[Phoenix] Proposal for CW system
Post: 8
Besøkt av: 41 users
|
People are griping about the fact a clan can get third in 3 days of games. Fact is when the game has 10 active CW clans split between casual and quick games, theres not a lot of elo to go around and literally 90% of the season is pointless. You can make 100 elo in less than 10 games... and an active clan with half decent players can achieve this at the end of a season. So from my perspective the problem is activity, specifically within the comp scene. How could we practically address this? Make the comp scene more attractive.... How do we make the comp scene more attractive? Kill this boring meta of eu games and make it more enticing to new players. I can already hear you all crying "PHO YOU IDIOT EU IS THE ONLY BALANCED MAP" Well my AW brothers my proposal is simple. We host a competitive map making contest and add a marking on each map with a "balance value" marked by "registered" comp players. Firstly being "registered" as a comp player would be like a mark of honor... you could get this after playing 50 cw's automatically... and then you can mark each map with a score which is averaged out, like a trust pilot or trip advisor review... easy code, we already have a mark for general reviews... ofcourse there needs to be enticing rewards for the map makers, and the winner is the player that produces the most interesting and (multiplied by) the most balanced map! and then we can have a wealth of new maps to play, which comp players can learn and come up with new metas etc... Think: a balanced US, a balanced Asia, a balanced Africa made viable for strats other than imp. A balanced Got map. A balanced ancient map...a mario kart map, a crash bandicoot map... whatever... The main issue is balance in other maps, if we address this we can solve all kinds of issues surrounding activity and the comp scene and how much elo there is available and circumventing camping clans. The only flaw with my idea I can think of is how to encourage comp players to actually branch out into those maps if they were produced... Simple enough... host official tournaments on them! Or add a score next to each clan for diversity... you could even code in an elo multiplier for diversity of maps played from where elo was earned... on official comp marked maps. This might also be a nice way to bridge the divide between casual rp players who actually make maps and comp players who are always online and arguably more active (and generally better at the game *shots fired*) Discuss tldr: 1. New maps 2. Introduce a "Balance ranking" for maps 3. Introduce "registered comp player status" 4. Registered comp players can give a balance ranking against new maps. 5. Host smaller cw tournaments throughout the season on these new maps 6. Add a diversity multiplier against clan elo. 7. reep rewards of a more active comp scene
---- 
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Yeah it's annoying how people are incapable of playing anything except Europe, it makes me think of a boring office job that you go to everyday 5 days per week because it's "safe" and you know exactly what to do
---- Happiness = reality - expectations
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Other maps are filled with arguing scenfags and take like 1-3 hours. If that wasn't the case i'd play other maps too.
----     
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Right and as a registered CW player... you could review maps and if they bore you... give it a low score to help tell the competitive community to stay away from it...
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Or play what you like and don't tell others what to play lol, if scenario players don't cws its their fault not ours lol
---- 
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Not forcing anything. If most people agree this idea shouldnt happen then it wont... just like the average score of a map will determine if people play it in comp... and a registered comp player score advises others if it can be used for comp purposes.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Well, as one of the very, very few mapmakers still lurking and playing on here, we need to get a standard on what is ballanced and what is not ballanced. As far as i know, Estus was trying to make a standard on how ballanced maps should have the cities/income/reinforcements. If we take the standard EU+ map as a ballanced map, for example and we wanto to make a ballanced map on North America, for example, it should keep then the pattern more income in west/less reinforcements in west and more reinforcements/less income in East? I hope we soon come with a standard to follow on this matter and then a lot of ballanced maps like Destoria could be made (Ballanced North America, Ballanced MidEast, etc, etc)
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
This would be great, a standard would be really good, imo it doesnt have to directly reflect the eu map, the more realistic the better, but the existing map is not balanced enough. Personally I would have more income north east, more reinf south, more income california and oregon and make the mid west more interesting, but maybe have more cities and states to help give the map some kind of complexity too. I think the key to achieving balance is to have an average income, a general income/reinforcement ratio (with discrepencies compensated for in neighbouring states) and a set minimum country cost and 4 /5 key picks with counter countries designed into the map for each income setting for 5k and 10k atleast. Another thing to consider is expansion patterns, keeping certain cities within range of some with standard unit range and out of range of others. Is there a map making guide distance for standard unit range? ie. for strategy none, imp, nc inf, lb etc?
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
