Guns Of Icarus Online
Community => Community Events => Topic started by: RomanKar on July 12, 2014, 08:28:45 pm
-
As my first piece of evidence, I would like to present people's exhibit 1-A: The SAC v BFS match from today's Hephaestus Challenge match. I would link it, but there is no reason on God's green earth anyone should have to sit through something like that. Not the broadcaster, not the players, and I would say the audience, but there really couldn't and shouldn't have been an audience.
The only way, right now, to guarantee non stop action in this game, and a winner within a reasonable time without artificial, kept outside of the game, timers, is by playing capture point.
I would also encourage Muse to develop a new type of game mode to make the competitive scene more fun to play and watch, and through the actual game modes, promote action oriented play with timers and guaranteed endpoints contained within the game itself.
My Clanmate is even pushing to try and have this game picked up by MLG. If they saw that video, I'm afraid of what they'd say about that proposal, or if they'd even bother to say anything.
The game, and the skill and dedication of players, as well as, any audience we hope to achieve, deserve a better competitive standard. Deathmatch is just not it.
I would also suggest that Deathmatch is the most seemly of gamemodes in other games. Even the FPS genres have small tweaks to the standard Deathmatch game mode.
I can't be the only one who thinks this. And I don't want to hear that this will take the long range out of the game. Crazy King, probably the more innovative of the modes currently in the game, could employ some sniping. But Crazy King is only 3v3. Maybe a new 3 point, 2v2, Crazy King?
I'd really like to know what people think about this matter.
-
Aerodrome was cool. Second Aerodrome time?
But.... to say that the current meta of GOIO is long range sniping.... ummm no... This was a complete anomaly. The top 4 teams in Hephaestus right now GwTh, HRA, Rydr, and SIR do not snipe. Thank God the time of 2 hr long snipe matches are long gone.
-
I'd be interested to see the kind of capture point map they use in competitive TF2. 5 points. You can only capture the next point in the line, and when you do it pushes back the enemy spawn. The more points you control the more your score goes up. Additionally if you capture all the points you win. Defensive builds are still valid cause you can still just hold when you get the advantage as long as they didn't rack up too many point before that. There are always 2 points a shorter distance apart that are in focus, keeping combat constrained, but not as hectic as a single point. It also prevents the squid/goldfish speed advantage from dominating the game.
-
But.... to say that the current meta of GOIO is long range sniping.... ummm no... This was a complete anomaly. The top 4 teams in Hephaestus right now GwTh, HRA, Rydr, and SIR do not snipe. Thank God the time of 2 hr long snipe matches are long gone.
I was just making the point that sniping should be a viable way to play the game competitively.
-
We just need more 2v2 CP. Almost no reason for there not to be. All the current maps would work for it. Just need to add CP points.
I'm not upset about today's match. SAC played well. They didn't fall for any of our traps. We've ran similar against other teams and they fell for them every time. All about positioning and getting an opponent to move where you want them in those fights. I applaud SAC for not being pressured by the clock and playing smart.
Aerodrome 2...maybe this fall/winter. Considering the organizer situation since our guys stated they wanted to participate last time. Early story ideas are already being put down. Some of the teams know as I've listed the doc for them but simply put, the Baronies will be getting involved in the plot next time.
-
Why doesn't desert scrap have a 2v2 or 4v4 variant?
-
It seems to me, that the OP is asking the wrong question (Should Competitive Matches move toward Capture Point?). As a competitive scene is made up of teams who compete in competitions, I would sggest therefore, the correct questions are:
• What are the priorities of the competition organisers (and competitors)?
Are the priorities entertainment, fun, high/mid/low level play etc...
• How should these priorities affect the rule set or structure of the competition?
For example, very long matches were not practical in competitive play with streamers and players because they were boring to spectators, hard to commentate and impractical for organising tournaments with a large amount of games in a short amount of time.
In the OP's complaint, no-score draw matches with very little action are boring to spectators and that something should be done. The OP then goes on to state "the only way, right now to guarantee non stop action in this game, and a winner within a reasonable time without artificial, kept outside of the game, timers, is by playing capture point." This is wrong.
