Maps
Vote A: Maps (incumbent)Eternal said:Wednesday 12/4/12: Should wins be based on total maps or rounds?
Gelden said:KissMyAxe said:Vote A: 4 rounds total (incumbent)Tuesday 12/3/12: How many rounds should be played before a swap?
I'm not convinced that 5-rounds-then-swap has any advantage other then making the map go longer (which I don't really think is an advantage to start with).
Hmm... I remember Wily having a good reason for 5 rounds, but can't recall it. Hopefully he reads this and doesn't make me look like turd.
My vote is Vote B: Top 8. (proposed change)Eternal said:Thursday 12/6/12: Should all of the teams be allowed in the finals (see CJTT) or just the top 8?
RoBo_CoP said:B
Vive la revolucion!!
The first map was Bay Farm, and it has already been updated to address the concern you've brought up. I think the dunes are not so OP anymore.Gelden said:Not to be a downer - cause I really appreciate the efforts you guys are putting into this tournament, but the first map we played last night was either fighting for the sand dunes (which, don't get me wrong was actually interesting, but got old after the 4-5th round) or camping the back of the map until MoTF. The entire one side of the map (the flat part opposite the dunes) was useless. My advice would be to add some balance and symmetricity into this map.
The second map was Verloren by AZAN. I would attribute it to hammers being OP in close quarters. But, I don't think we have explored all the tactical options on that map.Gelden said:On the other hand, whatever that second map was.. that was cool other than the seemingly lob-sided win percentage of the bottom spawn, but I attribute part of that to Xbows.
Gelden said:Not to be a downer - cause I really appreciate the efforts you guys are putting into this tournament, but the first map we played last night was either fighting for the sand dunes (which, don't get me wrong was actually interesting, but got old after the 4-5th round) or camping the back of the map until MoTF. The entire one side of the map (the flat part opposite the dunes) was useless. My advice would be to add some balance and symmetricity into this map. In addition, I don't believe that map is viable as a replacement for Random Plains, not only for the reasons stated above but also because Random Plains should be just that - random. RE: Beer's post above.
On the other hand, whatever that second map was.. that was cool other than the seemingly lob-sided win percentage of the bottom spawn, but I attribute part of that to Xbows.
Eternal said:If I feel the custom plains maps are not a satisfactory replacement for Random Plains, or do not have a sufficient strategic component (e.g. the strategy is to all-cav charge)
The Pizza said:I have a negative attitude towards this tournament because it's not CJ TT season 2. I feel bad saying that, but I also feel it needs to be said -- The last tournament was a success. Now you are changing things for no reason.
Yes, and so was K-TiT, K-BOOB and NASTe Season 1 and yet that's no excuse to keep a decadent system with no innovation going.The Pizza said:I have a negative attitude towards this tournament because it's not CJ TT season 2. I feel bad saying that, but I also feel it needs to be said -- The last tournament was a success. Now you are changing things for no reason.
That argument has never been said. I have said that if there is a custom map with that one strategy, then it will not be used.Gelden said:Eternal said:If I feel the custom plains maps are not a satisfactory replacement for Random Plains, or do not have a sufficient strategic component (e.g. the strategy is to all-cav charge)
I don't buy the argument that All cav > all other loadouts on Random Plains. I agree it's an effective strategy to use, especially if your team is loaded with stud cav players, but it's not the be all end all. The only proof I can think of on tape that you can go watch is the CJT finals random plains map. An all cav loadout was rarely used by either team, and it was negated if it was used. There's plenty more examples of other viable strats on Random Plains, so the argument that it's causing narrow strategic circumstances is a total myth that some people seem to believe.
I think Random Plains could be better, to be honest. I don't want to remove it or break it.I seriously think that a lot of the people against Random Plains either don't play it, it doesn't side with their playing style, or they just think it's boring to see to all the re-rolls. Whatever the reasons, that's all fair, but there's a huge core of players in NA that actually like Random Plains, particularly the "Random" part - which I think is an important reason for its popularity and it has been voiced multiple times to keep it that way.
The Pizza said:I have a negative attitude towards this tournament because it's not CJ TT season 2. I feel bad saying that, but I also feel it needs to be said -- The last tournament was a success. Now you are changing things for no reason.
Things are being changed for the sake of innovation - I get that - however, I think innovation for the sake of innovation is the wrong direction.
Z3ro said:Dislike, your forcing people to choice Custom Plains, when they want random plains. No offense but I have a negative attitude towards this tournament now due to that.
Eternal said:Yes, and so was K-TiT, K-BOOB and NASTe Season 1 and yet that's no excuse to keep a decadent system with no innovation going.The Pizza said:I have a negative attitude towards this tournament because it's not CJ TT season 2. I feel bad saying that, but I also feel it needs to be said -- The last tournament was a success. Now you are changing things for no reason.
RoBo_CoP said:See Zerp, you have to create an arguement as to why Random Plains is a positive and competitive map that should be used for competitive play.