9v9 Night Discussion thread

[Soltan]

[quote="Infusions";p="169922"]
The thing is, Dustbowl isn't really popular amongst Villuns (At least, I don't think so). I'm not sure about choosing maps that Villuns don't enjoy playing is a good idea or what.[/quote]

I play Dustbowl (on TV6) more than any other map and love it. I guess that puts me in the minority of Villuns.

[Stevo]

[quote="Guardian";p="170331"][quote="Stevo";p="170329"][quote="arfy4";p="170325"]I think we should get them to change 24/7 dustbowl. I agree with infy, dustbowl really isn't s very good map, so why do we need a 24/7 server for it.[/quote]
Maybe because it's our 2nd most popular server?
http://www.gametracker.com/search/tf2/?query=theville

I think it's the best stock map, and it would appear that many people also enjoy it...[/quote]

It's not the best stock map at all. It's just the most popular.

The chokepoint design unbalances the class to class balance. More specifically it's difficult to play scout and somewhat spy and easier to play demo, engy and pyro.

Still I'll add it to the maybe list if you guys REALLY want it.[/quote]
That's your opinion and I completely disagree with all of those points.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that if you want people other than a tight group of like minded people to participate in this event, it might mean making compromises such as trying maps you don't necessarily like. Who knows, maybe after trying those maps in this setting you might actually enjoy it. Anyway, if you want this to be a "Villun night" you need to think about everyone else, not just the ones that play on a particular server.

I'm guessing you won't get a lot of people that agree with me to post in this thread because they've already decided this is not for them.

Anyway, no offense, but that's just my opinion.

[Infusions]

[quote="Masakari";p="170303"]Never underestimate the power of a good dustbowl match. I played on the server for about an hour last night, and actually had a really strong and competitive battle. There's nothing quite like holding back a team for twenty minutes at the last point.
[/quote]

Just about every stock map can have a good match, given the correct team. The only stock I really dislike is Hydro, but I wouldn't doubt it being possible to have an intense Hydro match either.

But usually, when members are listing their liked and disliked maps, the disliked maps usually consist of maps like Dustbowl, ctf_Well, Hydro, 2fort, and (now) Eygpt and Junction.

Guardian: The chokepoint debate you're making still sounds as if you're basing it off of 12 vs 12 fast respawn matches. With only one Sniper and Engineer to focus on and very few spots for them to be in, picking targets as a Spy is easy. And since there's about four different ways of a Spy entering the base, it shouldn't be that hard. Scout might have the hardest time, but since this isn't highlander, having a Scout is optional.

Again, I'm not fully supporting the addition of Dustbowl or anything, I'm neutral to it being added. I'm just throwing out thoughts.

[Nick Mame]

It's unfortunate that few changes will attract a larger audience, Stevo. A lot of people are turned off by the format of the event and won't attend regardless of what compromises are made. Therefore I don't think it's necessary to consider much outside of the opinions of those who want to participate.


It's difficult to play certain classes on dustbowl because of fast respawn times and large player counts. A lot of spam-centric maps become a lot more interesting (and quite fun) once you lower the player count. I find dustbowl, goldrush and the like quite nice with a small number of people.

[Masakari]

Call me crazy, but I've always considered chokepoints to be a good thing as that's what forces players to work as a team to go through it. If a map had absolutely no chokepoints, teamwork wouldn't really be needed and people could cap points by themselves. Heck, look at the stats for TF2 - dustbowl is about as much lost as it is won for either team.

In terms of class balance, I've never seen scouts or spies have any issue killing me on that map. Dustbowl has a lot of routes to make those classes a viable option.

As well, I pretty much agree with everything that Stevo has said. Yes, it is your opinion, but I don't necessarily agree with it.

[Nick Mame]

Both sides have a huge history on that debate, Masakari.

The gist of our side is that we believe choke points result in an unsatisfying form of teamwork. We'd prefer players band together on their own volition rather than being tunneled together through choke points. Choke points result in players fighting near each other instead of fighting for each other. Teamwork happens by map design instead of player choice.

But most of us agree that forced teamwork is better than nothing at all. A few choke points can't hurt for publics servers where few band together.

[Guardian]

>.>

<.<

YOUR ALL CRAZY!!!!

I said to myself earlier that I would only add dustbowl if the entire forum was against me on the issue. Well since that is the case here, I'll add it.... for now.... because this is our night not mine..... you still haven't changed my opinion on it though.



However the next night the 2nd map will not be a A/D. Since I can see that having 2 maps would be ideal and having a classic 5 point map seems to provide a good foolproof 9v9 match we'll have one every night and I think good old Badlands will be a star choice for the next one (since we played granary and well is kind of like freight).

So next night I'll line up Badlands and a CTF map (since we did an A/D map last time) but I think I'll ask everyone else's opinion on this one since I'm torn between campingtrip and Turbine.

I'm still wondering if we should do this every week or every 2nd week. I'll keep the poll open and wait for responses. One thing we could do before events (more specifically ones like the ville cup) is change the night to every week to give people some practice and experience working in a team before heading off in the big match (the very first serious match can be frustrating for some).

[Plinko]

I think casting map preferences into an 'my side/your side' rubric is not helpful in discussing map quality.

