|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 7, 2015 9:15:31 GMT -5
A ridiculous amount, which is multiplied by 8 now, thanks to their stupid DLC system. This will be split into 16, and then 32, as the final two map packs roll out (and total player counts will be even lower by then) - No DLC - Atlas Gorge only - Havoc only - Ascendance only - Atlas Gorge + Havoc - Atlas Gorge + Ascendance - Havoc + Ascendance - All 3 I'm going to make some assumptions. The first is that my numbers are sort of right. So let's go with this. A typical evening night on XB1, there might be 10,000 people online. The breakdown would look like this: 35% TDM - 3,500 25% Dom - 2,500 20% GW - 2,000 15% S&D - 1,500 02% CtF - 200 02% Uplink - 200 NOW...divide that by 8 separate playlists (keeping things proportional, for ease of calculation) 35% TDM - 3,500 / 8 = 437....36 lobbies 25% Dom - 2,500/ 8 = 312 20% GW - 2,000 / 8 = 250 15% S&D - 1,500/8 = 187 02% CtF - 200 / 8 = 25.....4 lobbies 02% Uplink - 200/8 = 25....4 lobbies How exactly is someone going to be ensured of getting a decent match made, when you have fewer than 50 lobbies to pick from? And then when you consider the issue of some groups having dedis, and some groups not having them, plus SBMM? It's a mess.
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 7, 2015 10:55:08 GMT -5
I would be fine with there only be one Mosh Pit playlist. Just go nuts whenever FFA came up. Actually, I would be fine if there were only one playlist and it was Domination. The above might kill clan wars. Might. Then again, Clan Wars is on the brink of death right now as it is. The format of clan wars is flawed and should change as it presently does not measure the ability of one clan to perform compared to another in any real capacity.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 7, 2015 10:57:51 GMT -5
I would be fine with there only be one Mosh Pit playlist. Just go nuts whenever FFA came up. Actually, I would be fine if there were only one playlist and it was Domination. The above might kill clan wars. Might. Then again, Clan Wars is on the brink of death right now as it is. The format of clan wars is flawed and should change as it presently does not measure the ability of one clan to perform compared to another in any real capacity. That's not why it's flawed. What you described up there...Clan Wars does measure that very well, and do so better than any other format ever tried in CoD. Not to be argumentative, but I have witnessed it personally, up close and very well. It worked last year. It very accurately sorted out well over 100,000 clans and got the cream to rise to the top. The problem right now with it, is just downright horrible communication from the people who run it. They are making changes all hapharzardsly and dumping contests on people with only like four days notice, with very little explanation of rule changes, plus no scheduling at all. Not to mention, a scorekeeping system that does not work well with the new consoles, as well as the XB1 console's continued inability to group up people into parties.
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 7, 2015 10:59:28 GMT -5
Oh, that, too. But I would much prefer a format, say, where there were mock tournaments with brackets and everything. The current format primarily measures the ability of your clan to pub stomp.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 7, 2015 11:18:32 GMT -5
Oh, that, too. But I would much prefer a format, say, where there were mock tournaments with brackets and everything. The current format primarily measures the ability of your clan to pub stomp. They have that. It's the MLG system where the pro stuff is run. They just had the online qualifiers all over the country a few months ago, which seeded people in the North American qualifiers, where the winners went to last weekend's CoD World championships. A 4x4 clan/team format, that has been going on for quite some time. Six of the clans in the present top 20 Clan leaderboards, have teams that competed in this process (but none qualified for the Worlds). So why do something, that is repeating the above? Something that already exists? Furthermore, the above can't be done with the present CoD clan structure. Last year, there were well over 100,000 clans that started the Ghost season. It would simply be impossible to run enough bracket tournaments, to try and sort out the above large numbers. Furthermore, many of those clans had over 20 players. How do find the time to run best of seven MLG style tournaments, when clans might have multiple squads going? It's impossible. It would take well over a week to just have one clan compete against another. And the 'pub stomp' thing? That's kind of myth. If the CW's were solely about just pubstomping, then there would have been a logjam of thousands of clans at the top if it was that easy. But that wasn't the case. The reality was, it was very hard to get multiple squads of people playing, and have them win. It was never about beating the random squads you saw 7 out of 10 games. The real 'separation' with clan wars, was in the other 3 of 10 games, where you squads faced off against other clans/squads, especially in low population nodes, where it was actually very common. It wasn't easy getting a squad together, and then winning every single game you play over four hours (let alone all your squads). And this is what was needed...to get to the top (not to mention, all the tactics part) All of that.... Nothing to do with pubstomping there. The system worked quite well last year.
