Guns Of Icarus Online
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: Puppy Fur on February 14, 2015, 04:31:25 pm
-
So, for those who don't know, HC Season 2 is coming back. With it a few changes are likely to happen and new ideas are coming around. One of the ideas is a ship selection phase. Some other games have a 'selection phase' where they pick which decks or heroes are going to be played and they do so in a set order. One team picks then the other and so on. Some games also have a banning phase. This allows for a lot of different gameplay but also changes up the meta to make matches much different then the same old thing. Now this creates a harder challenge for players. They'll have to think of combos they want and don't want to face and work around this. They can change up the game before it even starts.
Overall I'm hopeful that this'll bring new matches and challenges that make the competitive scene more interesting to play in and enjoyable to watch. Maybe we'll even see a squid or two.
How far would this go though? There are only 7 ships? Well, we're trying to keep it pretty limited. Here's a preview of what we have currently.
(http://puu.sh/fVakt/e3b895a8bf.png)
The current rules you see above are after talking a bit with teams. Banning will only affect 1 out of 7 ships during each phase. You'll never be limited to less then 6. People wanted to keep choices open to their play style.
We'd like to see your opinions on this idea. Whether you think banning ships is bad because it limits you or whether you like the idea but think it needs tweaks. Without your post we just don't know! :P
-Puppy Fur :3
-
Yay, I think we have needed something like this for a while, the kind of phase like this was the R&D where they mades or team 1 picks 1 ship, team 2 picks both then team 1 picks their final ship, made for some interesting combos and prevented hard counters for the most part as I'd you didn't know both enemy ships until you had picked at least 1 of your own.
But did I read it right that that ship will onto be banned for thaw one pick, or is it banned for the other team altogether?
Also would there be a time limit on each turn? The lobby timenow can get ridiculous without a set time limit
-
Pls no.
-
Yay, I think we have needed something like this for a while, the kind of phase like this was the R&D where they mades or team 1 picks 1 ship, team 2 picks both then team 1 picks their final ship, made for some interesting combos and prevented hard counters for the most part as I'd you didn't know both enemy ships until you had picked at least 1 of your own.
But did I read it right that that ship will onto be banned for thaw one pick, or is it banned for the other team altogether?
Also would there be a time limit on each turn? The lobby timenow can get ridiculous without a set time limit
Not sure on a timer yet. If Team 1 Bans a ship it is banned for Team 2 during that phase. So if pyra is banned by Team 1 in Phase One then Team 2 can still pick Pyra in Phase Two.
-
The game is already won in the lobby in most cases, so you might as well make the lobby strategy more interesting. But who cares what a casual scrub thinks.
-
Some other games have a 'selection phase' where they pick which decks or heroes are going to be played and they do so in a set order.
A huge difference between these games and Guns of Icarus is that they have more stuff to choose from while often only being able to choose it once. I am not sure if I want this system in 2v2's with only 7 ships in total to choose from.
Ignoring the banning feature for the moment the picking system very likely leads to the following two scenarios:
A team will bring the ship the ship combination they are comfortable with, regardless of the enemy or take one ship they are sure can work on that map (e.g.: Metamidion on Paritan is a solid choice) while the second ship is a pure counter that may or may not work as well with the first chosen ship.
But the selection order could also be better than nothing, even though I can't remember any problems other than last second switching, which very rarely happens, but still should be looked at by the refs so when a Ready Up happens, changing ship is not allowed.
My greatest concern is the banning feature.
Some games also have a banning phase. This allows for a lot of different gameplay but also changes up the meta to make matches much different then the same old thing. Now this creates a harder challenge for players. They'll have to think of combos they want and don't want to face and work around this. They can change up the game before it even starts.
The Meta that people often refer to consists of individual ships instead of ship combination. What I see happening is that Pyramidions and Goldfish will be banned more than any other ship and that might not be healthy for the "Meta".
Thralls showed excellent gameplay by going Metamidion and Blenderfish on Dunes and eliminating multiple long range oriented ship combinations. This is and was never the Meta of Dunes as far as I can remember, yet the banning system would have denied such a beautiful show.
