Competitive Issues & Discussion

(Shinta) #101

Over a week of scrimmaging is enough to get a decent idea about how easy it is to play a game competitively. A truly great competitive game is not random, outcomes can be controlled by players. A player in brink can NOT control their bullet spray closely enough. The skill ceiling with SMGs in this game is very low due to this.

A scrim is not a true competitive environment. It can give you an idea, but is no where near conclusive. Hell a single tournament isn’t conclusive it will take a long history of competition before you can even hope to derive such a bold statement. The game is not completely random as far as outcome, perhaps it will be a game that is solely based on team work.

Like I said before I am in the same boat of wanting guns to be less random, but without a proper exhibition of the game you can not say it is broken even if you have been scrimming sense launch until this very moment.

(justince) #102

[QUOTE=Shinta;314847]A scrim is not a true competitive environment. It can give you an idea, but is no where near conclusive. Hell a single tournament isn’t conclusive it will take a long history of competition before you can even hope to derive such a bold statement. The game is not completely random as far as outcome, perhaps it will be a game that is solely based on team work.

Like I said before I am in the same boat of wanting guns to be less random, but without a proper exhibition of the game you can not say it is broken even if you have been scrimming sense launch until this very moment.[/QUOTE]

LOL because this game is so exploitable like the hlengine? No, there are limits and ways to push limits and every way attempted to push the limits are very minimal gains.

Kid, your completly shot saying that we need to wait for a league to say that guns take skill in this game, rofl.

There’s a point where you kind of make sense on a shaky argument and a point where your flat out retarded and wrong. This game has very minimal professional elements; the only 3 games that really succeeded were quake, cs, and sc. What do they all require?

INDIVIDUAL SKILL.

Hate to be frank but it’s true man. Stop defending the obviously bad things about this game and work with people that wanted it changed so this game can survive longer than failops.

(Beermachine) #103

Must admit that I’m surprised about all the competitive players who are not commenting about the accuracy ironsighted / crouched, stationary and especially on the move.

Luck / random elements playing any factor is a big negative in EVERY competitive sport in the world, with rules made to eliminate as much of it as possible, so the best individual / team always wins, just plain common sense.

Lower dmg / higher health / higher body shot to head shot dmg (but only with pinpoint initial accuracy so no lucky spread headshot, which happens a lot in Brink atm with it’s high spread and high ROF) also decreases the luck factor considerably, so the person / team with the best consistant aim (rather than getting lucky with a flick shot / spread) will always come out best in firefights.

(riptide) #104

[QUOTE=Beermachine;315065]Must admit that I’m surprised about all the competitive players who are not commenting about the accuracy ironsighted / crouched, stationary and especially on the move.

Luck / random elements playing any factor is a big negative in EVERY competitive sport in the world, with rules made to eliminate as much of it as possible, so the best individual / team always wins, just plain common sense.

Lower dmg / higher health / higher body shot to head shot dmg (but only with pinpoint initial accuracy so no lucky spread headshot, which happens a lot in Brink atm with it’s high spread and high ROF) also decreases the luck factor considerably, so the person / team with the best consistant aim (rather than getting lucky with a flick shot / spread) will always come out best in firefights.[/QUOTE]

Iron sights are even more random than hipfire.

(Beermachine) #105

From my experiences, no, and the information datamined by DenKirson (many thanks) here http://denkirson.xanga.com/738334226/brink/ seems to be pretty accurate in game.

And yes, the 0.1 spread on the sniper rifles means that you can have a well aimed headshot at long range miss every now and then.

(Ragoo) #106

[QUOTE=Anti;313188]These discussions always happen when a new FPS comes out and it’s a real shame so many comp FPS players are always so keen to keep the FPS genre locked in the year 2000.

Games that are more recent newcomers to eSports, like WoW Arena, DOTA and HoN, embrace team composition, itemisation and the additional level of tactics they bring to the game. I for one think it might be a great move if FPS ladders and tournaments could take a leaf our of their book.

:penguin:[/QUOTE]

From a viewer’s perspective simple games like CS and Quake Live are so much better for esport. I never really played CS and I only played Quake Live for some hours, yet when I see those games on stream I can at least kind of understand what happens and in the case of Quake Live I enjoy it.
WoW on the other hand failed as an esport despite having sooo many players just because if you don’t play the game (a lot?!) you don’t understand ANYTHING AT ALL.

