Maybe we should. Since the amount of proposed changes has dramatically increased over the last few weeks, probably because of the iron will to keep ET entertaining and alive in the face of many teams quitting, and many people feel the urge to discuss these issues, it is definitely worth a column.
There are some basic suggestions that have been made, I will name them and try to shed light on advantages and disadvantages. I will ask questions without answering them directly so that they can be discussed afterwards. After that, I'm going to tell you about a cup that tries to test some of these new configuration elements and is hosted by the ESL.
The 5on5 argument
That was probably the most dominant one. There are obvious advantages - fewer computers required for LAN gaming, less players roaming the maps (means less spam). It makes traditional defenses that use 3 teams consisting of 2 players each harder to set up, which makes defending less easy, especially on maps like oasis. There are disadvantages as well: Traditional 6on6 teams would be practically ripped apart because they would need to exclude one player and make new tactics.
The 5on5 proposal was the starting point which lead to a number of things that should be included as well but do not necessarily require reducing the team size:
Fewer land mines
While 3on3 players have never had the opportunity to use land mines, in 6on6 it is obviously seen as a tactical element that requires no skill or makes conversions of RTCW maps unusable for ET. Suggestions range from no land mines to up to three - main argument is that it would lead to more crossfire being used in the defense. The question is if it does not weaken the defense way too much?
The soldier - good, bad, ugly?
Concerning the soldier, there are a number of possibilites. While the flame thrower is hardly used anyway, many have said it would be good to remove mortar and mg42. The mortar has been weakened already in the last config by decreasing the firing rate. People who only want the Panzerfaust to remain obviously think of RTCW, where there was no mortar or mg. Apart from sw_goldrush (in the beginning) and sw_oasis (to defend the guns after the dynamite has been planted), the mortar is used on very few competition maps, so one should consider whether it is really worth removing it.
SMG-fanatics have demanded that all heavy weapons should be removed - wouldn't that be too much like any other semi-realistic shooter?
Watch out, rifle-nade incoming!
Now, the rifle...hated by many RTCW old-schoolers, loved by ET-players and it is generally accepted that you need some skill to be a useful rifle engineer. However, that has not stopped players from wanting it to be removed - are RTCW guys knocking on ET's doors there or is the rifle too strong?
Miscellaneous stuff
Just some keywords you should take into account as well:
wolfrof?
damagefalloff?
New maps?
Stronger sniper?
Less grenades?
-----------------------------------------------------------
Before you start discussing: It is always hard to talk about such things without knowing their real effect. That is why the ESL has decided to host a test cup, using a number of changes to the config, which can be downloaded here:
Changes:
- Heavyweapon restriction
- Mortar, MG and Flamer disabled
- Mines limited to 3.
- Map River with Spawntime 30/15 added
- Map Rommel_GA added
- Map sw_goldrush with moverscale 1.5
Cup infos:
3-Days-Left #5on5.et
4 x 4 (or 3 x 4) teams
Playoffs: Single elemination (no brackets)
Maps (updated): sw goldrush, braundorf b4, radar, supplydepot2, sw oasis
Round 1: sw goldrush, braundorf b4
Round 2: braundorf b4, radar
Round 3: radar, sw oasis
Round 4: sw oasis, supplydepot2
Round 5: supplydepot2, sw goldrush
IRC, website and other information will be added (as soon as chosen tells me about them).
Edit:
Playing a show match was brought up, maybe this is an opportunity too?
Now start the whining, bitching, screaming and moanin about all you want to change!
There are some basic suggestions that have been made, I will name them and try to shed light on advantages and disadvantages. I will ask questions without answering them directly so that they can be discussed afterwards. After that, I'm going to tell you about a cup that tries to test some of these new configuration elements and is hosted by the ESL.
The 5on5 argument
That was probably the most dominant one. There are obvious advantages - fewer computers required for LAN gaming, less players roaming the maps (means less spam). It makes traditional defenses that use 3 teams consisting of 2 players each harder to set up, which makes defending less easy, especially on maps like oasis. There are disadvantages as well: Traditional 6on6 teams would be practically ripped apart because they would need to exclude one player and make new tactics.
The 5on5 proposal was the starting point which lead to a number of things that should be included as well but do not necessarily require reducing the team size:
Fewer land mines
While 3on3 players have never had the opportunity to use land mines, in 6on6 it is obviously seen as a tactical element that requires no skill or makes conversions of RTCW maps unusable for ET. Suggestions range from no land mines to up to three - main argument is that it would lead to more crossfire being used in the defense. The question is if it does not weaken the defense way too much?
The soldier - good, bad, ugly?
Concerning the soldier, there are a number of possibilites. While the flame thrower is hardly used anyway, many have said it would be good to remove mortar and mg42. The mortar has been weakened already in the last config by decreasing the firing rate. People who only want the Panzerfaust to remain obviously think of RTCW, where there was no mortar or mg. Apart from sw_goldrush (in the beginning) and sw_oasis (to defend the guns after the dynamite has been planted), the mortar is used on very few competition maps, so one should consider whether it is really worth removing it.
SMG-fanatics have demanded that all heavy weapons should be removed - wouldn't that be too much like any other semi-realistic shooter?
Watch out, rifle-nade incoming!
Now, the rifle...hated by many RTCW old-schoolers, loved by ET-players and it is generally accepted that you need some skill to be a useful rifle engineer. However, that has not stopped players from wanting it to be removed - are RTCW guys knocking on ET's doors there or is the rifle too strong?
Miscellaneous stuff
Just some keywords you should take into account as well:
wolfrof?
damagefalloff?
New maps?
Stronger sniper?
Less grenades?
-----------------------------------------------------------
Before you start discussing: It is always hard to talk about such things without knowing their real effect. That is why the ESL has decided to host a test cup, using a number of changes to the config, which can be downloaded here:
Changes:
- Heavyweapon restriction
- Mortar, MG and Flamer disabled
- Mines limited to 3.
- Map River with Spawntime 30/15 added
- Map Rommel_GA added
- Map sw_goldrush with moverscale 1.5
Cup infos:
3-Days-Left #5on5.et
4 x 4 (or 3 x 4) teams
Playoffs: Single elemination (no brackets)
Maps (updated): sw goldrush, braundorf b4, radar, supplydepot2, sw oasis
Round 1: sw goldrush, braundorf b4
Round 2: braundorf b4, radar
Round 3: radar, sw oasis
Round 4: sw oasis, supplydepot2
Round 5: supplydepot2, sw goldrush
IRC, website and other information will be added (as soon as chosen tells me about them).
Edit:
Playing a show match was brought up, maybe this is an opportunity too?
Now start the whining, bitching, screaming and moanin about all you want to change!
