AGN: Consolidated Community Clash Feedback Thread - Page 2

Sardus · 2013-08-22, 11:00 AM

Suggestion for scoring:

Too much focus is on the last 60 seconds of the match. Right now those 60 seconds are all that really matter as the score is taken at the end of the match.

I would recommend taking scores at the 5, 10 and 15 (end) minute marks. This way more emphasis is on the entire match as a whole, instead of just the end. I felt like everything we did up to the last 60 seconds really didn't matter much and I had to build my strategy around just the last 60 seconds (I believe GOTR did the same).

Everyone likes clutch moments, so maybe make the end score 15 minute mark more points or something, but there should definitely be some scoring elements during the rest of the match too.

Sardus · 2013-08-22, 11:04 AM

Overall I have to say watching the show was extremely entertaining. But yes, it was a bit long.

Noxxia · 2013-08-22, 11:09 AM

Ok, sorry for spam. I just keep reading things I want to address.

Regarding on the spot rule changes too. This is something that will happen for a few weeks most likely. I hope people can be understanding. Once we're happy with the rules, there will be no budging. We already had to not budge a bit, but you guys don't hear the behind the scenes stuff. These might be due to things like I mentioned earlier with Cairn, but it could also be a slight oversight that one team points out to us. We do notify both teams in the sake of fairness of any questions asked.

Noxxia · 2013-08-22, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Sardus

Suggestion for scoring:

Too much focus is on the last 60 seconds of the match. Right now those 60 seconds are all that really matters as the score is taken at the end of the match.

I would recommend taking scores at the 5, 10 and 15 (end) minute marks. This way more emphasis is on the entire match as a whole, instead of just the end. I felt like everything we did up to the last 60 seconds really didn't matter much and I had to build my strategy around just the last 60 seconds (I believe GOTR did the same).

Everyone likes clutch moments, so maybe make the end score 15 minute mark more points or something, but there should definitely be some scoring elements during the rest of the match too.

This something I fully agree with. I feel like there is far too much emphasis on the end regarding scoring and it makes everything leading up to it meaningless. I do like taking a score at specific times though. In any good sport, scoring happens periodically, not at the bitter end. This was part of my reasoning behind 4 rounds, rather than just 2 big things, but it does make each round become a scenario where only the last 2-3 minutes seem to really matter if the territory is beyond the point of capture. This becomes worse with the 7 minute cap times, vs. the single node 4 minutes bases.

Thanks for the idea of periodic scoring! I'll see what I can't come up with that all us hosts are happy with

Sardus · 2013-08-22, 11:17 AM

I honestly didn't mind the spot rule changes this early in development. They were pretty minor at the time anyway.

At no point did I feel it was unfair for either side.

However the rules are a bit lengthy, and making changes makes it hard to remember them. But the way you guys handled it was good.

Sardus · 2013-08-22, 11:22 AM

Might want to shorten the show to two 25 minute halves.

Each team gets to defend a base of their choice. And it can be the same one if they wish. If you feel certain bases are too campy or something, you can eliminate them from being picked. Give them a list they can choose from in the rules.

That way you have less downtime and prep time. Once each half starts, you have 25 minutes of good fragging without much delay. And you can have the interviews at the start, half, and end. Those were fun to listen to.

15 minutes felt a little short. And if you introduce periodic scoring, or some other idea, you will have a more balanced event.

Realistically if there were no issues the show would be about an hour and 10 minutes long. But we know it never works that way, so it'd probably be 1.5 hours and that's about right.

EVILPIG · 2013-08-22, 11:25 AM

I feel that it should be kept as simple and light as possible. It should be about promoting the game, spotlighting outfits and entertaining the audience. It should not be a super serious be all, end all that says outfit A is "better" than outfit B. Take it from an exhibition for a charity viewpoint. (Hey, charity events sound cool) Unless of course, your goal is to make it a super-serious event about who's more 1337.

Pella · 2013-08-22, 11:27 AM

Good set up to be honest. And the commentary was great aswell.

Sadly us EU folks wont be up to watch it live. But having it watchable later is fine.

GJ all.

Desy · 2013-08-22, 11:44 AM

Shoot for the stars and you'll hit the moon.

Do your best, get sony involved and spend more time on it if you really care about making this a thing.

You've got the resources, you can be better than the average streamer... If you put the time in.

Dreadnaut · 2013-08-22, 12:55 PM

My comments are that Observer Cam needs to be improved, but that's an SOE issue and I'll send that feedback to them.