So even though WoW might have a deep tactical level I wouldn’t ever say esport games should be more like WoW.

(Anti) #107

[quote=Ragoo;315536]From a viewer’s perspective simple games like CS and Quake Live are so much better for esport. I never really played CS and I only played Quake Live for some hours, yet when I see those games on stream I can at least kind of understand what happens and in the case of Quake Live I enjoy it.
WoW on the other hand failed as an esport despite having sooo many players just because if you don’t play the game (a lot?!) you don’t understand ANYTHING AT ALL.

So even though WoW might have a deep tactical level I wouldn’t ever say esport games should be more like WoW.[/quote]

Yup, I agree, it’s why Soccer is the best example of a multiplayer game. Everybody can understand it and take part in it at the most basic level, but it has tactical depth and a skill curve that make it endlessly replayable.

That said, how viewable the game is as an eSport shouldn’t be the primary motivator behind eSports, it still has to be fun to play for the clans and it has to be close enough to the vanilla game to allow casual players to transition to clans and help maintain the scene.

The usual eSports FPS convention of “cut everything that isn’t guns and grenades” doesn’t do that.

(.Chris.) #108

I’ve only skimmed through this thread but I have to agree with Matt’s stance on avoiding mass baning and removals based on what folk think don’t suit competition play which normally is heavily biased towards previous experience on a different game rather than look at what actually breaks competition play in Brink and see if the problem can be changed first or if it does indeed have to be removed outright.

I’ve yet to play any matches in Brink yet as I’m too busy with another project so I can’t comment any further.

(prophett) #109

+1 for lowering spread and increasing headshot damage :expressionless:

(tangoliber) #110

I hope you guys won’t write off Security Tower without testing it a bit more. I like the map because it has one of the easier hacking objectives (don’t need to ban de-hacking for that map.) As for the final escort objective, it looks to me that towards the end of the match, I think that Securities spawn is well-placed. Resistance can control their entire right side of the escort path with some very good cover for attacking from above.

Plus, since there are so many objectives, it will be less common for two teams to be held on the same one.

(justince) #111

[QUOTE=Anti;315553]Yup, I agree, it’s why Soccer is the best example of a multiplayer game. Everybody can understand it and take part in it at the most basic level, but it has tactical depth and a skill curve that make it endlessly replayable.

That said, how viewable the game is as an eSport shouldn’t be the primary motivator behind eSports, it still has to be fun to play for the clans and it has to be close enough to the vanilla game to allow casual players to transition to clans and help maintain the scene.

The usual eSports FPS convention of “cut everything that isn’t guns and grenades” doesn’t do that.[/QUOTE]

We aren’t saying that.
We’re saying give this game at least the SLIGHTEST ammount of rewards for individual skill.

Any herpderp who’s pubstared games can shoot just as well as any top tier player in any other game. There’s also little room to outsmart people in 1v1-1v2 situations; maps are rather linear and movement is predictable.

That’s just ****ing dumb.

I’m not saying the vanilla of this game doesn’t have to appeal to pubnubs for this game to succeed. Tf2 does that, and there’s a decent ammount of individual skill involved. Not a ton, but there’s room. Here?

None.

(Decayed) #112

I don’t think you can use sports as an example, because every competitive sport has randomness due to the fact that the real world is not coded. Call it chaos theory or whatever you’d like, but there are plenty of times when the best team doesn’t win, let alone the best individual. Over the course of many games, randomness disappears and you see a lot more stability. Which is why the best teams still tend to win, and which is why most sports have a multi game series. There is no real life parallel where you can say, as long as I do this every time, I will be successful. Take bowling for example, the best players will not throw a strike every single time. However if bowling was an esport, that would be the expectation.

I’m not saying that esports should be a random mess of top teams losing to 5 year old kids, but I just think the sports example is a far far reach.

I don’t think the problems are gonna allow some scrub team to defeat a top tier team. Maybe once, but not consistently. But only time will tell I guess.

(Beermachine) #113

[QUOTE=Decayed;316207]I don’t think you can use sports as an example, because every competitive sport has randomness due to the fact that the real world is not coded. Call it chaos theory or whatever you’d like, but there are plenty of times when the best team doesn’t win, let alone the best individual. Over the course of many games, randomness disappears and you see a lot more stability. Which is why the best teams still tend to win, and which is why most sports have a multi game series. There is no real life parallel where you can say, as long as I do this every time, I will be successful. Take bowling for example, the best players will not throw a strike every single time. However if bowling was an esport, that would be the expectation.

