Best Team Set Ups

(tokamak) #21

You need 8 players more for a 12v12 match though. That’s a pretty big deal.

Obviously if logistics is all that matters then 1v1 would be the ideal competition size.

(BioSnark) #22

Depends on the value of each asset. I’m just assuming that medics will be overpowered, again.

(Gogeku) #23

I really don’t hope the competitive side of the game will be 8vs8. That’ll mean it will get ditched at a lot of LAN events as the number of players required would be to much.

(DarkangelUK) #24

The map size looks like it would work just as well with 5/6 players as it will with 8.

(.Chris.) #25

[QUOTE=tokamak;253859]You need 8 players more for a 12v12 match though. That’s a pretty big deal.

Obviously if logistics is all that matters then 1v1 would be the ideal competition size.[/QUOTE]

Brink isn’t a dueling game though.

(BomBaKlaK) #26

8vs8 I think that’s a good number !
and can make some cool balance, that’s not to much, so easier to fit for a comp than 12vs12
event if I think the best comp set up must be 6vs6 or near that number

(Gogeku) #27

6vs6/5vs5 would be preferable if the game has to make a hit competitively.

(tokamak) #28

Yes, it appears not to be balanced around 1v1 but around 8v8.

Gotta love passive-agressive dialogue :rolleyes:

(DarkangelUK) #29

Over dramatise much? I think the point he’s making (which you probably know fine well what the point is, and saying the passive-aggressive remark is a bit hypocritical) is that leagues and ladders thrive better when the player limit is less, and as has shown with ETQW, the ones that require more players don’t really do well or last too long. A thriving comp scene will certainly not hurt the game, and anything to make it more accessible to clans is better.

Anyway, as I said, from what I played I can see 5/6 players for comp matches working.

(SockDog) #30

But the point is to have team sizes that work within the parameters of the game (given any tweaks the competitive crowd throw in) and the practicality of fielding teams of that size. 1v1 doesn’t meet the first criteria and 8v8 may not meet the second.

(tokamak) #31

Indeed, there’s two parameters here, logistics and gameplay.

I’d like to see the logistics part being met through a very convenient social structure plastered on top of this game. Rather that than starting to meddle with the game balance itself.

If Blizzard can ask it’s players to group up with 10 or 25 man to play raids, then mustering 8 people shouldn’t be a big deal if you give players the right tools to do so. And note that this is not just ‘cooperative’ content. The rated battlegrounds allow for teams up to 15 players to be matched against other teams, all ranked within a ladder system.

W:ET had no buddy system, ETQW’s was very limited, but things have moved on and especially in the last two years we saw how incredibly smooth the social aspect of shooters can be.

(DarkangelUK) #32

I think it’s quite clear that the social aspect of the fps comp scene has always been different from Blizzards games, and I don’t think it’s the lack of in-game tools that is to blame for that. Leagues and ladders that require large numbers just aren’t popular, clans have websites, IRC, messengers, forums for communication, in-game tools would just bring a little more cohesion to what already exists and is available just now.

I’d rather it was more accessible for all clans, rather than those that can only field a team of 8 and have a couple on stand-by in case of no shows. Are you under the impression that something will be lost from the game if the comp scene (that doesn’t affect you in any way, shape or form) play with 5/6 players instead of 8?

(SockDog) #33

But the games are different. I’d argue gamers in WoW are there for longer, continuous periods and in larger guilds than you would see for an average FPS gamer. Game interfaces aside I used to have no problem sending emails or IMs to people arranging games (steam includes this also for groups), the issue was they’d have other commitments which would result in them being late or leaving early rather than not knowing they needed to be there at all. This brings us back to an old discussion on Clan size.

(tokamak) #34

Here we need to separate ranked battles, where you can enter into the matchmaker at any time, and scheduled matches. MMORPG’s have the advantage of keeping you busy anyway which results in lots of patient players. So granted, that’s something that FPS’s don’t have, but when it comes for scheduled matches, there’s no difference between Blizzard games and FPS’s.

