SWBFGamers

Gaming for the Original SWBF1 and SWBF2/other games => SWBF 1 and 2 Tournaments => Topic started by: Oven on January 16, 2013, 08:06:22 PM

Title: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Oven on January 16, 2013, 08:06:22 PM
First thing's first - congratulations to FC for winning the Second Intergalactic Clan War! I believe someone is working on awards which should be handed out soon.

I think this tournament has been worth it just to see those servers fill up every weekend; it's great to see that the community is able to put aside differences and still play some good games despite the shutdown.

Thanks to Buckler for hosting every week, and to the admins Agent Z and Scorpion for their excellent work. gdh deserves mention as well, not only for his tireless organizing/recruiting for YAK/ELK, but also because he was willing to step in as a admin when needed. Thanks to Nixo and Phobos for being communicative and cooperative as clan leaders/reps. Thanks to Unit 33 for outdoing himself with the tournament map every week! And thanks to everyone who, when conflict arose, was willing to understand the other perspective and reach agreement.

Now, on to business. I have a proposal, a (currently nameless) system for clan wars that is stress-free, easy, and regular. Here goes:

Each week, any clan (or team, or faction, or squad) may propose a clan war in a similar fashion to the ICW announcements (in a designated thread on this website). The war may take place on any map (mods too) as long as both clans agree; have any player limit (i.e. 5v5, 10v10 etc.) as long as both teams agree, be at any time/date as long as both teams agree, etc. However, there is a stipulation that the announcement must be agreed upon at least 2 days before the planned date.

Default rules will be the ICW Rules (no special units, premines, etc.), but modifications to the rules are fine if both clans can agree on the modification, and inform the admin for that battle. Additionally, server modifications (such as fair sides) may be made, as long as both clans agree.

SWBGamers will host all the servers; it will be the job of the announcer to inform Buckler of the server details 2 days in advance.

I think there should be a reasonable limit to the amount of announcements that may be made per week, like 2. What do you all think?

Here are some important differences between this system and the ICW:
-- No tournament planet map
-- No tournament planet list
-- No overall "winner"
-- No specified player maximum
-- No official clan list. Any clan or ragtag team of you and your friends can pop in and challenge whoever you want
-- No battle requirement. Schedule battles when you want to.
-- Admin setup (detailed below)

The admin situation would be different from the ICW as well. Anyone who wants to be listed as an "admin" should contact me (xfire or in this topic) and, as long as I have reason to believe that the candidate is competent (my discretion), I will add their name to a list. Here's the catch: both clans must agree to the admin before a match, or a list of acceptable admins. Thus, there may be many potential admins, but both clans are only likely to agree on a select few who are perceived to be sufficiently "neutral" by both. As always, I am the President/King/Dictator Admin; I reserve the right to reject a candidate admin or remove someone from the list whenever I want.

The idea is that this system will be entirely community-generated, with a minimum of authoritative input (beyond what is obviously needed). It is my opinion that such a system will be salutary for the continued lifespan of this game, not to mention a lot of fun!

Everything written above is subject to amendment, which depends largely on you all pointing out things that I've overlooked; please do so.

Admin list:
Oven (ovenlovesyou)
Anyder (anyder21)
Norris (212norris)
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: {212th} Ldr. Norris on January 16, 2013, 08:13:43 PM
Awesom, thanks Oven!  :tu: I will sign on as Admin if you will have me.  :)
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Phobos on January 16, 2013, 08:17:40 PM
Great idea

I propose that you allow for other types of servers (as long as both clans agree to proposed terms) which would mod the mission LUA to give certain units to both teams, like fair sides or dark jets vs dark jets with no cp and unlimited ammo for example, on popular stock maps such as mos or citadel.

In addition to the regular format where you explain time/date planet to attack etc. you could have something like "Proposed Additional Server Options" which would list anything different from how the ICW servers are set up by default (like unlimited ammo, no bleed, etc) Clans would then negotiate the terms of battle so there would be no confusion.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Oven on January 16, 2013, 08:32:20 PM
Thanks, I added the server mods possibility. And I will make sure that the announcement template contains all the relevant information concerning deviations from default rules/settings.