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 7, 2015 11:57:49 GMT -5
Sure you can have brackets. Other, more complex, games dynamically generate brackets for quick, mock tournaments. I never said you had to have every clan face every other clan: that would be logistically challenging and also stupid. Rather, you could have the eight clans in each clan war play each other repeatedly over the course of a week or something. This is different from MLG stuff since clan wars occur regularly and are just for fun.
Whenever my clan plays wars on PS4, maybe more than half our lobbies are randoms and we stomp. Encountering other full parties is fun and challenging, but not as common as it should be. During Ghosts, it was even more uncommon to encounter other clans due to the higher player count. Frankly, if I were a random without a clan, I simply wouldn't play during clan wars due to the increase incidence of parties.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 7, 2015 12:06:37 GMT -5
I hear you Mega, but do the math. How do you work down from 100,000 to a reasonable leaderboard? It's impossible. It's to time consuming and here's the thing.....Clans would never go for it. I am on Twitter now with many of the leaders of the top clans in CoD...and almost all of them are complete unison in saying they don't want competitions that drag out to long long. It's ridiculously time consuming. Clan leaders already spent months pushing Beachhead back, to get Diamond Wars reduced from three days to two days. Now push it to a week long? And do that every week, to get 100,000 to a top 20? It would be a full time job, as well as be impossible.
Just curious, what is your clan's name? How did you do in CoD Ghosts?
Are you playing in this weekend's Battle Royale?
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 7, 2015 13:54:36 GMT -5
The same way you divide all the clans into eight clans per clan war.
A eight team bracket would be at most four games: the week long window is just to ensure clans can be online at the same time to play their scheduled games. This is how other games mediate informal tournaments.
I think my clan was Sexual Healing for Ghosts. Clan for Advanced Warfare is Ken Diesel. We're absolutely not competitive since only two of us regularly play the game.
We did alright in Ghosts but were hampered by the lack of buckets and thus had many clan mates that did not contribute. We're bad in AW since no one wants to play the game. We're in the Battle Royale and I fully expect to be crushed since we don't have ten people.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 7, 2015 14:22:57 GMT -5
Well, few thoughts.
First with the Battle Royale. Here's the problem. every team has been forced to play the Battle Royale, which is stupid, as Beachhead only gave two weeks notice. But worse yet, BeachHead is forcing everyone to play different time zones (than what they normally play) Our clan (HSV1)...we are currently ranked #1 in the world in the 12-person bucket, and 12th overall amongst all the CoD clans...... and we probably aren't even going to play this weekend. I have a grappling tournament. Five other top guys in our clan (who we are invaluable for leadership, in keeping groups together) have other plans too. We are used to always playing the Eastern time zone, evening 7pm to 11pm slots. This Battle Royale? We are being forced to play in the afternoon. No one can make it. It's stupid. As it is now, we are just going to no-show, and basically lose.
But worse yet, this upcoming weekend is kind of irrelevant. What is the point? BeachHead is already on the record as saying after this weekend, they are going to reset the entire leaderboards, and do a complete 'do-over'. Past stuff didn't count, they are starting over again. WTF? That's absurd. Do they realize how much work people put into this? And then to, on a whim, just say..."oops, prior stuff doesnt' count, start over". It's nuts. NFL do that? MLB do it? NBA do that? NO LEAGUE ANYWHERE DOES SOMETHING LIKE THAT. Does anyone in their right mind, really want to put anymore time into this, knowing BeachHead could, at any moment, just delete past results?
