Some high skilled players are giving their opinion on the two formats. They all answered the same question.
[center]Having now played 5on5, what conclusions can you draw from it?[/center]
drago : It felt hard to adapt to 5on5. It is not as crowded and heavily aim based, spam is even deadlier now. Even one guy on full can turn a game around, so you have to play really careful. Personally, I prefer 6on6, but I admit that 5on5 might be better for the future of E.T. The only thing I'd like to change is the mappool, I hate supply... please make it disappear !
lettu : I think 5on5 is vastly different from 6on6 ! To put it small, it is closer to freedom of 3on3 where you don't have to have this spam avoidance skill.
Other things are: rifle is a bit more poferful I think and game like I said is more about aim, talented aimers have more chances to make an impact. I do like it and can't see why anyone would hate 5on5 and love 6on6 or vice versa, its sensless whine to me.
Just something everyone has to adapt to and then decide which one they prefer more, at the moment I can't say which one I like more.
sNoOp : 5on5 has been tried two times already and failed both times so things should actually be clear about it. I've got the feeling that there is way less action in 5on5 than in 6on6 and 1-2 spam kills totally turn the game sometimes. I've got the feeling that it's also alot more difficult to make tactics especially for defense on some maps.
Also there has been much more rape from what I've experienced yet, the maps are over rather quick. And spam, which I really liked to be honest, has somehow been reduced very much except for rifle which seems to be over-powered and the game is WAY more aim based now.
FiLuS : My opinion is not really positive or negative. When I look back at the last months of 6v6 there were many troubles with getting 6th in many matches, tactics were more-less predictable and few teams were just beating everything in their sight.
But, 6v6 was here since RTCW and it has a big history. On the other hand, 5v5 brought some freshness into competition, tactics are more variable right now, there is no team dominating everything around anymore (wider circle of so called "top-teams"). But there are few thing that needs to be fixed (riflenades or power of spam in general).
I can't say I prefer one format. I like both and don't really mind which one is going to be main competition format in future.
Sample : I understand the reason why 5on5 is played now. Of course players want to practice this format since it's used at LAN. But I'm not going to take part of it, except for NC (laughs).
5on5 doesn't work at all. It simply lacks one player. Some stages can't be controlled anymore and because of that you can't play some maps anymore (for example bremen). Two kills means your defence is fucked no matter what. Only sp_delivery_te is better in this format (less spam).
To conclude, 5on5 is bullshit, hopefully it will be 6on6 after lan.
teKoa : As I haven't played 5on5 that much myself I am not sure about it yet.
I do think the rifle is too powerful now for 5on5, maybe making it a bit weaker would work but i'm not sure about this. I still prefer 6on6 because I have played it for a long time and everything seems to be balanced that way.
Butchji : This format isn't new though. It was tested in 2006, I prefer 6on6.
Iron : Haven't played it much since I'm not playing a lot nowadays. As I've said several times before, I really dislike 5o5 online. Eventhough I understand why they use it for lan. Can't figure anything that could improve it at the moment.
Ati_ : It doesn''t really matter for me or my preformance if it is 5on5 or 6on6. I enjoy playing both 5on5 and 6on6 and I don't think there needs to be any changes, removing pronedelay would be a good idea though.
fra : The only moments I remember myself playing 5on5 were during the 2008 SummerCup and to be honnest it sucked hard. I think it doesn't correspond to E.T's spirit.
StrAf : I prefer 5on5, it is more clear, it implies more aim and defences are not static anymore.
Crossfire : The 5on5 idea came to mind when thinking about how to run the Challenge LANs better, in our current location we're limited to running just 2 matches at a time for E.T if we have any other games because we only have 2 sets of 6 PC's.
For CIC7 we could (unconfirmed) have as many as 80 PC's which will all be set out in sets of 5 PC's, meaning we can put players from ALL games anywhere across the venue. From an administrative position this is 110% better than 6on6, particularly as we're expecting around 20 teams for the event for E.T.
As much as each of us are RTCW & ET purists at heart, the three of us (Tosspot, Adacore and Cash) debated out the pro's and con's of the switch and the con's from gameplay do not appear to have outweighed the pro's from an event perspective.
After coming to that conclusion, I ran the idea by a number of players both high and low skill before making the final decision and announcement. At the end of the day, if you dont like it your beef lies with me.
In hindsight now, having E.T sat next to a gigantic CoD tournament there's no doubting that this will prove to be a good decision from an event management perspective. If E.T falls behind schedule we can place teams anywhere to play. Look at the Intel 1 day Cup signups also with about 40 teams in each, I'd say the decision proved not too unpopular with the players though I've no doubt many of those people would rather 6on6 than 5on5 but "accept" 5on5.
Images by :phaloid
What do you think, crossfire ?
