Spring RTS Engine

dansan wrote:What do you ppl think of making a 6v6 tourney?

It'd be much more on the ground of big-team-game-players than 1v1 or 2v2 tourneys and would include DSD. Ofc it'd include other maps too and so both parts of the BA community (DSD-lovers and -haters / team-players and 1v1-vets) could participate.

If it'd work it'd be very good for the BA community as a hole, as it would be more inclusive. Such a community is more attractive for new players. New players mean potentially more players for 1v1, 6v6 and 8v8 games. BA survives - happy end

It wouldn't work because there wouldn't be enough players for a tournament. At best you would have 2-4 teams (considering you had 10 at the last 2v2 one).

I'd rather people work into improving the tournament infrastructure. This means proper amount of autohosts that work, autohosts uploading replay games and results, and some better time scheduling.

Yeah, keeping people around for a 6v6 tournament would be next to impossible. And even if you had like 4 teams playing, and somehow none of them leaves etc., the games wouldn't probably be very exciting since the teams would inevitably have very uneven skill levels when there's no autohost balancing to force good people into separate teams. And in a 4-team (as opposed to a 8-team 2v2, or 16-man 1v1) tournament it'd mean the finals too would probably be 1-sided.

Hmm.. true... sad... I'd like to get more ppl into community stuff (tourney, map testing, forums etc.), but you are right - this thing won't work :(

Yeah, i think a 6v6 tourney is impossible now, maybe soon when we get more players :D

I'd rather people work into improving the tournament infrastructure. This means proper amount of autohosts that work, autohosts uploading replay games and results, and some better time scheduling.

I agree, concerning this I posted something on the corresponding topic:
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.ph ... 7&start=20

I don't think there's too much wrong with the infrastructure we have, better and clearer rules are just needed than in the last tourney (no answer on how to pick maps, when is signup deadline, can you switch players or not, why must people restrict themselves to certain autohosts). A place to host replays is needed tho, but automatic result reporting in a tourney is not really necessary I think, we've always managed without.

what good will replays do when engine/game versions invalidate them?

dansan wrote:

albator wrote:They also edit the challongue chart so they make their own team win against team that they made give up cause of the rules they made up... just in order to get more than ZERO win... :D sad

They made the tourney continue even if ppl were missing.
Sad is someone who didn't participate, but needs to pick on others in order to feel mighty. Fabrice & Zorro (and Pizdo) made the tourney continue and be fun, even though lots of registered players just didn't show up. Go pick on those if that is your way of having fun.

You are completely missing the point, you are obviously talking about different people. Read again.

albator wrote:

klapmongool wrote: @alba; yea, it sucks. I even saw an ACE admin threaten a player in non-ACE-host (to ban him in ACE). Corrupted by the (little) power he had. Poor boy.

Yeah, some (not all) of the ACE poeple are sad.

They use twice their admin power to stop a game there are not even involved to just cause we did'nt rename in last tourney...

They also edit the challongue chart so they make their own team win against team that they made give up cause of the rules they made up... just in order to get more than ZERO win... :D sad

The poeple I am talking about actually prevent player to fill the gaps.

Hey, what about I create a fictive tourney with real names players and make all the team give up so I make my team win and when some people show up to replace some player, I tell them they cannot play cause they does not respect the rules I just invented to make me win.

Player always make the shows go on. I wanted to point that is the first time I saw a player that has admin right on autohost where the tourney was happening trying to screw up the tourney to make him feel "useful".

Conclusion: next time, please use autohost with non-fag admins.

smoth wrote:what good will replays do when engine/game versions invalidate them?

everything has a temporary value, replays as well, and anyhow, most people will be probably watching them only during and around the tournament time
if they're really great someone may even make youtube clips or find ways to port replays to newer engines, but for now let's get what we can

good point, some people may want them for videos and things..

suggestion, save a copy of the engine and game so that the replays can be watched at a later date.

smoth wrote:what good will replays do when engine/game versions invalidate them?

Trades replay site had 100s or 1000s of downloads every engine version regardless. And most people didn't even really know about the site. What good is speccing? Actually replays are in a way superior to speccing since you can speed up if you want, too bad the feature to watch them together was removed ages ago.

I miss that host replay option.

a 6v6 tourney is not easy to make, but a 4v4 tourney on DSD it can work.

And DSD is a 4v4 Map, will improve great battles

Senna wrote:...

And DSD is a 4v4 Map, will improve great battles

I saw DSD games with 24 Players and 10 Specs, if 70% of them join the tourny we can get 6 teams



btw: why we are talking about the tourny in this thread?

we should add them to the list of those who are going to be put to the wall the day the revolution begins. All of them.

God i luv the intertubes. Beeing all mighty and powerfull, because nothing ever has consequences


User was banned for this (Moderation)

btw: why we are talking about the tourny in this thread?

Indeed, all these post should be here :)
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27637&start=20

Talking about future tournaments is kinda offtopic in either thread, but whatever.

2v2 is the upper limit to call it tourney. I you do more of them u need schedule cause it is a mess, and schedule need lot of time, and this becomes more like a ladder. Interest of tourney is you can pay a lot of game in a short period of time and keep you skills warm. If you start to plan all the games then it is gonna be impossible to keep it like a "tounrey"

albator wrote:2v2 is the upper limit to call it tourney. I you do more of them u need schedule cause it is a mess, and schedule need lot of time, and this becomes more like a ladder. Interest of tourney is you can pay a lot of game in a short period of time and keep you skills warm. If you start to plan all the games then it is gonna be impossible to keep it like a "tounrey"

So 4v4 game cannot be tourney?? wtf are u talking???, team tourney game so lol?

Other thing would be nice is to improve lobbys to show {cups} for each player who wins tourney-s gold, stone and bronce cups so if its 4 then those 4 players win the cups and puts on theyr nickname on lobbys.

It will make people care to play tourneys

smoth wrote:The only way you can replace the DSD host is if your host offers something better

This one is funny. :D Because every other host there is (non dsd) can offer many things that are better. But maybe things have changed, now there's only minority left of the once fairly big community. CA/Z-K players stayed, as well as DSDers. LoETs got what they wanted.

Carpenter wrote:

smoth wrote:The only way you can replace the DSD host is if your host offers something better

This one is funny. :D Because every other host there is (non dsd) can offer many things that are better. But maybe things have changed, now there's only minority left of the once fairly big community. CA/Z-K players stayed, as well as DSDers. LoETs got what they wanted.

Yep. Most of the decent players left. Because they got tired of DSD.

And to the positivity advocates: already explained the issue in 2010. You didn't get it.