WM Feedback
07-15-2013, 06:52 PM
My assessment of current problems:
1) The vast majority of games are won by a small minority of squads. This is causing frustration for a large number of FC members in both armies.
2) The current rotation system cannot feasibly produce balanced matches without breaking up and distributing teams or constantly forcing repeat matchups.
3) The rigid structure of FC gametypes only appeals to a small portion of Halo players, and is too casual for the competitive and too competitive for the casual.
Overview of solution: Separation of casual and competitive gameplay
Just as an actual war is fought on a variety of fronts and in a variety of ways, there should be diversity in official FC gameplay. The current practice of auxiliary battles is an underutilized resource that could be used to highlight the contributions of more members, and solve the natural tension between casual and competitive players.
-Either in place of or in addition to the current Vcash system. FC squads can participate in online MM or customs games in any gametype of their choosing and accumulate points. These points can be used to purchase various battle map elements that will drastically affect weekly auxiliary battles.
-The current battle night rotation used in primary battles would be replaced with a more competitive challenge system. On battle night, each squad of an attacking army will issue challenges to the defenders. The defenders will field teams specifically chosen to answer these challenges in a best of 3 series.
Detailed breakdown: Auxiliary battles (Casual emphasis).
-At any point during the week (Sunday included), FC squads can join up, and go into MM to earn points for their army.
-Once a squad is together, they will submit a “start of gameplay” notice. This will include their current roster and playlist.
-That squad will then proceed to play 3 consecutive games in matchmaking, and submit the results of these games for points.
-All playlists are weighted equally. However, MM FFA playlists are not eligible. (I don’t want us to troll the general Halo population)
-Each individual is allowed to participate in 9 official games per week.
-Any falsification of game results will result in a loss of all the army’s points for that week. (Or something similarly harsh. Just don’t do it!)
-In addition to MM games, squads can host open-invitation custom games (posted in the forum or spread by word of mouth) of any type to earn points. These can include FFA/flood, 1v1, etc. gametypes, where the individual winner will earn points for their squad.
-Each game must include an equal number of REDD and BLUE members, and be submitted using the same format as MM games.
Why would this be awesome? It would allow everyone to contribute to their army while playing their favorite Halo gametypes in a balanced environment. I could invite another team to a game of Shields up, Spiderman could challenge everyone and their mother to a 1v1, SpartanBH could be a troll with stickies in gun game, Coag and Yehsus could practice their BR skills in an FFA, etc. and it would all matter on the Army vs Army scale.
Detailed breakdown: Primary battles (Competitive emphasis).
Disclaimer: This half is intended to be the competitive side. Rather than treating competition as taboo, it needs to be handled in respectful, healthy ways.
-Using the current attack plans structure, 2 maps per week will be selected as battlegrounds. However, rather than using a rotation, attacking teams will issue challenges to the defending army.
-Each week, attacking squad leaders will assemble fireteams that wish to compete, and their relevant CSR will be averaged (Infinity slayer for 4v4, BTIS for 6v6). The challenging rosters and their CSR averages will be submitted to the defending army, who will then assemble fireteams to accept the challenges. The CSR average of the team that accepts must be within 5 ranks. These teams will then play a best of 3 series consisting of 2 objective and one slayer gametype. If the attackers win a majority of their challenges, they win the map.
-If a challenge cannot be answered due to lack of matching players, it will not be counted as either a win or a loss. For this reason, it will be very important that army numbers, (and to some extent army skills) are balanced in between wars to ensure a high number of potential matches.
This format will allow players of all skill levels to enjoy balanced competitive games. By using a best of 3 format, tournament aspects such as mental toughness and positive attitudes will factor in as well. It will also allow for a bad game to be shrugged off and overcome.
Primary battles will be a venue for the best of the best to face off and earn some bragging rights (we all want to see the best of REDD and BLUE go at it), and for lower skilled players to improve their game. Respectful conduct must be strictly enforced in these games, and recruiting must be held to a high standard to keep egos in check.
Not everyone will want to participate in these games, and nobody will be forced to. However, the CSR averaging will provide balanced games for teams of all skill levels, and everyone will be invited to participate without fear of brutal mismatches.
Potential concerns:
-Will this take more work?
By using google forms submissions for auxiliary points, the only additional effort would be tallying points once per week and cashing them in for use on the war map, and occasionally investigating suspicious games.
The challenge system will require more work, but the potential benefits would be huge. I’m sure we could easily find members to help run such a system.
-Won’t this mean I’ll play largely the same people every week?
Playing the same people every week isn’t the problem; losing to the same people every week is what we all hate. There will naturally be a smaller subset of players that you will be matched against in this system, but if every week is full of nail-biter games, will that really be a problem? It will only add to the drive to practice during the week, and beat that team that edged you out by 1 kill last Sunday.
-We have always done “X” this way, we can’t change it.
If you argue against one of these ideas, tell me why in a logical and constructive way. If it’s because it challenges the status quo, I’ll find out where you live, and mail you a large crate of rabid, starving, raccoons.
Conclusion:
I don't actually expect that this will be implemented. I just want people to start thinking outside the box in terms of ways to make FC more fun for more people. I'm pretty new here, and I'm no expert on how things run. That said, I don't have to be a vet to see that there is room for improvement.
