Forum
Switching over to the NA scoring system
Created 14th March 2013 @ 16:41
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 11 12 13 14 Next »
I think it’s ridiculous that you’d expect one league to change its ruleset for its competitors just because a new league that does things differently has decided to expand.
Especially considering the time-frames. ETF2L’s ruleset is old, ETF2L itself older still, and ESEAeurope announced it’s very first season a few weeks ago. What did you really expect? :v
Also, from emb’s post, I don’t think we’ll be getting shorter map times, but that’s a guess.
Last edited by Smyther,
No, I understand the issue just fine.
You’re practising for 2 different rulesets. This adds a lot of pressure to teams practising for both, and a lot of teams don’t have the resources (mostly time) to deal with that. In other sports, this usually means teams focus on only one league at a time. But TF2 is small and some teams will be trying to support the growth of ESEA without sacrificing they participation and support of ETF2L. Standardising the rulesets would be a great help here.
But ESEA is committed to keeping its ruleset (so far as I’m aware) and ETF2L is obligated to keep it it’s ruleset because all the infrastructure and (more importnaly) the majority of players being set on the ETF2L season 15(-ish) ruleset. Complaining about it now, just before season 16, after EU players have been practising all summer, with ESEAeurope yet to even try a season, and with i49 just finished, seems a little fruitless to me to complain and demand to ETF2L.
But maybe I’m underestimating how much ESEA’s rules change the game and how little it transferable from ETF2L practise to ESEA matches, and maybe my complaining about your complaining is equally as fruitless.
Quoted from emb
We are not switching to the NA rulesets in Season 16, be it maps or unlocks. Small changes to both are likely, though.
Thank the lord allmighty jeesus!
Quoted from ondkaja
So incredibly bad that we have to practise two different rulesets at the same time if we are playing in both ETF2L and ESEA. We should attempt to unify the scenes by having the same ruleset, and I don’t see any advantages of ETF2L keeping the EU ruleset. :/
Sorry, but this is the most bullshit excuse ever. I didn’t agree when b4nny (or w/e it was) used it to explain their poor performance at i49 and I still won’t agree now.
You don’t have to practise for a ruleset. If anything you go into the game with a different mindset depending on the ruleset but the meta remains the same, and the all the basics still apply.
The ruleset is there purely for structural reasons. And if there’s a thing influenced by the ruleset it’s the whole infrastructure involved in a game (from servers to the streams, casts etc.) , not the team strategies. And from this point alone, our ruleset is vastly superior to the American’s. No need for external plugins or clients, compatibility with popular log parsers, easy comprehension of the games from a spectator pov, etc etc… I could go on all day (and maybe I will if I ever get my vanilla article done).
Also imo the biggest single advantage of our ruleset, since it’s so simple and straightforward (no teamswitching bs, or no half time bs) any independent league, or person or organization can pick it up and organize a cup / tournament / league from it. While as the NA ruleset will require a much vaster infrastructure and manpower (you can’t possibly think that running a cup with the NA ruleset is easier than running with the EU ruleset, it simply isn’t), besides, having the infrastructure (talking about a client in this case like ESEA has) that automates most of the ruleset tasks (halftime, switchteams, etc) is not doable for 99% of the organizations or people that want to run cups / leagues, etc…
Last edited by Kaneco,
This ^
Plus the esea ruleset is basically the same thing as our etf2l one, the only difference is that you have to win 2 rounds less and you can take a legit break between halfs.
Quoted from fraac
Switching to the NA ruleset now would be like switching to Deutschmarks in 1945.
We’d stop hyper-inflation…?
It sounded better. I guarantee they won’t know the difference when I say it on teamfortress.tv.
Quoted from fraac
Switching to the NA ruleset now would be like switching to Deutschmarks in 1945.
fraac pls stop.
Quoted from accless
[…]
We’d stop hyper-inflation…?
Apparently he’s still thinking “We beat America so they have to use our ruleset now”. The Mark in 1945 isn’t even a proper example because no one switched to anything at that time and the was no hyper-inflation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagen_H RIP Sweden
Setsul, accless was teasing about my use of ‘Deutschmark’. The point was to hyperbolically compare results of a computer game to halting the spread of Nazism, so it was worth fudging details for a better flow.
