What you actually mean by competitive play?

(montheponies) #21

Whether it’s public or competitive, you should always have the ability to restrict certain classes/weapons. Let the server owner decide, that way you should be able to cater to the widest audience. Certainly RTCW benefited from having restrictions in things like number of PFs.

In simple terms, the maps become incredibly difficult to balance, if you consider the potential for two PFs for example to lock down an area. I’d much rather have the weapon restricted, than have the weapon itself ‘balanced’ to the point it itself is no longer useful (thinking along the lines of the ET neutering of the PF from RTCW).

(Kendle) #22

I guess that depends how it’s balanced. In ET heavy weapons restrictions decided the frequency with which airstrikes could be called in based on the number of F/Ops. You could “balance” a class like the PF by only allowing “x” rockets to be fired per minute, regardless of the number of PF’s, so if it was 2 they’d each only be able to fire x/2 per minute. If there were 3, it’d be x/3 per minute etc.

You then obviously get to a point where playing a 2nd or 3rd (or 4th) of that class becomes naturally pointless without having to hard-lock the number with class restrictions.

(montheponies) #23

Personally that would frustrate me more than a straight restriction, but either way I’d still be looking for all of these things to be server settable - not hard coded into the game (same goes for map spawn times, btw). I fear that with F2P there won’t be the option for mods to cater for different players, so the more control server admins have to tailor the game to suit their chosen community the better.

(woll3) #24

Shootmania is the worst example of all, its comparatively slow, it has no gameplaydepth, gaining speed consists out of pressing one button, its maingamemode isnt well liked and has not much to do with teamwork, not to mention there is no track aim weapon at all, also why the heck is there view bobbing?(“esports”) Even the players themselves admit that there is no reason to play this unless for money, and the player/viewer numbers are supporting that. Just having a demo function and throwing out money doesnt make a esports game, only something that dies when the cash is gone, its just the prime example of “How not to make a game”.

Edit:

To say it in one sentence, Nadeo confused non-existent gameplay with esports.

(Bangtastic) #25

IMO one point to shootmania: actually it isnt that bad, it just aims to be 100 per cent a comp game, without doing any split. The real thing what annoys me most is that “elite” is the esport mode, i mean 3v1 isnt a bad idea, but particpating on lans and tournaments, there is only one man show by one, no place for team spirit as in common esport. i think esport as a teamsport is more enjoyable IMO ofc.

(Rex) #26

[QUOTE=woll3;447218]Shootmania is the worst example of all, its comparatively slow, it has no gameplaydepth, gaining speed consists out of pressing one button, its maingamemode isnt well liked and has not much to do with teamwork, not to mention there is no track aim weapon at all, also why the heck is there view bobbing?(“esports”) Even the players themselves admit that there is no reason to play this unless for money, and the player/viewer numbers are supporting that. Just having a demo function and throwing out money doesnt make a esports game, only something that dies when the cash is gone, its just the prime example of “How not to make a game”.

Edit:

To say it in one sentence, Nadeo confused non-existent gameplay with esports.[/QUOTE]

Summed it up pretty well. This game died even before it was born and the problem was the “easy” gameplay, in meaning of being non-complex.
No pub -> no comp

(Bangtastic) #27

well but royal mode gives you adrenalin, love it ^^

(Jamieson) #28

In its simplest terms competitive play is simply playing to win, but I guess you weren’t asking that and were actually referring to what we think competition is. For me competition is two teams going at each other in the most balanced environment with the variables being the player skill levels and team coordination etc. So really restricting certain abilities or weapons is about cleaning up the game for want of a better word. A good example of this was the artillery and deployables in ETQW. In 4v4 they weren’t allowed because the teams were too small and they’d be far too powerful.

The same applies to 6v6 only vehicles and one of each deployable were allowed, with the artillery being the most powerful. Seriously I remember the Strogg having like 5 Plasma Mortars on the first stage of Valley and you’d just end up with full holds so no fun for anyone. You have to remember that comp players are usually at a higher skill level and are therefore more efficient and able to coordinate their resources with teammates, so what works in pub may not work in comp. As others have said restrictions are there to ensure teams can post times so a winner can be judged over 2 rounds, otherwise both teams defend for 20mins and there is no way to separate who is better, not to mention it’s pretty dull and boring for the players and even more so for those watching.

(rUBBEN) #29

Hello :slight_smile:
Just to say that I lol’d hard at " Who needs medics with a spawntime of 10 ". Everybody knows that 10 seconds is huge, and medics also mean sustain for a team, hence the choice of many teams to play with a lot of medics in the enemy territory game-play. A team can afford to lose a player for 10 seconds only from time to time, after a big push/full pull, after an objective (and still, it is not always right since in many case the whole team must rush the next obj in order to take the best positions).

I really don’t know if we should increase the spawn time or not, but the objective/tactic is the soul of Enemy territory’s gameplay while the medic part is its body !

Ah, and if I have a room to state my opinion on what competitive gameplay here, I would say that on the one hand public gaming is more or less playing at war, as some of us may want after seeing an action movie or whatever, getting as much frags as possible etc.
On the other hand, competitive gaming is more like a sport : it is a performance (it is not called eSport by chance) with players who have a common interest and a common view of the game. At a very high level you can clearly distinguish team’s playing style, like in rugby or football, and what makes the team really strong, aside of each player’s skill.

In my opinion, ranked is like " player A’s skills " + " players B’s skills " + " players C’s skill " etc. While competitive gaming is " player A’s skills " x " player B’s skills " x " player C’s skills ". That could explain why some teams look quite equal regarding at the players, but the difference of performances appear to be a huge gap, and this gap can be bridged only if the given team practices a lot.

All in all, the difference between public and competitive gaming is a matter of minds, some just want to frag like beast and some want to go further. It is the same difference as playing football in the street with your mates and playing football in a club. As when you play in the street you don’t need special shoes or a special field, when you wanna do public you just want to join a server, take your favorite class with your favorite weapon regardless of your team’s need and destroy everything. Making a balance for public regarding to this fact is one thing, and making balance for competitive is another.

(Kl3ppy) #30

[QUOTE=rUBBEN;448052]Hello :slight_smile:
Just to say that I lol’d hard at " Who needs medics with a spawntime of 10 ". Everybody knows that 10 seconds is huge, and medics also mean sustain for a team, hence the choice of many teams to play with a lot of medics in the enemy territory game-play. A team can afford to lose a player for 10 seconds only from time to time, after a big push/full pull, after an objective (and still, it is not always right since in many case the whole team must rush the next obj in order to take the best positions).
[/QUOTE]

This the only part I disagree with you. Right now the time from plant till blow up is 40 (?) secs. When you have a respawn timer of 10 secs for the attackers, they have 3 or 4 chances to get the defuse. I prefer they have like 2 spawn waves to get the defuse. I think the main prob is, that the defenders are too fast back at the objective and the attackers usually have a longer way to the objective and so they have a disadvantage. First they have to fight really hard to clear the objective but 10 secs later, the defenders are back. Right now there is no real need for a medic to revive mates. 1. No spawnshield which means the medic is absolut without cover, 2. the spawn times are too short so the revive is not really needed.