Holy Roman Army appeared out of nowhere and killed everything with easy focus fire of Metamidion and Gat/Carro Pyramidion, a combination nobody used before and was not in the Meta.
Mandarians practised forever to get their double Metajunker to work and won an entire tournament without changing ships even once.
The point I want to get to is that the competitive playerbase might not be active enough for the banning feature. Deny the Mandariand their Metajunker and what would have been left? And so on.
Another main difference between the games you were referring to and Guns of Icarus is "Classes and Roles". In Guns of Icarus you have Pyramidions that can be a kill ship or support ship or the assassing Squid and bait Squid and some more stuff. Banning a Pyramidion is too generalized. It's almost as if one was saying "we are banning all fighter classes" or "we are banning all blue characters". A ship is dependend on it's loadout. This of course means that more stuff can be banned at once, which I am kind of ok as long as it isn't too general. This would actually allow people to force the other team to go into a specific direction. But this also means that people will deny map specific stuff "I am gonna deny this and that close range ship on Paritan so the enemy has to go long range".
"They have to"? They most likely have to, yes, or come up with a new idea on the spot. The inactivity in the competitive scene I mentioned earlier does lead to certain teams not being practised with certain stuff. I remember one certain team that we fought against with long range ships on dunes, after winning one of the captains told me "We actually don't know what to do in long range". Had the Mandarians practised other ships than the Metajunker, who knows if they or their crew had been remotely as good as they were? And how many teams and clans stay or can stay active after two or three tournaments?
One more note on the Meta is that I actually don't think there is one in this game. Thralls showed Spire can work just fine, with double lesmok Gatling and Heavy Flak no less. Overwatch and SPQR showed some Squid business. Mandarians used to win everything with Metajunker, even though nobody wants to even consider it once there is one Blenderfish or Galleon with at least one Lumberjack. People are just either not creative, determined, daring or active enough to have a huge impact on the Meta that can change people's minds.
To conclude all of the above, I say that the picking order might be better than nothing, but also the argument of "Why change a working system?" still stands. Banning entire ships is too general as, in my opinion, the loadouts matter more and banning loadouts will still allow some kind of flexibility for some teams, although teams might not be active enough to get a chance to practise anything too special in which case banning a ship does leave a very deep cut. Furthermore, people just have to do something else in order to "change" the Meta or "create" a new Meta.
This is not the end though for there is more thought!
Depending if the order matters in which captains are on their side, banning a ship can be more targeted. For example, if I am the captain of the first ship and we are in phase one the enemy team can casually ban my most favourite Mobula and possibly reduce a significant amount of our strength. And that can happen against every team for every match. In the worst case scenario I am not able to fly the ship I am most practised it.
You mentioned changing the Meta so there won't be the "same old thing". Last hepheastus challenge the only same old thing was a Metamidion paired with ships that were not often seen as their ally (Gat/Carro Pyramidion, long/mid range Mobula). The Meta has changed between the first Hepheastus Cahllenge and the tournament before it.
Also it is to be considered what kind of tournament this tournament should be: One in which people fight at their best against the enemies best or one that possibly forces both teams to go subpar ship combination they are not as practised with just to please the audience, considering, as I previously mentioned, the Meta has changed between tournaments so it isn't the necessarily the "same old thing". The SCS or scrims with other teams/clans and even the iron fork are great places to practise something new and experiment, so is it necessary for this tournament to force this?
That should be about everything I have to say to this topic.
-
The immediate problem I see with any ship picking system, is that this game is just too small for it, both competitive team-wise, and game mechanics-wise. Game-wise there are only 7 ships available to choose from (Pyramidion, Junker, Mobula, Goldfish, Galleon, Spire, and Squid, respectfully). Of these, only really 5 of them are viable for competitive play: Pyramidion, Junker, Mobula, Goldfish, and Galleon. While competitive teams have brought Spires and Squids in the past, and done quite well with them, usually they're not advised, just do to their "easy to kill" nature. Games that have a "Pick Order" draft for their competitive games (LoL and Dota 2 come to mind) have tens of heros/champions/whatever to choose from, and having a pick-order simply curtails the number of choices teams can make, whereas in GoI these same pick-orders/ship banning could drastically hinder a team.
