User panel stuff on forum
  46 posts on 2 pages  First page12Last page
European Quake League
2016-01-26, 18:37
News Writer
220 posts

Registered:
Jan 2013
Hooraytio wrote:
Given the amount of games played even when I used one large division I dont see how EQL20 could have been any better with 2 divisions with the clans we had.

Good point. Much of the problem is that D99 is in a league of its own. Anyway, I don't mind one div and lots of games!
2016-01-26, 19:43
Administrator
2046 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
Hooraytio wrote:
There would have been 2 divisions if there was 16+ teams.
Realistically tho, how would you divivide the 15 teams we had into 2 divisions?

FE, PARAS and LB all did pretty well vs the higher ranking clans wich leaves D99 in a class of their own. (perhaps together with WG but they didnt play at all)
Given the amount of games played even when I used one large division I dont see how EQL20 could have been any better with 2 divisions with the clans we had.

I would not be too concerned about getting the level of the teams in div2 absolutely even as that's currently an impossible feat just like you mention. Still two divisions would "save" the lower tier teams (and the ones playing vs them...) of 8 more or less pointless games per season. I also don't see the problem in splitting the teams and letting some teams, like the examples you mention, play in the 2nd division unless they themselves protest loudly about not getting to play the best teams.
www.facebook.com/QuakeWorld
2016-01-26, 19:50
News Writer
265 posts

Registered:
May 2006
To andeh:

Where in this txt do i say that 4vs4 is boring? Been playing 4vs4 a lot now since i got back. But when you are playing offical clan games in a competitive league (the only one we got...as you put it) then i dont see the point of rapes. Is it not better to do that in pracs or somewhere else?

And where do i say that EQL should become a 2vs2 league? It was a suggestion. Then almighty admin Hooraytio said "no way" and i said ty for answers and conclusion. The point was that EQL got a name/brand and it would be easy for EQL to do it. I never said it should swap 4vs4 with 2vs2. Why not do both?

As i love the game i was trying out some new-thinking, so that we dont become cavemen and do the same thing for 200 years. Sorry for trying to think out new stuff that might trigger something. And when i say change the format for 4vs4 i said this:

Link wrote:
How about letting the 4 vs 4 scene do tournaments instead, duelmaina/thunderdome style? With so few teams i think that might be better


You did not read that? I guess not.

Andeh wrote:
You also don't normally see pracs when it's off season. I don't remember ever seeing pracs between teams when there was no EQL/NQR to play. At least not during my time in QuakeWorld.


Well, i guess you are playing QW then in the lamest and sadest period of QW ever. How about we try to change that?

Andeh wrote:
If you don't enjoy 4on4, don't play it. You are not forced to sign up for EQL. If you enjoy 2on2, play it. If you want a 2on2 tournament, organize one.


Where did i say i dont enjoy 4on4? I am trying to find out where i wrote that but i cant find it.

And that you dont see any points anywhere should tell a lot
Link, we are not even oldtimers anymore, we are dinosaurs. - Hooraytio
2016-01-26, 20:27
News Writer
220 posts

Registered:
Jan 2013
Link wrote:
... so that we dont become cavemen and do the same thing for 200 years.

Minor tweaks aside, isn't the reason we still play this game that it is the same as it was 20 years ago? Aside from some client, config and server tweaks and it being a lot more plug-and-play today, and of course, the best players being a lot better and really pushing the limits of the game physics, it's just like it was 20 years ago. We play 4on4, 2on2 in clans/teams and duels on the same maps (a handful of exceptions here) as when I was 16. That's what I love about it.

The only big difference to me is mix, we didn't do that back then, and the lack of friendly clan games outside tournaments. They sort of cancel each other out.
2016-01-26, 22:02
News Writer
1267 posts

Registered:
Jun 2007
I dont want to run a 4on4 tournament where clans get eliminated after 2 games in the worst case scenario.
Getting together and play upwards to 12 games with the same team is more fun imo.
Chosen
2016-01-26, 23:45
News Writer
265 posts

Registered:
May 2006
Ye I agree on that but the really sad thing about this is that - if i understand this correctly - you need some sort of official league to get ppl to play those games. WTF happend to regular pracs? I cant understand this.

So if this is true we actually need more leagues and tournaments then to get more activity.

That can be fixed.
Link, we are not even oldtimers anymore, we are dinosaurs. - Hooraytio
2016-01-27, 05:33
Member
148 posts

Registered:
Sep 2013
Link wrote:
So if this is true we actually need more leagues and tournaments then to get more activity.


I realize I am the odd man out, but I disagree completely. I see tournaments, like EQL, doing more harm then good. For any player not in the top few teams games are lopsided and boring.

During EQL season I see multiple teams clogging servers with 3 players idling because they can't muster a 4th player (who they don't even know how to contact). Instead of multiple mix games getting played 0 actual games get played. Or worse, in recent drafts, a "div1 replacement" joins and completely unbalances teams to the point where it isn't fair or fun. The "free agents" in the last few tournaments (EQL included) have been a joke.

Here is what I'd rather see, but I know would never happen (because it requires someone players respect to organize which is nobody at this point):
  • Saturdays = mix. If you can't commit to 2 hours of quake, this is your day to get in on 4on4s.
  • Sunday = one day tournaments. Players join an IRC channel committed to playing ~2 hours, get assigned teams, get on voice, play games. Start with 8-10 people, grow to 16-20 players.


