suggestion for competitive

[Moy]

I think towers is great competitively, coordination is key in it, similar to tf2's payload mode.

I changed my opinion about towers throughout my posts. It might have potential once custom rooms are released w/ organized teams. Which means we can play with people on our team that actually know how to play towers instead of the random matchmaking teams on ranked.

 

[Kowai Yume]

If anything, we should just copy what the UGC does for competitive Team Fortress 2. Get teams to play in a swiss-style format for about 8-10 weeks on pre-selected maps determine by the higher ups, then take the top 25% and put them in a single elimination playoffs. In playoffs, the teams still plays on pre-selected maps until grand finals. In grand finals, it's a best 2 out of 3 MAPS. The team with the higher win/lose ratio will select the first map to play on, play the match and then the other team picks a map for game two. In case of a tie, they will play on a map determine by the higher-ups. I'm sorry if this doesn't make much sense.

 

[Hitzel]

Removing any modes or maps from competitive play is unhealthy for a game this young. The obvious choice is is to go with map striking and gametype striking, then some kind of counter-pick system for best-of-whatevers.

I feel that the only limitation should be limiting game one of a best-of match to a few maps for that specific tournament.

 

[Kowai Yume]

Well for a one-on-one standpoint, yeah we should have a striking system. But if you ask me, I feel that having team captains and admins pre-select the maps for the season gives it consistency. Of course each mode will have it's own set of rules (best of 5 for tower control, best of 9 for splat zones and whatever rainmaker brings us).

 

[Theworstmaker]

would giving each team a free pause per match hurt the game? (similar to a time out a coach can give in football)

 

[Kowai Yume]

No, just in case someone drops out or another technical issue arises.

 

[Friendan]

would giving each team a free pause per match hurt the game? (similar to a time out a coach can give in football)

Yes. This can be abused and most FPSes require you to cooperate with what you got, and not create some master plan. I don't know how this could be executed well even.

 

[Hitzel]

Well for a one-on-one standpoint, yeah we should have a striking system. But if you ask me, I feel that having team captains and admins pre-select the maps for the season gives it consistency. Of course each mode will have it's own set of rules (best of 5 for tower control, best of 9 for splat zones and whatever rainmaker brings us).

It can work, but then what actually happens is some big organization says "use these maps and noting else" and all of a sudden the competitive community plays only a fraction of the game's content. It happens like every single time people try that.

Play with everything the game has to offer and only start removing things in the future when they have proven to be detrimental to the game.

 

[Theworstmaker]

Thats why i believe it should be more of a team effort to decide on the maps. discuss strategies and stuff

 

[Sitri]

Don't force anything right away. Give the game a few months and let the metagame settle. Treat the game like other shooters; this isn't Smash where we play a single mode.
Figure out which modes work best on which maps, and play those. Go in with an open mind and find out what works and what doesn't. I think a BO5 would be the best choice due to how short games can be.

 

[LemonPlaid]

This is a great ruleset, keep it simple. I'd say maybe 2 bans for maps considering how many there are.

As for the rest of the people on this thread, its pretty funny. "Let the meta develop with no ruleset!" "We don't need a balanced competitive ruleset, just play the game!" "We should be allowed to pause during matches!" Sounds like people don't exactly understand the concept and purpose of a Ruleset in the first place.

 

[Hope]

This is a great ruleset, keep it simple. I'd say maybe 2 bans for maps considering how many there are.

As for the rest of the people on this thread, its pretty funny. "Let the meta develop with no ruleset!" "We don't need a balanced competitive ruleset, just play the game!" "We should be allowed to pause during matches!" Sounds like people don't exactly understand the concept and purpose of a Ruleset in the first place.

Sounds like you don't know the purpose of a ruleset. The purpose is to provide the most fair, competitive environment possible for the game's meta and competitive experience. But if we have no clue what the meta will be then we can't really have a hard-and-fast ruleset now can we? It's better to have some broad rules first and just let people experiment with modes and stuff so that we can actually flesh out the meta, instead of stunting it by banning stuff or making rules that restrict gameplay too early.

 

[LemonPlaid]

Sounds like you don't know the purpose of a ruleset. The purpose is to provide the most fair, competitive environment possible for the game's meta and competitive experience. But if we have no clue what the meta will be then we can't really have a hard-and-fast ruleset now can we? It's better to have some broad rules first and just let people experiment with modes and stuff so that we can actually flesh out the meta, instead of stunting it by banning stuff or making rules that restrict gameplay too early.

Lol wait how does it sound like I don't know the purpose of a ruleset? I said OP's works. It's balanced, simple and diverse.

 

[Vexen]

Like I said on the rule suggestion thread, matches should be Bo5 and depending on how many maps we end up getting each team strikes as many maps there are until only 5 remain and then the teams pick the map order along with the mode they want on that map with the mode for the 5th map being selected at random.

 

[N-Strike]

bo9
All game modes
Each team bans a game mode pre war
Each team bans 2 stages pre war
Targeting does NOT get tolorated and gives the other team the game that was targeted (unless teams aggre to make targeting allowed)
In the event a player disconnects, the game will be restarted.
Substatutions and wepon changes take place after each game

 

[Power]

Agree with Hope here, we should just let people test their own rules. set up their own tournaments, clan battles for the early days after the update. I don't think anything super official should occur during that time period, we just need to see how each rule set works out and chip away until we can decide what is the most fair one. If we settle too early we may miss something very crucial.

 

[Kowai Yume]

Okay we'll try out different methods. There's a problem, though, how are we gonna settle match disputes? How are teams gonna communicate strikes and bans during the match?

 

[Power]

Okay we'll try out different methods. There's a problem, though, how are we gonna settle match disputes? How are teams gonna communicate strikes and bans during the match?

There are lots of forms of communication, skype being one of them. I heard of the other "better" ones but i forgot their names