Users who are viewing this thread
Even if the costs of the venue wouldnt be that much higher in 8v8 (it would still be a big factor though), I dont see a sponsor touching a team of 8 players in an unproven e-sport when they can find a cs or dota team for almost half the cost. As Grimsight mentions you're competing against other e-sports with years on the scene.
E-sports is a business, minimizing costs is always a priority for a company, and if warband or bannerlord takes off all they will look at is "does this make money?" Most people watching the BoB stream probably didn't know 8v8 was standard, nor did they care, they just wanted to see people beat eachothers heads in.
E-sports is a business, minimizing costs is always a priority for a company, and if warband or bannerlord takes off all they will look at is "does this make money?" Most people watching the BoB stream probably didn't know 8v8 was standard, nor did they care, they just wanted to see people beat eachothers heads in.
I think this is a common problem, the scenes are very independent of eachother. Branch out?Rosslington said:
Firunien said:because you always play 2 archers
It's slower with every build.
+1 Firunien
Also Greed is right about the business concept to.
--------- Opinions ------------
Personally I enjoy 8v8 but I do enjoy 5v5 more admittedly, at this point. People say it has "less depth" but as Lust stated earlier it simply changes, numbers mean nothing. For instance you can choose cross-fire or cavalry dominance. I was also surprised to see the effectiveness of 3 inf, 1 archer, 1 cavalry.
Teams often co-ordinate far better and it CAN be far more rewarding for each team. Every player counts. Though the same can be said of 8v8 I just find the success/enjoyment rate for myself is higher with 5v5.
----------------------------------
I am aware that the reason we see same faces is because of it being small. Though interestingly the game isn't all THAT small but the Native Multiplayer component is. A solution to this problem has occurred to me but it is far too broad and alpha an idea meanwhile being irrelevant to this forum discussion. Most PC gamers have either heard of or played the game but mostly either singleplayer or if they did Multi it was NW and if not then it would have been casual deathmatch.
Sure there was something else to be said but luckily for you lot... I've forgotten!!
Also Greed is right about the business concept to.
--------- Opinions ------------
Personally I enjoy 8v8 but I do enjoy 5v5 more admittedly, at this point. People say it has "less depth" but as Lust stated earlier it simply changes, numbers mean nothing. For instance you can choose cross-fire or cavalry dominance. I was also surprised to see the effectiveness of 3 inf, 1 archer, 1 cavalry.
Teams often co-ordinate far better and it CAN be far more rewarding for each team. Every player counts. Though the same can be said of 8v8 I just find the success/enjoyment rate for myself is higher with 5v5.
----------------------------------
I am aware that the reason we see same faces is because of it being small. Though interestingly the game isn't all THAT small but the Native Multiplayer component is. A solution to this problem has occurred to me but it is far too broad and alpha an idea meanwhile being irrelevant to this forum discussion. Most PC gamers have either heard of or played the game but mostly either singleplayer or if they did Multi it was NW and if not then it would have been casual deathmatch.
Sure there was something else to be said but luckily for you lot... I've forgotten!!
Seems we have two main paths here.
Those who want to play 8v8 mostly but accept more 5v5 tournaments can happen and those who seem to want to make warband a medieval cs:go clone.
I think if you try to base competitive native on a csgo or LAN system you will fail. Online 5v5 to me is no easier to organise than 8v8 because most 8v8 teams have more than enough players to cover someone not turning up. If your goal is LAN then you are not ever going to join a 5v5 team as a sub knowing you will just get removed for a LAN tournament unless someone else can't make it, and then if someone is away for a LAN your probably disbanding anyway. Same can be said for 8v8 of course but people won't be joining clans in the hope of going to a LAN.
LAN events are good for sure but you can't change the current system to fit it very well. If more notice is given it would give plenty of time to form 5v5 teams. Imo keep most tournament 8v8 and run a couple of 5v5 tournaments too. Don't force 5v5 to be the main format
Those who want to play 8v8 mostly but accept more 5v5 tournaments can happen and those who seem to want to make warband a medieval cs:go clone.
