.: BattleRoom / Lobby idea's :.
Moderator: Moderators
Didn't Quake (multiple incarnations), Warcraft III, and Unreal Tournament (multiple incarnations) all have competitive ladder systems? Guild Wars has an obligatory one, and it's plenty successful.Dragon45 wrote:We shoudln't have a competitive ladder system at all because no successful online game has ever had such a system.
I've played 2 years warcraft 3 ... and I think theire ladder is not a good idea.
Of course, it's really good when you're in and you play 3 hours a day...
But for player who play only occasionally (and it's the majority) it's really a pain in the ...
People are generally harse, if you loose, you're a "funcking newb" ... if you win you're "fucking lucky".
Nobody will help you, and nobody will try to have fun game, because they don't want to loose.
But I think their automatic tournament is really great.
Of course, it's really good when you're in and you play 3 hours a day...
But for player who play only occasionally (and it's the majority) it's really a pain in the ...
People are generally harse, if you loose, you're a "funcking newb" ... if you win you're "fucking lucky".
Nobody will help you, and nobody will try to have fun game, because they don't want to loose.
But I think their automatic tournament is really great.
Ingame Ladders generally are a bad idea.
It makes games much too competetive - people start disconnecting and bugusing and cheating.
If someones wants to have a ladder they should make an external ladder/tournament, which has admins and proper rules.
I still want to be able to play games just for fun and I don't want to see the good tas-atmosphere going down the drain because of some stupid ingame ladder.
├óÔÇÜ┬¼:
I played A LOT of Zero Hour, and because of the automatic win/lose counting, the general atmosphere was apoling.
In the end now one cared about your win/lose counting anymore anyway after the third account and the ladder where good players competed was clanwars.cc
A clanwars.cc - like league would be great for tas, but a ingame-ladder would just ruin the game experience.
It makes games much too competetive - people start disconnecting and bugusing and cheating.
If someones wants to have a ladder they should make an external ladder/tournament, which has admins and proper rules.
I still want to be able to play games just for fun and I don't want to see the good tas-atmosphere going down the drain because of some stupid ingame ladder.
├óÔÇÜ┬¼:
sry minimat, but I can assure you, that Generals/Zero Hour would have been a lot more fun without the ranking system.no succesful game?
TA? CnC (original)? Generals? BFME (now 1.03 is out cw is fun)?
I played A LOT of Zero Hour, and because of the automatic win/lose counting, the general atmosphere was apoling.
In the end now one cared about your win/lose counting anymore anyway after the third account and the ladder where good players competed was clanwars.cc
A clanwars.cc - like league would be great for tas, but a ingame-ladder would just ruin the game experience.
the CW style OPTIONAL LADDER is what is being suggested ~.~
betalord has persistantly said NO to a INGAME ranking system. sorry if it wasn't clear.
EDIT: oh sorry you are right. what i meant is a external ladder is being made by a person who wants to remain anomynous. yes this thread is a noobish piece of shit. my bad.
betalord has persistantly said NO to a INGAME ranking system. sorry if it wasn't clear.
EDIT: oh sorry you are right. what i meant is a external ladder is being made by a person who wants to remain anomynous. yes this thread is a noobish piece of shit. my bad.
I've played some Quakeworld (it's still being played a lot, although quake turns 10 this summer).
Anyway, there are ladders and leagues and whatnot in the community, and teamplay clans can freely join them at the start of season. The leagues fill a place for competitive teamplay, to sort out who's the best. Ladders are a bit more casual, you're not required to have a certain schedule etc., but they are still more focused than just "friendly matches". Usually they are set up so that you get points for playing, and can't get negative points even if you lose, so they encourage teams to play a lot.
Here's one example: http://ladder.nqr-network.com/4on4/
I don't know if Spring (or XTA or AA or any mod) is yet in the state of competitive play and not just sportsmanshiplike diversion. :) The rules are always hard to create and it would probably take a couple of tries... also some inevitable bashing and flaming would ensue.
It would be cool if there was a way to run a proxy, so games between the top players could be spectated by many people in realtime (in qw top matches there are hundreds) and not burden the server too much. There's already a teamspeak server which could host some commentary.
Anyway, there are ladders and leagues and whatnot in the community, and teamplay clans can freely join them at the start of season. The leagues fill a place for competitive teamplay, to sort out who's the best. Ladders are a bit more casual, you're not required to have a certain schedule etc., but they are still more focused than just "friendly matches". Usually they are set up so that you get points for playing, and can't get negative points even if you lose, so they encourage teams to play a lot.
Here's one example: http://ladder.nqr-network.com/4on4/
I don't know if Spring (or XTA or AA or any mod) is yet in the state of competitive play and not just sportsmanshiplike diversion. :) The rules are always hard to create and it would probably take a couple of tries... also some inevitable bashing and flaming would ensue.
It would be cool if there was a way to run a proxy, so games between the top players could be spectated by many people in realtime (in qw top matches there are hundreds) and not burden the server too much. There's already a teamspeak server which could host some commentary.
I think some people are only seeing the possible negative effects of a ladder system.
The idea was, to get a system which allows you to match with players like you, so that the match is indeed, FUN! So that you do have a change of winning, and also know that the other player will try and finish the battle, instead of leaving, only after hearing the first bertha shots.. or doesn't really play a RTS, but more like a cartoon drawing contest..
You should all see it like a match-making system. You can find matches better and FASTER this way, and the chances of a good fight are much greater.
It shouldn't be so that you need your points in order to play more, or against other people.. It's more like an indicating system, instead of a ranking E-Penis system.
The idea was, to get a system which allows you to match with players like you, so that the match is indeed, FUN! So that you do have a change of winning, and also know that the other player will try and finish the battle, instead of leaving, only after hearing the first bertha shots.. or doesn't really play a RTS, but more like a cartoon drawing contest..
You should all see it like a match-making system. You can find matches better and FASTER this way, and the chances of a good fight are much greater.
It shouldn't be so that you need your points in order to play more, or against other people.. It's more like an indicating system, instead of a ranking E-Penis system.
yes indeed, that's kinda the question. Maybe the whole ladder idea shouldn't be there, but somekind of system to match up. Esspecially when TAS community will grow, and the ammount of players is 10 times more than it is now..
It is certainly not a critical issue, that has to be done asap, but i think to let the community grow, you need to forfill the needs of all the (new) players, and this is closely linked to the matches they'll play..
It is certainly not a critical issue, that has to be done asap, but i think to let the community grow, you need to forfill the needs of all the (new) players, and this is closely linked to the matches they'll play..