I’ve just realised you’re the same guy who posted this creepy weirdness. I don’t know who you are or when you think I beat you, but you’re welcome to play any of my teams for revenge. Add me on Steam.
Last edited by fraac,
Quoted from Kaneco
[…]
Thank the lord allmighty jeesus!
[…]
Sorry, but this is the most bullshit excuse ever. I didn’t agree when b4nny (or w/e it was) used it to explain their poor performance at i49 and I still won’t agree now.
You don’t have to practise for a ruleset. If anything you go into the game with a different mindset depending on the ruleset but the meta remains the same, and the all the basics still apply.
The ruleset is there purely for structural reasons. And if there’s a thing influenced by the ruleset it’s the whole infrastructure involved in a game (from servers to the streams, casts etc.) , not the team strategies. And from this point alone, our ruleset is vastly superior to the American’s. No need for external plugins or clients, compatibility with popular log parsers, easy comprehension of the games from a spectator pov, etc etc… I could go on all day (and maybe I will if I ever get my vanilla article done).
Also imo the biggest single advantage of our ruleset, since it’s so simple and straightforward (no teamswitching bs, or no half time bs) any independent league, or person or organization can pick it up and organize a cup / tournament / league from it. While as the NA ruleset will require a much vaster infrastructure and manpower (you can’t possibly think that running a cup with the NA ruleset is easier than running with the EU ruleset, it simply isn’t), besides, having the infrastructure (talking about a client in this case like ESEA has) that automates most of the ruleset tasks (halftime, switchteams, etc) is not doable for 99% of the organizations or people that want to run cups / leagues, etc…
Having two different rulesets run simultaneously would mean that teams that participate in both leagues at the same time (and thus supports the scene more efficiently) would be in a disadvantage against teams who only plays in one league, and only has to practise one of the rulesets.
Yes, the ruleset is important and you have to practise it! You go into an ESEA and ETF2L games with completely different mindsets, and if you’re only familiar with one mindset, you are in a disadvantage when you have to play with the other mindset. For example, chilling and waiting out the time (“parking the bus”) doesn’t work as efficiently in ESEA because of the prolonged timer and the fact that you either have to wait out the full hour or push and win the game earlier. Similarily, throwing rounds in order to have more time winning the next round works in ETF2L but it much riskier tactic in ESEA due to the winlimit. These are examples of tactics that derives from the different mindsets the different rulesets require, and one mindset does not work with the other ruleset. Being passive in one scenario might work in ETF2L but will definitely doom you in ESEA, and vice versa. So yes, you need to practise so you know what to do in the actual games!
External plug-ins or clients would not be mandatory in ETF2L, they aren’t a necessary part of the american ruleset in any way! ESA ran cups with the American ruleset without any plug-ins or clients required. I don’t see why running a cup with ETF2L rules in ESA would’ve been easier!
ETF2L can slightly alter the rules so that team switching is optional, and you only have to switch if the other team demands it. I believe the teamswitching in ESEA is automated anyway. The technical sides of having the ruleset include setting mp_winlimit to 5 during half-time, which is hardly requires “much vaster infrastructure and manpower”.
You seem to have the misconception that you need a plug-in to play the american ruleset, you don’t! You just load the config, play for thirty minutes or until one team have reached 5 points. During half-time you set the winlimit to 5 and then you play for another thirty minutes or until one team has reached 5 points. IN case of a draw, you play a golden cap (same rules as in the EU ruleset). It’s just as “turn-up-and-play”-friendly as the European ruleset. The only difference is that you have to manually set the win-limit to 5 during half-time.
Quoted from ondkaja
[…]
Having two different rulesets run simultaneously would mean that teams that participate in both leagues at the same time (and thus supports the scene more efficiently) would be in a disadvantage against teams who only plays in one league, and only has to practise one of the rulesets.
No, sorry but no. It’s still the same game. If you’re bad at it with one ruleset changing it won’t help. You don’t practice for rulesets, sorry but I can’t believe that. When the americans practiced for i46 they practiced for the unlocks which those effecticely change the metagame not a ruleset.