But to your original idea. I don't see how it could work. 100,000 clans...buckets of 8....that means 12,500 buckets. Each bucket having clans playing each other all week long. It's to burdensome and gets into the whole mess of how gamebattles used to work. Who is host? Monitors. How to handle disputes. What are the times? It's INCREDIBLY unwieldy and just becomes to burdensome as clans will bicker like mad over host and times and everything else, dragging shit out. Think about it. And worse yet....it's not just playing four games like you said. You have seven other clans in a bucket. Each clan has to play all the other seven clans too!!! That means each of your squads, has to play SEVEN four-game series. That's 28 games, not four. And that's just for ONE of our squads. What about the other 20 to 50 guys you have? They have to do it too. Clan leaders will not get a single hour of sleep.
|
|
|
Post by illram on Apr 7, 2015 18:39:52 GMT -5
Yeah too many playlists funnels segregating people is bad. Sounds like this is getting worse.
On the topic of having difficulties getting good games in a large party, I always remember this being a problem. Maybe this is even worse now? Of course my Xbox friends mostly sucked and only wanted to play TDM so honestly playing with them is low on my priority list.
On the topic of merging PC vs. Xbox players... for the past few weeks I have been messing around on PC with Ghosts. I use a controller from my couch because I am lazy and just was not having fun relearning how to play with the KB/M, even though I did it for years and years and years before slumming it up on Xbox with MW2. After getting over the initial psychological terror of facing KBM master race opponents with nothing but a gimpy Xbox controller, honestly it's not that bad. (I use kontrol freeks too which do help a tiny bit.)
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 8, 2015 11:29:51 GMT -5
But to your original idea. I don't see how it could work. I find your lack of imagination disturbing. I came up with the following in five seconds. Two weeks before the tournament, brackets are made. This is the same process that the game currently uses to match clans. Clan leaders select preferred times for each day. Wars are 7-11 PM local time. Have each clan rank the hours per day. So, Saturday, you might first preference might 7 PM and then 10 PM, etc. For two clans playing each other, the most preferred hour is selected. Elections lock a week before the tournament begins. At the time of each battle, clans connect to the lobby. There is a hour window for both clans to connect and be present. In the event, neither clan is present at the same time for the entire hour, the clan that was in the lobby in a ready state for longer automatically wins. A dedicated server is selected that provides the most ideal connection for all players. The time for the day's next battle is revealed and battles continue. Pending the results of the current day's battles, the given teams facing each other will change. This continues until a champion is decided. The only thing I did not address is clan sizes of more than four (or five or six or whatever the format is). I think the easiest solution while still preserving the competitive nature of the above format would be to simply have multiple teams and thus multiple brackets per clan that do not compete with each other. Thus, your clan would have your principal varsity team and then junior varsity, etc. In this case, the members of each team would vote for their preferred battle hours. Boom. Coming from Starcraft 2, which actually handles ranked play extremely well (and better than literally any other game in existence hitherto: even League of Legends needs to learn from Starcraft), the situation in Advanced Warfare is appalling. In Starcraft, everyone has a individual ladder rank, but every possible team has its own rank. Every. Single. One. You, Bob, and Alice have a rank. You, Bob, and Susan have a rank. You, Bob, and random (literally random, as in, your party had an empty slot before entering matchmaking) have a rank. You and two randoms have a rank. This last bit is huge as it encourages playing with randoms since it does not affect your personal ranking or your other team rankings. Using the above tournament format, every party would be assigned an ELO rank and then clan ELO would be the average of all its constituent ELO ranks. (Randoms would probably need to be omitted for this purpose.) After getting over the initial psychological terror of facing KBM master race opponents with nothing but a gimpy Xbox controller, honestly it's not that bad. (I use kontrol freeks too which do help a tiny bit.) Just use a mouse. Your KD will go up. Your love life will be enhanced. Your portfolio will grow exponentially. If you must sit on the couch (peasant), then use something like a Couchmaster to provide a mock desk for your mouse and keyboard.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 8, 2015 12:51:56 GMT -5
