Forum
Golden Caps Feedback
Created 9th March 2012 @ 19:24
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 Next »
Quoted from Admirable
The American system does have a timelimit?
It’s winlimit 5 timelimit 60.Do they actually play the same map twice?
I thought they just played halves where you switch over midway through the map (after one team has 3 rounds or something?)The fact that there is an interval is awesome, allowing teams to reevaluate their approach.
So often in ESEA we see these amazing turn-arounds when teams can cool off for a few minutes and address any problems. Surely this is a deeper and more rewarding format?
correction, it does indeed have timelimit 60 (or so some little birdies across the ocean said when I asked for confirmation)
Nevertheless it’s still meh-ish, having an official spread out over 2 maps is a more fair approach (I’m aware they play 2x more games but the point stands, inb4ing in case someone decides this is a valid counter argument).
As for the point that it’s more exciting, for every good NA final there’s a good EU final, never found NA more exciting due to this (gunboats aka funboats are the only thing I really like in NA which we lack in EU)
Compared to time limit only it’s better, but time limit + GC, not so much. there’s a half time in what we have now (the time between the 2 maps) as well, anyway.
Can’t believe this has gone 4 pages, it’s such a non issue. There’ll be maybe 3 or 4 games out of the whole season where the golden cap rule ruins a good match. If the time limit was 0, it’s not suddenly going to make every golden cap go on for 30 minutes.
Option 6 Play GC timelimit 10 winlimit 1, if no one caps then restart the round and the first team to cap middle wins.
This way the victor is always decided through an attacking action rather than a defensive one. The teams get a chance to play out a full round, but failing that they have to roll the dice at middle :>
I see a problem with option 6 (gc 10 minutes, if neither team caps last, restart and first team to cap mid).
What if a team gets pushed back to last at the 5 min mark. With the current ruleset, they would have to take risks to push back to the middle. With option 6 they could turtle for 5 more minutes to get another chance of winning the midfight in the next round and therefore the golden cap. Does anyone else see a problem in this?
Maybe it would be better to restart the golden cap round after every 10 minutes if neither team capped the last point?
Last edited by CanFo,
In the following order
USA System
allow Draws
Golden Cap = 1 full round
Yes it may last a while, but in reality if you are at 3-3 or 4-4 after 30 min, it’s unlikley to last much more than 10 min, the currnt system just allows negative play.
Win mid, push and cap 4 and never attack last and turtle for 10 min, most maps played in etf2l (or 6v6 in general) it is almot mpossible to push out from last without 4 or 5 picks, so the team that wins mid has no need ot ever push last
In my opinion, the golden cap rule was a real progress in competitive TF2 at the time and i’m very thankful of etf2l for that rule. It was needed in LANs and online cups so we can have a winner on each map during the brackets. More predictable schedule, less drama situations etc.
However i think you should remove GC of the regular league matchs, when you think about it there’s no real point to have overtime in league matchs and no absolute need to have a winner in each map. Most leagues don’t have that kind of system, for exemple in football the leagues allow draw.
The counter exemple would be basket because in NBA there’s overtime/GC but there’s not really matter of comparison because GC win = win and there’s a load of match (82 matchs per season).
Keep GC for cups/playoffs and drop it for league matchs.
From the “team champion of GCs in Season 11” (although Quarantine can steal our title): current GC rule set is good.
1. You can get some points winning GCs during the season.
2. They take strongly 10 min (so it is good for russian teams).
3. You lost mid fight? Your problem! Go and try something! When we lost mid on granary – we took Spy and killed opponent’s medic with uber. Also one time we were holding opponent’s 2nd point – but enemy did pretty good push and won that GC… So all situations are possible!
Last edited by Galant,
Quoted from Monkeh
Play first to 5 instead of 30 minutes…. yes map may take a lot of time. Play twice a week 1 map only, home and away.
Maybe we should learn something from our Yankee-Doodle-Dandee cousins.
Was about to post pretty much exactly this, apart from I’d consider going up to first to 6. The 5 rounds, 2 halves format always feels so broken with the second half being nearly always shorter than the first. Genuinely close games tend to go close to the full stretch of an hour anyway (ie. the extra round doesn’t elongate the game that much for back-and-forth matches), whilst one-sided games go by with fast paced rounds so it doesn’t really drag it out that much more than it needs to.
This used to be the system in mpuk pickups (minus the half time), and the games always had a very good flow. It changed to reflect the typical 6v6 format when windifference cvar was used, but perhaps we should all switch back…
Also +1 ads point about half time. Whenever I’m playing a officials lately I just wish to god I could take a few minutes and go over some things. I end up having to do it while we’re holding a choke or something which has some pretty dire consequences.
Last edited by kaidus,
Let’s do it like in ice hockey and have a penalty shootout round. Attacker (roamer) 1v1 against goalkeeper (medic).
I like the idea of draws in the two map week, the solution to the problem of playoffs not being conducive to draw is to have all playoff rounds be best of three. This also gives us way more awesome games to play/watch, makes the winners more definitive and rewards teams that can play a variety of maps/gamestyles. If the length taken to play the playoff games is too much, reduce them to 20 minute no half games.
I dont think its time to change the complete map system, and if it was im sure loads of ppl would have to many suggestions.
This thread is about the golden cap system and we should keep it about that.
I liked the #pirateradio solution/Admirable’s option 6 where you first played a 10 min, or whatever, GC and if no one won that you go for a first to take mid.
Regardless of whether you think there should be a GC in a regular league game the GC rules themselves need to be considered for playoffs and the likes, so the question is still an important one. Personally, I prefer to have no draws in league maps neither.
Last edited by MR JOHNSON,
Out of interest, what is the point of the logic behind the Golden Cap scoring rules?
I mean the Golden Cap came in to make it a binary output for fixtures: you win or you lose. However, the admins chose to implement degrees of winning or losing with the Golden Cap scoring system.
The team that wins on a Golden Cap round still wins, whether it has taken 30 minutes or 40 minutes; I don’t see the distinction here. Why should they be punished for winning, and equally why should the losing team be rewarded for taking a long time to lose?
The rules begged to be ridiculed with the fact that Gravelpit is not subject to the Golden Cap scoring system… there seems to be no consistency of thought here.
I would suggest removing the Golden Cap scoring system, and simply having wins and loses. Your reward for drawing after 30 minutes should surely be that you are given a second chance to win it outright, not a free league point?
You either win or you lose, it has to be black and white. Discuss.
Last edited by Admirable,
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 Next »
content rss