I kinda feel like Observer cam needs a wallhack so you can see people from the air inside buildings, etc.

It was fun to watch, even with the minor issues. I had Torokokill's stream up in another window, the delays were much different but still very fun to watch.

I've decided that I need to be an MLG cameraman someday =)

robocpf1 · 2013-08-22, 12:58 PM

Periodic Scoring is a great suggestion, and I'd like to mirror what Sardus said. It did feel kind of POINTless (PUNPUNPUN) to have those awesome holds for much of the match and then a quick flip of two points in the last few seconds cinched the win. So, that in mind, theorycrafting (this is only an example to encourage discussion and should not be taken as a direct suggestion of format change):

Not only could you take the score of who has what point at 5 minute intervals, you could introduce scoring for continuous holding of 2/3 points. In Round 3 when TRG was holding 2/3 points for something like 5-7 continuous minutes, they should have scored some points for that. I would almost say if attackers can hold 2/3 of cap points for more than 2 minutes, you should get some sort of score for that, and defenders could in turn be rewarded for completely preventing attackers from having 2/3. I don't want to make this really complicated though. Let's give it a shot, I'm using 1 point for each capture point held at each interval.

Match start, VS defending, TR attacking.

5 minute mark: everyone is fighting over the points and they've been continuously flipping, nobody has held a point for very long, but at the 5 minute mark VS hold two and TR holds one. Score: VS 2, TR 1

10 minute mark: Same situation, except TR now hold two and VS only hold one. Score: VS 3, TR 3

At the 11 minute mark TR hunkers down at point B and C and holds them both, uninterrupted, for 2 minutes. That nets them an additional 2 points, a "hold bonus". VS do not get a hold bonus for A, because holding one point is still losing the base. Score: VS 3, TR 5

TR eventually loses hold of those two points and it's back to intense fighting over all three.

At the 15 minute mark, or whatever the "end" is, VS makes a mad push for all three points and caps them as the timer hits zero, making the score VS 6, TR 5 - but that's a lot better than a similar situation (a situation that happened last night) where the score was VS 2, TR 0. This eliminates "playing to a draw" and awards points based on performance during the round instead of the end result of the round. However, it also requires a lot of stopwatches.

**Malorn** · 2013-08-22, 01:09 PM

I liked how you had the two outfit leaders during the break talking after each round, specifically how they were talking to each other. Some great sportsmanship in this competition, really impressed by both GOTR and TRG, hope this sets a good precedent for all PS2 competitions.

Noxxia · 2013-08-22, 01:13 PM

Awesome feedback continues! Thanks guys!

one comment on the rule length though. We tried short simple rules, and it only caused more problems with outfits not being on the same page. While it is tedious and annoying, specifics are needed. counter strike rulesets also were very long, and that game is much more simple.

http://www.cevo.com/event/css-season1/rules/

NotTheMomma · 2013-08-22, 01:27 PM

I agree with Sardus & Robo about the scoring. In fact, I commented in TS post-match that it felt kind of silly fighting for so long when only the last 60 seconds really mattered.

I have a few years past experience in competitive gaming, and, maybe I'm getting old, but that event was too damn long, lol. It's hard to stay "up" that long continuously. While there were numerous delays due to technical issues, the official breaks were 5 minutes, so we were sitting there tensed up (at least I was) for going on 4 hours. While I used to go on 12-hour marathon GvG matches in the original Guild Wars, we'd still stop for 20-30 min or so every few hours, take care of eating & the like, then queue back up.

Playing was a lot of fun, and I hope most of it was fun to watch, but I don't feel like anything was really "decided" by the match, if that makes any sense. Without having development powers, I don't know how even a playing field you could potentially provide or how to really measure effectiveness when the main game doesn't really support even-Steven, equal teams competitive gameplay. Battle Islands on PTS will probably help a bunch.

Until then, I would suggest you guys choose the two (or simply one) bases that will be used, and announce them well in advance. In this fashion, you can choose bases that will be more or less balanced in attack and defense and suited to the number of competitors. The teams will be able to form some interesting strategy in advance, and then we'll see who can adapt the best when their marvelous plans break down, lol.

Thanks for all the hard work y'all are doing for the community.

Nutters · 2013-08-22, 01:34 PM

I think it would be really cool for the scoring system to be based on length of point capture. It may be tedious, and hard to be completely accurate, but if someone's job was to just time and add up points for each node controlled for each team, I think that would be really neat. There should definitely be something for controlling points the longest.