Which brings me to the next point: GoI doesn't have all that large of a competitive scene to begin with, and with fairly limited selection of ships to choose from, many teams just focus on flying one or two specific ships well together. Having this ship-banning system could very easily screw over your opponent unfairly. For example, lets say in the finals of Sky League (picking the last major competitive event I was not a participant of, to reduce any bias I might have) the Mandarins banned Rydr from using Pyramidions, and Rydr banned the Mandarins from using Junkers. Two teams that near-perfected their respective ships would of been reduced to a potato-fight of ships that they're not used to flying, and that's in a "best case" scenario. Two highly ranked teams neutralizing one another. What would happen if Team A can effectively fly and practice with Pyramidions, Junkers, Galleons, and Goldfish, and Team B can only effectively fly and practice with Pyramidions and Goldfish. While all of these ships can work well together, if Team A simply bans Pyramidions one match for Team B, and then Goldfish the next match, that could greatly weaken Team B's chances of winning, even if they would have won otherwise, had they been able to fly ships that they had practiced and trained on.
Yay, I think we have needed something like this for a while, the kind of phase like this was the R&D where they mades or team 1 picks 1 ship, team 2 picks both then team 1 picks their final ship, made for some interesting combos and prevented hard counters for the most part as I'd you didn't know both enemy ships until you had picked at least 1 of your own.
To reply to this: the R&D Invitational did not have a pick-order system. The one you're describing sounds like the one Skrimskraw was testing out for the Sunday Community Skirmish, which had its own set of problems. Team A picks 1 ship, Team B picks 2 ships, and then Team A picks 1 ship seems fine in theory. But in actuality, Team A picks 1 ship they "hope" will be good on the map and can only guess as to what Team B will take to counter them. Team B picks 2 ships that can counter Team A's first ship, and whatever they think could be Team A's second ship. This leaves Team A with a problem while picking their second, and last ship, choose a ship that works well with their teammate's ship, or a ship that can hopefully counter both of Team B's ships. Even swapping this system around for each match still leaves the team that had the first ship pick on match 1 as the eventual victor.
Obviously none of this takes skill into account, and this game is all about skill, but personally forcing a team to limit themselves doesn't seem right to me. Lobby Swap Games in competitive are an unfortunately annoying aspect of competitive games in this game, but also a necessary evil, to me, when you consider the other options such as banning ships or giving one team an inherent advantage over another team based solely on what order they pick their ships.
-
I certainly wouldn't play in this event as I told you before. Ship banning is beyond terrible in this game. You've been playing too much Dota.
-
One of the main worries is that there are only 7 different ships to choose from. I personally feel that's still a decent pool and 1 being removed shouldn't destroy a team (and if it does, I don't think that they should be winning competitive :P). There are a few worries with the system and before it ever gets implemented, if it does at all, I'd like to try it out for a weekend and see how it goes and if anything is too big of an issue it won't be implemented.
-
I certainly wouldn't play in this event as I told you before. Ship banning is beyond terrible in this game. You've been playing too much Dota.
This is in many, many games. Personal claims toward me should be left out of this post, thank you.
-
You might as well just say no Pyramidions. Only a few teams consistently use other ships.
This isn't a MOBA.
-
You might as well just say no Pyramidions. Only a few teams consistently use other ships.
This isn't a MOBA.
Once again, this is in many many games. Not just mobas. But, I see the point people who are making considerably longer posts are making. Would this be fair without the ban system?
-
You asked for more. Instead of echo a lot of the other comments I'd add my personal perspective.
I don't see the fun in an event where my ship is dictated by this by another team. Honestly here is how I would see this playing out. Before hand I would ask the opposing team what ships they wouldn't mind being banned. Ban, those two, and hope for the same kindness towards my team. I'd likely see any team that didn't do this in return as being complete jerks. I'd feel less cheated by fast swaps than these ship bans.