But to your original idea. I don't see how it could work. I find your lack of imagination disturbing. I came up with the following in five seconds. That's nice what you said...but do you realize, you are talking to someone who has been heavily active with clan competitions for like five years now, who actually runs a clan that has placed three different years, in the top twenty, has done all this work...AND...has had probably well over three dozen conversations this year alone with the head people at BeachHead studios? One a private one on one. Do you? My imagination is fine. The issue is I know quite a bit on how BeachHead studios system works, their relationship with Activision and SledgeHammer, and many of their limitations. What you described up there would never fly. For to many reasons to list. Like right off the bat, who is going to arrange for a Dedi to be used? BeachHead can't even get Activision or SH to even give them an extra bonus camo for the CW winners (actual quote from FelixGallo) And you think dedi server space is just going to be handed over that easy? And your idea doesn't handle clan's over four people in size? That there is a HUGE issue. Probably 49 out of the top 50 clans last year, were competing in 12-person size or larger. How can you propose something, that eliminates all the best clans. Again, I love the idea of what you are proposing. Stuff like this has already been tossed around last year quite a bit. But there are practical limitations to something like that. StarCraft is a 1v1 game. CoD Clan Wars is a 'clan' competition, that has groups ranging in size of four to a hundred, trying to compete. It's completely two different things there, comparing those two games. And your way of proposing teams, like how StarCraft did....that has ALREADY been done in CoD. It was done with BO2 and the clan community entirely rejected it. Treyarch's attempt failed for the most part (for to many reasons to list here). Boom.
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 8, 2015 13:07:34 GMT -5
Your conversations with Beach Head, sadly, are irrelevant: the studio has been operating since MW3 and the end results present in-game do not reflect any amount of work. That said, it's really cool that you reached out to them and they actually responded, repeatedly, to you. It's pretty dumb that Beach Head couldn't get a bonus camo seeing as how new camos are implemented seemingly every week and it would be easy to simply give one away as a gift to clan war victors (that said, the gear rewards already accomplish much the same thing, but a Centurion or Valkyrie camo would be sweet).
My problem with the current clan war format is that it does not actually pit clans against each vis-a-vis in the logical way that Call of Duty should. Additionally, the wars are disruptive to anyone who is not participating in the war as the wars occur in the normal playlists.
All my post following here is purely hypothetical and what I propose is simply what I would want to see, but understand is not viable for technical and community reasons (like exactly what you said).
Regarding dedicated servers, both Ghosts and AW already use dedicated servers so there's no technical or logistical issue there. As the player count decreases and Activision invests more in bandwidth, I would expect the use of dedicated servers in Call of Duty to expand over time.
Regarding clans larger than four people, which is all of them, just use multiple teams, like I already said. You would have High Voltage 1, High Voltage 2, etc. Then average the ELO of each team for the clan ELO.
Starcraft is usually played at a professional level as only 1v1, but supports unranked games up to 12 players and ranked games can go up to 4v4. Again, every single team permutation is ranked: with 4v4, the amount of permutations can be significant.
