public mode in the first place while also being great for comp. That mode supporting 8v8 wouldn't mean teams are forced to play 8v8 right away, right? Before full release there won't be enough teams for that anyway.

    Yes, it was. Useless chaos with mixed teams.

    It was good for a big play B)

    But yeah, it was more chaotic for sure, a bit more organised as pub, but chaotic nevertheless...
    SNLSTB.Bart^
Sign In or Register to comment.