Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

yacoub
Warrant Officer
Posts: 475
Joined: Sat 20 Jul 2013 03:44
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby yacoub » Wed 8 Oct 2014 18:27

AustrianOak wrote:From my personal experience I have noticed the a change in the player base between the spring/early summer to the late summer/fall. The 'fat' of the wargame community is gone. The player base has stopped exploring new game modes or playing solo when their friends are not on. During the summer all my friends that play wargame were out traveling. Being the hermit that I am, I stayed at my house to play wargame. I played around 250 games solo. During this time I usually could find fair and balanced teams, and had enjoyable games. As the summer moved on, however, I started to notice it taking more time for my lobbies to fill; and the average player skill in my games decreased as well. The 'average' player has left wargame. We are left with people who almost exclusively play 1 game mode and do not try and branch out, or people only play with their friends and do not play solo (myself included).

Today I almost exclusively play with friends because I can't trust my team mates to do anything correct. However, my group always looks for other teams to play,


Sadly, most teams out there won't play against yours, they only want to beat up on pubbies.

yacoub
Warrant Officer
Posts: 475
Joined: Sat 20 Jul 2013 03:44
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby yacoub » Wed 8 Oct 2014 18:28

ThatGuyTheGreat wrote:
AustrianOak wrote:From my personal experience I have noticed the a change in the player base between the spring/early summer to the late summer/fall. The 'fat' of the wargame community is gone. The player base has stopped exploring new game modes or playing solo when their friends are not on. During the summer all my friends that play wargame were out traveling. Being the hermit that I am, I stayed at my house to play wargame. I played around 250 games solo. During this time I usually could find fair and balanced teams, and had enjoyable games. As the summer moved on, however, I started to notice it taking more time for my lobbies to fill; and the average player skill in my games decreased as well. The 'average' player has left wargame. We are left with people who almost exclusively play 1 game mode and do not try and branch out, or people only play with their friends and do not play solo (myself included).

Today I almost exclusively play with friends because I can't trust my team mates to do anything correct. However, my group always looks for other teams to play, and we try not to play against full rando teams. Though we also struggle with getting kicked from other teams lobby. As a side note I actually have a lower win/loss from player with friends than I did when I played solo. I would think that comes from actually playing good players, and from me leaving if a friends drops in a game from a bad connection (surprise, surprise teams are usually are more interested in playing with friends than winning at all cost).

My suggestion on improving the current situation, as many people have already suggested, is to unite the player base under 1 game mode. Standard game owners would only be able to make 1 type of lobby and eugen/player servers would cover the rest.
Example-

Standard Game Mode- Conquest (1v1-4v4/any starting points/any win condition/any time/any map/any income)
Eugen Server- 2 lobbies for each game type (standard destruction/TD/econ/10v10)
Player Serves- anything under the sun

For current situation I can only offer suggestions that work for me when I play solo or with friends.
1- Name your lobby in a way that gets across important info. Ex- For solo player = Random Players Welcome, For team= team v team
2-Even if team mates don't respond, ping and type important info while in game. Ex- where your AO is, where/when you will push, if you have units supporting someone, if you spot important enemy units
3- Don't be a girl dog and kick people for being better than you, you can learn from your mistakes (If a team joins a solo game, that is a different situation).

How about absolutely not because most lobbies (and all of mine) are destruction games. Stop trying to force these awful, fever-dream, community destroying ideas down people's throats. Conquest was only bearable in EE when it played like a funny mini game instead of a monotonous grind where players are rewarded for actions completely divorced from the basics of wargame.

Agree. Conquest is rather terrible. Destruction directly rewards actual skill with units and combat tactics, rather than who can place the most cvs in zones.

dalailama2006
Sergeant
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri 6 Dec 2013 19:54
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby dalailama2006 » Wed 8 Oct 2014 18:37

Let's try and not have this turn into a debate on which game mode is better.

User avatar
Tonci87
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 536
Joined: Thu 17 Oct 2013 17:13
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby Tonci87 » Wed 8 Oct 2014 18:39

I too like destruction better. Conquest players are just too careless with their units and I really hate to see stuff like suicide transport scouting wich is absolutely the norm in conquest...
ImageImage
German realism oriented Arma Coop Community http://www.brigade2010.de

dalailama2006
Sergeant
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri 6 Dec 2013 19:54
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby dalailama2006 » Wed 8 Oct 2014 18:41

yacoub wrote:Sadly, most teams out there won't play against yours, they only want to beat up on pubbies.


On topic, excellent.
What makes you say most teams only want to beat pubbies?

User avatar
trotskygrad
General
Posts: 6444
Joined: Mon 17 Sep 2012 16:09
Location: две тысячи лет война
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby trotskygrad » Wed 8 Oct 2014 18:53

ThatGuyTheGreat wrote:
trotskygrad wrote:
ThatGuyTheGreat wrote:How about absolutely not because most lobbies (and all of mine) are destruction games. Stop trying to force these awful, fever-dream, community destroying ideas down people's throats. Conquest was only bearable in EE when it played like a funny mini game instead of a monotonous grind where players are rewarded for actions completely divorced from the basics of wargame.


most people are scrubs, most competitive games (BTR flash, ranked) are conquest.


Destruction is just more about lolartysniping and doesn't reward skilled aggressive play.

You've obviously never been in one of my games. Destruction rewards well thought out and carefully planned offensive maneuvers with the only thing that means anything: heavy casualties inflicted on enemy formations. Ask Sweeper about how I play for more info.