If a competition organiser wishes to set up a competition where the OP's scenario was to be discouraged, it can be done through the rule set of the tournament. Now I am not going to be prescriptive, I am merely pointing out some examples.
In rugby, teams gain more points in the league by scoring more trys in a match. This suggests that teams could be ranked not just on a win/loss ratio but also upon the number of kills they achieve. It would also be possible to penalise teams for failing to score a point which would encourage teams to be less passive.
In Golf (Ryder cup), teams play different versions of the game (four ball etc..) in order to provide variety into a competition. This means that a tournament could involve not just death match but also capture the flag, or even other crazier elements (squid racing).
I think that these sort of discussions are best left to the individual competition organisers, who have their own priorities for the competitions they wish to run.
-
Your rugby analogy fails from the start. Rugby is a great game to start with. 30 guys find a field and play, and people show up to watch. No league, barely a scoreboard, not even an announcer, though the chap next to you may have to explain a thing or two.
No league rules for extra points in the league for scoring 4 tries. No standings in the New Zealand conferance on the line, places in the playoffs, or all that other stuff that is really off the field of play. As a matter of fact, one of the highest levels of play are the international tours. 3 games, Winner gets a Trophy. None of that other crap I mentioned. It's all on the field of play. League rules, and in chat timers won't make the game better.
I'm talking about the game. Pure and simply, played at the highest level. And we should debate as a community of competitive players, spectators, organizers, developers (thanks the gods for this), streamers, referees, Clan Leaders, those just trying to get started in the competitive scene, and salty old birds.
We all know the dominant mode for competitive play is Deathmatch. I'm not a fan, under all those categories I qualify for in the above list. The only proof I need is that when I bring up capture point for competitive play, ONE, 1, tournament came to everyone's minds.
Deathmatch is the default. I think that needs to change.
-
The Rugby union bonus point system is an example of a sport creating a set of rules, parallel to the rules on the pitch, in order to encourage an attacking style of play and attempt to score more points. This would have been done for the particular priorities of those who designed the system in the first place. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_union_bonus_points_system)
Another example is the qualification for the FIFA world cup, teams are seeded according to their rankings when the draw for qualification groups are made. It doesn't have to be this way, the qualification draw could be entirely random. FIFA chose for the tournament to be run their way for their own particular priorities (no matter how nefarious they might be).
This is the point I am trying to make; it is the responsibility of whomever organises a tournament to make clear their own priorities concerning the creation of a tournament with all relevant parties when forming a rule set for the tournament.
You state that "Death match is the default. I think that needs to change." I think that is great, if you want a tournament which is not just death match, then create one. The community will be richer for it and you will get to play and watch games that you want to.
-
Ok. Future Hapheastus Challenges and Sunday Skirmishes should be run with something other than DeathMatch. I am formally requesting a format change that eliminates Deathmatch in favor of Capture point. I appeal to those organizers directly, here, now.
-
The only issue with this currently, is that if this change is implemented, all our matches will be on labyrinth... or it'd be 3v3... which increases the amount of players a clan has to maintain. I understand this would also be a plea for muse to add more Capture point maps, but the Tourney organizers are working with what they have currently, not what could be in a future patch....
-
Next competitive events being CP, lolno.
Labyrinth being inserted into the map pool for competitive 2v2 events, hell yes.
-
I agree, there would have to be more 2v2 Capture points to be viable as the default for competitive play.
-
I don't think that deathmatch in general should be dropped from competitive play. We rarely see matches like the one that happened yesterday, and when we do it's almost always on Dunes. So why not just replace Dunes with Labyrinth?
-
This is only from my point of view not an official statement from the hephaestus admins. Just to make sure ^^.
Yes the Sac vs BFS Match wasnt fun to watch. Yes I wouldve preferred a more action packed game. But how can you accomplish that?
In the stream chat yesterday there was a discussion if dunes encourages those superlong range sniping to easy and if it should get dropped out.
I'd say no. This was the first match in the entire Season that ended in a draw with no kill. I might see it as an issue if Teams start to do this on a regular bases but not if it happens for the first time.
Thats why we have a time. To prevent matches from going into endless.
But even if we removed Dunes (and i would in the same way erase canyon if id decide so) from the mappool there would've been teams that didnt like it.