What is at issue is a preference for one type of gameplay vs. another. The most popular maps will always be the most predictable ones - most people prefer to play FPS games in terms of individual battles and want to think only of moving up and making kills/scoring points.

A map like dustbowl (at a larger team sizes) minimizes the strategic choices players have to make (eg do I push left or right, do I wait for backup or press, do I take the long way to flank or do I help the main push) because generally there is only one way to go. In these games the quality of play depends on coordination - generally the team with more will win regardless of individual skill. No one player can skillfully take out two sentries and 4-5 players covering the final point on stage 3, instead it happens if the offensive team can create a wedge in the defense, then clear the rest and take the final point when most of the defenders are dead or re-spawning.

The reason a specific minority dislikes this for the exact reason it's popular - they don't want to grind, they want to outthink and outplay their opponents, having multiple independent routes helps with this a lot because it requires both sides to read and react to the other side. The one that finds a seam and takes it can win without coordinating a giant push. Someone who pulls off a few spectacular one on one kills can collapse a side and lead their team to victory. It also allows you to survive and thrive as a player despite weaknesses on your team - you rarely get rolled because your engie doesn't know what he's doing - which is easy to happen on dustbowl.

To me its the difference between Big 10 and SEC football. Dustbowl and Warpath are 3-yards and a cloud of dust maps with even 24 players. With 18 or 16 it becomes a little more fun-and-gun.

The best part is, reducing player limits (and regular spawn times) makes some of these maps fit the bill for the latter crowd, because dying is considerably riskier, and one needs to make decisions constantly about how far/hard to push, which routes to take and whether or not to attempt big flank maneuvers. It also places a big premium on individual skill.

So, in sum, at 9v9 dustbowl is a completely different map, I think it should be tried. I am looking forward to making the next event.

I am a big fan of structure, a method for choosing teams and allowing people to think for a minute or five before playing would be keen. Otherwise it's just apub game where everyone hits random but sitcks around all game. Captains are OK for picking if that's the route, but leadership should arise naturally in the course of a game.

[Ironwolf]

While I am not a big dustbowl fan, I agree with Plinko that with a smaller number of players and longer spawn time, the pace of the map changes significantly.

We should try it out before coming to a conclusion, in fact it might be good to try all the maps over the month and then choose which ones should be repeated and those which should not.

[Guardian]

[quote="Plinko";p="170355"]I think casting map preferences into an 'my side/your side' rubric is not helpful in discussing map quality.

What is at issue is a preference for one type of gameplay vs. another. The most popular maps will always be the most predictable ones - most people prefer to play FPS games in terms of individual battles and want to think only of moving up and making kills/scoring points.

A map like dustbowl (at a larger team sizes) minimizes the strategic choices players have to make (eg do I push left or right, do I wait for backup or press, do I take the long way to flank or do I help the main push) because generally there is only one way to go. In these games the quality of play depends on coordination - generally the team with more will win regardless of individual skill. No one player can skillfully take out two sentries and 4-5 players covering the final point on stage 3, instead it happens if the offensive team can create a wedge in the defense, then clear the rest and take the final point when most of the defenders are dead or re-spawning.

The reason a specific minority dislikes this for the exact reason it's popular - they don't want to grind, they want to outthink and outplay their opponents, having multiple independent routes helps with this a lot because it requires both sides to read and react to the other side. The one that finds a seam and takes it can win without coordinating a giant push. Someone who pulls off a few spectacular one on one kills can collapse a side and lead their team to victory. It also allows you to survive and thrive as a player despite weaknesses on your team - you rarely get rolled because your engie doesn't know what he's doing - which is easy to happen on dustbowl.

To me its the difference between Big 10 and SEC football. Dustbowl and Warpath are 3-yards and a cloud of dust maps with even 24 players. With 18 or 16 it becomes a little more fun-and-gun.

The best part is, reducing player limits (and regular spawn times) makes some of these maps fit the bill for the latter crowd, because dying is considerably riskier, and one needs to make decisions constantly about how far/hard to push, which routes to take and whether or not to attempt big flank maneuvers. It also places a big premium on individual skill.

So, in sum, at 9v9 dustbowl is a completely different map, I think it should be tried. I am looking forward to making the next event.

I am a big fan of structure, a method for choosing teams and allowing people to think for a minute or five before playing would be keen. Otherwise it's just apub game where everyone hits random but sitcks around all game. Captains are OK for picking if that's the route, but leadership should arise naturally in the course of a game.[/quote]




The thing about testing maps is that it's difficult to test them all because.... if were playing 2 maps every 2 weeks then it's going to take forever to test every map everyone wants to try especially if we have 1 5-point map every night.

I'm almost certain there are other maps people will want to add to these nights that are controversial (desert fortress, warpath, Egypt, Goldrush, etc)

If you guys really want to test all of the non-5 point maps (let's face it, it's hard to screw up on those) then I propose we have a giant map 9v9 testing weekend extravaganza where we try 2 maps every day that fall into debate to speed up the process then we return to having this night every 2 weeks or so. It would also encourage people to try out the night.

[arfy4]

I want to try it. It sounds to me like just normal playing but with only people who are usually at the ville so you don't get new people or afk's.