[WWC18] Discussion Topic

Status
Not open for further replies.

WhiskeR

Recruit
Best answers
0
Welcome to Warband Winter Cup 2018!

If you have any interesting suggestions for the tournament, want to ask a question or just want to chat - don't hesitate and leave your message in this topic!
 

Fietta

buıʇʇǝs uoıʇɔǝɹıp ʞɔɐʇʇɐ
Subforum Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
wow another warband weekend cup I love these
 

OurGloriousLeader

Grandmaster Knight
Best answers
0
I see there's been some discussion on the mount and blade polish forum but don't know if any final decisions have been made regarding this so thought I'd ask.

Firstly the number of rounds will require changes to the gold, 7 or 5 rounds vs Swadia/Nord will be unwinnable after losing 1 or 2 rounds with current gold. You would need to remove the survival bonus I think, but from memory this messes up some of the other economics so would be good to get that confirmed and fixed asap, or some other solution.

Secondly, I understand some of the changes have been made to make the game more entertaining for viewers, which generally I think is a good idea. However, the rules state 3 minute rounds with flag spawning at 2 mins, this is an increase in the wait from most recent tournaments (outside of the Polish ones, not sure what your rules were). In general I think the scene has shown there's no need for 60 seconds before flag spawns and it just leads to unnecessary waiting. We've been using flag spawning at 2.20, however you could probably move it even closer.

Another option would be Blivandefar's old suggestion of having flags spawn in a set order rather than the randomisation we currently have (so flag would spawn A, B, then C, then repeat). With teams knowing exactly where it would be it would allow them to instantly start taking action, and with the flag moving each round it prevents things getting stale.

Hope the tournament is a success whatever you pick, I'm glad there's experimentation either way.
 

Charlini

Master Knight
Best answers
0
6v6 is gonna be pretty close to how a 5v5 is played, without changes in the gamemode you're gonna meet a lot of dead waiting time and that's not good for the players or the spectators. Tactical options are quite limited, even if expanded a bit with 2 more players on the field. If you wanna make the games more dinamic, so that it meets your expectations and becomes more attractive to watch, you should try to cut down those wait times, and try to invest in situations where rounds are fast-paced, quick rotations and fights in every single round. This would benefit a lot those watching as it would become more entertaining, but also for the players who would find it more enjoyable.

Suggestions[Considering you wanna do 7 rounds per set]:

Time settings
-Reduce Round time from 180 to 120
-Flag Spawns at 1:30(Same speed to raise it fully --> 70 seconds)


Gold settings
-Reduce Combat Bonus Gold to 50%(+75g per kill)
-Reduce Survival Gold bonus to 50%(+250g for each who survives the round)


-Highly Recommend that you adapt all those settings as a pack, and not discard any of the time or gold settings splitting from the others as they're thought to work well together reinforcing this 6v6 with 7 rounds played per set format.

In case you accept those changes, would also be pretty convenient to adapt the map pool to such settings, try to Pick mainly maps that asure pretty easy and quick rotations(To asure Fast-Paced rotations through the round), and those who provide as many tactical options as possible without sacrificing that rotation time which will be key as you will only get 30 secs for the initial move+drops and between 70-90 to make your way to the flag or position to fight+whole fight).

·About time changes, it will add that activeness into the rounds that 5v5 and even 8v8 lacks, you will need to stay focused and move quick and constantly contest key positions to rotate or control certain flags while not rushing them(30 secs to spawn&drops + initial move and around 90 for the rotation+fight which should be enough for a 6v6 format).
·About the gold system, I didn't test the economy changes but given it a bit of thought it would provide small buffs after each round is won rewarding slightly(not enough to determine a huge advantatge on the upcoming rounds). The idea is that with most factions you can get either more armor(helmet, boots+gloves and/or shield) potentially upgrade your weapons or get new ones thing which is unorthodox with the common gold system as you rush the tanky armor straight away and later on, if any of your troops survives 3-4+ rounds potentially get a tanky upgrade which should become a decent reward for performing well several rounds in a row.