I forsee many benefits:
  1. Games actually get played. (No more wasting an hour waiting for 1 more person nobody knows how to contact...)
  2. Better skill assessment of players that show up and play.
  3. Easier to balance => closer games => more fun.
  4. Assigned teams => low and high skill players together can cause players to learn more.
  5. More variety. Maybe one day everyone plays a custom map `cmt5` instead of dm2/3.
  6. Not enough players => mix


  7. (Cue PHPBB code failing)

    You might argue, "but the point of EQL is organized teams". Whatever. I know this is the wrong thread for me to post in but I couldn't hold my tongue after seeing that last comment. Also, organized teams would be fine in this model as long as the games seem somewhat balanced. Nobody has fun in a 400-0 walk over (which EQL produces consistently). I think everyone had fun in the last 5 Americas vs Russia 4on4 games which all ended with a frag difference of less than 50.
2016-01-27, 07:24
News Writer
1267 posts

Registered:
Jun 2007
About EQL doing more harm than good: No, it is during EQL we actually see some 4on4 activity. Also Ocoini has been great at creating activity, especially during the spring 2015.

About contacting players: Players use whatsapp and other things to contact eachother and the overall activity in last EQL shows that ppl actually showe up for games.

About lacking someone everyone respect to organize the stuff you suggest: No, as far as I know Ocoini is respected amongst others. Also I seem somewhat respected since I am allowed to run EQL singlehandedly for several seasons now and ppl still seem to signup and play.

QW is fun but also competetive, the scores you mention are not somethine new and they will keep happening, thats just the way qw is.

You mention free agents as a problem but in EQL when we only use 1 large division it isnt a problem. There is nothing that can be unbalanced when everyone plays in the same division. The best team will win no matter if they had the players from the start or added 2 guys later on. I can see it being a problem in a draft when the goal is to make as even teams as possible. I would actually like an example from you on where a free agent ruined the fun in the last few seasons of EQL.

Lastly, there is nothing stopping your ideas to run alongside EQL or any other tournament. The more QW the better.
I like your ideas alot since they would increase activity but perhaps you are a little negative as to how they would be realized and who will do it.
Chosen
2016-01-27, 10:36
News Writer
265 posts

Registered:
May 2006
Bogojoker:

How would a 1 day tournament work? Lets say you got 8 teams, then i guess you need 1/4 finals, semis and final. That is potentially 3 hours of game play (3x20 min per game) for the final 2 teams + all the prewar/wait stuff. If you do double elimination brackets i guess it takes longer than that also.

I guess that would be ok for me but im not sure 4 hours is ok for everyone. Is it not better to do a tournament over lets say 1 week or 2 weeks?

Just asking
Link, we are not even oldtimers anymore, we are dinosaurs. - Hooraytio
2016-01-27, 18:06
Member
148 posts

Registered:
Sep 2013
Link wrote:
How would a 1 day tournament work? Lets say you got 8 teams


Let me stop you right there. I said 8-10 growing to 20 players, expecting 2-4 teams. If QW had 8 teams on at once it would be a miracle.

Link wrote:
Is it not better to do a tournament over lets say 1 week or 2 weeks?


The problem I see is players being availability and showing up. As soon as you spread it across multiple weeks scheduling becomes a problem. In recent tournaments (even duel tournaments, which require just 2 players to be on at the same time) matches have been delayed by weeks/months, drafts fizzle, and walkovers are rarely given out.
2016-01-27, 19:01
News Writer
300 posts

Registered:
Feb 2008
I wrote this gigantic reply with my thoughts on this topic, but it all went to hell cus it timed out.. so f it - i'll shorten it to one sentence:
I vote No to brackets to eql, and no to making divs for eql unless tons of clans..
My post really was pretty well written as well, might even have convinced link! ( keep dreaming oco .. AAAA logout time #%!%!!!"

Bogo: it should happen after eql has settled, dev and me probably doing some 1 day events. Problem, no-one seems to like refragged site, I don't understand it.. I've hinted tonnes of times of a team qw sites we could all use. With similar layout to NQR/EQL - so people feel at home. however - no-one seems to have the time or interest to make it - or if they do they want it for themselves. Then when they are done with whatever they do, and go MIA the site just disappears because they don't pass it along.

With links new one -map ttourny we should be good
Street Vendor Crack down Princess Cop
2016-01-27, 19:30
News Writer
220 posts

Registered:
Jan 2013
If bps can get the wiki revamped, it can be used as a tourney site.
2016-01-28, 06:01
Administrator
864 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
erlend wrote:
If bps can get the wiki revamped, it can be used as a tourney site.


I like what erlend can see.
IRC went Discord -> join the chats @ discord.quake.world
2016-01-28, 07:28
Member
148 posts

Registered:
Sep 2013
ocoini wrote:
Bogo: it should happen after eql has settled, dev and me probably doing some 1 day events. Problem, no-one seems to like refragged site, I don't understand it..


Why a site at all? This has the exact same problem with scheduling: someone will sign up on the site but not show up when it counts.

My concept revolves around grouping players that show up. What makes it different from a mix is the idea that these players would get on voice and play multiple games with the potential of some structure. Call it a "one day draft" if you want.
2016-01-28, 07:50
News Writer
1267 posts

Registered:
Jun 2007
I like this, set a date and create a channel on irc quakenet and it is ready to go. First ppl to join and sign up in topic gets to play.
Chosen
2016-01-28, 21:12
Member
278 posts

Registered:
Jan 2015
BogoJoker wrote:
ocoini wrote:
Bogo: it should happen after eql has settled, dev and me probably doing some 1 day events. Problem, no-one seems to like refragged site, I don't understand it..


Why a site at all? This has the exact same problem with scheduling: someone will sign up on the site but not show up when it counts.

My concept revolves around grouping players that show up. What makes it different from a mix is the idea that these players would get on voice and play multiple games with the potential of some structure. Call it a "one day draft" if you want.



thumbs up
dev
  46 posts on 2 pages  First page12Last page