League

[nocte]

Guys...

I really think this topic has got out of hand.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, whether it be 6v6 or 8v8.

So can we all be adults here and save the fighting for the battlefiled.

 

[.cage]

Originally posted by Redfive
oh dear cage, how mature your points are.

Just like to add, we do know how many games yourve played when your irc room topic is

"Well played guys won 3 out of 3 clan games"

Pld.

As in, we won three in a row, not three total. Assumptions again, quelle surprise.

 

[SuperNickX]

Took him awhile to think that 1 up.

No response for 20 whole minutes

 

[.cage]

I was on the phone to my girlfriend, a concept possibly alien to you.

 

[bigfoot]

Settle down fellas.

At the moment we're talking through something with regards to the league, if it works out then you should see a BW RTCW League in the very near future, and it should be pretty popular. If it doesn't work out we will still try to go ahead with the league, but it may take a while longer.

I'll update you all as soon as we know either way, until then try to keep the casualty list down .


p.s. I don't play RTCW, i did for a little at the start but it didn't offer more than Q3CTF (which is what i play on the odd occasion i get the time). I have read a little though, and 6v6 seems to be emerging as a standard. Slowly.

 

[old.PestilenZ]

Nice one

6v6, 7v7 or 8v8...i'll be happy with any of them (altho i still prefer 8v8 ), the main thing is having a bw league

will further official info about the league be put on this thread btw?

 

[old.dh.vash]

Thanks for the update Bigfoot, I agree 6v6 is becoming the Standard for Wolfy clan matches.

I'm going to offer my piece now. Dont flame me for it, i'm simply giving my opinion. We have also played about 25-30 Wolfy games now, we have tried 5v5, 6v6, 7v7 & 8v8.

• 5v5 is what the Euro teams play, it calls for precise tactics and DM skills, the downside to this is the game can be over in one spawn. I should add that Lag is minimal and FPS isnt affected.
  
• 6v6 is what we have found to be a great medium, And no, i'm not an AGB groupie this is purley my own opinion, its combines the need for a perfect balance of DM skills, Quick Thinking and most importantly Teamwork. FPS stays average and Pings seem fine.
  
• 7v7 Calls for less Teamwork and thinking but you'll need better DM skills (To battle your way thru defences) It starts to get laggy at 7v7 and FPS starts taking a hit.
  
• 8v8 not much teamwork involed at all nor thinking, DM skills need to be superb to fight your way thru. gets really Laggy now and FPS will be harsh on peeps with less then 1gig Tbird and a GF3.

I'll explain my thingking behind teamwork to you, with more then 6v6 the tactics become less accurate, you can simply say ok Bob jon and daz you lot just sit on the towers as LT's spamming your Airstikes so they cant come up, Jim will be there as a medic if ya need him, the rest of us will spam there flag.

In that example I am trying to show you how Tactics are less thought out, with 6v6 you have to 'spend your players' more cautiously, you cant just pile 4 on a certain point, because the enemy can attack the other way. It becomes alot Trickier(SP?) so the tactics take alot more tweaking and Teamplay need to be at its pinnacle.

Defending deep, or rushing your enemy, these things need to be thought thru, but with 8v8 you can do both! so it makes it all abit pointless, you could thro 5 players forward and still have 3 back. with 6v6 if you thro any more then 3 your taking a huge risk and the games is on a knifesedge.

Thats my opinion on this, Ive tried to give reasons behind it all and I hope you'll respect it and try to build on it, if you disagree then say your peice and give reasons (Not just 6v6 is redicuosly shit ) and I'll happily go into a discussion with you. I have an open mind about this so if you have a good reason why we should use Different numbers then lets hear it. Altho its not me you have to convince (its bigfoot) but I'm sure hes reading this thread with great intrest.

Its obvious we arent all going to agree on this, so lets try to come up with some solutions, Heres an idea we discussed in #heresy. Each map is different in size, and if BW does the league Like Q3 then we'll be doing a different map each week (not choosing our home map etc) if this is the case then could we also have alternating Team sizes? Example: Beach, 6v6 the next week we do assault 7v7 then we do Trench toast 8v8, then Depot 7v7, then base 6v6.