Quoted from ondkaja
[…]
Yes, the ruleset is important and you have to practise it! You go into an ESEA and ETF2L games with completely different mindsets, and if you’re only familiar with one mindset, you are in a disadvantage when you have to play with the other mindset. For example, chilling and waiting out the time (“parking the bus”) doesn’t work as efficiently in ESEA because of the prolonged timer and the fact that you either have to wait out the full hour or push and win the game earlier. Similarily, throwing rounds in order to have more time winning the next round works in ETF2L but it much riskier tactic in ESEA due to the winlimit. These are examples of tactics that derives from the different mindsets the different rulesets require, and one mindset does not work with the other ruleset. Being passive in one scenario might work in ETF2L but will definitely doom you in ESEA, and vice versa. So yes, you need to practise so you know what to do in the actual games!
Sorry but that “passive plays won’t work in NA ruleset” excuse is complete bullshit and if you want proof of that you can watch the last ESEA lan finals, where teams hold a point for almost 45 mins. What happened when europeans got wrecked in i46 was that the european meta was very slow and methodical, dependent on clear advantages, maybe because of no unlocks, when unlocks were introduced things started to change, and we could see it in i49 where with the EU ruleset in fact EU teams were the most aggressive ones, sometimes even super aggressive while AUS and the NA team were much more methodically and passive. So, no, sorry but no, that “the NA ruleset makes us play more aggressive” excuse is bs.
Quoted from ondkaja
[…]
External plug-ins or clients would not be mandatory in ETF2L, they aren’t a necessary part of the american ruleset in any way! ESA ran cups with the American ruleset without any plug-ins or clients required. I don’t see why running a cup with ETF2L rules in ESA would’ve been easier!
hmmm, I don’t know if you understood what I said, what I said is that the NA ruleset requires a more prepared infrastructure than the EU ruleset, and you can’t deny that. If you want to use the NA ruleset you need to have a good infrastructure or are you going to ask teams to change teams manually ? Etc etc etc.. Its just one of the examples. It requires much more hassle than the EU ruleset which is much more straightforward. Also arranging cup bracked and games is much easier with the EU ruleset. I am speaking from experience since I am running the newbie 6v6 cup.
Quoted from ondkaja
[…]
ETF2L can slightly alter the rules so that team switching is optional, and you only have to switch if the other team demands it. I believe the teamswitching in ESEA is automated anyway. The technical sides of having the ruleset include setting mp_winlimit to 5 during half-time, which is hardly requires “much vaster infrastructure and manpower”.
But then that would make the NA ruleset completely irrelevant if you change it according to your preference. The purpose of having the NA ruleset would be 1) A step towards a unified ruleset 2) Avoid map asymmetrical characteristics by changing teams. If you are chaning anything to it you completely defeat the purpose of implementing it in the first place.
I could go on, but just want to add I am for a unified ruleset, but I think it should be decided among all the scenes for the better of it, even some americans have started to support the EU ruleset lately. I think itwould be much more sensible to implement a universal ruleset that is as straightforward and league/spectator-friendly as possible, and having in consideration the NA and the EU ruleset the EU ruleset takes clear advantage here
Quoted from Kaneco
[…]
The ruleset is there purely for structural reasons. And if there’s a thing influenced by the ruleset it’s the whole infrastructure involved in a game (from servers to the streams, casts etc.) , not the team strategies. And from this point alone, our ruleset is vastly superior to the American’s. No need for external plugins or clients, compatibility with popular log parsers, easy comprehension of the games from a spectator pov, etc etc… I could go on all day (and maybe I will if I ever get my vanilla article done).
[…]
Sorry, but this is the most bullshit excuse ever!
Tournament Mode, Spectator HUD, Random Crits, Damage Spread, Fixed Spread, Whitelists, etc.
A plethora of features that were added to the game over time to make it more competitive. TF2 is not built as a competitive title, we will have to make and request changes.
Last edited by Admirable,
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 11 12 13 14 Next »
content rss