Skrimskraw from the Thralls said in the chat that he would hate to see Dunes getting dropped cause he likes this map. And i cant think of any superlong range drawn out game the thralls had. Its just a different mindset teams have to use when fighting on those ranges or approaching such an enemy. Thralls shown it, Mandarins shown it and others aswell. Its possible to approach an succesfully engage a sniper team on dunes. Yes I would still like more hardcover on Dunes to allow easier movement without getting shot to a certain area (for example the line of scrimmage).
But still ... Dunes is a unique map in the pool even without looking at those superlongrange fights. I like the general idea and the map pool would be to small with only 4 maps.
Regarding the MLG thingy ...
Have you ever seen a Terran vs Terran in proffessional starcraft 2? Its a bid similiar. 2 Players positioning their army infront of each other without alot of movement besides the occasional movement of Vikings to gather visions for their tanks. Its the same. Every E-Sport Title had that. Thats how things go. League of Legends had the passive Farming style aswell which wasnt as fun to watch. Thats how things work. Fun for the viewers and effective gameplay arent always the same.
For Labyrinth or CP to work in a tournament area I think we would need to look further into it. I can remember having Labyrinth as map in a past tournament. Not sure if it was flotsam or a cogs s2 match. It was Duck vs Duck and sure it was a totally different tactic but it ended that one team was simply able to circle around the globe with one ship while the other always died on the first enemy approach. I am unsure if that was just a big mistake of the opposing duck team that they didnt manage the kill or if that was just a way to easy to do thing. Would need to further look into it to see if thats really what i want personally for a competetive match.
-
If you want capture point create an event
-
If you want capture point create an event
I am looking into that and would appreciate any help anyone can give to me.
I do not want to be someone that just complains and really does nothing to help. I will try to do a tournament, and have a few ideas, but want to flush some things out first. If anyone would like to advise, collaborate, send links, take my ideas and run with them, I'd love to discuss it, feel free to PM me, message me in Steam, RomanKar, in game or whatever. I would like to put my money where my mouth is on this and see what shakes out.
Less QQ, more Pew Pew
-
capture point doesn't work right now. A switch to CP would almost certainly result in an increase in the mean length of matches.
If Muse fixed the point capture mechanics (remove point blocking, or maybe even remove control completely and just tick points based on the number of ships on point) and added a decent number of CP maps... I'd still heavily oppose competitive CP because I don't think CP is particularly strategic or interesting.
The fight is entirely limited to a single area of the map and the range of strategies for the defender is limited purely to camping. Many tactics would be marginalised, including both the one you want to marginalise but also pretty much anything based around ranges beyond gat/mortar. Right now the good and interesting matches are mobile and dynamic... I don't really see why you would want to end that for the sake of further discouraging what is already a very niche and unpopular strategy.
The introduction of time limits to some competitive events has worked really well in forcing shorter and more interesting games, I don't really see any need to entirely turn around the competitive scene to serve the same purpose.
-
It'd be interesting. My only concern about the capture points is pretty much the same thing with long range sniper matches. Equally skilled teams causing long and drawn out matches.
This can be caused by teams competing over a neutral point over and over again, and neither one gaining a clear advantage. While this is less likely to happen than one team claiming the point and just being unable to be removed from it (it's incredibly difficult to take a capture point back); leading to extremely one sided matches (at least in the score).
With the options for 2v2 capture point matches being extremely limited, it would almost have to be a 3v3 or 4v4 maps. Needing more ships to compete reduces the number of teams that can compete, as not a lot of clans can guarantee 12 players on a continual basis.
One option could mixing teams. Such as having the usual 8 person team sign up, then splitting the ships between matches. Having half of Team A compete in Match 1 with halves from Team B and D going against halves from C, E, and G, then having the other halves compete in different matches for the day. As long as all teams get an equal number of play sessions throughout the event. Each partial team on the winning team earns a point for their team. The team with the highest score at the end of the event wins. Ties can be broken by having the full teams compete on labyrinth.