This is not a great idea imo as i'm for 6v6 (from our wolfy experiance is perfect for every map) but i'm trying to meet you all half way here, lemme hear your thoughts on this.

rant over :sleeping:

Thx for reading.

Vash
-Digital Heresy

 

[old.Kidni]

hehe pld vash

nice run down
and i think u r spot on

Seeing as rtcw is aimed at a teambased player group and not an all out DM spree, 6v6 is the prefered number of players for a match. As you said, 5v5 is over too quickly. and the other rely too much upon DM die death kill tactics, which in truth arent really tactics.

i hope that all comps are sensible enuff to require 6v6 in the games.

Cheers all

 

[WFJuNkY]

the stuff about the fps decreasing is a bit bullshit if u ask me, that depends o your own hardware, and u can tweak it into the 200 on a p3 500 with a voodoo2, (i've done it)
i think 8v8 is more fun, and 5v5 is bad, that might aswell be deathmatch, tried 6v6 a few times, was ok, but i think 7v7 might be the best way, a compromise between both, it requires both DM skills, and superior tactics

maybe we should just let it be decied by the clans amongst themselves, in the match arranging, see what both of em want to play, and most of the time u'll find a good way i think, maybe i'm to optimistic though, but hey, i played rtcw from 3 days after it was released, so i suck and dont know what the almighty AGB's do....

 

[old.dh.vash]

The FPS decrease isnt bullshit, not everyone has uber comps so i tried to take that into consideration.

 

[WFJuNkY]

heh i did take it into consideration..
i got a p650 with a gf2 mx and 256 mb, if that's a high end system i'm a potatoe....

 

[old.PestilenZ]

Judging by the arguing here, ppl won't always be able to agree on team sizes

Altering team sizes for each game is a nice thought, but people would probably complain that they faced their biggest rival and had to play with an amount they weren't used to, and stuff like that

5v5 is crap, i dont care if the europeans like it. It's fairly obvious, tbh....far too empty, little chance for clearing out the attackers if they even just get a bit lukcy, etc

6v6 i still think is too empty - yes, it makes attacking more risky, but the tactical element is always giong to be there, there's not _that_ much difference between being attacked 5v3 and 4v2, and you could argue that 8v8 and 7v7 allow for more tactics, because you have more freedom with how you attack/defend, and on which classes you choose.

The fps argument isn't all that relevant...nothing that's not sorted by lowering resolution, changing r_picmip, etc, and most people have isdn or cable now, both of which are fine on 8v8....i know that my connection is flawless (unless those bastards at bt screw with me, in which case 1v1 would be laggy) on 10v10 public servers

 

[bigfoot]

I dunno about that Pest. When Q3CTF started off being played most people saw 5v5 as the way to go, however some thought 6v6 was better and went with that instead (they were in the minority i should point out). They still used 6v6 for a couple of seasons, but eventually saw sense and dropped back to 5v5, which is what all EU leagues use now afaik (US plays 4v4 for some unknown reason).

 

[.cage]

Originally posted by WFJuNkY
heh i did take it into consideration..
i got a p650 with a gf2 mx and 256 mb, if that's a high end system i'm a potatoe....

Tbh, you can tweak the game pretty well, although it's hardly constant 300 fps on my Athlon XP 1600 / 256mb / gf2mx / w2k, so I can definately see where you're coming from.

 

[.cage]

5v5 sounds foul, and i'm still not enlightened to the magic of 6v6, but 7v7 would be a decent enough compromise. Although in future, may I advise you drop the condescending attitude, or I can't really see you guys staying around that long.

