Planetside 2 and MLG: an e-sports Future? the mittani

[Phantomdestiny]

i read this very interesting article on the mittani and wanted to share it here :)

http://themittani.com/features/planetside-2-and-mlg-esports-future

[Assist]

I wonder if that 48v48 is a set number.

They had stated before that there would be multiple ladders based on outfit size, wondering if that got tossed already?

[Higby]

I wonder if that 48v48 is a set number.

They had stated before that there would be multiple ladders based on outfit size, wondering if that got tossed already?

Nope, not tossed. The multiple ladders are so that smaller outfits aren't competing with mega outfits for qualification, but with other outfits with similar manpower. Once qualified the outfits, no matter the size, will send platoon sized force for the battles to keep things even. This is just a first phase. Ps2 is capable of doing 12 v 12 or 250 vs 250 and exploring how we can make those and everything in between work is something we will do at some point. For now were concentratingon getting one size "match" working well. Platoon size felt like the right balance.

[Pella]

Nope, not tossed. The multiple ladders are so that smaller outfits aren't competing with mega outfits for qualification, but with other outfits with similar manpower. Once qualified the outfits, no matter the size, will send platoon sized force for the battles to keep things even. This is just a first phase. Ps2 is capable of doing 12 v 12 or 250 vs 250 and exploring how we can make those and everything in between work is something we will do at some point. For now were concentratingon getting one size "match" working well. Platoon size felt like the right balance.

12v12 is wheres its at Higby.

[Hamma]

Thanks Higby!

Some interesting ideas on that article as well regarding the Observer Cam.

[Rahabib]

Nope, not tossed. The multiple ladders are so that smaller outfits aren't competing with mega outfits for qualification, but with other outfits with similar manpower. Once qualified the outfits, no matter the size, will send platoon sized force for the battles to keep things even. This is just a first phase. Ps2 is capable of doing 12 v 12 or 250 vs 250 and exploring how we can make those and everything in between work is something we will do at some point. For now were concentratingon getting one size "match" working well. Platoon size felt like the right balance.

Platoon sized? still a bit big. Even if its not the "main event," I would like to see 12v12 still supported in ladders.

[Hamma]

Yea 48v48 platoon sized will definitely rule out lots of outfits, mine included.

[ChipMHazard]

I've been wondering about how it would be possible to have teams be physically present at MLG events... And I cannot believe that I did not think about just having the leaders represent the outfits:p Makes perfect sense.

So Higby, am I right in thinking that you will allow for smaller outfits to band together in order to field a full platoon?

[Rahabib]

I've been wondering about how it would be possible to have teams be physically present at MLG events... And I cannot believe that I did not think about just having the leaders represent the outfits:p Makes perfect sense.

So Higby, am I right in thinking that you will allow for smaller outfits to band together in order to field a full platoon?

If you do that, might as well make a zerg outfit so you can actually compete. Banding together would just screw up the qualification criteria. Seems to me, 48v48 is the minimum for now.

[Pella]

I've been wondering about how it would be possible to have teams be physically present at MLG events... And I cannot believe that I did not think about just having the leaders represent the outfits:p Makes perfect sense.

So Higby, am I right in thinking that you will allow for smaller outfits to band together in order to field a full platoon?

I hope not.

But i can see where Higby is going with this.

The Esports domain of FPS is already filled.

COD / CS:GO / HALO / GoW

I presume Higby is looking to offer something new to that domain. And its where BF3 Failed. And spending big bucks with MLG was the only way todo it.

[kidriot]

First off thanks for posting a link to my article! I was coming here to do just that.

48 vs 48 really is the perfect size to showcase everything Planetside 2 has to offer. It would involve a higher level of coordination on the part of platoon and squad leaders, showcase the various vehicles and their uses and still have those intense infantry battles we all enjoy being a part of.

My outfit doesn't have 48 people but we've been in contact with other outfits to fill out the roster. My suggestion is that if you want to compete in MLG form alliances with similarly minded outfits and start working together. You want your play to be seamless as possible when it comes time to compete.

[ChipMHazard]

If you do that, might as well make a zerg outfit so you can actually compete. Banding together would just screw up the qualification criteria. Seems to me, 48v48 is the minimum for now.

