Results 181 to 200 of 204
23-08-2011, 10:52 AM #181
Just signed up right before you posted that, so I guess it's confirmed as working.
23-08-2011, 10:53 AM #182
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
23-08-2011, 11:21 AM #183
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
I'm not a fan of symmetrical games either but I guess it's the only way to guarantee the games are fair. I'm happy with elimination but I've never really played any of the other modes so maybe a change would broaden my experiences so to speak. Has to be dark though, light games are nowhere near as much fun.
And thanks for organising it all, based on the effort you've put in I'm going to guess you're a teacher enjoying the summer holidays!
23-08-2011, 11:41 AM #184
I'd like to throw my hat in the ring for this, if I may. I've added myself to the spreadsheet.
I just recently got Frozen Synapse and am slowly becoming addicted to it. It would be nice playing with some RPS people as opposed to total randoms.
23-08-2011, 12:29 PM #185
23-08-2011, 04:42 PM #186
Dark elimination, symetrical.
If we arent doing doing preset maps, this is the only fair way.
Charge cant be generated symmertrical, as far as I know.
Hostage never is. Disputed has random boxes. Secure doesnt make sense as symmetrical, though if the teams are the same, its kind of symmetrical, in that you both start with the same thing.
Elimination is pure, the goal is clear to new comers, which is a bonus.
23-08-2011, 09:43 PM #187
I'm for DE SYM too. I reckon it would also be nice to have some informal discussion about reusing some maps, perhaps build up a decent pick of tournament favourites. Some of the first turns have been amazing throughout this tourney and I'd love to see what else might happen.
24-08-2011, 01:48 AM #188
I've posted a new thread for season 2; we can keep this one going for discussion of season 1. I've gone for symmetrical dark extermination again because it just makes things easier and I don't have to worry about people claiming unfairness, but if we get some kind of consensus we can try something else for season 3.
Maps: I'm up for having a selection of interesting maps but lack the time to create them myself. If anyone fancies giving it a go I'm happy to use a predefined collection instead of generating them for each game.
Pushed for time tonight but I will check in again tomorrow, and sort out the final remaining division 1 games. Sign up for season 2 if you haven't already done so, and please consider PMing me your email address!
24-08-2011, 04:36 AM #189
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
Wait, I was supposed to challenge antilope?
24-08-2011, 10:10 PM #190
The final results for season 1 are in! Congratulations to Circle and Peter Radiator Full Pig for coming top of divisions 1 and 2. Very impressive performances from both players; Circle remains undefeated and all of his opponents in season 2 will be given an extra Devastator. Well played also to zuddy, AKA mdean, who is awarded the Balls of Steel award for hurling himself into the fray with almost zero multiplayer experience.
Provisional division movements look like this:
Relegated to division 2:
Promoted to division 1:
Peter Radiator Full Pig
I say 'provisional' because the final result will depend on the size of the divisions for season 2. In any event, those relegated will very soon have a chance to get themselves promoted back up (and of course those newly promoted will shortly have to justify their place in division 1).
24-08-2011, 10:28 PM #191
On the subject of game mode: as I mentioned briefly last night, I've gone for symmetric DE for two main reasons:
1) It saves administration time and is easier for new players
2) I can't think of a way to make asymmetric games fair.
We might be able to address point 2 with the creation of some standard maps, if anyone wants to make them. As for point 1, I suppose we could take the view that anyone unfamiliar with the tactics of (say) a secure game will have plenty of experience by the time they reach the end of a season, but I'm a bit concerned about putting people off. Perhaps we should just try it in season 3 and see what happens; as long as we keep the games dark I'm not hugely bothered about the rest of it.
What do you all think about the number of men? I'm inclined to the view that each match can have 3 or 4 per side: it makes game creation a bit easier and perhaps provides a bit more variety. There's a theoretical chance that someone could game the system towards the end of a season where goal difference is a promotion/relegation factor, but I suspect that's going to be a pretty rare scenario.
I like measurements' idea of voiced commentary! Does anyone know if there's a way to generate slower videos for youtube?
24-08-2011, 11:01 PM #192
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Assymetric games could be made fair by playing both sides of them, perhaps have it so every player has 4 symetric elimination and 4 other game types with the same map once for each side against the same player. (Which game type goes against which player would be determined randomly in advance. Both plays together would only count the same as a single symetric map in scoring.) That would increase it from 8 to 12 games and increase the complexity a bit though.
3-4 men seems a good number, and I think that's what almost all of my games had last season. I'm not worrying about the goal difference so much myself so I don't care wether we lock it down or not though.