Also, the new wargame elitism I spoke about in a previous post shows itself again with trotskygrad supporting conquest being standard by saying "most players are scrubs".


dude, learn what satire is. and it's true, most players will be less skilled than those at the top (which I am not, I'm only average).

I've played destruction since EE and basically nothing has changed. Even if the attacker gets a certain mass of force, the defenders have the flexibility to engage on their own terms and as a result take less losses.

this even applies in other RTS games, like men of war. Similar modes to conquest (the analog in MoW:AS, Assault Zones) were the only modes truly considered viable, combat, which was the analog to destruction.

yacoub wrote:Destruction directly rewards actual skill with units and combat tactics, rather than who can place the most cvs in zones.


so you mean "obsessive micro" with "actual skill"?

putting CVs in zones is equivalent to taking land.

With destruction, it's not about achieving objectives but rather destroying the enemy's units by any means possible. I'm not sure how you're getting that this reflects real tactics more.

But yeah this debate is as old as EE itself. Best not to get distracted.

Changing the default mode to conquest wouldn't prevent people from playing dest if they wanted.
NEXT TIME I SEE A DAMN FLAMEWAR INVOLVING DARTH-LAMPSHADE, FROSTPOOKY, LONERIFLE, FADE2GRAY, TROTSKYGRAD AND/OR ANYONE INVOLVED IN A DISCUSSION BETWEEN THEM I'M GOING TO HAND OUT BANS TO ANYONE USING ANYTHING LOOKING REMOTELY LIKE AN AD-HOMINEM

ThatGuyTheGreat
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu 20 Mar 2014 21:12
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby ThatGuyTheGreat » Wed 8 Oct 2014 18:57

trotskygrad wrote:
ThatGuyTheGreat wrote:
trotskygrad wrote:
most people are scrubs, most competitive games (BTR flash, ranked) are conquest.


Destruction is just more about lolartysniping and doesn't reward skilled aggressive play.

You've obviously never been in one of my games. Destruction rewards well thought out and carefully planned offensive maneuvers with the only thing that means anything: heavy casualties inflicted on enemy formations. Ask Sweeper about how I play for more info.

Also, the new wargame elitism I spoke about in a previous post shows itself again with trotskygrad supporting conquest being standard by saying "most players are scrubs".


dude, learn what satire is. and it's true, most players will be less skilled than those at the top (which I am not, I'm only average).

I've played destruction since EE and basically nothing has changed. Even if the attacker gets a certain mass of force, the defenders have the flexibility to engage on their own terms and as a result take less losses.

this even applies in other RTS games, like men of war. Similar modes to conquest (the analog in MoW:AS, Assault Zones) were the only modes truly considered viable, combat, which was the analog to destruction.

yacoub wrote:Destruction directly rewards actual skill with units and combat tactics, rather than who can place the most cvs in zones.


so you mean "obsessive micro" with "actual skill"?

putting CVs in zones is equivalent to taking land.

With destruction, it's not about achieving objectives but rather destroying the enemy's units by any means possible. I'm not sure how you're getting that this reflects real tactics more.

But yeah this debate is as old as EE itself. Best not to get distracted.

Changing the default mode to conquest wouldn't prevent people from playing dest if they wanted.

Sorry, sarcasm can't really be "read" and your post as satire was indistinguishable from the actual arguments some people make. Also, the making conquest the default mode post was made by a guy asking for all other modes to be locked off, not simply make conquest selected by default when making a lobby.

Nobody could seriously support that.
I’d rather die standing up than live on my knees.
Stephane Charbonnier (1967-2015)

gurny
Corporal
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed 5 Mar 2014 03:10
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby gurny » Wed 8 Oct 2014 19:16

Lets not forget most of new players who get stomped prob don't go on forum so we wont hear them. (a lot don't even learn about the game before joining 10v10, but well....)
For me 10v10 is what attracts me to this game and even a team of 3 (possibly 2 lol) can ruin a 10v10 when other players are fairly new.

As others have said game NEEDS a match maker of some kind, or a completely random server where you don't know if you'll be red or blue until loading time.

By all means keep the other servers for team stomping but at least new players will have a choice. Oh yeah and make server details more obvious for them.

Is it at all possible to write a bit of code for this? I've no idea

also... make a basic 10v10 low point tutorial please

User avatar
Mako
General
Posts: 7352
Joined: Sun 5 May 2013 20:00
Location: Cascadia
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby Mako » Wed 8 Oct 2014 22:43

There should certainly be some sort of nooby exclusive lobbies, like for those with under 50 games or something.

And yeah you could make one, but many noobs don't realize that they can or should do that
If there's two kinds of players, those that like challenges and those that want a fair game, pubstomps should make everyone happy.

SikkeSakke
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri 2 Mar 2012 13:01
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Teams and randoms (pub stomping)

Postby SikkeSakke » Wed 8 Oct 2014 23:28

I play roughly half team games and half alone with randoms. Sometimes I intentionally join to play against teams with randoms knowing that we got very slim change to win. But those games are good learning experiences. Best games that I have lately were purely randoms vs. randoms. Roughly I've been equally on winning and losing sides, but most of those games were pretty equal - and therefore fun.

Of course there's sometimes situations when random teammates act like they are described - totally random and you never know what they are going to do. But if your random mates communicate even a tiny bit, it's usually enough to have a good game.

Just played one 3v3 where we communicated by chat and flares and it was pretty nice to see that I with my mates managed to create coordinated push that led to victory.
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests