An open letter to the competitive community

[Dabos37]

Let me translate:
If everyone has to be forced to do something they don't like in their free time which they want to spend properly for few weeks is that the end of the world?

????????

Anyone is forcing you to play anything. Just play infantry and get wrecked by archers and cavalry like you expect and show your point. Or you could simply do not participate in the tournament if it is too horrible for you.

Seriously, devs are giving a chance (in Early Access) to MP community to show the most broken things in the game, in order to fix them, but people still complain? What is wrong with you people?

 

[The_Great_White]

Anyone is forcing you to play anything. Just play infantry and get wrecked by archers and cavalry like you expect and show your point. Or you could simply do not participate in the tournament if it is too horrible for you.

Seriously, devs are giving a chance (in Early Access) to MP community to show the most broken things in the game, in order to fix them, but people still complain? What is wrong with you people?

This was not a reply to the devs but a reply to an earlier post, what is wrong with people, that are not able to read a quote properly?

 

[Aeronwen]

Anyone is forcing you to play anything. Just play infantry and get wrecked by archers and cavalry like you expect and show your point. Or you could simply do not participate in the tournament if it is too horrible for you.

Seriously, devs are giving a chance (in Early Access) to MP community to show the most broken things in the game, in order to fix them, but people still complain? What is wrong with you people?

Exactly

 

[Mikal Manfriedson]

IDK...currently in MP I enjoy playing INF with shield and spear/sidearm. If played right, the INF can help the archers as both cover (loose formation) and protect versus gung-ho cavalry (spears are pretty good versus CAV now). With the right timing you can take them out well - either they impale their horse and fall or it rears nd the rider gets swarmed. Works in 2 of 3 cases. At least, I get a far better kill to death ratio than as archer or skirmisher. I still do not survive most matches till the end, but I feel all right with the current situation. The only things breaking stuff for me is when enemy captains run around my shieldwall and my guys turn and get shot in the back - the should not do that.
I have worked out that if aiding your teammates you got strength in numbers, make an impact and feel quite useful - even if you die.
But then, here the n00b is talking.

 

[Fietta]

Anyone is forcing you to play anything. Just play infantry and get wrecked by archers and cavalry like you expect and show your point. Or you could simply do not participate in the tournament if it is too horrible for you.

Seriously, devs are giving a chance (in Early Access) to MP community to show the most broken things in the game, in order to fix them, but people still complain? What is wrong with you people?

I think you're misunderstanding the situation; If BEAST were to remove class limits, it has a high possibility it won't work, the tournament will become unplayable and could potentially ruin the beast's name. Why is the beast's name important? Because it's one of the few large-scale skirmish tournament in Bannerlord. If removing the class limits doesn't work, you're harming the competitive community, you're unable to switch half-way through if it's not working because teams have been getting used to the no class limits so it would ruin team composition. It would be silly to make that sacrifice, especially considering this is how the community has been playing it for a long time and would be against what people actually want, If I were a BEAST administrator (which I'm quite clearly not), I'd have declined it in a heartbeat, I'm not risking the already small competitive community for the sake of some testing. There's numerous ways this data can be collected, using the best BL tournament series just ain't it boss.

It's not about 'IF YOU DONT LIKE IT DON'T PLAY IT', especially considering you'd be removing the biggest competition (DM) and considering it's already a small competitive community which are most likely against remove class limits, do you want the best tournament series to drop from 50 teams to 20? All for the sake of some balance testing? I bloody wouldn't like that

Another important factor is that if BEAST decline having no class limits, AVRC said they were planning on making a tournament themselves; surely that's a win win? It's great that TW gave BEAST that opportunity, but it was an awful decision having these cards on the table knowing it could be extremely detrimental to the community. Not only would you have an extra tournament if AVRC made his own, you'll have one that's actually enjoyable with class limits and the other used for testing skirmish.

 

[Dabos37]

I think you're misunderstanding the situation; If BEAST were to remove class limits, it has a high possibility it won't work, the tournament will become unplayable and could potentially ruin the beast's name. Why is the beast's name important? Because it's one of the few large-scale skirmish tournament in Bannerlord. If removing the class limits doesn't work, you're harming the competitive community, you're unable to switch half-way through if it's not working because teams have been getting used to the no class limits so it would ruin team composition.

Another important factor is that if BEAST decline having no class limits, AVRC said they were planning on making a tournament themselves; surely that's a win win? It's great that TW gave BEAST that opportunity, but it was an awful decision having these cards on the table knowing it could be extremely detrimental to the community. Not only would you have an extra tournament if AVRC made his own, you'll have one that's actually enjoyable with class limits and the other used for testing skirmish.

I understand your point but at the same time, I think that using most popular tournaments as reference for balancing is the way to go and much more effective than anything else.

I do not see the problem about “ruining” some few tournaments for a good purpose (having a much better and balanced game). As dev, it should be a paint to balance a game just reading some player’s feedback who are not 100% of the time right, where people usually have their own preference for pushing buffs for their favorite play styles, etc.

To be honest, even if I would be the BEAST tournaments’ creator, I would be much more afraid for the future of the game than for my tournament reputation.

 

[sniparsexe]

I think you're misunderstanding the situation; If BEAST were to remove class limits, it has a high possibility it won't work, the tournament will become unplayable and could potentially ruin the beast's name. Why is the beast's name important? Because it's one of the few large-scale skirmish tournament in Bannerlord. If removing the class limits doesn't work, you're harming the competitive community, you're unable to switch half-way through if it's not working because teams have been getting used to the no class limits so it would ruin team composition. It would be silly to make that sacrifice, especially considering this is how the community has been playing it for a long time and would be against what people actually want, If I were a BEAST administrator (which I'm quite clearly not), I'd have declined it in a heartbeat, I'm not risking the already small competitive community for the sake of some testing. There's numerous ways this data can be collected, using the best BL tournament series just ain't it boss.

It's not about 'IF YOU DONT LIKE IT DON'T PLAY IT', especially considering you'd be removing the biggest competition (DM) and considering it's already a small competitive community which are most likely against remove class limits, do you want the best tournament series to drop from 50 teams to 20? All for the sake of some balance testing? I bloody wouldn't like that

Another important factor is that if BEAST decline having no class limits, AVRC said they were planning on making a tournament themselves; surely that's a win win? It's great that TW gave BEAST that opportunity, but it was an awful decision having these cards on the table knowing it could be extremely detrimental to the community. Not only would you have an extra tournament if AVRC made his own, you'll have one that's actually enjoyable with class limits and the other used for testing skirmish.

why would it damage the BEAST title? I think it's the exact opposite, it would be useful for BEAST. If I were someone from outside of the forums I'd say "the actual developers improved the game by playing in this tournament, it should be something important I may as well join" etc. and whatever you might say, I think it's just "don't play it if you don't like it for this time" you may not join if you don't like. I don't see how this will damage the beast title.

 

[Fietta]

I mean, the whole point of class-limits coming about in the first place is to make tournaments more enjoyable because of the shambolic matches found in NA's BSL, following those steps would almost always be detrimental. It's the same as Warband, the Nation's Cup was the greatest tournament of the year, in 2017, the host was changed and it had changes that the majority didn't want and ever since the Nation's Cup is a meme and no one even thinks about sweating it out as much as they did, that tournament's reputation hit rock bottom even after they reverted the rules but because they had a bad experience with it, it's not considered the best tournament anymore, this is how people work. The majority of teams voted for class-limits (hence why they exist in the first place) because playing without the limits was absolutely tragic for balance.

Removing the majority of the Tournament's player base because you want to remove class-limits is going against a lot of players, and the players that want to remove class-limits most likely wont enjoy it as much, so you're pretty much losing half the teams and then the teams playing probably wont have as much fun or competition. Again, if BEAST decline (which they should) the TW developer (AVRC) will make their own tournament to test it anyways, so I don't see ANY point potentially ruining a tournament.

I understand your point but at the same time, I think that using most popular tournaments as reference for balancing is the way to go and much more effective than anything else.

I do not see the problem about “ruining” some few tournaments for a good purpose (having a much better and balanced game). As dev, it should be a paint to balance a game just reading some player’s feedback who are not 100% of the time right, where people usually have their own preference for pushing buffs for their favorite play styles, etc.

To be honest, even if I would be the BEAST tournaments’ creator, I would be much more afraid for the future of the game than for my tournament reputation.

Using the most popular tournament for balancing is great, but that's assuming all the teams that played with class-limits would sign up, which they almost certainly wont. You'd get the same amount of signups with AVRC making his own tournament as you would with BEAST with class-limits, so why not just have AVRC's and BEAST separate?

In regards to 'To be honest, even if I would be the BEAST tournaments’ creator, I would be much more afraid for the future of the game than for my tournament reputation.', like I said AVRC (taleworld's developer) would most likely run their own tournament, so you'll be running the two tournaments in parallel, which is the most IDEAL scenario.

 

[mrArgentum]

I understand your point but at the same time, I think that using most popular tournaments as reference for balancing is the way to go and much more effective than anything else.

I do not see the problem about “ruining” some few tournaments for a good purpose (having a much better and balanced game). As dev, it should be a paint to balance a game just reading some player’s feedback who are not 100% of the time right, where people usually have their own preference for pushing buffs for their favorite play styles, etc.

To be honest, even if I would be the BEAST tournaments’ creator, I would be much more afraid for the future of the game than for my tournament reputation.

You don't understand that this is DEVELOPER'S job to improve and balance game not community's. We are not testers here. We already paid money for the game. They can ask things like that during free beta test but we already PAID a full price for game. So why we must tolerate uninteresting gameplay during 8 weeks? Why developers can't host their own tournament?

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

However, Skirmish does make a nice semi-competitive mode. A way for new players to transition from chaotic Siege and TDM to a more ordered and determinable single-life competitive gamemode without all the down-time or single-life frustrations.

Agree, this is how I see it, not as the be-all and end-all of competitive mode but something viable for matchmaking for semi-casual players. IIRC this was also the devs initial idea, as they said it wasn't the "competitive Skirmish" over a year ago. Not sure if that's still the case.

 

[Dabos37]

You don't understand that this is DEVELOPER'S job to improve and balance game not community's. We are not testers here. We already paid money for the game. They can ask things like that during free beta test but we already PAID a full price for game. So why we must tolerate uninteresting gameplay during 8 weeks? Why developers can't host their own tournament?

You have literally paid for EA game to help Developers with the game (of course, it is not mandatory to help but the main point of EA is this).

Community helping Devs for improvement balancing is a thing in almost every game.

Sure, devs could host their own tournament, I just do not get why people act like if it would be the end of the world to play in this way for 8 weeks (not saying that you personally have to play as cavalry or archers, just play against this and try to defeat it). I am pretty much sure that making this kind of tests would increase the game improvements speed by a lot, which totally worths for me. As I see it, the most harmed ones with balanced issues are us, so why do not help devs to improve it faster?

 

[Rangah]

I don't really understand why people are being all doomsday like if we have to play one tournament without class limits, but I also understand that games won't be fun at all, leading to potentially people not trying their best and such. I think we could just bite our teeth and play the next BEAST "for the greater good" without class limits, but it's totally understandable if people don't want to do it.

 

[Fietta]

Not really doomsday, just worse.

 

[Zoonanay]

TW should host a seperate, short tournament with a prize pool. It'll incentivize using any and all tactics and compositions that are effective and also encourage clans to sign up despite a lack of class limitations, unique badges for this tournament would also help.

Without significant incentive I think Bannerlord's community is too small to avoid gentlemen's agreeements (whether formal or informal) effecting results.

Agree, this is how I see it, not as the be-all and end-all of competitive mode but something viable for matchmaking for semi-casual players. IIRC this was also the devs initial idea, as they said it wasn't the "competitive Skirmish" over a year ago. Not sure if that's still the case.

I hope this is still the case, Skirmish is a nice addition but I think it'll struggle to be a purely competitive mode.

 

[hoonii]

Well following the voting for restriction it's going to be WITH the class restriction this season as well, unless people change their minds.

TW should host a seperate, short tournament with a prize pool. It'll incentivize using any and all tactics and compositions that are effective and also encourage clans to sign up despite a lack of class limitations, unique badges for this tournament would also help.

+1

 

[Horatius]

Well I can tell you what will probably happen if there are no class limits (what TCV will probably do).
We sign up, play first and second match. See if it is fun and if it's not we just drop out get demoted and trash the next season.

You are going to have a great unscaved tournament if people start dropping out because they find it worse than not playing. It won't only have consequences for this season.

The season will be a joke if people actually drop and get demoted. Imagine DM dropping and getting demoted to B, have fun in BEAST#5.

 

[Younes]

Just like fietta said, this is a win-win situation like bruh. Just let beast do whatever and have the devs host their own tournament for testing.

 

[Dextrus]

Well I can tell you what will probably happen if there are no class limits (what TCV will probably do).
We sign up, play first and second match. See if it is fun and if it's not we just drop out get demoted and trash the next season.

You are going to have a great unscaved tournament if people start dropping out because they find it worse than not playing. It won't only have consequences for this season.

The season will be a joke if people actually drop and get demoted. Imagine DM dropping and getting demoted to B, have fun in BEAST#5.

Imagine DM, greenskinz, hinq and DR dropping because of no limits. DIV B will be DIV A.

Anyway I would suggest that if we were to play without limits, teams should no be able to drop divisions and or gain a division.

 

[KSHMR]

Not really doomsday, just worse.

More like end of the world day

 

[ObelixNW]

Or we can play 100 pick ups game without class limit and send stats to devs