Blizzard allows for both. Be it in SC2 (granted, the matchup is 4v4 max there) or WoW. It has proven itself to be able to host scheduled matches through conventions or online tournaments. We haven’t yet seen 10v10 or 15v15 match ups but I’m sure the next Blizzcon is going to have them.

The point still stands, a rigid social structure should allow 8v8 matches to be easily set up. I truly expect Brink to have that.

I’d rather it was more accessible for all clans, rather than those that can only field a team of 8 and have a couple on stand-by in case of no shows. Are you under the impression that something will be lost from the game if the comp scene (that doesn’t affect you in any way, shape or form) play with 5/6 players instead of 8?

If a game is accessible to 8v8 clans, then it’s automatically even more accessible to smaller matchups.

(.Chris.) #35

Like I said before that’s all fine and dandy when you want to play a random mix match and I have no problems with the concept of playing 8v8 stopwatch matches but when you enter a league or cup having to depend on 8 people to turn up to every match and then get enough clans who themselves can achieve the same can present problems resulting in forfeit losses due to lack of players when certain people can’t play.

Having smaller team sizes reduces the chance of people not turning up due to other commitments or computer problems or whatever, the trick is finding the right team size for a given game. It was clear from the start 12v12 in ET:QW just wasn’t going to work so the comp community opted for 6v6 and that seemed to work although it did require the game to be altered in order to do so but that’s another discussion and I don’t see the same happening in Brink either (much).

(Humate) #36

Are you under the impression that something will be lost from the game if the comp scene (that doesn’t affect you in any way, shape or form) play with 5/6 players instead of 8?

Larger numbers allow players to pick and choose their moments.
Smaller numbers require a constant contribution from everyone.

I’m guessing tokamak likes to pick and choose his moments.

(DarkangelUK) #37

@tok

Your last part kinda makes no sense, if a team can’t field 8 players then they can’t field 8 players, if it’s geared heavily towards requiring 8 players and 5/6 won’t cut it, I don’t see how that makes it accessible.

I’m thinking maybe you’re hinting at filling slots with non-clan members, which are referred to as mercs. Or you’re talking about organized games but not full of clan members, and those are called PUG’s. The initial point still stands, it’s easier for clans to field 5/6 players and makes it open. It’s not like 8v8 will be wiped out, a lot of sites that host leagues have multiple ladders. When I comp’d for RtCW they had 4v4, 5v5, 6v6 ad 7v7 ladders, generally that larger clans would enter multiple ladders while the smaller ones stuck to the lower end… which again had nothing to do with tools or organization within the game.

(tokamak) #38

Of course it’s easier to organise for smaller teams, like I said, if that was the only issue then 1v1 should suffice, but that’s not the case here. The entire game is balanced around 8v8 so that should be the goal. If that goal is reached then it means that smaller games are possible (and even easier) anyway.

Lowering the bar before the game is even released is just being cynical.

@Chris 12v12? How convenient, adding 8 more players to the requirement.

(DarkangelUK) #39

The game can be balanced around 8v8, and still be accessible with 5v5 or 6v6 (which tbh i think it will be going by what i’ve seen/played). It still doesn’t matter what the game is like, if a team can’t field 8 players then they can’t field 8 players, that issue doesn’t go away before or after the games release so ‘wait and see’ accomplishes nothing.

Sorry but Chris’ comment stands, this isn’t a duelling game and your comment about 1v1 is just being facetious. Generally the sweet spot for most leagues and ladders that the biggest majority of clans can work with is around the 5/6 mark. I’d rather accessibility was there from the get-go, rather than leaving it up the comp scene to butcher the game to fit their needs.

(.Chris.) #40

OK lets look at ET then, it’s now 5v5 after been 6v6 for quite a while, last’s years crossfire LAN saw increase in clan sign ups and a higher cash prize as a result.