Fair enough. I just don't much like the idea of indirectly "forcing" the smaller outfits to either combine into bigger ones or create new "zerg" outfits so they can compete. Alliances would allow for smaller outfits to compete, but I see your point about the qualification and how that would work with alliances. (Unless they allow smaller outfits to form an alliance that would function like a single outfit, when it comes to qualifying.)
I guess the smaller outfits might just have to wait until they make a new bracket that allows for smaller outfits.

[Chewy]

Im thinking that 48v48 may be to small in the long run. This is Planetside and 96 people is nothing of what I seen in a common ops night for us and our enemies. I want the cluster fuck of 192v192v192 (4 platoons for each faction) made with outfits working together over a set objective.

Now that would be a PS2 fight. It would be a bitch to get that many people, but would be worth it.

[Pella]

Im thinking that 48v48 may be to small in the long run. This is Planetside and 96 people is nothing of what I seen in a common ops night for us and our enemies. I want the cluster fuck of 192v192v192 (4 platoons for each faction) made with outfits working together over a set objective.

Now that would be a PS2 fight. It would be a bitch to get that many people, but would be worth it.

Every armchair general just came.

[Bear]

I'll preface this by saying I've been EXTREMELY supporting of SOE and they work they've done on this game but they're going backwards right now. Instead of racing to release new stuff to buy every week or MLG, I'd prefer they work on the current performance issues and glitches. The servers were absolutely terrible last night. Reavers glitching across the sky, terminals not flipping. There are bigger issues that need addressing that should be fixed before rushing towards MLG.

[Roy Awesome]

Nope, not tossed. The multiple ladders are so that smaller outfits aren't competing with mega outfits for qualification, but with other outfits with similar manpower. Once qualified the outfits, no matter the size, will send platoon sized force for the battles to keep things even. This is just a first phase. Ps2 is capable of doing 12 v 12 or 250 vs 250 and exploring how we can make those and everything in between work is something we will do at some point. For now were concentratingon getting one size "match" working well. Platoon size felt like the right balance.

Honestly, I think that a 48v48 fight is too large for an event of this size. You can't get the tight teamwork and coordination that is required to succeed in an event like this.

Secondly, any outfit with less than 200 members is going to struggle to get 1/4th of their member base online at a single time.

[Rahabib]

Honestly, I think that a 48v48 fight is too large for an event of this size. You can't get the tight teamwork and coordination that is required to succeed in an event like this.

Secondly, any outfit with less than 200 members is going to struggle to get 1/4th of their member base online at a single time.

yea I hope SOE knows what they are doing. Think about this. Finding 5-10 people willing to pay to travel to an event is one thing. 48 is another. Is SOE going to pay for 96 round trip tickets, food, lodging, etc. to host a finals match? Or will this be online only second billing (likely - bring on the hackers).

Now the winning team has to split the purse 48 ways... so that greatly diminishes the value of a "professional" level competitors - so now its more amature league, which is ok I suppose.

So unless SOE is doing really really well, this is just another in game ladder that has a MLG sticker slapped on it. No "pros" are going to take this serious.

Then theres the whole, lets get 48 people to show up for matches, so now we are down to maybe 2-3 teams that can play each other.

so yea, Higby is really quiet about details, and it makes me think they really haven't thought this through enough. I mean why half ass the announcement if you dont know how its going to work.

[CzuukWaterson]

Nope, not tossed. The multiple ladders are so that smaller outfits aren't competing with mega outfits for qualification, but with other outfits with similar manpower. Once qualified the outfits, no matter the size, will send platoon sized force for the battles to keep things even. This is just a first phase. Ps2 is capable of doing 12 v 12 or 250 vs 250 and exploring how we can make those and everything in between work is something we will do at some point. For now were concentratingon getting one size "match" working well. Platoon size felt like the right balance.

Nice. Although it looks like I've got some coaching to do. I thought we were a small outfit.

[Sonny]

I just read the article - very interesting. I also just watched some of the MLG Dallas finals and I have to agree with Kidriot that the Starcraft 2 matches are hands-down the most exciting to watch.

I agree that if we're going to get the same amount of excitement into a Planetside 2 match then we'd need a top-down observer cam much like what Kidriot describes. Also the idea of having a mix of 'home bases' and capturable outposts is really good.

I think these ideas would take a lot of work to get right. But if they could be implemented - Planetside 2 would be an absolutely awesome spectacle for e-sports.

