[WPL2] Suggestions
- Thread starter Arys
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Dr4g0nkn1ght
Sergeant Knight at Arms
Just put more pressure on the people leading teams, job is way too easy.
Oh wait, its not actually a job and some people might not want to theorycraft the whole week,
then get screwed over by the picks taking place on matchday and finally have to spend
half of the matchday just for setting up the actual tactics and explaining it to their team.
Heck why not play a training match right before the official match just to make sure, your tactics
do actually work and everyone understands them.
Yea really looking forward to that, sounds like a fun idea.
Oh wait, its not actually a job and some people might not want to theorycraft the whole week,
then get screwed over by the picks taking place on matchday and finally have to spend
half of the matchday just for setting up the actual tactics and explaining it to their team.
Heck why not play a training match right before the official match just to make sure, your tactics
do actually work and everyone understands them.
Yea really looking forward to that, sounds like a fun idea.
Made some good points but you're always thinking about lower teams vs high end teams. Since this is for the last stage tournament, the top 8 teams will be going against each other. This means that it's all about previous knowledge on the game. Since (I believe) Arys will make a well-known map pool, tactics wouldn't exactly change. People have used the same tactics on these maps for years, teams can almost predict every time where they will be. Having the new system will make teams able to catch them out by making on the spot tactics to make change. Everyone knows tactics on these maps and basically know the in's and out's of each team. Fixtures would just be teams using the same tactics over and over again.
Dr4g0nkn1ght said:
You're acting like it's High end teams vs low end again. You already know tactics... explaining it to your team?, I'm sure they'd already know. You're also making it out as if tactics will be completely different and everyone would be surprised will you tell them. Man, tactics rarely change, and if they do the team would adapt.
When did Fietta start making spot on posts? Completely agree. I'll make a longer post in a day or so regarding this.
Fietta said:
So tactics wouldn't change at all because all tactics are the same but fixtures lead to the same tactics all the time, whilst same-day map picks would create on the spot tactics which, coincidentally, would be the exact same tactics because tactics rarely change.
You're making my point for me - the game is already stagnant, doing this makes it more so.
OurGloriousLeader said:
You misunderstood my post. Tactics would rarely change, but the new system could cause on the spot tactics, since when would on the spot (meaning different) mean the same as other tactics, dont quite understand the logic. Me saying 'tactics rarely change' doesn't mean that they're always the same, this system encourages change.
Why would the new system cause on the spot tactics if tactics rarely change and, as you just explained to Dragz and Osiris, it would be a simple case of explaining them to the team? How does it encourage change?
When you've been training for the same 2 maps for an entire week you create set tactics, which rarely change. However this system makes it so all your previous experiences of being a leader or player comes into play. This system again, tactics would rarely change, however since its very quick notice, and since you know your opponent, you could create on the spot tactics, which is change. The more you countlessly train on the same map the entire week you stick with these same tactics and don't change. Also, if you created an on the spot tactic during training, you'll then probably not use it or find it very innefective. During the day of the match, if you used an on the spot tactic it could be 50/50 it would work or not, all depends on how your team handles and play (past experiences, adaptability etc).
Fietta said:
xD
In my experience the opposite is true. Having lead a few teams and more recently playing in AE, a common theme I've noticed is that from beginning of the week to the end builds and tactics start off messy and simple, and become more refined as you play to the strengths of the faction, spawn, and your own team. The result is teams having trained often end up with quite distinct variations from where they started.
Nice, so you refine as the week goes, since it's refined you'll stick with them, I'm not saying you'll never make an on the spot tactic but there's a higher chance if it was on the day. I find it very strange that AE an old 2012 clan would refine tactics by the end of the week when they've been playing this game and maps for years... It's probably sloppy because well, it's the start of the week. Motivation isn't exactly prime, as the week progresses you get more hyped and start, well, playing. If you look at let's say AE playing on Verloren on 2 different tournaments you'll probably see almost identical tactics.
