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

[Roy Awesome]

Originally Posted by Higby

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]

Originally Posted by Roy Awesome

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]

Originally Posted by Higby

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]

Originally Posted by Higby

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]

Originally Posted by Roy Awesome

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.

Originally Posted by Rahabib

I didn't read the article

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

[Rahabib]

Originally Posted by Assist

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]

Originally Posted by themittaniatricle

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.

Originally Posted by Rahabib

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Assist

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.

Originally Posted by Assist

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.

Originally Posted by Assist

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]

Originally Posted by DirtyBird

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]

Originally Posted by kidriot

... 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]

Originally Posted by kidriot

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.