-Feedback
1) The vast majority of games are won by a small minority of squads. This is causing frustration for a large number of FC members in both armies.
2) The current rotation system cannot feasibly produce balanced matches without breaking up and distributing teams or constantly forcing repeat matchups.
3) The rigid structure of FC gametypes only appeals to a small portion of Halo players, and is too casual for the competitive and too competitive for the casual.
Overview of solution: Separation of casual and competitive gameplay
Just as an actual war is fought on a variety of fronts and in a variety of ways, there should be diversity in official FC gameplay. The current practice of auxiliary battles is an underutilized resource that could be used to highlight the contributions of more members, and solve the natural tension between casual and competitive players.
-Either in place of or in addition to the current Vcash system. FC squads can participate in online MM or customs games in any gametype of their choosing and accumulate points. These points can be used to purchase various battle map elements that will drastically affect weekly auxiliary battles.
-The current battle night rotation used in primary battles would be replaced with a more competitive challenge system. On battle night, each squad of an attacking army will issue challenges to the defenders. The defenders will field teams specifically chosen to answer these challenges in a best of 3 series.
Detailed breakdown: Auxiliary battles (Casual emphasis).
-At any point during the week (Sunday included), FC squads can join up, and go into MM to earn points for their army.
-Once a squad is together, they will submit a “start of gameplay” notice. This will include their current roster and playlist.
-That squad will then proceed to play 3 consecutive games in matchmaking, and submit the results of these games for points.
-All playlists are weighted equally. However, MM FFA playlists are not eligible. (I don’t want us to troll the general Halo population)
-Each individual is allowed to participate in 9 official games per week.
-Any falsification of game results will result in a loss of all the army’s points for that week. (Or something similarly harsh. Just don’t do it!)
-In addition to MM games, squads can host open-invitation custom games (posted in the forum or spread by word of mouth) of any type to earn points. These can include FFA/flood, 1v1, etc. gametypes, where the individual winner will earn points for their squad.
-Each game must include an equal number of REDD and BLUE members, and be submitted using the same format as MM games.
Why would this be awesome? It would allow everyone to contribute to their army while playing their favorite Halo gametypes in a balanced environment. I could invite another team to a game of Shields up, Spiderman could challenge everyone and their mother to a 1v1, SpartanBH could be a troll with stickies in gun game, Coag and Yehsus could practice their BR skills in an FFA, etc. and it would all matter on the Army vs Army scale.
Detailed breakdown: Primary battles (Competitive emphasis).
Disclaimer: This half is intended to be the competitive side. Rather than treating competition as taboo, it needs to be handled in respectful, healthy ways.
-Using the current attack plans structure, 2 maps per week will be selected as battlegrounds. However, rather than using a rotation, attacking teams will issue challenges to the defending army.
-Each week, attacking squad leaders will assemble fireteams that wish to compete, and their relevant CSR will be averaged (Infinity slayer for 4v4, BTIS for 6v6). The challenging rosters and their CSR averages will be submitted to the defending army, who will then assemble fireteams to accept the challenges. The CSR average of the team that accepts must be within 5 ranks. These teams will then play a best of 3 series consisting of 2 objective and one slayer gametype. If the attackers win a majority of their challenges, they win the map.
-If a challenge cannot be answered due to lack of matching players, it will not be counted as either a win or a loss. For this reason, it will be very important that army numbers, (and to some extent army skills) are balanced in between wars to ensure a high number of potential matches.
This format will allow players of all skill levels to enjoy balanced competitive games. By using a best of 3 format, tournament aspects such as mental toughness and positive attitudes will factor in as well. It will also allow for a bad game to be shrugged off and overcome.
Primary battles will be a venue for the best of the best to face off and earn some bragging rights (we all want to see the best of REDD and BLUE go at it), and for lower skilled players to improve their game. Respectful conduct must be strictly enforced in these games, and recruiting must be held to a high standard to keep egos in check.
Not everyone will want to participate in these games, and nobody will be forced to. However, the CSR averaging will provide balanced games for teams of all skill levels, and everyone will be invited to participate without fear of brutal mismatches.
Potential concerns:
-Will this take more work?
By using google forms submissions for auxiliary points, the only additional effort would be tallying points once per week and cashing them in for use on the war map, and occasionally investigating suspicious games.
The challenge system will require more work, but the potential benefits would be huge. I’m sure we could easily find members to help run such a system.
-Won’t this mean I’ll play largely the same people every week?
Playing the same people every week isn’t the problem; losing to the same people every week is what we all hate. There will naturally be a smaller subset of players that you will be matched against in this system, but if every week is full of nail-biter games, will that really be a problem? It will only add to the drive to practice during the week, and beat that team that edged you out by 1 kill last Sunday.
-We have always done “X” this way, we can’t change it.
If you argue against one of these ideas, tell me why in a logical and constructive way. If it’s because it challenges the status quo, I’ll find out where you live, and mail you a large crate of rabid, starving, raccoons.
Conclusion:
I don't actually expect that this will be implemented. I just want people to start thinking outside the box in terms of ways to make FC more fun for more people. I'm pretty new here, and I'm no expert on how things run. That said, I don't have to be a vet to see that there is room for improvement.
-Feedback