Sonny

[Assist]

Nope, not tossed. The multiple ladders are so that smaller outfits aren't competing with mega outfits for qualification, but with other outfits with similar manpower. Once qualified the outfits, no matter the size, will send platoon sized force for the battles to keep things even. This is just a first phase. Ps2 is capable of doing 12 v 12 or 250 vs 250 and exploring how we can make those and everything in between work is something we will do at some point. For now were concentratingon getting one size "match" working well. Platoon size felt like the right balance.

Fair enough, have to start somewhere and I'd rather see the competition be at the Platoon size than the smaller arena sizes first.

What about the weapon balance? Is this specific to infantry or does this include limiting vehicles?

[bpostal]

250 v 250 is more like it! I suppose I could get behind something like that.

That should really showcase the scale and potential of this game instead of looking like some kinda Battlefield knockoff with this platoon vs platoon bit.

[Assist]

Honestly, I think that a 48v48 fight is too large for an event of this size. You can't get the tight teamwork and coordination that is required to succeed in an event like this.

Secondly, any outfit with less than 200 members is going to struggle to get 1/4th of their member base online at a single time.

I disagree. While true in other games, including Planetside 1, many games have succeeded in fielding large numbers and some very often. Everquest, Everquest 2, and even vanilla WoW all had many raids that required 40 people. In WoW's case many of these guilds/outfits were in the 50-80 member range and fielded 40+ people 3-5 times a week up until the first WoW expansion came out.

I think people understand that MLG is for a rather specific player group but those same people don't seem to understand the level of dedication required for it. It's a competition level league that you have to earn to be a part of, not be given it. Sure everyone has a chance to be apart of the ladder and ranking system, but make no mistake people will be forming outfits specifically for MLG PS2, just like is done in other games.
Think of the number of players who play Starcraft 2 for example, think about how many of them are part of MLG. Everyone has a chance, only those crazy good, sometimes no-lifers, are the ones who really go far in it.

I didn't read the article

You really should read the article, it's what this thread is about.

[Rahabib]

I disagree. While true in other games, including Planetside 1, many games have succeeded in fielding large numbers and some very often. Everquest, Everquest 2, and even vanilla WoW all had many raids that required 40 people. In WoW's case many of these guilds/outfits were in the 50-80 member range and fielded 40+ people 3-5 times a week up until the first WoW expansion came out.

I think people understand that MLG is for a rather specific player group but those same people don't seem to understand the level of dedication required for it. It's a competition level league that you have to earn to be a part of, not be given it. Sure everyone has a chance to be apart of the ladder and ranking system, but make no mistake people will be forming outfits specifically for MLG PS2, just like is done in other games.
Think of the number of players who play Starcraft 2 for example, think about how many of them are part of MLG. Everyone has a chance, only those crazy good, sometimes no-lifers, are the ones who really go far in it.



You really should read the article, it's what this thread is about.

I did read the article. It was an author stating his opinion:
How Could This Work?
Allow me to explain my vision for this.
not how they are they are actually doing it. Also he talks about using Station Cash - not a good enough incentive.
no where does he address where it fits in with MLG as far as online only (ladder is - we know this) or in person (finals as most other MLG games). The only real info we have is:

Here are a few details Higby laid out about PS2 in MLG:

It will be 48v48, meaning Platoon vs Platoon
Teams will only be able to practice in the open world. No private instanced servers for practice, so that each team is always involved in the conflict on the servers.
There will be objectives within the bases and map.
Weapon choices will be limited based on balance.


If I missed something feel free to quote the article for me.

[Assist]

Platoon vs Platoon is the perfect size for MLG competition. Let’s go back to the quote from above where it mentions “presence at MLG events.” What I envision for this is 5 people go to the live event to represent each outfit. You take 4 squad leaders plus the 1 platoon leader as live representatives of the 48 people on each side. These 5 people act as the face for the outfits.
yea I hope SOE knows what they are doing. Think about this. Finding 5-10 people willing to pay to travel to an event is one thing. 48 is another. Is SOE going to pay for 96 round trip tickets, food, lodging, etc. to host a finals match? Or will this be online only second billing (likely - bring on the hackers).

Now the winning team has to split the purse 48 ways... so that greatly diminishes the value of a "professional" level competitors - so now its more amature league, which is ok I suppose.