I don't recall this being implemented in Black Ops 2 as I didn't play that game much, but what was the grounds for the community rejecting it? I suspect that the reason had to do not with the basic idea (every team permutation being ranked), but rather its unique implementation or simply the mechanics of the ranked ladder itself.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 8, 2015 13:27:18 GMT -5
Your conversations with Beach Head, sadly, are irrelevant: the studio has been operating since MW3 and the end results present in-game do not reflect any amount of work. That said, it's really cool that you reached out to them and they actually responded, repeatedly, to you. It's pretty dumb that Beach Head couldn't get a bonus camo seeing as how new camos are implemented seemingly every week and it would be easy to simply give one away as a gift to clan war victors (that said, the gear rewards already accomplish much the same thing, but a Centurion or Valkyrie camo would be sweet). There are what seems to be, HUNDREDS of restrictions or limitations BeachHead has, when doing Clan Wars. They get no help from Activison or the gaming developer. BH kind of operates, out on it's own, in very limited capacity as sort of a hired contractor. For another example, and I kid you not here. They could not run leaderboards that had certain levels of division when calculating scores. Their code, software, had to keep things within certain realms of straight addition/subtraction. Seriously, I am not joking there. I do agree with you there, 100%...and your ideas are spot on....but...again, there are just way to many clans. To many to sift through, when finding the best of the best. MLG can do it much easier, as many of their LAN tournaments, they typically restrict the weekend brackets to like 128 teams. We are talking 60,000 to maybe as many as 200,000 (most of which are very unpredictable) Felix and Trey have already talked about this. The difficulties of getting a specific clan playlist. Both of them said that is not a viable option right now, and would go against both theirs and Activision's wishes, ..which is further fragmenting the playlists (yes, I know, that makes no sense) BO2 tried this. The problem is this. Take Lethal Gaming. They have around 60 to 70 people in their clan, and often times, will bring in new people with a turnover of almost a couple hundred percent. Can you see where this is going? Clans lose their identity. An active clan like LG could in theory have like hundreds of LG pup clans within only a month or two. There would be so many combinations, of different clans, thing would spiral out of control fast. BO2's league play is where this was. Each 'season', the settings reset. And each time you brought in a new combination, you had to restart a new team.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 8, 2015 13:30:33 GMT -5
Your conversations with Beach Head, sadly, are irrelevant: the studio has been operating since MW3 and the end results present in-game do not reflect any amount of work. What? Huh? BeachHead is the company that has been working on, and running clan wars, for the past three years. And the stuff I am posting here, much of it is direct quotes from conversations over Twitter with them, direct responses back to me. That's hardly irrelevant. There are what seems to be, HUNDREDS of restrictions or limitations BeachHead has, when doing Clan Wars. They get no help from Activison or the gaming developer. BH kind of operates, out on it's own, in very limited capacity as sort of a hired contractor. For another example, and I kid you not here. They could not run leaderboards that had certain levels of division when calculating scores. Their code, software, had to keep things within certain realms of straight addition/subtraction. Seriously, I am not joking there. I do agree with you there, 100%...and your ideas are spot on....but...again, there are just way to many clans. To many to sift through, when finding the best of the best. MLG can do it much easier, as many of their LAN tournaments, they typically restrict the weekend brackets to like 128 teams. We are talking 60,000 to maybe as many as 200,000 (most of which are very unpredictable) Felix and Trey have already talked about this. The difficulties of getting a specific clan playlist. Both of them said that is not a viable option right now, and would go against both theirs and Activision's wishes, ..which is further fragmenting the playlists (yes, I know, that makes no sense) BO2 tried this. The problem is this. Take Lethal Gaming. They have around 60 to 70 people in their clan, and often times, will bring in new people with a turnover of almost a couple hundred percent. Can you see where this is going? Clans lose their identity. An active clan like LG could in theory have like hundreds of LG pup clans within only a month or two. There would be so many combinations, of different clans, thing would spiral out of control fast. BO2's league play is where this was. Each 'season', the settings reset. And each time you brought in a new combination, you had to restart a new team.
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 8, 2015 13:53:55 GMT -5
Activision's bureaucracy is unfortunate but is not a customer concern as players view and interact with the game holistically. That said, Beach Head's limitations are tragic as they are clearly limiting its ability to enhance the game with clan events.
With the three year cycle for Call of Duty, these things could be baked sooner and deeper into the game and they should.
The number of clans is irrelevant (actually more clans makes matchmaking easier, albeit more complex): clearly, the current system can handle the current number of clans. Again, in the format I proposed, each individual bracket would be small, but there would be many clans.
Regarding a specific clan playlist, what I proposed did not call for a playlist.
(That said, if there's a goal of reducing playlist fragmentation, Sledgehammer is doing a shit job: there are way too many playlists and it hurts matchmaking.)
I don't see how clan turnover is an issue for the format I proposed. If a person was in the clan for a season, then his work should be recorded and contribute to the clan's rank, even if he leaves the clan during that same season. What I proposed would combine all the constituents of each clan so the actual clan leaderboard would only have the clans themselves and not all their permutation teams that make them up.
(That said, Starcraft 2's leaderboards literally had millions of permutations, and all of them ranked.)