I think if you try to base competitive native on a csgo or LAN system you will fail. Online 5v5 to me is no easier to organise than 8v8 because most 8v8 teams have more than enough players to cover someone not turning up. If your goal is LAN then you are not ever going to join a 5v5 team as a sub knowing you will just get removed for a LAN tournament unless someone else can't make it, and then if someone is away for a LAN your probably disbanding anyway. Same can be said for 8v8 of course but people won't be joining clans in the hope of going to a LAN.
LAN events are good for sure but you can't change the current system to fit it very well. If more notice is given it would give plenty of time to form 5v5 teams. Imo keep most tournament 8v8 and run a couple of 5v5 tournaments too. Don't force 5v5 to be the main format
_Osiris_ said:
I am sure you are aware, but some arent so i will give a brief history why our matches are 8v8 :
Starting out with 15v15 we had the problem : Teams did drop out because they couldnt manage to get enough people during a tournament at some point.
After that we are at 12v12 and we had a problem : Teams did drop out because they couldnt manage to get enough people during a tournament at some point.
Then we went to 10v10 and suprisingly we had a problem : Teams did drop out because they couldnt manage to get enough people during a tournament at some point.
Now we are at 8v8 because it is somewhat stable, and not because we had a great council on how warband is to play right and where we had a huge consensus about 8v8. I dont know how you come to the conclusion that arranging 5v5s ist somehow harder then 8v8s. Your second argument doesnt make sense as well, people leaving a team because they are on the bench would be the same in 8v8 for a LAN, theres just more of those benchies without a chance because you have to have them in order to be able to play regular online matches. Personally i think Warband would be played best 12v12, but there is neither enough willing commanders nor the players for that. (commanding a 5v5 is easy, commanding a 8v8 is stressfull, commanding a 12v12 is a fulltimejob)
Probably didn't articulate my point too well because I'm writing on the phone.
About people not joining 5v5s as subs but doing so in 8v8 is because I am assuming the main reason to form these 5v5 teams is because you want to go to a LAN event thus people will be less willing to join a 5v5 team unless you are guaranteed a spot. If my reason for playing 5v5 is to qualify for the LAN I won't join a team to sit on the bench and not go to a LAN.(making it just as hard to schedule a match because you can't miss any players). The main reason people join 8v8 teams is not because they might go to a LAN.
Ofc this reasoning goes out of the window if 8v8 lans become a thing.
About people not joining 5v5s as subs but doing so in 8v8 is because I am assuming the main reason to form these 5v5 teams is because you want to go to a LAN event thus people will be less willing to join a 5v5 team unless you are guaranteed a spot. If my reason for playing 5v5 is to qualify for the LAN I won't join a team to sit on the bench and not go to a LAN.(making it just as hard to schedule a match because you can't miss any players). The main reason people join 8v8 teams is not because they might go to a LAN.
Ofc this reasoning goes out of the window if 8v8 lans become a thing.
Firunien said:
tbh not only do 8v8 tourneys get drop outs but so do the duel tourneys.
Lowering teh team numbers was never a good response because it is based on a false premise. That being that there will be MORE viable teams if you lower the number of people in the team. Both that and the idea that you HAVE to have teams of 5 to be an esport is lazy thinking.
This.Firunien said:
Also, i would say that 5v5 allosws to have more different teams which means more teams to oppose. This gives more diversity. In addition, this is something that should be consider as an improvement for arranging matchs. All teams don't have a roster of 20 players so gathering 5 players is easier than gathering 8.
I'm not sure about it, but i'd say 5v5 should make matchs shorter than they are on 8vs8, specially if we can get smaller/more adapted maps, which is good in my opinion. I'm not fond of blocking my evenings to plays matchs to the end.
Disbanding shouldn't be consider a problem if tournaments are made like the Battle of Bucharest. You just have to team up with some players to be able to play the tournament, play all the week matchs, and then disband to make another team for the next one. Or not... and you don't have to be sure that you have at least 12 people ready to play regulary for 3 or 4 months in a row.