I mean a simpler way of saying it is that you change tactics, so it's the opposite of sticking with them. You're free to compare matches and see any differences/lack thereof.
If you feel it's sloppy I look forward to playing your team I assume you're making.
If you feel it's sloppy I look forward to playing your team I assume you're making.
We changed our set up and tactic on Nord Town like 3 times during the last week due to players not being available and stuff we tried out that didnt work out very well. But hey if Dragz is not available during the matchday and could just come to the match we will just improvise.. or we will take a 15 minutes break after every set to discuss our set up and tactic.. im sure that will make the stream very intense! Or while we were at the cs comparison we could implement a 1 minute break after a round during the set to change tactics or set ups!
If your leader isn't present Sebe or players, it's not the tournaments fault. There's also a co-captain who's experience should be prime in a top tier team. If not that's not the tournaments problem. Besides, you've all (even you sebe) have played the maps countless times to know what you're doing.
Dr4g0nkn1ght
Sergeant Knight at Arms
Im sure you know more than anyone else about preparing and organizing teams, aswell as leading them in matches,
after all you have done it for years with....what was the team called again?
after all you have done it for years with....what was the team called again?
You're right, I haven't lead a team, I just understand simple logic. Do you want to blame your loss on the tournament format because the leader didn't show up?. I'm also impressed with these current 'team' insults. Makes me happy.
Let teams pick and ban the maps/factions, but do it the same day you find out who you verse, not the day you play the match? The question mark is asking if anyone else thinks that's a good idea.
So similar to the pick nights we had for the weekly fixtures, you find out who you verse, and then on that same day (Tuesday?) you do your picks and bans. This results in a variety of maps and factions being played by different teams, whilst also allowing teams to practice because they already know what maps they're playing.
So for example:
First week of the elimination stage, it's Tuesday, Team 1 finds out they are versing team 2. That same day, both teams do their picks and bans. They have until their match to practice those maps and factions (pretend the match is on Saturday).
Team 3 finds out they are versing team 4, they also do their picks and bans on Tuesday. They picked different maps and factions compared to team 1 and team 2. They also have until their match to practice those maps and factions (pretend the match is on Saturday).
So, doing this makes everyone happy because:
1) Teams can pick what map and faction is best for whatever strategies they want to use.
2) Spectators wont get bored of watching the same maps and factions.
3) Teams don't have to worry on the day of their match, because they already found out on (Tuesday?) what maps and factions they were going to be playing.
So similar to the pick nights we had for the weekly fixtures, you find out who you verse, and then on that same day (Tuesday?) you do your picks and bans. This results in a variety of maps and factions being played by different teams, whilst also allowing teams to practice because they already know what maps they're playing.
So for example:
First week of the elimination stage, it's Tuesday, Team 1 finds out they are versing team 2. That same day, both teams do their picks and bans. They have until their match to practice those maps and factions (pretend the match is on Saturday).
Team 3 finds out they are versing team 4, they also do their picks and bans on Tuesday. They picked different maps and factions compared to team 1 and team 2. They also have until their match to practice those maps and factions (pretend the match is on Saturday).
So, doing this makes everyone happy because:
1) Teams can pick what map and faction is best for whatever strategies they want to use.
2) Spectators wont get bored of watching the same maps and factions.
3) Teams don't have to worry on the day of their match, because they already found out on (Tuesday?) what maps and factions they were going to be playing.
I can respect fixtures for the organization that they add to the tournament, but they're effects in and outside of the tournament itself is what makes me hate them so much.