Quote from: {212th} Norris on January 16, 2013, 08:13:43 PM
Awesom, thanks Oven!  :tu: I will sign on as Admin if you will have me.  :)
Sure
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Helios on January 16, 2013, 08:40:36 PM
Cool i like the idea
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Anyder on January 16, 2013, 10:41:23 PM
I Bet u'll say no, but, i'd like to sign as admin (if my clan mates feel like joining then, we'll join, but by now we would be 4, and that isnt rly cool :P
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Are§ on January 17, 2013, 06:16:45 AM
I would like to suggest that clans like YAK split up into smaller teams (such as 5v5 teams) to give clans more of a variety of people to fight. It could also help in getting more people involved and maybe some people out of inactivity.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Oven on January 17, 2013, 07:03:01 AM
I've added you Anyder. Folks, don't hesitate to become an admin: the longer the list, the less scheduling becomes a problem and the more choices each clan has.

Ares, your idea is sound and is in the spirit of what I hope will happen. This system, which I will give a catchy name soon, should allow for a much greater diversity in team possibilities than the tournaments. It is the most inclusive thing I could think of that is also organized and practical.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: {YAK}{212}Col{COM} Johnis on January 17, 2013, 07:55:01 AM
What does an admin have to do.I know its a stupid question but I have never been one so Idk.If All they have to do is keep the peace during the match.Nvm I'll over heat during a map reset.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: -=(212) Nixo=- on January 17, 2013, 08:29:56 AM
If you are need of an Admin I could help :P (if you want me to) Anyder, there is no limit because there is no limit to mercs so im sure you could get a few more at least :P
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Anyder on January 17, 2013, 09:11:16 AM
In UEF we are like bro's and we dont want merc. ;)
So im ok as Admin (in last ICW I could have administrated as I was only multiclans helper (multi helper), but oven said me no...
So I played as clans merc.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: {PLA}gdh92 on January 17, 2013, 10:07:58 AM
I think everyone, including myself has said their congratulations to FC and thanks to everyone for a great tournament but it should always be said again. :)
As for the weekly battles it sounds like a good idea, I don't know if I want the stress of organising things and being the one to make complaints again but I would certainly do my best to play if it was the same rules as the ICW. It's nice to play in large numbers and as part of a team rather than just aiming to top the leaderboard.

Quote from: Are§ on January 17, 2013, 06:16:45 AM
I would like to suggest that clans like YAK split up into smaller teams (such as 5v5 teams) to give clans more of a variety of people to fight. It could also help in getting more people involved and maybe some people out of inactivity.
I think while a clan like FC would have the members to split into individual groups YAK would find it hard, while it has members who do turn up regularly, a large amount of members (much like ELK), only turn up when I reminded them on X-fire although that improved alot in the 4th week.

Edit: If there were 5v5 battles it would mean smaller clans like FD, ALPHA and SNP could join which would mean plenty of variety.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: SirPimped on January 17, 2013, 10:42:24 AM
I like the idea of weekly battles. I understand that we don't want to have a "winner" on the weekly battles, but would suggest having a clan "leaderboard" which would tally wins for each team over time. Either way is fine with me though as long as we play.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: -=(212) Nixo=- on January 17, 2013, 11:35:43 AM
Quote from: SirPimped on January 17, 2013, 10:42:24 AM
I like the idea of weekly battles. I understand that we don't want to have a "winner" on the weekly battles, but would suggest having a clan "leaderboard" which would tally wins for each team over time. Either way is fine with me though as long as we play.
But thats basically showing who wins?
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: SirPimped on January 17, 2013, 11:50:35 AM
Quote from: {212} Nixo on January 17, 2013, 11:35:43 AM
But thats basically showing who wins?
Think of it as a way to encourage clans to participate on a weekly basis. It will basically be like standings with wins, losses, winning percentage, etc. I think this would get clans more involved. There would never be a winner, just a top of the standings kind of thing.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: -=(212) Nixo=- on January 17, 2013, 12:10:44 PM
Quote from: SirPimped on January 17, 2013, 11:50:35 AM
Think of it as a way to encourage clans to participate on a weekly basis. It will basically be like standings with wins, losses, winning percentage, etc. I think this would get clans more involved. There would never be a winner, just a top of the standings kind of thing.
For me (being fairly competetive) that just puts more pressure on me to be at the battles even if I dont really want to be >.<
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: {PLA}gdh92 on January 17, 2013, 12:25:42 PM
I like the idea of something long term being involved, the problem with a scoreboard is that once a team gets a large lead theres no point trying to beat it as it could mean having to win every battle for a month just to be even although I agree some sort of record should be kept.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Helios on January 17, 2013, 01:12:30 PM
Quote from: {212}Lt.Com Johnis on January 17, 2013, 07:55:01 AM
What does an admin have to do.I know its a stupid question but I have never been one so Idk.If All they have to do is keep the peace during the match.Nvm I'll over heat during a map reset.
They govern the match
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: SirPimped on January 17, 2013, 03:53:45 PM
Quote from: {PLA}gdh92 on January 17, 2013, 12:25:42 PM
I like the idea of something long term being involved, the problem with a scoreboard is that once a team gets a large lead theres no point trying to beat it as it could mean having to win every battle for a month just to be even although I agree some sort of record should be kept.
Well it could be based on winning percentage instead. But I just want something to get people to actually care. Because if what nixo said is true for some people, they won't even want to have battles each week.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Shazam on January 17, 2013, 04:11:58 PM
Here's an off-the-wall idea.