He laid out in the article how it could work and likely how it would. You're right, they're not going to pay for 96 round trip tickets. Usually it's not the game company that pays for these either, it's sponsors. So really it would be 48, but still no sponsor is going to pay that, which is why what themittani article laid out seems to be the most logical option. If you don't agree that can work, that's fine, but it's laid out pretty clear that it could indeed work.

I also disagree with your assessment that it won't attract high competition players. Sure it's not going to pull some guy whose top in his specific game, but it will attract plenty of 'professional' gamers.

[DirtyBird]

Im thinking that 48v48 may be to small in the long run. This is Planetside and 96 people is nothing of what I seen in a common ops night for us and our enemies. I want the cluster fuck of 192v192v192 (4 platoons for each faction) made with outfits working together over a set objective.

Now that would be a PS2 fight. It would be a bitch to get that many people, but would be worth it.

The important part of your idea is that you included 3 factions in the fight and thats what PS2 is all about, NC v TR v VS.
If you want to make an impact in esports why not change it up and go the three way.
Is it not possible to do this in esports and compete in PS2 the same we do day in and day out?
With faction loyalty that's something I would watch.

[Rahabib]

He laid out in the article how it could work and likely how it would.
I am not sure how "likely" it is to be exactly like that.
You're right, they're not going to pay for 96 round trip tickets. Usually it's not the game company that pays for these either, it's sponsors. So really it would be 48, but still no sponsor is going to pay that, which is why what themittani article laid out seems to be the most logical option. If you don't agree that can work, that's fine, but it's laid out pretty clear that it could indeed work.

Yes, generally its not the publisher who pays for that, its the sponsors and for a team this size without a history to be gathering sponsors (at least for the first several seasons) it will be the players who will have to pay that - IF it comes to an actual MLG billed game (not just an online Gamebattles ladder). But to offer an in game currency as rewards, that will only work for existing players and not incentivise players to come over to play. Honestly, top players likely would have already spent enough station cash to more than make any station cash incentive not as lofty. In essence it will end up being bragging rights, which is incentive enough for many players - but not top players to move over from another game. I played for years in Day of Defeat leagues to know how online leagues etc. work. Lets not fool ourselves its not like you will see top names in other games moving to play for station cash. There are good players then there are pros who play 24/7 and practice more than is practical or healthy.

I also disagree with your assessment that it won't attract high competition players. Sure it's not going to pull some guy whose top in his specific game, but it will attract plenty of 'professional' gamers.
It will attract high competition players who happen to already play Planetside 2. You wont see the level of dedication to it that you see for SC2, LOL, or more realistically COD or CS. Not for station cash and not for online only billing. I know they wont pay for 96 plane tickets - I bring it up because thats what it would take to be a top game at MLG and to get noticed. Otherwise its just another game on Gamebattles.

[kidriot]

The important part of your idea is that you included 3 factions in the fight and thats what PS2 is all about, NC v TR v VS.
If you want to make an impact in esports why not change it up and go the three way.
Is it not possible to do this in esports and compete in PS2 the same we do day in and day out?
With faction loyalty that's something I would watch.

There would be too much of an imbalance if you made it 1v1v1.

The reason that works on a Continental scale is that you have predictable resources in numbers and unpredictable in the sense that you never know when someone is going to show up. There's a 2000 Continent sliced up into 3 and that's usually enough to hold the line in an evenly populated continent.

Now, if you make it 48v48v48 you can guarantee one team will get dominated. I think it would be far more interesting to watch same faction battles, NC vs NC, etc than it would be to watch a 3 way turn into a 2v1 (which it easily could).

You want to make the game as viewable as possible and a 3 way is counter-intuitive in that sense.

[DirtyBird]

... I think it would be far more interesting to watch same faction battles, NC vs NC, etc than it would be to watch a 3 way turn into a 2v1 (which it easily could).

You want to make the game as viewable as possible and a 3 way is counter-intuitive in that sense.

I had thought about the NC v NC scenario, how do we get an over all "winner" if the two best sides are on the same faction, they'll never meet.
Its not like say BF3 where you change teams at the end of map.

[bpostal]

There would be too much of an imbalance if you made it 1v1v1...

Unfortunately, I have to agree. I know...it just doesn't seem like Planetside if you cut a faction out to focus on the faction v faction fighting but it's been proven that 1v1v1 is susceptible to tag teaming (intentional or not.)

http://i.imgur.com/MQtPf.png

I dunno if anyone's at work or not but it's probably best if you don't click that link if you get offended easily by lewd sexual acts. HINT: It's from the Old Oshur event.