Every practice scrim outside of the tournament is played using the weekly fixtures (I mean why not? it would be stupid to waste the opportunity if it's laid out for you like that) but it reaches that point where it becomes so tightly repetitive within the same week that it becomes repugnant. Like listening to Darude-Sandstorm is fine every now and then, but listening to it 3 times in a row? holy **** geezus, just rip my ear drums out and run away with them plz. Tournament fixtures have affected practice scrim meta significantly, in a negative way in my eyes, and for that, I genuinely hate them. Playing the exact same maps with the exact same factions 2-3 times a week for over a month becomes disgustingly repetitive, dull and boring (at least to me.) I fully understand how some people may view that as a positive, that allowing "competitive" teams to practice on a certain map with specified factions would allow them to play that map to their best potential, but I feel like that says more about a team's ability to practice well on a single map rather than their general ability to adapt and be able to play well cohesively on ANY map with ANY faction at any given time, being forced to use all individual and team experience gained throughout their time playing warband on the spot.
As to Osiris' post, I feel like EU and NA history tell completely different stories. From my own experience in NA, the only really enjoyable matches that have been exciting and watchable to me are the matches that come through our single elimination final matches where picking is involved, and if you look at the last few tournaments in NA, picking has lead to very close matches that have gone into 3rd maps, and close matches themselves are inherently more entertaining than one sided matches that fixtures absolutely have the potential of creating given their random nature. I would say that these artificially occurring close matches stems from the fact that both teams have the ability to pick and play on a map they are confident in, and on a map that they may be weak on, as opposed to leaving it completely to chance to randomized fixtures that could, by chance, favor one team over the other.
If the fear you have is that teams will be able to pick their strongest map and that you have no way of preparing for it, then I have a suggestion that may be reasonable. Instead of getting 1 ban and 1 pick out of a map pool of 6 maps, let every team get 2 bans instead, and let the higher seed choose which of the two remaining maps gets played first.
If you think of this practically, this would mean that you and your team would have the ability to take out 2 maps that week completely, meaning that you don't have to worry about practicing on them, and you should be able to make an educated guess as to which maps your opponents want to ban, at the very least 1 of them, meaning that you should be left with maximum 3 maps that you would need to practice on for that week, meaning that the only real variation that would come of it are the factions played, which you have exactly half control over anyway, so it's fair.
In the case of a tie (always be prepared), out of the remaining 4 maps, have each team ban 1 of the maps, and have an admin or referee randomly choose one of the two, and if that map ends in a tie, play the other one, and if that one also somehow ties, rinse and repeat with the last 2 maps.
I'd prefer the way it's already written in the rules, but I think this is a fair compromise between choice vs fixtures, IF there needs to be one. I came into this tournament expecting it to work by choice from the beginning, but since Arys was trying to make the game a little more organized and accessible to newer players, he decided to go with fixtures for the regular season so that they would be able to play all the maps before the final stage and have it be organized, and that's acceptable. But I mean, we are all experienced players here in the final stages, we can and should be able to make our own decisions here. We know the maps, we know the factions, so those aren't limiting factors for us. I already endured 7 weeks of dull repetitive matches, so please, I beg you, no more. If anything, at the very least allow us to choose the factions the day of, even that should add enough variation to loosen the abhorrent repetition.
Every practice scrim outside of the tournament is played using the weekly fixtures (I mean why not? it would be stupid to waste the opportunity if it's laid out for you like that) but it reaches that point where it becomes so tightly repetitive within the same week that it becomes repugnant. Like listening to Darude-Sandstorm is fine every now and then, but listening to it 3 times in a row? holy **** geezus, just rip my ear drums out and run away with them plz. Tournament fixtures have affected practice scrim meta significantly, in a negative way in my eyes, and for that, I genuinely hate them. Playing the exact same maps with the exact same factions 2-3 times a week for over a month becomes disgustingly repetitive, dull and boring (at least to me.) I fully understand how some people may view that as a positive, that allowing "competitive" teams to practice on a certain map with specified factions would allow them to play that map to their best potential, but I feel like that says more about a team's ability to practice well on a single map rather than their general ability to adapt and be able to play well cohesively on ANY map with ANY faction at any given time, being forced to use all individual and team experience gained throughout their time playing warband on the spot.