In Starcraft 2, new teams can be placed all the up to Platinum after assessment and thus have no need to grind their rank if they are in fact skilled. If BO2 was like AW where all players start as Bronze and need to work their way up, then each new team having its own rank would be an obvious issue. However, this is an issue with the implementation, not the idea of each permutation having its own rank.
We've been going at this for awhile so I'll summarize by repeating that I know what I'm saying cannot be implemented. However, the current clan war format is not optimal and I would love to see it improved to something that can be respected and actually encourages high level, competitive play ad hoc a la Starcraft 2.
On-topic: buy a PS4.
|
|
|
Post by illram on Apr 8, 2015 14:51:29 GMT -5
Just use a mouse. Your KD will go up. Your love life will be enhanced. Your portfolio will grow exponentially. If you must sit on the couch (peasant), then use something like a Couchmaster to provide a mock desk for your mouse and keyboard. I know, I know. It's sacrilege. I'm like the guy on the TV infomercials in the black and white cut scene spilling his nachos. I just don't feel like investing the time to get back to being good with the mouse again and re-learning quick and smooth KB movement and equipment use. My accuracy with the controller is just better right now, like 14% with a mouse vs. 20% with a stick, and the movement and equipment usage with the controller is hardwired into my muscle memory after so many hours of doing it from MW2 onwards. It's just more enjoyable. While that would surely improve with time (especially mouse accuracy %), for the maybe 1 hour of free time I have per night to play it's just not worth it to me. I really really hate sucking due to lack of control. Poor map knowledge, straight up gun skill, fine. But dying because I pressed x instead of c or couldn't change my secondary quick enough or I forgot what button is my tac nade and which is my semtex or whatever... so frustrating. With the controller it's just smooth as butter and in game I am still getting basically the same results as I was on the console against xbox plebians. I was surprised actually at how little a difference I notice in competitiveness. Maybe it's because there are so few people online playing Ghosts right now and the competition is unusually light or something. I realize this probably sounds insane/stupid. I sort of feel like Copernicus telling the Pope the Earth actually orbits the sun. "I use a controller on the PC, it's fine." "BURN HIM!"
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 9, 2015 11:13:57 GMT -5
In TF2's UGC league, which people won't even discover unless theyre interested in playing fairly competitively, there is already enormous issues with people not showing up on match days, particularly at the lower levels. Easy: the team that does show up automatically wins. In what I proposed, the team that is in the lobby longer wins if both teams are present but never simultaneously. ...also, competitive TF2? That's almost as silly as, I don't know, competitive Call of Duty.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 9, 2015 11:53:52 GMT -5
In TF2's UGC league, which people won't even discover unless theyre interested in playing fairly competitively, there is already enormous issues with people not showing up on match days, particularly at the lower levels. Easy: the team that does show up automatically wins. In what I proposed, the team that is in the lobby longer wins if both teams are present but never simultaneously. ...also, competitive TF2? That's almost as silly as, I don't know, competitive Call of Duty. Not quite following why you would call competitive CoD 'silly', seeing all it's success recently. I've been a bit of a critic in the past, but even I will admit it's one of the more successful parts of the MLG stuff now.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 9, 2015 14:24:01 GMT -5
In theory, yes...many CoD clans could go out and set up private matches in lobbies, to help facilitate a direct comp type of league, with ongoing leaderboards.
But theory won't work. It's already a mind-crushing amount of work RIGHT NOW for clan leaders, and that's just with trying to organize people to play in bi-monthly weekend clan war contests. Emailing people, coordinating people, following up, sending out emails, making sure people will show, confirming stuff, posting results and everything else. Stupid amount of work that kills almost the entire weekends we have. What's being proposed up there, would CRUSH clan leaders. I'm already pretty much shutting down our clan operations with the current environment. You add in 10x more work, arranging squads to be online, meeting all week long for match play...PUTTING the burden on clan leaders to do Beachhead's job......I'm done. You'll simply kill everything.