What if people simply signed up to compete with/against with a random group of players for a match? The time, day, map, era, and admin could be previously set (by Oven?) and anyone interested just needs to say so.

For example, let's pretend there was a planned battle this Saturday at 3:00 PM CST on Utapau: Sinkhole (CW). Let's say a post was made for the match and that 10 people (5 on each team) posted stating that they want to participate in the match and they are very certain they can make it. From there, Oven would randomly put them on a specific team and then boom, an organized match has been made.

The reason I had this idea was because it gets somewhat tiring playing with or against the same people all the time. Why not mix it up and play with someone you have only competed against or vice versa?

This would also encourage all SWBF players to get involved without worrying about any clan issues.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Black Water on January 17, 2013, 04:19:24 PM
I was thinking the same thing. It would be nice to finally fight alongside other players :-P
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: {212th} Ldr. Norris on January 17, 2013, 06:50:40 PM
I like the idea Sha-Zam, that way if smaller clans can't get whole teams at least they can still play.

To keep people interested you could have personal stats of game wins and losses.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Oven on January 17, 2013, 06:56:47 PM
That's a fantastic idea, Agent Z. We could have at least 1 or 2 battles per week that is open to anyone who shows up, and which has default ICW rules and so forth, plus an admin.

Dividing into teams could even be done last minute, in the buffer map, so that anyone who is online at the time can come and play.

As for standings, I'm unsure. I'm tempted to leave that to the clans to keep track of. Keeping an official ranking will not influence the clans that don't care, and the clans that do care will probably keep track anyway. But we'll see.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Shazam on January 18, 2013, 04:36:01 AM
Quote from: Oven on January 17, 2013, 06:56:47 PM
As for standings, I'm unsure. I'm tempted to leave that to the clans to keep track of. Keeping an official ranking will not influence the clans that don't care, and the clans that do care will probably keep track anyway. But we'll see.

I think we should have some sort of scoreboard to post the top 5 player's KDR averaged from all of the battles they've been in. This would promote everyone to try their hardest in all of the battles, but if they don't do so well they won't need to worry about their KDR average being shown until it gets higher and make the top 5.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Anyder on January 18, 2013, 05:15:43 AM
Quote from: Oven on January 17, 2013, 06:56:47 PM
is open to anyone who shows up, and which has default ICW rules and so forth, plus an admin.

I can come to all games :)
{If im not meeting ppl or doing hw or those things..
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: SirPimped on January 18, 2013, 09:57:25 AM
Quote from: Agent Z on January 18, 2013, 04:36:01 AM
I think we should have some sort of scoreboard to post the top 5 player's KDR averaged from all of the battles they've been in. This would promote everyone to try their hardest in all of the battles, but if they don't do so well they won't need to worry about their KDR average being shown until it gets higher and make the top 5.
But I think for some people, they will just try to get a better individual score, rather than try to win for the team.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Shazam on January 18, 2013, 04:25:46 PM
Quote from: SirPimped on January 18, 2013, 09:57:25 AM
But I think for some people, they will just try to get a better individual score, rather than try to win for the team.