I also dislike the tacit implication that there is something wrong with ship specialization or that I was somehow a worse pilot for bringing my junker and only my junker. I found a ship I both liked and flew well in competitive play. Why is that wrong or more appropriately why is it somehow better to have to fly ships people don't want to?
This is supposed to be a competitive event, and gimping teams out of some notion of fairness is a terrible idea.
I mentioned the Dota because you seek to defend this system due to its use in other games like Dota which you play a good deal of. I am not insulting you for time spent Dota, I'd be a huge hypocrite to insult someone due to hours spent playing a game. Clearly the game has inspired this idea for you. Nothing wrong with inspiration.
-
Let me just copy and paste this xD
"Would this be fair without the ban system?" -Puppy
-
I've never seen the need for a pick order and have always preferred people having more freedom with their ship choices. Like last time, strongly enforced lobby timers are what I see as ideal as well as social shaming of fast swappers. Ideally refs could be made to force start a lobby. However it wouldn't be as game breaking as this ban system.
-
Overly complicated and will be a nightmare to maintain.
If one thing goes wrong, you risk pissing off a lot of people. Best to keep it simple and plan for overcoming problems.
-
Will it be fair without the ban system? Well, we've never really used a banning system before, so it should be fine. The banning would make things a little more interesting, because you're able to lock teams out of ships they're well practiced on. This is more interesting for the opposing team, but can be frustrating for the team who can't use the ship they enjoy.
I'm not a big fan of the ship selection either because it just complicates things. I think there was some testing done with a pick system for the SCS, you can always check out what Skrim gathered from that feedback. It didn't go all that well.
That being said, it 'might' make things more or less fair than the current system of just having free picks within a time limit.
-
If you want hc 2 to be better than hc1 then dont use more confusing or limiting rules. Keep it simple and within game mechanics.
-
If you want hc 2 to be better than hc1 then dont use more confusing or limiting rules. Keep it simple and within game mechanics.
I agree with Skrim.
Although Ayetach has proven how restrictions upon pilots can be very fun, it can also be too restricting.
Keep it simple, try to encourage as many teams as you can fit into the time frame to sign up, and you'll see different and unusual builds through the new and old faces. :)
-
Jub Jub that is the one I meant, I thought it was in the R&D not just SCS for a while. That was when I was only just starting to play competitive though so I did at first think that system was used for all major events XD
-
I think I understand why this idea is being put forward: The metamidion
Maybe it is just me but I noticed that the breakdown of responses here is basically between those who sparingly use the more meta builds (especially the metamidion), and those who use them often and are very well practised at them (I'm counting the Duck junker as meta here). Some teams have as a strength their experience and skill with traditional or specific load outs, others do not. That said the responses on the 'not liking the meta' side are also pretty mixed, but everyone who uses the meta lots looks to me to be on one side of this discussion.
You cant avoid the fact that a system designed specifically to reduce the use of the meta specifically weakens some teams that are well practised in it. This system would have been brutal for the Ducks for instance back when 'junker is OP' was a thing.
My initial reaction is to love the rule change because I hate flying the metamidion, and I hate flying against it. Unfortunately reflection tells me this is a bad idea. For one thing it solves a problem that will be reduced in the next patch (that the pyra is still a bit too strong). For another it upsets the balance of teams away from the status quo, and not by patching the game to correct the slight imbalance, but by trying to 'patch' the meta-game. For a specific 'break the meta' tournament that would be great, for Hephaestus I think this will reduce the motivation of some teams to play as it stacks the deck against them unfairly.
That said I'm not opposed to a pick system in the abstract, because there are things wrong with the current competitive ship picking mini-game. There are teams who will keep picking hard counters every time the opposition changes until everyone ends up with one metamidion and some other ship and that is boring. I just don't think a system where we block ships is a good solution.
-
the metamidion is already hard countered by teams who put effort into doing it.
is it really the organizers job to help teams worka gainst certain ships and builds, isnt it the teams themselves that should be practicing and learning how to counter things?