 

[throdgrain]

Tweak rtcw to 200 fps on a p3 650??with a gf2mx? did i get that right?
damn i bet that looks awesome m8
personally i played it with a p3 1000mhz and a gf3 ti and the fps would go from 40 -50.but the main interest for me was how it looked,not frames per second.i did try it with vertex lighting on for a game then it made quite a bit more fps,but god it looked awful
/now im waiting for a "youre pc's fucked i get 90 fps with my 350 celeron" reply.that will make me laugh.dont forget its the lower fps rate you should be concerned with,not the higher

 

[Orin Askhammare]

Good to see this thread has calmed down some

After seeing Vash's post I'll post my own ideas about the whole #v# thing, since it's important we all post our ideas and feelings on this matter.

I'll skip over 5v5, as I get the feeling pretty much everyone thinks this just feels way too empty.

The way I see it there are generally speaking 2 kinds of objective maps. The ones where one team attacks and the other defends (beach, base, assault) and there are maps where teams have to do both (depot).

Now depot would be a great 8v8 map, since you get more tactical options, 5 attack & 3 defence, or make it 4 & 4? Also the map is pretty large. But the other type of maps get easier for defence and harder for attackers the more people you have. The defending party gets more people "sitting on" the last objective while the attackers have to coordinate an attack over more and more people to the point where getting it done is more luck than anything. When looking at the complete set of maps available I'd pretty much rule 8v8 out. Also the amount of unintentional friendly killing goes up because of clogged up hallways and the like, usually on the attacker's side. If the league were 8v8 I think I'd make a good profit betting "draw" as the outcome most of the time

So what's left then. 6v6 or 7v7. Because of the reasons I listed above I'm leaning towards 6v6. Playing 6v6 the teams actually have to make tougher choices sometimes when it comes to positioning players and especially class distribution. Your tactics choices have a much larger chance of influencing the outcome of a match. 7v7 might work fine on some maps, if played a certain way, but considering the current map pool I'd say 6v6.

On a final note, I'd like to mention that if you want to play it safe you as a clan would need 9 players for a 7v7 game. 7 players and 2 subs. Players lag out, one might be unable to make it because of a unexpected real life complications etc. I don't know if BigFoot has any experience with this, but I would expect that with larger teams the amount of postponements, defaults, clans playing with less people than the other clan goes up. That would not help the league.

This has all been an opinion, not the final truth

Nucleus
Phoenix Rising (Q3)
Digital Heresy (RtCW)

 

[old.PestilenZ]

defence being easier isn't really a bad thing - it encourages teams to send off more people to attack, which makes defence harder, so things really even out (on maps like depot), and on other maps, it just encourages better teamplay from the attackers, rather than just being able to outgun the opponents

6v6 does make class choosing harder, but i think that's not really a plus, since you'll just end up seeing less diversity in class choices...people will often end up choosing what they _have_ to, rather than what might allow them to employ better and more interesting tactics

the no. of players needed could be annoying, but clans having to recruit a few extra people isn't a high price to pay IF 7v7 or 8v8 is the better route to go down.

 

[.cage]

Originally posted by throdgrain
Tweak rtcw to 200 fps on a p3 650??with a gf2mx? did i get that right?
damn i bet that looks awesome m8
personally i played it with a p3 1000mhz and a gf3 ti and the fps would go from 40 -50.but the main interest for me was how it looked,not frames per second.i did try it with vertex lighting on for a game then it made quite a bit more fps,but god it looked awful
/now im waiting for a "youre pc's fucked i get 90 fps with my 350 celeron" reply.that will make me laugh.dont forget its the lower fps rate you should be concerned with,not the higher

Yeah, i'd rather have 40-50 fps on a lovely graphical setup, and I do thanks Although the p3 650's aren't, so the only option is upgrade or tweak... I guess a good analogy would be durzels column on Cable / DSL being a probable requirement of future multiplayer games - Why should peoples inability to upgrade slow down progress?

 

[.cage]

and u can tweak it into the 200 on a p3 500 with a voodoo2, (i've done it)

Are you cunted on smack?!

 

[bigfoot]

Cage - i wasn't suggesting u play 5v5, just using it as an example of how over time a standard for games gets agreed upon without any sort of formal discussion.