[Higby]

Some more details for you guys to answer a few of the questions popping up in the thread. We'll have a more complete release of all this plan, and of course we'll be changing and iterating it based on feedback from all of you throughout the development - but just to put a few things to rest.

- The people working on the systems to support eSports are NOT the same guys who are working on fixing performance issues. We have dedicated staff for it and the skill sets don't really overlap, so we're not "giving up" performance fixes/optimization bandwidth to get this stuff. If game development were a car dealership, it'd be like being upset about the finance guys working on figuring out loans while the mechanics shop has a queue - totally different specialties and you really wouldn't want them "helping" each other out.
- We're currently planning on doing 5 people live at the events, 4 squad leaders and 1 platoon leader, as the article speculated.
- It will support inter-faction fights, so you will be able to test your badass TR outfit against another badass TR outfit.
- We have discussed doing 3-way fights. It's something we're really interested in, but it has a lot of what-ifs to work out, it might be something we do for a later phase.

[nilkilla]

A quick suggestion for smaller teams would be to pick something and specialize in it. That way you could interact with larger or equal sized teams and socket into a "department" they need. Say a platoon of aircraft/tanks/large number of medics/engineers. That could help manage the numbers and keep you involved.

[Mastachief]

Is this a USA only thing then?

[bpostal]

Is this a USA only thing then?

I hope not, that'd be fucked up if that was the case.

[ChipMHazard]

Is this a USA only thing then?

Good question. Even if it isn't restricted to US only it might become so indirectly.

[snafus]

How did they feel about balance and how current and future faction specific weapons will affect that?

[Rahabib]

...
- We're currently planning on doing 5 people live at the events, 4 squad leaders and 1 platoon leader, as the article speculated.
...
alright, so its 5 players and 43 well wishers per team. Oh well, its probably the only way it would work.

[Hamma]

Some more details for you guys to answer a few of the questions popping up in the thread. We'll have a more complete release of all this plan, and of course we'll be changing and iterating it based on feedback from all of you throughout the development - but just to put a few things to rest.

- The people working on the systems to support eSports are NOT the same guys who are working on fixing performance issues. We have dedicated staff for it and the skill sets don't really overlap, so we're not "giving up" performance fixes/optimization bandwidth to get this stuff. If game development were a car dealership, it'd be like being upset about the finance guys working on figuring out loans while the mechanics shop has a queue - totally different specialties and you really wouldn't want them "helping" each other out.
- We're currently planning on doing 5 people live at the events, 4 squad leaders and 1 platoon leader, as the article speculated.
- It will support inter-faction fights, so you will be able to test your badass TR outfit against another badass TR outfit.
- We have discussed doing 3-way fights. It's something we're really interested in, but it has a lot of what-ifs to work out, it might be something we do for a later phase.

Will the systems be tied directly somehow to MLG's ladder/ranking system via their API? Also, do you guys plan to flesh out Observer much more to allow for things similar to what was mentioned in the article?

[Pella]

Good question. Even if it isn't restricted to US only it might become so indirectly.

We can compete in the ladders as MLG already offer EU ladders.

But live events will be out of the question unless you have a private jet. Or Until SOE partner with ESL.

If the devs want to take esports seriously and want to attract the competitive crowd. They have to abolish hackers full stop.

It will take 1 Big match and 1 hacker to seriously destroy what soe are trying todo.

Trust me on that one.

[Blynd]

They have to abolish hackers full stop.

It will take 1 Big match and 1 hacker to seriously destroy what soe are trying todo.

Trust me on that one.

completely agree with that pella (damn ive agreed with a dirty TR :P)

[Hamma]

It's impossible to 100% remove all hackers from the game.

[CzuukWaterson]

Some more details for you guys to answer a few of the questions popping up in the thread. We'll have a more complete release of all this plan, and of course we'll be changing and iterating it based on feedback from all of you throughout the development - but just to put a few things to rest.