Some problems with this method would be the possible number of ties and complexity of setting up the matches in a way that gives all teams an equal opportunity for winning.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
For example:
We have Teams A-L competing (12 teams)
Match 1:
A1, D2, E1 vs K1, B1, L1
Match 2:
B2, F1, J1 vs C1, H2, I1
Match 3:
A2, C2, G2 vs H1, K2, D1
Match 4:
E2, F2, L2 vs G1, I2, J2
(assuming I didn't mix things up too horribly)
We'll say that the groups on the left won each round, leading to
2 Points to teams: A, E, F
1 Point to teams: B, C, D, G, J, L
0 Points to teams: H, I, K
Do this over a season, and the scores should start to spread out more. With most number of teams, they won't divide up this nicely, so there would need to be some teams sitting out, or perhaps competing in a 2v2 match (mixed or unmixed teams?). It's possible to spread the score out even more by awarding all the ships their end match point value (similar to the Aerodrome). But of course it would have to be ensured that all teams had equal opportunity to earn the same score (different matches have different winning point values).
It leads to a lot of interesting situations where teams have to work with ships they're not at used to flying with, making it harder to practice. Teams should never be paired up with or play against their own halves in the 3v3 matches.
This is of course assuming that a lot of 2v2 CP maps aren't released relatively soon.
----------------------------------------
edit:
Instead of giving them the value of the points they earned for the match, award a score based upon the % of points earned for the match. So the winning team would get 100 points for earning 100% of the maximum score, while the losing team would earn between 0 and 99 points depending upon their performance. This eliminates the complexity of trying to guarantee everyone gets equal opportunity for raw points.
-
The issue you have here is lack of pressure on DeathMatch maps to get immediate kills. Usually brawling teams don't have that issue, because they are prepared to take alot of damage while getting the kills, cause that's what the brawling mindset is in the first place. As long as there's at least one side that tries to close distance between two teams, because their strategy includes it, the fire exchange will happen. The problem starts in the situation when you have two teams with their layouts and strategy based on passive sniping. Usually we see sniping builds working and still providing entertainment because, while passive snipe team only defends itself, there's another, much more agressive team that puts pressure and initiates fights, causes the engagements, and their actions decide on whether there will be any kills in this match or not. But the moment when both teams' ships are based on just camping in one point and hoping for good snipe, there's a problem. No team engages, not putting pressure, so both teams just camp, exchange non-lethal amount of inaccurate long-range fire and take cover in case they take more of it, repair, then come back to sniping. Did any ship lose some permahull in this game? I believe armor fell once on one mobula. Should we remove armor or permahull from the game just because it causes the ships to be able to endure enough damage to survive long range exchange? Of course not! But same goes for removing DM maps from the pool and/or getting rid of sniping guns. All teams have certain playstyles and strategies, some of them, like GwTh, can manage to use all kinds of cover on Dunes, making them almost unseen until you're in the range of their close range guns. Rydr have their agressive-sniping approach with Mobulas. There's alot of more examples I'm sure you yourself can come up with, where some team prefers fighting on one map or another, using sniping guns or not, but removing DM maps/sniping guns from the pool during competitive events is not a solution, and neither is making them CP only.
Thing is, to win a CP, you do have one thing that you need in deathmatches - pressure. You're pressured to fight for the point in the middle of the map, and you can't really go passive snipe camping on your spawn and hope for an easy win. But sadly, what CP does is it reduces your ship choices and strategy approach. We probably won't see sniping ships at all anymore, you'd probably prefer some brawling ship to contest the point, especially since there's not enough space around the point on any CP map to effectively keep your distance with it against enemy ships. Furthermore, such things as flanks and making use of the environment, using map cover, getting to know the whole map, those things won't happen. That's a big flaw of CP maps, you're only pinned down to one point at the map, you need to hold it, you need to go for it, you ignore the rest of the big map you're flying on. What's the point of getting to know the names of every single paritan building for your strategical advantages if all you'll care about from now on is The Globe on Lab?
You end up with a problem of having a CP mode, that puts the pressure to act, which you need on DM, but in form of making one point of importance, which cripples the amount of effective ship layouts to ones being useful only close to the point, and by completely ignoring the structure of the rest of the map, which takes away alot of strategical advantages for many teams that worked hard on making them work.