I’m not saying that esports should be a random mess of top teams losing to 5 year old kids, but I just think the sports example is a far far reach.

I don’t think the problems are gonna allow some scrub team to defeat a top tier team. Maybe once, but not consistently. But only time will tell I guess.[/QUOTE]

I agree, every competitive sport, game, whatever has an inherent random factor and no-one has perfect skill, even the best FPS player in the world with perfect accuracy in game will not be able to 100% headshot everytime.

But to take your bowling example, would bowling be made better if the balls were randomly weighted so they deviated every now and then? Name one game rule in anything competitive where a random element is added (cards dont count as the game is inheritently random, but they dont every now and then have 5 aces without the players knowing just to mix it up).

(Luk) #114

[QUOTE=Beermachine;315065]Must admit that I’m surprised about all the competitive players who are not commenting about the accuracy ironsighted / crouched, stationary and especially on the move.

Luck / random elements playing any factor is a big negative in EVERY competitive sport in the world, with rules made to eliminate as much of it as possible, so the best individual / team always wins, just plain common sense.

Lower dmg / higher health / higher body shot to head shot dmg (but only with pinpoint initial accuracy so no lucky spread headshot, which happens a lot in Brink atm with it’s high spread and high ROF) also decreases the luck factor considerably, so the person / team with the best consistant aim (rather than getting lucky with a flick shot / spread) will always come out best in firefights.[/QUOTE]

Don’t agree with higher health. And flick shots are not caused by luck any more than anything else. Watch any professional CS/CSS player (awpers esp.) and gorgeous flick shots are EXTREMELY common place as these players have trained and trained to get their reaction/flick shots down to perfection.

Overall I agree, however.

(Beermachine) #115

[QUOTE=Luk;316580]Don’t agree with higher health. And flick shots are not caused by luck any more than anything else. Watch any professional CS/CSS player (awpers esp.) and gorgeous flick shots are EXTREMELY common place as these players have trained and trained to get their reaction/flick shots down to perfection.

Overall I agree, however.[/QUOTE]

I apologise, and consistent flick shooting is definitely a hard skill to master. It’s just that flick shooting emphasises reactions, where as higher health emphasises consistent accuracy more (my preference, old guy with shot reactions!). Neither is better than the other, just different skills to master.

(Luk) #116

Makes sense. I come from a 1.6/CSS background so I guess that explains my position xD

(ToweL) #117

I strongly agree.

(Decayed) #118

[QUOTE=Beermachine;316578]I agree, every competitive sport, game, whatever has an inherent random factor and no-one has perfect skill, even the best FPS player in the world with perfect accuracy in game will not be able to 100% headshot everytime.

But to take your bowling example, would bowling be made better if the balls were randomly weighted so they deviated every now and then? Name one game rule in anything competitive where a random element is added (cards dont count as the game is inheritently random, but they dont every now and then have 5 aces without the players knowing just to mix it up).[/QUOTE]

That’s a good point. But it’s a bit different when it comes to developed games, I mean sure you can say that these random elements were “added.” But in real life, randomness exists anyway. Maybe not to the extent of different sized bowling balls, but like the fact that the alley may not have been polished perfectly. In outdoor sports, weather could be considered a random element.
In general, sports do try to remove most randomness. But there is still a lot of it that was never removed, like different stadiums in baseball. They could easily come up with a standard, but it’s a fact that home runs come easier in certain stadiums, whereas a left field longball is much harder at Fenway.
I’m not trying to say that Brink is good where it stands. I agree with most of the posts about how the spread is too random. I think it could be tighter. But I don’t think it’s so random that the best teams are gonna lose to random teams for the most part.

(chas) #119

I can’t believe there are people arguing weapon spread should NOT be fixed.

ET had a great (perfect?) balance between individual skill and teamplay by making weapons insanely accurate but relatively slow-firing. One guy pretty much never outshot two guys straight up unless it was something like mystic/maus against some mongoloids. This game has the exact opposite where you can spray over two guys if you’re lucky but you didn’t really do it by aiming/moving well.

I’m enjoying Brink as hell so far but there’s a TON of stuff that needs fixing, which I’m sure SD or a good promod will get around to. Remember dual airstrikes, double duration artillery, 10 mines and full revives on classic oasis? Yeah that was no fun either.

(playa) #120

This game would be amazing and require more skill with less spread and less recoil