No the biggest problem is the carronade fish who counters 80% of everything in the game, only being unable to counter the pyramidion.
The teams will pick what works when its high competitive. Muse are the ones who need to rebalance the game in order to change this, but try reading the dev app forums, there is a storm everytime something gets proposed ;) Same here with competitive rules.
as nanoduckling says, what the hell would the ducks have done if junker would be banned, the ship wasnt overpowered in any sense, they just knew how to fly it properly, and it should be the teams that work towards beating that and not a system of bans where there are 7 choices.
-
The main issue with ship choice in the lobby stage is the prospect of being "hard countered" by the opposition. Hence I will suggest as others have in the past, the possibility of a "blind pick/set up" where ships are sent by the Teams Representatives to the nominated "officials" running the event.
Now the problem with the blind picking system which has been stated in the past is that: "Well if nobody knows what the enemy is taking, then most people will feel confined to the meta."
I believe that this could be addressed if Teams knew in advance what maps they would be fighting on. This way they will base their strategy on how they believe they can best play that map. As a result we are no longer playing the lobby "hard counter" game but instead the maps that are selected for the event to occur on.
The only question if this is to be implemented is "how much time do teams need to formulate a strategy for the map/s they'll be playing on?"
-
Uhh, if anyone's been paying attention to SCS or basically any other recent tournament it's pretty clear that there are so many ways to counter a metamidion. Many times it's the case that the team that doesn't bring the pyra wins nowadays. However, that's when it's a very well practiced team like Rydr or Spqr. I can see how newer teams might have a problem against metamidions but really I think the best way to progress as a team is knowing how to deal with different tactics, and that doesn't even mean you have to "lobby counter" but rather refine your play style to counter the other teams'.
In regards to pick order and banning, it makes me very nervous. Essentially, it would just further divide the skill gap in competitive as I see it. The only teams that would be so versatile as to not be affected by the ban are the top teams who have been playing the game forever. Newer teams will be forced to do things they're not comfortable with, and in the end it will just increase the chances of their failure. It seems to me that whoever made this ban thought that top teams only used metamidion or something, and this would put the top teams on par with the lower ones. However, that is simply not the case. Being on the Rydr team I can tell you we have practiced Mobula, Pyra, Junker, Galleon, Goldfish, and Lue even flew a squid at one point. SPQR have the same amount of versatility. Compare that with newer teams like Mad Hatters or WoD and it's clear that they have less room for things they are comfortable with. The thing is, as a new team starting out it makes perfectly legitimate sense to specialize because there is no way you'll be able to just get as much experience with every ship as the top teams. But if you specialize, you stand much more of a chance by having the same amount of experience with one ship.
As to the pick order? Meh. From what I can tell things just get more counter-y and I'm not a fan of the lobby counter game. You can implement it but I think it will just make people more wary of counters.
-
Seems like an interesting idea. Having teams pick ships beforehand with notification of what map they will be on.
-
Seems like an interesting idea. Having teams pick ships beforehand with notification of what map they will be on.
its the best solution that havent been tried proper yet.
If you want to test it you can most likely get velvet to run this next SCS if it serves as purpose for making a better league.
-
I just want to reiterate another reason why it should be kept KISS (Keep It Stupidly Simple.)
Two days ago in a match with mostly random players, the team I was in won, 5-2, at the end of the match the pilot of the enemy spire (in canyon ambush) complained that "We'd have won that had Kamoba not taken a F****ing metamidion." I was flying a gatling Artemis...
Imposing rules means opening rules up to interpretation, some people call any pyra with armour damage and hull damage a meta, though most others see Gat Mortar as the meta...
My point being, as people start saying this rule is against "the metamidion" they mean different things, so if the rules proposal is changed to account for the players who want pyra and the players who don't want meta, the meta is anything which works effectively together, and thus more complaints that the rules don't account for X.