Hope the suggestions are considered at least
 

Firunien

Master Knight
Best answers
0
You should really think about the whole suggested changes Charli proposed, would even be possible to get in more rounds per spawn. Those changes would give a better pace to the game, for players and for viewers. But as he said, take them all as a package, the gold setting change ist a must anyway because of playing 7 rounds. Thanks for hosting a tournament anyway  :party:
 

SirAlecks

Knight at Arms
WBNWM&B
Best answers
0
Agreed with both Charlini and Firu, the faster the better. Would even probably balance the classes and factions further (with the exception of nords probably) the longer the deadtime the more boring it becomes to watch and play and only really benefits archery plays, which aren't specially fancy or interesting regardless of the skill it takes.

I'd say priorities should go as follow:  > fancy enough so that individual skill is shown (and this format already kind of has it)
                                                      > then go for fast-paced combat (low map timers)
                                                      > make it **** chaotic for the flag (no dead-times - fast spawn, but no so fast that tactics mean absolutely nothing)
                                                      > interesting maps and not ridiculously open ones
                                                      > ???
                                                      > profit from twitch subs
 

Tardet

French Toast
Count
NW
Best answers
0
I am curious to see how this tournament will go, I like the idea of bringing new changes, especially gameplay wise but I am unsure about some other aspects. Good luck either way and thanks for taking the time to organize this.
 
Best answers
0
SirAlecks said:
Agreed with both Charlini and Firu, the faster the better. Would even probably balance the classes and factions further (with the exception of nords probably) the longer the deadtime the more boring it becomes to watch and play and only really benefits archery plays, which aren't specially fancy or interesting regardless of the skill it takes.

I'd say priorities should go as follow:  > fancy enough so that individual skill is shown (and this format already kind of has it)
                                                      > then go for fast-paced combat (low map timers)
                                                      > make it **** chaotic for the flag (no dead-times - fast spawn, but no so fast that tactics mean absolutely nothing)
                                                      > interesting maps and not ridiculously open ones
                                                      > ???
                                                      > profit from twitch subs
Hmm odd that this almost entirely caters to your teams' playstyle
 

SirAlecks

Knight at Arms
WBNWM&B
Best answers
0
Yeah its not like there has been overall suggestions in the past that heavily relied on buffing the strengths of already strong classes or factions that curiously were favourites of the teams that were making such changes, oh wait.

It might sound odd and all you want fella, but if the tournament admins want to have a viewer-friendly perspective those are, in my opinion the required changes, and you can ask anyone close to me or anyone in FT for that matter and will tell you that not only I despise quick engages but I've always been keen on methodical or technical approaches both individually and in melees for most situations, and that those aggresive tactics we used back in WSC1 only really worked because the scene wasn't really used to it. I believe last tourney was kind of the best proof for that matter.
 

Aharo

Squire
Best answers
0
First of all, thank you for your opinions and for joining the discussion. At the same time, we would like to point out that the tournament is very test-oriented, which you have certainly noticed. Our goal is to move the game to a higher level of entertainment from not only the point of view of the player, but also the viewer. Finally, we hope to introduce a system that will be best for everyone and will hopefully bring better results regarding our plans for the future.

Regarding changes:
1. When it comes to economics, we are inclined to the idea of ​​Charlini (thank you!). We have now publicly turned on the WWC_DE_1 server where you can test the changes.
2. Regarding time, we have only changed the setting in connection with forcing flags at 2:20, which gives 40 seconds to set up before the flags will appear. When it comes to reducing the time of the round, we are not really convinced. First of all, we wanted to extend the competition for a little bit. Secondly, less time will force players to fight faster, which means that the tactics will lose its value and the teams concentrated solely on the infantry will gain a strong advantage. We will see how the first matches are going to come out and we will think about modifying the time or leaving it in its current form.

Additionally:
1. We have launched our own website: http://warband.cfagency.pl/
2. We invite you again to the Discord (join here) server, where you can catch us. During the tournament itself, we will make special chatrooms for team captains.
 

Fietta

buıʇʇǝs uoıʇɔǝɹıp ʞɔɐʇʇɐ
Subforum Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Not reducing the round time was a good idea, glad you didn't agree with that part of Charlini's suggestion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.