That's the thing. here's the crux of the entire debate. For 'joe casual' clan, that doesn't really give a fvck about how they do, the above might be great. Play? Don't play? It's all good. Just go with the flow. But clans that actually play to try and be the best in the world? Something like will crush them. You need a central organizational body, company, to facilitate things and make it easy for clans to compete.
|
|
Will
True Bro
K/D below 1.0
Posts: 1,309
|
Post by Will on Apr 9, 2015 16:33:18 GMT -5
It works for the Runescape clan cup. I couldn't imagine how shitty it would be if that were run like the COD clan battles - whoever nolifes the most wars against shitty clans? That's like saying the Cleveland Browns should win the Superbowl because they beat their local highschool team more times than the New England Patriots did.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 9, 2015 16:40:06 GMT -5
It works for the Runescape clan cup. I couldn't imagine how shitty it would be if that were run like the COD clan battles - whoever nolifes the most wars against shitty clans? That's like saying the Cleveland Browns should win the Superbowl because they beat their local highschool team more times than the New England Patriots did. except that's not really how clan wars worked last year. Some elements of truth in what you said, small bits...but the rest is kind of bullshit. Shame on you Will.
|
|
Will
True Bro
K/D below 1.0
Posts: 1,309
|
Post by Will on Apr 9, 2015 16:49:22 GMT -5
I just wanted an excuse to take a shot at Cleveland.
I'm surprised that you didn't target the fact that I've been playing Runescape for 14 years. What a shit game that is
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 9, 2015 17:15:23 GMT -5
I just wanted an excuse to take a shot at Cleveland. I'm surprised that you didn't target the fact that I've been playing Runescape for 14 years. What a shit game that is Honestly, i don't even know what it is. I've heard the name dropped here and there ....but haven't a clue what that game does. regarding cleveland...that poor city doesn't need any additional shots. The Manziel fiasco was horrible last year. Maybe LeBron can change this soon...
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 10, 2015 10:25:57 GMT -5
Not quite following why you would call competitive CoD 'silly', seeing all it's success recently. I've been a bit of a critic in the past, but even I will admit it's one of the more successful parts of the MLG stuff now. Just because Call of Duty has been successful as an esport does not validate the game: the mechanics and rules of the game itself do not lend itself to serious high level play. I'm surprised that you didn't target the fact that I've been playing Runescape for 14 years. What a shit game that is I wanted to check out Runescape 3, but couldn't remember my password. I recover my account, log in, and half my stats are maxed out and I have a few hundred million gold. I think I was hacked. I should be hacked more often. But theory won't work. It's already a mind-crushing amount of work RIGHT NOW for clan leaders, and that's just with trying to organize people to play in bi-monthly weekend clan war contests. Emailing people, coordinating people, following up, sending out emails, making sure people will show, confirming stuff, posting results and everything else. If you struggle with logistical challenges, the onus is on you. I expect clan members to know when wars are and to follow the status of said wars (all they have to do is open the app: if someone cannot be expect to do this, just kick them). For organization, etc., we use a spreadsheet. Failure to show results in probation and then kicks so I simply don't worry about it.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 10, 2015 10:33:59 GMT -5
Not quite following why you would call competitive CoD 'silly', seeing all it's success recently. I've been a bit of a critic in the past, but even I will admit it's one of the more successful parts of the MLG stuff now. Just because Call of Duty has been successful as an esport does not validate the game: the mechanics and rules of the game itself do not lend itself to serious high level play. Validate it, according to what? All Esports are kind of silly. StarCraft is good? CoD is bad? Speaking solely with my opinion....it's not like a StarCraft player is going to get big 'oooohs & aahhs' from me, versus a CoD Esports player. They are both kind of dork activities with the Esports, compared to real athletic events. (and I say that, being one of those dorks who did clan wars) And when talking about CoD, I'm not sure how you even discuss it anymore. Are you talking BO2 CoD? Ghosts CoD? Or this new Mexican Jumping bean version called AW? CoD mechanics and gameplay styles aren't even remotely the same in any of these games anymore, so which game you validating? Ultimately, if the audience comes to view it, the sponsors roll in, the prize money comes...it's validated. End of discussion. No matter how much you dislike it.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 10, 2015 11:30:30 GMT -5
Popularity of the game is a huge component of any esport really. Hell even for real sports. You could easily rank professional physical sports based on how much objective skill they require; and you could also absolutely design tests which more accurately measure skill than existing sports. I dont think that there are many people who think comp cod would really exist without the game being so popular casually, but it is popular and does have a notable scene because of it. I mean yeah, cods mechanics arent really particularly amazing tests of skill, and yeah the meta isnt terribly deep, but that doesnt really mean much beyond dick stroking. Meta is overrated.