 

[WFJuNkY]

Originally posted by throdgrain
Tweak rtcw to 200 fps on a p3 650??with a gf2mx? did i get that right?
damn i bet that looks awesome m8
personally i played it with a p3 1000mhz and a gf3 ti and the fps would go from 40 -50.but the main interest for me was how it looked,not frames per second.i did try it with vertex lighting on for a game then it made quite a bit more fps,but god it looked awful
/now im waiting for a "youre pc's fucked i get 90 fps with my 350 celeron" reply.that will make me laugh.dont forget its the lower fps rate you should be concerned with,not the higher

heh u mixed up the post a bit, i tweaked a voodoo 2 and a p2 500 mhz to 200 fps, and it looked horrible, now i'm using a p3 650 with a gf 2 mx, and it runs at an ave fps of 80 in firefights, and the cpped 125 normal, with some of the eyecandy still on, but a lot turned off

 

[throdgrain]

whilst i agree with you to a point cage,i dont think new games should nescessarliy stretch the living buggery out of your pc,its summat that puts me off rtcw im afraid.apart from the obvious excellent gameplay of CS,its enduring appeal is surely also to do with the fact that you DONT need a uber-pc to run it.
on mine it runs at 99fps at 1024-768 which is nice,but i know people who play at 640 with 25fps and still kill me now and then!
Bloody good luck to them i say

 

[old.dh.MadBone]

6v6 Thankyou and goodnight.

 

[.cage]

Well argumented, you thouroughly shit cunt.

 

[.cage]

Originally posted by throdgrain
whilst i agree with you to a point cage,i dont think new games should nescessarliy stretch the living buggery out of your pc,its summat that puts me off rtcw im afraid.apart from the obvious excellent gameplay of CS,its enduring appeal is surely also to do with the fact that you DONT need a uber-pc to run it.
on mine it runs at 99fps at 1024-768 which is nice,but i know people who play at 640 with 25fps and still kill me now and then!
Bloody good luck to them i say

Hmm, I do agree that buying a 'uber gaming rig' type thing is more future proofing than struggling to play the latest stuff.

Btw, what setup are you on for 99fps at 1024?

 

[Orin Askhammare]

Originally posted by CageCunt
Well argumented, you thouroughly shit cunt.

While not argumented he was merely stating he prefers 6v6. He didn't say "I want 6v6 and anyone who says differently is a friggin nobhead!". I don't see an insult or flame there. Yet just stating he prefers 6v6 is enough for you to call him a thoroughly shit cunt? And you expect me to take you seriously?

And while both Vash and I did bother to put down an argumented opinion you haven't bothered to write down any constructive arguments in reply to those.

Your first contribution to this thread is a post containing just this:

Originally posted by CageCunt
6v6 is rediculously shit.

In a later post comes your first argument:

Originally posted by CageCunt
With 6v6 maps like depot turn in to two 3v3's, which essentially boils down to who has the greater deathmatch skills. With 8v8 it throws in the additional tactical element of "3 defenders or 5?" "3 attackers or 5?", which can make a huge difference

And quite shockingly it's the only real argument you have put forth in your entire string of posts in this thread. The rest seems to be merely. "You are an AGB fanboy" "Your entire argument is based on assumption" with or without an added
whiff of flame.

If you really want to argue your case for 8v8 (since merely stating I'd like 6v6 thank you is obviously not good enough) can you please take some time and post your complete reasoning? Since you seem to feel so strongly about this that shouldn't be too much of a problem? I'd be happy to reply ever so politely and heck you might even convince me on some points.

If not, you probably indeed live under a bridge.

 

[.cage]

Okay.

AGB fanboy.

 

[old.[CGF]*$LIM*]

Burp!

I agree with vash and MadBone!

The both are 100% correct in there views..

T I A

 

[.cage]

The both are 100% correct in there views..

k

Anyone noticed a pattern? Every so often, another AGB/DH/fuckknowswhoelse person signs up, says "6v6 is right you're all wrong we're more experienced you suck you've played no games we're infinitely better we should run the league we're great" (Although far less coherantly)

Great.

Maybe you should all fuck off to congregate in your own community of lamers? You evidently don't want any kind of community other than yourselves. Great.