Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

A place for threads related to tournaments and the like, and things related too.

Moderator: Light

Post Reply
User avatar
noob_saibot
Round Winner
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:39 am

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by noob_saibot »

sinewav wrote:
akira wrote:Reinforcing your reputation as a troll, eh?
Aw c'mon, that was kind of funny though, right? And that's the least troublesome thing he's posted in forever (he even smiley'd it as a joke).
Yeah I guess smiley's don't support my notion of humor :( But maybe I should edit my definition of a-holers:
noob_saibot wrote:a-hole-ers (noun): one who has that annoying team chat "/team Follow me! I'm going to hole! and uses really annoying/lame internet lingo such as troll, pwnt, owned, woned etc." coughAKIRAcough
As far as holes are concerned just eliminate them. Or make the cycle walls disappear immediately. At least the latter doesn't delay the inevitable...
WINNER OF: Ladle 47 .... preSsure's mom & Durka's mom

"If you're not part of the freaks, you're part of the boredom." -Perry Farrell
Goodygumdrops
Round Winner
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:39 am

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by Goodygumdrops »

that pwnt woned you, akira
Well...I did.
User avatar
akira
Core Dumper
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Neo-Tokyo

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by akira »

I know that I am just biting, but to propose that I am using alot of internet slang is kind of hilarious. Especially coming from you.
Also you didn't even get my insta-chat right. Now please, instead of fishing for repsonses, add something worthwhile to the thread.

on-topic:

Could we vote team-sizes at some point again? I'd like to try 8vs8 again.
User avatar
noob_saibot
Round Winner
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:39 am

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by noob_saibot »

To akira: Coming from me? I obviously only use the internet to play this game and bait you. Now if you would please get back on topic...

on topic:

Eliminate holes. Even the accidental ones, too.

I actually much preferred 8v8 instead of 6v6 and encourage everyone else out there to prefer 8v8 too.
Last edited by noob_saibot on Thu Jul 22, 2010 11:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
WINNER OF: Ladle 47 .... preSsure's mom & Durka's mom

"If you're not part of the freaks, you're part of the boredom." -Perry Farrell
Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4310
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by Word »

i like 8vs8 but i still remember how difficult it was to get a full team together for Ladle 18. Perhaps some teams like una or dbd (or our own one) wouldn't be able to take part with a complete roster.

@BoxeD:
Word wrote:edit: ew, if you copy my signature you must link it to a youtube video :twisted:
:wink:
Last edited by Word on Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
wildcat
Average Program
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 10:26 pm

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by wildcat »

8v8=Fail

To laggy. It's laggy enough with 6v6/
User avatar
dreadlord
Match Winner
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:26 am
Location: Germany

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by dreadlord »

/me agrees
User avatar
AI-team
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 1020
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:17 pm
Location: Germany/Munich
Contact:

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by AI-team »

dreadlord wrote:/me agrees
  
 
"95% of people believe in every quote you post on the internet" ~ Abraham Lincoln
 
 
User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6472
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by sinewav »

Voting thread started.

I didn't include the team sizes in the vote this time. Larger teams have never strong support in the vote over the last year and a half. However, I think we should keep the discussion going for next vote.

One thing I noticed is that games in Mega Fort, when the teams are full, go by very fast. I mean, really fast. A 9v9 match is usually over in less than 10 minutes!

So, is it possible increasing the team size will help with the problem of Ladles going over time?

Ok, people in Mega Fort take lots of stupid risks they wouldn't normally do in competition. But even still, it looks to me like having those extra players on team do a few things:

1. More players might equal more kill points and thus as quicker match.
2. More players means less room on the grid and more chances to die! :twisted:
3. More players almost certainly means more mistakes that result in zone conquers.

The downside of course is more lag, more difficulty getting a team together, and ultimately fewer teams since the community is pretty static. Personally, I'm totally cool with fewer, larger teams. I'm less interested in the growth of Fortress and more interested in the gameplay itself, and all of us having a good time.

For the next few months when Clan Wars happen, what if they didn't use 6v6 Ladle servers and tried out larger teams? And maybe they could record the time it takes to complete the wars?
Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4310
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by Word »

should be possible. our last 8vs8 was 2 months ago :)
User avatar
Titanoboa
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1795
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:07 pm

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by Titanoboa »

Well in my experience it's rare to even find enough for 6v6 wars, but that is of course speaking for a small unestablished fort team that's still expanding. 90% (if not more!) of our wars end up as 4v4. Even when we do have 6, the enemy team usually don't.

And I like 6v6 gameplay. It's possible that 7v7 would be interesting for different line-ups (do you put the 7th player as attack or sweep, or just midfield?) and it could possibly enhance gameplay but 8v8 is just too much imo. Note though that I wasn't here back when ladles were 8v8.

In my book 8v8 is out of the question until the servers and connections and whatnot is a lot better, but I have nothing against voting it down once every three months :P
User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6472
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by sinewav »

Titanoboa wrote:It's possible that 7v7 would be interesting for different line-ups (do you put the 7th player as attack or sweep, or just midfield?)...
I like that better than 8v8 too. I like odd numbers. I even liked Flex's idea of a 5v5 league last year. Soccer teams have an odd number of players.
newbie
Core Dumper
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:04 pm

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by newbie »

Add 5vs5, 5vs5 means one player less to gank the zone. Also it means, that teams can't lose more than half of their players in order to play 3vs1.

5vs5 with bigger holes and everyone will be happy

About the time, just lower the score to 80, if that bothers anyone.
1, 4, 6, 9, 11, 21, 24, 33, 34, 35

Image
User avatar
noob_saibot
Round Winner
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 5:39 am

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by noob_saibot »

good idea newbie. I like the 5v5 idea. It should give teams less motive to hole cough*****cough
WINNER OF: Ladle 47 .... preSsure's mom & Durka's mom

"If you're not part of the freaks, you're part of the boredom." -Perry Farrell
User avatar
dreadlord
Match Winner
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:26 am
Location: Germany

Re: Ladle 36 Voting Discussion

Post by dreadlord »

http://forums3.armagetronad.net/viewtop ... 60&t=20425 --> this is the voting thread, no need to talk here anymore, things that we are voting on are discussed yet ...
Post Reply