However if you keep it simple: Competitive teams -have- been practicing counter builds to gat mortar pyra's, using these builds in live competitive matches, then you will soon notice the "meta problem" will be less apparent than it "has been"
Having people pick ships before hand? It removes the "lobby.counter game." But adds psychological play for the pilots in their choices.. "Okay I'm against Bob on Dunes, he will likely pick a mobula, so I cant take my lumber spire.. But I can take my lumberfish..." It is not a bad idea and not too complex to referee and implement. :)
-
Puppy Fur,
Is the purpose of this idea to simply diversify the ship selections from what the last HC had? If so does this contribute to the core function of this competition? Or is the aim focused on something specific? Is it based on performance of players? Is it based on teamwork focus? or tanacity of handling circumstances that would be out of the control of the players?
I could go off the extreme end and say a randomizer would select ships for each crew if player performance wasn`t the focus, but if we`re looking to have a competition where a compilation of player contributed and team contributed performance is involved then its a matter picking what each team wants to perform best with and that would require providing them the freedom to choose what works for them.
Knowing the purpose of this competition on the core level will ultimately dictate how to best address these various ideas, and I would venture to guess that this will be a competition of player and team performance that requires the best utilization of all the options available.
-
I just want to reiterate another reason why it should be kept KISS (Keep It Stupidly Simple.)
Two days ago in a match with mostly random players, the team I was in won, 5-2, at the end of the match the pilot of the enemy spire (in canyon ambush) complained that "We'd have won that had Kamoba not taken a F****ing metamidion." I was flying a gatling Artemis...
Imposing rules means opening rules up to interpretation, some people call any pyra with armour damage and hull damage a meta, though most others see Gat Mortar as the meta...
My point being, as people start saying this rule is against "the metamidion" they mean different things, so if the rules proposal is changed to account for the players who want pyra and the players who don't want meta, the meta is anything which works effectively together, and thus more complaints that the rules don't account for X.
However if you keep it simple: Competitive teams -have- been practicing counter builds to gat mortar pyra's, using these builds in live competitive matches, then you will soon notice the "meta problem" will be less apparent than it "has been"
Having people pick ships before hand? It removes the "lobby.counter game." But adds psychological play for the pilots in their choices.. "Okay I'm against Bob on Dunes, he will likely pick a mobula, so I cant take my lumber spire.. But I can take my lumberfish..." It is not a bad idea and not too complex to referee and implement. :)
If people seem to think the idea is ok I'm up for it. My main concern is not having the "lobby counter game".
Would this idea lock weapons on send in as well? Or would weapons be changed during the lobby portion? (I'm leaning toward weapons being like the ships).
Puppy Fur,
Is the purpose of this idea to simply diversify the ship selections from what the last HC had? If so does this contribute to the core function of this competition? Or is the aim focused on something specific? Is it based on performance of players? Is it based on teamwork focus? or tanacity of handling circumstances that would be out of the control of the players?
I could go off the extreme end and say a randomizer would select ships for each crew if player performance wasn`t the focus, but if we`re looking to have a competition where a compilation of player contributed and team contributed performance is involved then its a matter picking what each team wants to perform best with and that would require providing them the freedom to choose what works for them.
Knowing the purpose of this competition on the core level will ultimately dictate how to best address these various ideas, and I would venture to guess that this will be a competition of player and team performance that requires the best utilization of all the options available.
I'm mostly trying to find a way around the "lobby counter game". I feel that it isn't organized or fun to play in.
-
Locking in weapons may be a bit too much (imo, sometimes weapon tweaks are just too vital to lock in based on assumptions, but locking the ship still lets teams pick ships based on tactics...
However I do want to point out one situation that happened in the SCS I took part in... TT (my team) against Centurions in the final, two rounds at a Tie, only way we'd have won would have been a 5-0 victory, but the centurions having the ability to choose their ships meant they were able to take a galleon, and it was that tactical ship choice that denied our team the 5th kill and fave Centurions a well deserved win, locking ships before hand still has its draw backs :(
-
If a team knows the map they'll be on... Given that they have had enough time to plan their ships and tactics in advance, they shouldn't need to swap the loadouts they have sent to the event officials because they will be playing the map to their own strengths.