- The people working on the systems to support eSports are NOT the same guys who are working on fixing performance issues. We have dedicated staff for it and the skill sets don't really overlap, so we're not "giving up" performance fixes/optimization bandwidth to get this stuff. If game development were a car dealership, it'd be like being upset about the finance guys working on figuring out loans while the mechanics shop has a queue - totally different specialties and you really wouldn't want them "helping" each other out.
- We're currently planning on doing 5 people live at the events, 4 squad leaders and 1 platoon leader, as the article speculated.
- It will support inter-faction fights, so you will be able to test your badass TR outfit against another badass TR outfit.
- We have discussed doing 3-way fights. It's something we're really interested in, but it has a lot of what-ifs to work out, it might be something we do for a later phase.

Very excited. Thank you. Finally an esport that challenges my brain.

[FireStormNova]

250 v 250 is more like it! I suppose I could get behind something like that.

That should really showcase the scale and potential of this game instead of looking like some kinda Battlefield knockoff with this platoon vs platoon bit.

Yea i agree! They should put the others games to shame and show what the system can realy do and what the other games can't do. Massive battles! :p

The only problem is getting people to avoid the zerg fest and to be more tactical! ;)

[Hamma]

My outfit doesn't have 48 people but we've been in contact with other outfits to fill out the roster. My suggestion is that if you want to compete in MLG form alliances with similarly minded outfits and start working together. You want your play to be seamless as possible when it comes time to compete.

I know I'm going back to page one but.. this sort of thing is the problem with PS2. It caters to much to very large outfits - the smaller ones who want to retain their own name are yet again hung out to dry with this.

[Rahabib]

It's impossible to 100% remove all hackers from the game.
yes but its much easier to police for major events when everyone can be there in person. With 86 online participants and money on the line, you can rest assured at least a few wall hackers will sign up. For games where there are only 5 people all in person, its virtually impossible to pull out a wall hack or aimbot without someone noticing.

[Hamma]

I guarantee they will have admins watching these events like hawks.

[ChipMHazard]

I guarantee they will have admins watching these events like hawks.

And Jenny watching out for bailers:p

[o Solei o]

Higby: Any chance of getting some of code, hardware, and assets for these E-Sports only instanced environments also utilized for other forms of game-play? (i.e. outfit-specific training areas - would make a nice outfit unlock, or orbital station maps?)

[Rahabib]

I guarantee they will have admins watching these events like hawks.
its a lot of people to watch... but Ill give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Gimpylung]

...The people working on the systems to support eSports are NOT the same guys who are working on fixing performance issues.....

Don't doubt that for a second, I'll wager, however, that there is significant overlap with the guys doing Hossin and Searhus, the new lattice/hex system, warp gate traversal and cont locking. All that important 'Big Game' stuff.

I have nothing against eSports aside from its timing, it's too early in the lifecycle of the game. The core game is too underdeveloped as yet to be used as a springboard for this eSports offshoot.

4 months in and the typical player is still zerging about on Indar in the general vicinity of the Crown with little of no reason to move to Esamir or Amerish because there is no incentive. Medium and small sized outfits are struggling to retain their playerbase due to player boredom and SOE are talking about instanced matches that are likely to be played by a very small proportion of players.

EVERYTHING including the kitchen sink should be thrown at developing the core game as fast as possible. Put the eSports component on the back burner until there is a solid foundation to support it.

[kidriot]

My only concern are more subtle hacks like no recoil and things like that.

[Noxxia]

Per Higby's post, the article, and other responses I've see, I wonder how having only 5 of 48 show up really effects the integrity of planetside as an eSport. I mean, I hate to bring up the evil h-word, but this really does have to do with hacking. Many counterstrike pros that were LAN proven players have admitted to hacking in online tournaments on a day where they were sick, or even just to not have to play as hard.I can't find anything on the internet because sometimes things you read 8 years ago completely vanishes. I will keep looking and if I come across the article I'll post it, because what i"m saying is a bold statement to make without any proof. So take it for what it's worth. But basically, with 43 players that aren't LAN proven my fear is that PS2 will not be taken seriously as an eSport. Obviously fielding 48 players at a LAN is just about impossible, but maybe a better goal would be "Bring as many as you can". Sending only 5 encourages teams to have a hacker or two, even if it's just Wall hacks. If there is a prize on the line and they don't have to prove they weren't cheating other than relying on anti-hack software, which is far from reliable, this scares me.