24-08-2011, 11:56 PM #193
Yes, I wondered about playing asymmetric maps from both sides but I suspect that confusion and mayhem lie in that direction. Perhaps we should reconsider the idea in a season or two when everyone's comfortable with the basic set-up.
On a completely different note, does anyone have any favourite exciting/tense/silly matches from season 1 for us to take a look at?
Last edited by WombatDeath; 24-08-2011 at 11:58 PM.
24-08-2011, 11:58 PM #194
25-08-2011, 01:10 PM #195
I dont like the idea of assymetry played from both sides. I would say that the person who plays first on the favourable side (Assuming there is one) will have an advantage. They will get to play the better side first, exploit any discoverable tactics, know whats coming in the second one, and assuming equalish skill, winning the match will put the opponent on the back foot. I know that if I was beaten, Id maybe play a little more catously. And if I needed to get X amount of kills to win overall, Id need to play more aggressivly. As the winner in the second match, you could allow your enemy to come to you, as if you sit back youve already won.
Playing the games at the same time wouldnt solve this. Id just play the advantage one first, then the second one.
Also, for the voiced commentary, your best bet would be to record the match from in the game. That way you can pause where you want to wait, zoom where to want to look and rewind where you want to revise. When you look at someone elses game, can you see the command lines they made? That would also be interesting. If you could, its possible that you could look at the same match from both different accounts to get both sets of lines.
Of course, these means youd probably need to edit footage and then commentate on it, but who said it was going to be easy?
Last edited by Peter Radiator Full Pig; 25-08-2011 at 01:31 PM.
25-08-2011, 05:19 PM #196
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
25-08-2011, 08:46 PM #197
Is the green player always the same person, or is it whoevers profile you are viewing the game from? I imagine its the same person, makes more sense that way.
Possibly, we should go to the Mode7 forums with some suggestions, though Im sure there are plenty of those already.
26-08-2011, 12:37 AM #198
I am fine with DE SYM, it is easiest.
What about the random creation of the maps? Some of the random generated starts suck. Should we maybe agree on skipping some setups? 3 - 4 men is good, sometimes it only gives you 2. Do people like starting with a man amidst the enemy, and an enemy in your ranks? I kind of like the spread out starts. It does not have to be with opponents on extreme ends, but not with units intermixed side by side. Sometimes it even generates units trapped by walls with no rocket launchers or even windows to help the unit join in. However it does not matter because everything is mirrored.
Perhaps we can use the season 1 results along with assigning the new entrants a 0. Then let the lower score have the generate advantage, in the case of a tie use alphabetical name order. At the end of the season we can recalculate to figure out who generates / challenges for the next season. And so on... Unless that is too complicated.
Good games everyone!
26-08-2011, 02:39 AM #199
The Devastator is a unit in the single-player campaign which moves extremely quickly and fires five rockets each turn. I toyed with the notion of confiscating all of your ammunition before each match, but unfortunately the game interface hasn't reached that level of customisation.
I think that the rules for season 1 stipulate three or four men per side, but if not they will for season 2. Beyond that, I don't want to set restrictions on the map layout (too subjective and potentially confusing) unless perhaps someone comes up with some good custom maps. Even then, I'm concerned that custom maps will add complexity: it's easy enough in theory, but every rule creates new opportunities for mistakes which I then have to spend time unravelling. I'm strongly inclined to keep things as pure and simple as reasonably possible.
The season 1 results will be used to create the season 2 starting divisions. The promoted players from division 2 will be merged with the remaining division 1 players, by overall score and goal difference. Same for division 2 and the players relegated from division 1. This will give us a ranked list of players from season 1. I will then add the new players to the bottom of the list. This list will be split in half to give us the starting positions for season 2.
In future seasons it will be a bit simpler: promoted players will join the bottom of their new division, and relegated players will join the top of their new division. The only reason I'm not doing this for season 2 is that the initial division split for season 1 was done alphabetically rather than by ability. In a nutshell, the approach for season 2 means that Circle will start in first place in division 1 and Peter Radiator Full Pig will be in second place, which seems fair to me.
All of that will hopefully become clear when I draw up the season 2 starting positions over the weekend.
We will keep the challenging format wherein the lower-ranked player issues the challenge (and therefore selects the map layout and unit types). In an uncharacteristic moment of foresight I instituted this rule in season 1 because it would give a slight advantage to the lower-ranked players in subsequent seasons. This may come back to bite me: I suspect that I am once again going to have to issue a challenge to everyone in my division...
26-08-2011, 01:39 PM #200
The challanging system is a good idea. We need all the advantages we can get against Circle2.