-
If a team knows the map they'll be on... Given that they have had enough time to plan their ships and tactics in advance, they shouldn't need to swap the loadouts they have sent to the event officials because they will be playing the map to their own strengths.
Some peoples strengths are in tactical choices, also lock in the weapons and this will just encourage people to pick the "metamidion" not because it is their own strengths but because it is the "safer" choice.
And if the rule being implemented is to.encourage less use of this one ship and build, locking ship and weapon choice pre-match would do.the opposite.
-
As stated before this idea constitutes a blind pick, there is no real safe choice... You have no idea what you may be up against. Hence you observe what map you are on and choose what you are most comfortable with. If that ends up being a metamidion, then so be it. The problem here isn't a metamidion being chosen, but rather being hard countered. By locking ships along with loadouts you will only be bringing ships with loadouts you believe that will be effective on that set map.
-
What about each team picking and locking one ship prior match (without each other knowing what they pick ofc)? And then they can choose whatever they want for second ship once they get in a lobby. So that wouldn't make things too complicated and limited, but still limited enough so there wouldn't be endless ship swapping on both sides and would still require some thinking and strategizing depends on the map and enemy you're facing.
This would equally limit both teams and give them enough freedom (with second choice) to decide if they want to choose a counter to enemy or pick a support to their ally or whatever.
Like people already said, complicating too much might just turn it into a mess and not fun experience, so I think this idea wouldn't limit any teams too much, but enough to think about what they will pick and unable them to freely swap both their ships 10x in lobby.
EDIT:
Also
The game is already won in the lobby in most cases, so you might as well make the lobby strategy more interesting. But who cares what a casual scrub thinks.
Just curious... Are you related to Cerersbane? If not, you gotta be at least best buddies?
-
I'm mostly trying to find a way around the "lobby counter game". I feel that it isn't organized or fun to play in.
You are suggesting a "lobby counter game" that requires more thinking. If it isn't a blind pick then there will always be a counter game in the lobby, unless a team knows what the other team is used to fly and might just be trying to counter that.
A picking or banning system is less fun than what normally happens.
-
I'm mostly trying to find a way around the "lobby counter game". I feel that it isn't organized or fun to play in.
You are suggesting a "lobby counter game" that requires more thinking. If it isn't a blind pick then there will always be a counter game in the lobby, unless a team knows what the other team is used to fly and might just be trying to counter that.
A picking or banning system is less fun than what normally happens.
Currently, it's just switching ships and weapons up until the last second. Hopefully, there is a different way of doing things.
-
As long as it isn't an unexpected last second switch, I am ok with this.
Yes, there are different ways, but only one has been tested in a test SCS, the picking system, and it hasn't been implemented in the SCS. If you want to get feedback from experience you should start competitive matches with various different systems of ship/weapon picking and see what the actual results are.
-
The big problem I see with this suggestion is that it bans ships. There aren't enough ships to choose from and it would be complicated to ban specific loadouts.
My idea is have each side bring a ship into the lobby. Give each team a one time hidden option to switch. Each team sends a message to the ref for what they will switch to. This way the teams don't know what the other will do. After the optional switch the match starts.
Sure there would be deception and frustration, but also strategy.
-
Maybe the squid/spire buffs and slight pyra nerf will be enough for ship banning to be pointless.
-
Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it. (https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php?topic=417.0) The format was divisive at the time and the scrimmages never happened, partially because I was a competitor and focused on playing in other events.
The first event I did actually organize, Sky Tournament (https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php?topic=805.0) (May 2013), had a much simpler ruleset involving a blind pick. Each team captain would submit their ship builds to a website prior to the match, and the builds would be validated by the lobby ref. In subsequent games the winner of the previous was locked to their build. The Sky Tournament went smoothly, but most teams didn't care enough about counterpicking to warrant the additional complexity and hassle. Based on the feedback in this thread, it seems that is still the majority opinion.
I would recommend, if you wish to pursue an advanced counterpicking ruleset, would be to do as I proposed in that original thread. Find interested teams and run a weekly scrimmage for a while to test the gameplay implications and gauge community reaction, rather than suggesting its immediate use in a major competition.