On the other hand you have DM, where you're not pressured to one point on the map, and your ship layouts are dependant solely on your team's playstyle, and possibly with a little bit of dependance on the map type, but, as brawling Dune Thralls already have proven many times, not significantly enough to make your builds not work on certain maps at all. You have no pressure to go straight for one point on the map, giving you freedom of choice for approach and making use of the map's structure. Basically, no pressure at all, which sounds great, until you have no pressure to actually engage the enemy.
That's where the problem is, you either end up with interesting, intense and complex fights, with an occasional situation when no team feels pressured enough and confident with their builds to get any kills, or you get a game that will end at some point, will end quickly, and you'll have significant fire exchange, but for the price of giving away many essential aspects of competitive games, dumbing down the fights to simple "rush in for the point, kill people fast and cap", and you'll reduce the amount of effective layouts to mostly brawling ships. What you need to come up with is a good ruleset (for either tournament or the map) that will put pressure on people to actually kill eachother, or, in CP case, something that will make use of larger part of the map, so hiding between buildings, behind cover etc. would have any point on it, and also something that would allow you to use sniping ships effectively, simply put, we need kill pressure on DM, and playstyle variety on CPs.
As it has been mentioned before, I'd love to see Labyrinth as an additional map to be put in the map pool, under specific rules designed for CP maps to cope with DM ones. I also don't mind seeing some kind of mini tournament, something similar to SCS, that is only oriented around CP. But for a bigger scale, to exclude DeathMatches in every single competitive event that we'll end up with from now on? That I'll never agree on. A misread strategy for two teams during one competitive DeathMatch is not enough of a reason for me to give up all the fun that DM fights provide, just carpe diem next time and our problem is solved there. I thought that neither team would like the idea of ending up with no kills and no win at the end of the day, especially since, as you put it yourself, neither casters, nor audience, nor players themselves enjoyed ending up in such situation.
-
Dota suffers a similar fate called rat dodo where teams just push towers and back off whenever a fight is about to happen. It was nearly unbeatable a year ago, but the best team in the game last year just got knocked out of The International this year because people have learned how to deal with it. Boring games happen, even in real sports.
-
Same disclaimer that Ali put up a bit back, this... is personal.
Competitive labyrinth games are my FAVORITE! However, it is the only 2v2 CP. If there were more 2v2 CP maps then I'd definitely say throw all maps into the pool for a general tournament. However, with only having one, having that slight chance to have to play a game completely different than everyone else is patently unfair. While my old team the Brood was going through major restructuring, we were able to stay pretty high up in Cogs one week as we got Labyrinth and I just got onto the point and didn't die.Valid strategy of course, but completely different skill set than DM.
-
Dota suffers a similar fate called rat dodo where teams just push towers and back off whenever a fight is about to happen. It was nearly unbeatable a year ago, but the best team in the game last year just got knocked out of The International this year because people have learned how to deal with it. Boring games happen, even in real sports.
This was going to be my point as well.
As the person who had to cast the match which brought this up in the first place, while it was unfortunate, these things happen. I watch an excessive amount of esports, whether it's something like Starcraft or DOTA, and there are times when some matches just make you want to go to sleep. I don't think it's too big of a deal honestly, and in a stretch of 7 weeks, this was the first time it happened. Personally I think if we wanted to make sure that never happened again we should just remove Dunes from the competitive map pool.
Now, if we're talking about making a Capture Point tournament, I'm intrigued by it for sure, just wish there was more than just Labs for 2v2 point.
-
The map is irrelevant really. We've seen this happen on other maps as well. Including Paritan and Duel at Dawn. Realistically it comes down to the teams and their playstyle.
I don't think this means that DM itself or any particular map is broken/boring when it comes to competitive play. If teams don't want to be aggressive, they're just not going to be aggressive. And this very well could lead to two teams who are less interested in winning than they are with not losing.
-
The map is irrelevant really. We've seen this happen on other maps as well. Including Paritan and Duel at Dawn. Realistically it comes down to the teams and their playstyle.
Yes, while it can and has happened before, nearly all Dunes matches are of the long drawn out sniping matches which has led to more time limits being reached than any other map.