[Rahabib]

Per Higby's post, the article, and other responses I've see, I wonder how having only 5 of 48 show up really effects the integrity of planetside as an eSport. I mean, I hate to bring up the evil h-word, but this really does have to do with hacking. Many counterstrike pros that were LAN proven players have admitted to hacking in online tournaments on a day where they were sick, or even just to not have to play as hard.I can't find anything on the internet because sometimes things you read 8 years ago completely vanishes. I will keep looking and if I come across the article I'll post it, because what i"m saying is a bold statement to make without any proof. So take it for what it's worth. But basically, with 43 players that aren't LAN proven my fear is that PS2 will not be taken seriously as an eSport. Obviously fielding 48 players at a LAN is just about impossible, but maybe a better goal would be "Bring as many as you can". Sending only 5 encourages teams to have a hacker or two, even if it's just Wall hacks. If there is a prize on the line and they don't have to prove they weren't cheating other than relying on anti-hack software, which is far from reliable, this scares me.
I see we have someone who has actually played a competitive game before. Its not uncommon to find people playing years before they get caught online. CAL and even CEVO was full of them. I am skeptical it will work, but we will just have to see. Aimbots and recoil hacks can be detected by just spectating - but wall hacks aren't easy unless you can see the person's monitor.

[SGTAce]

So let just get it straight - you want to play MLG tournament.
You want at least 48 vs 48 people, okay, I'm gonna get from friendly outfit.

Open world? That's a real thread. It's going to be uneven. Why?

Disbalance.
1. Random cheaters
2. Random zerg (you can tell your friends to coordinate it against your enemy, and they will never know what hit them)
3. PC lagg - just imagine 48 vs 48 lan party with 200 people more at one biolab/outpost. Oh, no. You got 2 FPS right now? That's bad.


Sorry, it's just making me mad, I want to play fair eSports tournaments with my outfits, but right now it's bullshit. You gonna start bad eSports - it's gonna end fast.


How I see it: Closed private SOE server, only availble for certain outfits.
For example, if I want to play tournament, I call my friend sentinels from woodman, and I tell my outfit we gonna shoot each other next friday, cause I got booked place in queue.
We are only allowed people to play on this server so we got no problems to log in.


It's going to be 36 vs 36. My outfit has got right now 36 people online, sentinels got 48 so to be fair we choose lower count of people. We could say "we got for all in" and then go 36 vs 48 if both sides choose the same.



So we join servers, we got like 5 minutes of warmup. Everyone gets ready, it's going to be fight for biolab. We got Splitteak Pass, out friends got Granite Valley Garrison. We gonna fight for Xelas Biolab which is in the middle. First team who captures biolab and holds it for 30 minutes is going to win.




Isn't that better idea? Less cheating options, less disbalance options, less problems with server and pc lagg.


I wrote simillar post about half year ago on Forumsite 2, where it gone lost somwhere between whining threads.

[Hamma]

MLG will not take place in the open world, they will have instanced match areas for tournaments. However, there will be no instanced areas accessible at any other time.

[Killjaeden]

You can't do mindless zerg with 48 people... you get outplayed if the other team uses any sort of tactic. So creating zerg-outfits won't get you far up in the ladder.
And i'm pretty sure that ressources are limited so that you can't just go 3 platoons entirely made out of 1/2 tanks

I would imagine that the whole platoon has a ressource pool that gets drained once a player needs ressources. Shouldn't be too high to allow too many vehicles but it shouldn't be too low either, because with certain weapons its too easy to completely annihilate any vehicle if you time your fire with your squad.
maybe 2/3 infantry and 1/3 vehicles of some sort (not just tanks, also flash, sunderer and Galaxy)

Or a limited pool per vehicle, for example you could have 8 MBTs for the whole game, and if you used all you can't have any more of them. It would propably easier to balance that, on the other hand it would limit the tactical choices.

I could also imagine a platoon certpool at the beginning of the game, and it has to be distributed by the platoon leader and then by squad or something like that. Reason beeing that a vehicle specialist might require more certs then a footslogger.
If there was an easy way for spectators to see what people certed, the game could already be interesting in the initial phase. If certs are even in...


It could turn out pretty awesome, a combined arms battle with lots of tactics and nice graphics definitely sounds worth watching. Especially the logistics are kinda unique compared to other games, when and where to pull the correct vehicles for the task.

And think of it - if there are more professional players they will quickly find the unbalanced/cheesy things for them, which can then be adjusted and the base game can benefit of that as well