No one is saying that you HAVE to have teams of 5 to be an esports, it's just that it is a lot easier to become an esport if we conform to the standard format; it makes it more attractive for sponsors and team organisations. To use the PLG studios example again, they only had 10 chairs set out in a 5v5 format it would have cost a lot to rebuild the stage to allow for another 3 seats per side.Aeronwen said:
So to say we should stick with 8v8 because "It's more fun" and that "It has more tactical depth" is ridiculous. I would rather sacrifice the 8v8 format and have more tournaments like BoB with travel and accommodations paid for and I'm surprised some of the competitive veterans here don't agree with me, they're the ones losing out on potential prize money. Obviously we can use 8v8 for online tourneys, as said before, so I'm not saying we sacrifice it completely.
Honestly I don't think people care if the LAN tournaments stay as 5v5 instead of 8v8. What everyone is finding so toxic is the idea we abandon the 8v8 from the scene so we can be esport. We have had plenty of 5v5 tournaments before LAN was even a thing. I don't see any reason we can't continue as usual and have the big community tournaments be 8v8 which allows for more people to be involved whilst still not being impossible to get everyone to a match. And then also have the 5v5 tournaments running on the side. This whole thread and idea is just ridiculous to me and I don't understand it
Rosslington said:
You are equating 5v5 with esport sponsors and prize money. That is a false premise. You are also assuming that with 8v8 it is not possible to have a contestant paid for tournament, another false premise.
8v8 being more fun that 5v5 is a valid point, Warband won't become an esport if people find it boring to play. 8v8 having more tactical depth also makes it more fun to play and watch.
Maintaining what makes Warband a great game to play is more likely to make it a success than losing it's integrity trying to fit it into the mould of very different games.
Its just weird that people who advocate for 5v5 are labeled as sellouts, assuming they just want the money, or just as outright stupid. I am all for loads of 8v8s but please step up and make teams and lead them! The newest 8v8 team is years old already or formed by 100% veterans.. there is no way for newer players to get a foot in the door. Now to make this clear, you wont get a lot if any new players with only 8v8s, and this is bad for your "community".
8v8 battle is also not that great you suddenly make it out to be:
I hear this tactical depth all the time, you mean this skill-neglecting chaos which breaks out everytime a fight starts ? You can argue this is a skill for itself, but the more elements out of your control the less skilled by its own nature. Also you mean tactical depth by having a bunch of benchies ? Then there is match times, always in the evenings because you have no chance to find an enemy before 18BST and after 22BST. If organisational talent is the skill we are looking for, sure. This stuff is all inherent to 8v8 and some people dont like it, but we play it because we wanna play Warband competitivly.
If we had a 5v5 infrastructure (match settings,maps,tourneys) and MM this new people and also the old who dont like to play on IG would have a nice place to learn and train. Those players can surely transition to 8v8 when starting to get a grasp of basic teamfighting.
8v8 battle is also not that great you suddenly make it out to be:
I hear this tactical depth all the time, you mean this skill-neglecting chaos which breaks out everytime a fight starts ? You can argue this is a skill for itself, but the more elements out of your control the less skilled by its own nature. Also you mean tactical depth by having a bunch of benchies ? Then there is match times, always in the evenings because you have no chance to find an enemy before 18BST and after 22BST. If organisational talent is the skill we are looking for, sure. This stuff is all inherent to 8v8 and some people dont like it, but we play it because we wanna play Warband competitivly.
If we had a 5v5 infrastructure (match settings,maps,tourneys) and MM this new people and also the old who dont like to play on IG would have a nice place to learn and train. Those players can surely transition to 8v8 when starting to get a grasp of basic teamfighting.
The reason it is so hard for teams to be formed is lack of open tourneys. Any new teams that sign up in NA at least have to play and get destroyed by our top teams, with all this hype it'd be the perfect time to start another ECL type league. Designed to be for new players and teams, if Taleworlds wants this to be real they need to promote our community tourneys to develop the next generation of potential top players.