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Apr 10, 2015 12:44:01 GMT -5
Popularity alone does not validate; for example, the Transformers movies are not quality cinema despite their box office numbers.
That said, I don't think highly of real sports and I have no respect for esports, despite being an avid gamer.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 10, 2015 13:28:26 GMT -5
Popularity alone does not validate; for example, the Transformers movies are not quality cinema despite their box office numbers. We aren't talking 'art'. We are talking sports. And in sports, popularity is one of the main drivers. What's not to respect. It's one of the purest forms out there.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Apr 13, 2015 7:56:29 GMT -5
It works for the Runescape clan cup. I couldn't imagine how shitty it would be if that were run like the COD clan battles - whoever nolifes the most wars against shitty clans? That's like saying the Cleveland Browns should win the Superbowl because they beat their local highschool team more times than the New England Patriots did. Oh, that, too. But I would much prefer a format, say, where there were mock tournaments with brackets and everything. The current format primarily measures the ability of your clan to pub stomp. I thought I would readdress these two comments made last week. In light of the Clan Wars Battle Royale just ending this past weekend. A two round war, on Saturday and Sunday. I wanted to bring this up because while talking to some other clans, I got to see some of their in-game stat performances. They help shed some light on just how crazy good some of these clans were this past weekend. Both you two (Will and Mega), you try to make the point that Clan Wars is easy, and is just about 'pub stomping' easy players. You BOTH need to chew on some of these numbers. Some of the top clans that won this past weekend, saw their best units (squads) putting up 65 to 67 wins over the two rounds. Those are just the few I saw. The best was 67, a squad from the former Wicked players, now run by PWNStars. To put that into perspective, that's 67 wins over two rounds, eight hours. That's 8.37 wins per hour. And that's 8.37 wins per hour, and that's INCLUDING wait times between games, switching game modes, and searching for opponents. Also keep in mind. To put up the above numbers, you can't lobby shop. You play whoever you get. Searching for a new lobby, adds about 30 seconds per game. Won't work. It also means that not only are you 'pub stomping crappy randoms, ...you are ALSO having to stomp down other full-party groups and clans you will typically see one out four/five games. Not only that, but also stomp down mostly all full squad clan opponents in lessor modes like HCTDM, Uplink and CtF, where pretty much the only people playing are clans during the weekend. Not only that, but be able to play all these different types of game modes, equally well. Last but not least, pretty much go 67-0 over the course of those two rounds. You two really want to tell me that's easy? I saw some of those stats and they are real. I know our best squad, from the three prior clan wars, has only hit 59 over two rounds. And that was just our best squad, others were well below them.Some of these clans that won this weekend, their best squads hit the sixties. That's an insane win rate level. Reality is, pubstomping is mostly only a factor when playing low level scrub wars and meaningless early season stuff. But when you get to the more meaningful wars, towards the end, where you bunched up against good competition (which neither of your two clans seemed to have hit yet)... it becomes brutal. Pubstomping is needed, but over the two rounds, you will ALSO have to win against other full-party groups, and win fast. You need to perform in the above manner. Not only 'pubstomp', but also pubstomp ALL your opponents, including the one or two dozen other full-party clans you will inevitably match up against (over 2 rounds), in game modes you don't typically play. You two think you can do that? You can't. Not trying to be rude there, but that's the part you are missing, winning in stressful conditions like that, at that high of a rate. Most solo people will never get how hard that is. If you aren't putting up those type of numbers, yourself and your friends...you will get sh1t on. That is reality. Keep these numberrs in mind when you try to play it off as just pubstomping some randoms, something anyone can do.
|
|