-
Only match I've personally been in that went to the 30 minute mark was a Duel at Dawn game against the Gents, we couldn't kill them because they were repairing too hard but they lacked the fire power because of the same reason. However, there was a constant engagement.
Fault for the longness of that match belongs to the teams. Yesterday BFS and SAC functionally refused to fight. I didn't see any armor breaks and there was definitely no perma hull hits. BFS did some light probing two or three times but hardly pressed and SAC functionally never left the fallen ship. If you don't want to see games like that then don't play like that.
-
Ummm...you guys do know Aerodrome had 30 min match timers and there was only 1 match in the entire event that came close to it. All the rest ended within 10-20 mins. All of which was intense fighting and action to the point the casters couldn't keep up. Don't go assuming CP battles being the same unless you have real proof to back it up. Fact of the matter is...the changes to CP gametype which lowered the cap points and forced teams to relocate faster, have changed CP to the point that long drawn out battles are extremely rare. The longest battles will potentially only take place on Scrap since it is just 1 point.
Sammy you are so full of it. There was multiple armor breaks and perma was done to both sides. Not much but there was some. Maybe if you and Sunderland weren't preening your corkscrews all the time in the stream chat you'd notice it.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR5yX_oEQYY#t=2138
Not a pixel missing of perma that I can see Even if there is an invisible perma hull pixel missing, it is very indicative of neither team doing much. I was able to find a few moments of armor break but they were few and far between. However I can't find anything hitting the perma.
-
Sammy you are so full of it. There was multiple armor breaks and perma was done to both sides. Not much but there was some. Maybe if you and Sunderland weren't preening your corkscrews all the time in the stream chat you'd notice it.
There was zero perma damage done. Perhaps a handful of armor went down, but certainly no permanent damage was done by either ship for 30 minutes.
-
So what would happen if a tournament was run where hitting the time limit without a clear winning team resulted in double elimination?
In Armored Core, there's a strategy of playing for "AP lead" which is usually boring to watch. "AP" is "armour points", or your machine's health, and like permahull in GoI, it doesn't regenerate. When a match in Armored Core is decided by time limit, the game defaults to awarding the win to the player with the highest AP.
There have been tournaments in various games in the series where people have done their best to control that particular playstyle. Some tournaments have disallowed AP lead wins, requiring a match that goes over time limit to be replayed, or eliminating both players in the match. Others have penalised players for not playing aggressively, though that tends to be a tougher call to make. I've played in a competition where a win by enemy destruction was a win, and if the timer expired, the win was awarded not to the player with the highest AP, but with the smallest loss of AP, so if you bring a high-durability build, you can end with more AP and still "lose" (even though the in-game stats record it as a win).
It might be interesting to try a similar approach here.
If you're playing 2 vs. 2 Deathmatch, and both teams have the same number of survivors at the end of the match, EITHER the match gets replayed OR both teams are eliminated.
-
I used to cast several matches like this every weekend when sniping was at the peak of its popularity, including a SIRS vs Gents bo3 that went nearly three hours. Sometimes it got kinda boring, but I never once blamed any of the teams for using the builds and styles that they thought were best. I wouldn't expect them to do anything else. Actually, it was often an opportunity for some fun banter with my co-casters during the lulls in the action.
It seems bizarre to kick up a fuss over one rather anomalous sniping match in a league with hard 30 minute time limits that's otherwise chock full of brawling. I agree there should be more CP in competitive for the sake of variety, and that's a big reason why I wanted to be involved in the organizing the Aerodrome (and it should be noted that Gilder put a huge amount of time and effort into organizing it).
I don't think either us or the SIRs went into the match intending to make it a 0-0 draw. That's just how it turned out. In the end, for a variety of reasons, neither of us could get the engage we wanted. It happens sometimes. GOIO is a wonderfully unique beast where a wide variety of styles can be used and experimented with and that is what I love about it, even if it means there are long, drawn out matches now and again.
-
Here is my answer:
https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4504.new.html
-
Here is my answer:
Unsure of whether to post here or there. I'll post here because reasons.
Very cool. Sort of an SCS level event for capture point. While I don't think capture point and death match can easily reside within the same event for reasons other people have touched on, a new shorter running CP only event is a good move. :)