I agree, many players would just camp to get a better KDR. I don't know how, but perhaps adding their CP capture count into the scoreboard would solve that.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: SirPimped on January 18, 2013, 10:23:18 PM
Quote from: Agent Z on January 18, 2013, 04:25:46 PM
I agree, many players would just camp to get a better KDR. I don't know how, but perhaps adding their CP capture count into the scoreboard would solve that.
Back when PLA servers had between 20 – 32 players, I would use a certain way to grade myself for performance. I used 1 point for kills, -1 for deaths, and 3 points for CPs. Maybe something like that?
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: {PLA}gdh92 on January 19, 2013, 04:02:33 AM
Quote from: SirPimped on January 18, 2013, 10:23:18 PM
Back when PLA servers had between 20 – 32 players, I would use a certain way to grade myself for performance. I used 1 point for kills, -1 for deaths, and 3 points for CPs. Maybe something like that?
It's nice to know I'm not the only one who's done that, I did that for about 5 years when I played splitscreen with my brother to avoid arguments. :)
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: -=(212) Nixo=- on January 19, 2013, 04:03:29 AM
Quote from: {PLA}gdh92 on January 19, 2013, 04:02:33 AM
It's nice to know I'm not the only one who's done that, I did that for about 5 years when I played splitscreen with my brother to avoid arguments. :)
Split screen on PC???
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Shazam on January 19, 2013, 05:53:26 AM
Quote from: SirPimped on January 18, 2013, 10:23:18 PM
Back when PLA servers had between 20 – 32 players, I would use a certain way to grade myself for performance. I used 1 point for kills, -1 for deaths, and 3 points for CPs. Maybe something like that?

I was thinking two seperate scores; one for your averaged KDR and a seperate one for your CP capture count, but I like your idea better. It would be very easy to calculate individual end-game scores with your method.

What would we call this score, though? It's not really a KDR or a capture count... We may need to make up a new term. How do you like "KDCCR" or "KDCPCR"? Kill Death CP Capture Ratio? :P
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Phobos on January 19, 2013, 06:14:51 AM
Quote from: Agent Z on January 19, 2013, 05:53:26 AM
What would we call this score, though? It's not really a KDR or a capture count... We may need to make up a new term. How do you like "KDCCR" or "KDCPCR"? Kill Death CP Capture Ratio? :P
KDCR
kill-death-capture ratio
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: SirPimped on January 19, 2013, 07:54:49 AM
Well I never used it as a ratio, just a total points-per-game scale. Volume of points rather than percentage.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: «ΙΞ¢KØ» on January 19, 2013, 10:16:07 AM
i think this is an awesome idea, i always thought someone should do this. Does anyone plan on makeing yak again or do i need to clan up.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Shazam on January 19, 2013, 10:29:45 AM
Quote from: «ΙΞ¢KØ» on January 19, 2013, 10:16:07 AM
i think this is an awesome idea, i always thought someone should do this. Does anyone plan on makeing yak again or do i need to clan up.

If we go with the system I proposed, there will be no need for YAK or ELK.

@Oven:  I know the ICW is kinda your thing, but can I help you organize this? I don't really want to be an in-game admin, but I would love to help get this going. I think we should schedule 3 battles for next week; one on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: -=(212) Nixo=- on January 19, 2013, 11:26:11 AM
Then you would need to sort out timezones. For most Euros 5 est is the latest that they can make it.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Shazam on January 19, 2013, 11:39:22 AM
Quote from: {212} Nixo on January 19, 2013, 11:26:11 AM
Then you would need to sort out timezones. For most Euros 5 est is the latest that they can make it.

What if we spread out the match times and scheduled Friday battles to start at 4:00 PM EST, Saturday battles at 2:00 PM EST, and Sunday battles at 12:00 PM EST? That would allow participants from other timezones to have a fair shot at being able to come to battles.
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Black Water on January 19, 2013, 11:52:16 AM
Most schools get out at 3:30 here.... -peanut
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Helios on January 19, 2013, 03:15:22 PM
Quote from: {212} Nixo on January 19, 2013, 04:03:29 AM
Split screen on PC???
Ps2  :slap:
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: [FC]Elite on January 25, 2013, 07:41:05 AM
awards?
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Anyder on January 25, 2013, 08:27:27 AM
seems like for next year xd
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: -=(212) Nixo=- on January 25, 2013, 08:40:47 AM
Quote from: [FC]Elite on January 25, 2013, 07:41:05 AM
awards?
They are being made.. But Goldman is busy. Just have patience   :whip:
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: {212th} Ldr. Norris on January 25, 2013, 10:54:40 AM
Quote from: {212} Nixo on January 25, 2013, 08:40:47 AM
They are being made.. But Goldman is busy. Just have patience   :whip:

I have a feeling waiting on Gm will not prove a waste. He will come up with something good  :tu:
Title: Re: ICW2 Conclusion; A Proposal
Post by: Gold Man on January 25, 2013, 11:57:59 AM
Quote from: {212th} Norris on January 25, 2013, 10:54:40 AM


I have a feeling waiting on Gm will not prove a waste. He will come up with something good  :tu:

Again guys, sorry I have been busy (recently finished exams, and also helping with a kitchen reno still), but I do hope to get the awards out soon.
EhPortal 1.34 © 2024, WebDev