As to Osiris' post, I feel like EU and NA history tell completely different stories. From my own experience in NA, the only really enjoyable matches that have been exciting and watchable to me are the matches that come through our single elimination final matches where picking is involved, and if you look at the last few tournaments in NA, picking has lead to very close matches that have gone into 3rd maps, and close matches themselves are inherently more entertaining than one sided matches that fixtures absolutely have the potential of creating given their random nature. I would say that these artificially occurring close matches stems from the fact that both teams have the ability to pick and play on a map they are confident in, and on a map that they may be weak on, as opposed to leaving it completely to chance to randomized fixtures that could, by chance, favor one team over the other.
If the fear you have is that teams will be able to pick their strongest map and that you have no way of preparing for it, then I have a suggestion that may be reasonable. Instead of getting 1 ban and 1 pick out of a map pool of 6 maps, let every team get 2 bans instead, and let the higher seed choose which of the two remaining maps gets played first.
If you think of this practically, this would mean that you and your team would have the ability to take out 2 maps that week completely, meaning that you don't have to worry about practicing on them, and you should be able to make an educated guess as to which maps your opponents want to ban, at the very least 1 of them, meaning that you should be left with maximum 3 maps that you would need to practice on for that week, meaning that the only real variation that would come of it are the factions played, which you have exactly half control over anyway, so it's fair.
In the case of a tie (always be prepared), out of the remaining 4 maps, have each team ban 1 of the maps, and have an admin or referee randomly choose one of the two, and if that map ends in a tie, play the other one, and if that one also somehow ties, rinse and repeat with the last 2 maps.
I'd prefer the way it's already written in the rules, but I think this is a fair compromise between choice vs fixtures, IF there needs to be one. I came into this tournament expecting it to work by choice from the beginning, but since Arys was trying to make the game a little more organized and accessible to newer players, he decided to go with fixtures for the regular season so that they would be able to play all the maps before the final stage and have it be organized, and that's acceptable. But I mean, we are all experienced players here in the final stages, we can and should be able to make our own decisions here. We know the maps, we know the factions, so those aren't limiting factors for us. I already endured 7 weeks of dull repetitive matches, so please, I beg you, no more. If anything, at the very least allow us to choose the factions the day of, even that should add enough variation to loosen the abhorrent repetition.
+1 Fidel
Fietta man, it seems you know how it all should work in teams, you learned that in the tier 3 team you played ?
(not counting F since you were not long there and on the bench when you were there)
The faction thing is very important, you cant say "you played it for years you should know what to do", the way you play a map changes significantly because of the factions.
I am not against those pick on the day system but people keep comparing it to csgo maps which is totally different, there is no factions and no classes.
Lags proposal to ban 2 maps seems a reasonable compromise.
(not counting F since you were not long there and on the bench when you were there)
The faction thing is very important, you cant say "you played it for years you should know what to do", the way you play a map changes significantly because of the factions.
I am not against those pick on the day system but people keep comparing it to csgo maps which is totally different, there is no factions and no classes.
Lags proposal to ban 2 maps seems a reasonable compromise.
You want to make preparation largely ineffective, punish the teams that are willing to put in more time and effort whilst taking away one of the few tools "worse" teams still have in order to win matches against "better" teams. You want to make exciting innovation less likely than ever before, resulting in teams playing overly defensive and standard, decreasing the quality of play to about the same level as we see it in matchmaking. You want to see the same maps being played over and over again, because teams will go with the two maps they are most comfortable with. You therefore also want to punish teams with well balanced rosters, because the chance of playing two maps of the same maptype increases. And last but not least, you also want to leave the door wide open of meaningful advantages teams will get because someone leaked which maps their opponent has been practising.
For what? A little bit more adaptation, a factor that is and always has been present and rewarded in tournaments - look at Renegades in WNL2, KURWA in WNL3, or Freelancers in ECS1.
For what? A little bit more adaptation, a factor that is and always has been present and rewarded in tournaments - look at Renegades in WNL2, KURWA in WNL3, or Freelancers in ECS1.