[center]Having now played 5on5, what conclusions can you draw from it?[/center]
drago : It felt hard to adapt to 5on5. It is not as crowded and heavily aim based, spam is even deadlier now. Even one guy on full can turn a game around, so you have to play really careful. Personally, I prefer 6on6, but I admit that 5on5 might be better for the future of E.T. The only thing I'd like to change is the mappool, I hate supply... please make it disappear !lettu : I think 5on5 is vastly different from 6on6 ! To put it small, it is closer to freedom of 3on3 where you don't have to have this spam avoidance skill.Other things are: rifle is a bit more poferful I think and game like I said is more about aim, talented aimers have more chances to make an impact. I do like it and can't see why anyone would hate 5on5 and love 6on6 or vice versa, its sensless whine to me.
Just something everyone has to adapt to and then decide which one they prefer more, at the moment I can't say which one I like more.
sNoOp : 5on5 has been tried two times already and failed both times so things should actually be clear about it. I've got the feeling that there is way less action in 5on5 than in 6on6 and 1-2 spam kills totally turn the game sometimes. I've got the feeling that it's also alot more difficult to make tactics especially for defense on some maps. Also there has been much more rape from what I've experienced yet, the maps are over rather quick. And spam, which I really liked to be honest, has somehow been reduced very much except for rifle which seems to be over-powered and the game is WAY more aim based now.
FiLuS : My opinion is not really positive or negative. When I look back at the last months of 6v6 there were many troubles with getting 6th in many matches, tactics were more-less predictable and few teams were just beating everything in their sight.But, 6v6 was here since RTCW and it has a big history. On the other hand, 5v5 brought some freshness into competition, tactics are more variable right now, there is no team dominating everything around anymore (wider circle of so called "top-teams"). But there are few thing that needs to be fixed (riflenades or power of spam in general).
I can't say I prefer one format. I like both and don't really mind which one is going to be main competition format in future.
Sample : I understand the reason why 5on5 is played now. Of course players want to practice this format since it's used at LAN. But I'm not going to take part of it, except for NC (laughs).5on5 doesn't work at all. It simply lacks one player. Some stages can't be controlled anymore and because of that you can't play some maps anymore (for example bremen). Two kills means your defence is fucked no matter what. Only sp_delivery_te is better in this format (less spam).
To conclude, 5on5 is bullshit, hopefully it will be 6on6 after lan.
teKoa : As I haven't played 5on5 that much myself I am not sure about it yet.I do think the rifle is too powerful now for 5on5, maybe making it a bit weaker would work but i'm not sure about this. I still prefer 6on6 because I have played it for a long time and everything seems to be balanced that way.
Butchji : This format isn't new though. It was tested in 2006, I prefer 6on6.Iron : Haven't played it much since I'm not playing a lot nowadays. As I've said several times before, I really dislike 5o5 online. Eventhough I understand why they use it for lan. Can't figure anything that could improve it at the moment.Ati_ : It doesn''t really matter for me or my preformance if it is 5on5 or 6on6. I enjoy playing both 5on5 and 6on6 and I don't think there needs to be any changes, removing pronedelay would be a good idea though.fra : The only moments I remember myself playing 5on5 were during the 2008 SummerCup and to be honnest it sucked hard. I think it doesn't correspond to E.T's spirit.StrAf : I prefer 5on5, it is more clear, it implies more aim and defences are not static anymore.Crossfire : The 5on5 idea came to mind when thinking about how to run the Challenge LANs better, in our current location we're limited to running just 2 matches at a time for E.T if we have any other games because we only have 2 sets of 6 PC's. For CIC7 we could (unconfirmed) have as many as 80 PC's which will all be set out in sets of 5 PC's, meaning we can put players from ALL games anywhere across the venue. From an administrative position this is 110% better than 6on6, particularly as we're expecting around 20 teams for the event for E.T.
As much as each of us are RTCW & ET purists at heart, the three of us (Tosspot, Adacore and Cash) debated out the pro's and con's of the switch and the con's from gameplay do not appear to have outweighed the pro's from an event perspective.
After coming to that conclusion, I ran the idea by a number of players both high and low skill before making the final decision and announcement. At the end of the day, if you dont like it your beef lies with me.
In hindsight now, having E.T sat next to a gigantic CoD tournament there's no doubting that this will prove to be a good decision from an event management perspective. If E.T falls behind schedule we can place teams anywhere to play. Look at the Intel 1 day Cup signups also with about 40 teams in each, I'd say the decision proved not too unpopular with the players though I've no doubt many of those people would rather 6on6 than 5on5 but "accept" 5on5.
Images by :
phaloidWhat do you think, crossfire ?
true
well, I know you'll answer something stupid since you have never made a serious reply on such things as far as i remember. so instead of writing something like "change something" again or "i dont care" please dont reply at all.
there a single offline event with a prize pool of like 1k for the first place, so why exactly do you want to change it now?
its always been 6on6, we already tried to change it to 5on5 a few years ago and it failed. big time.
forcing players to play it, because 2-3 people think itll be better for the "future" of a game that was released almost 7 years ago, sure was a great move
i totally understand lan logistics but its no reason to change online competition
!
You simply can't hold some stages of maps the same way as in 6on6.(Radar cp stage for example)
Spawntime is more crucial than ever, get a bad spawntime relative to enemy, and you will be in big trouble. In 6on6 this played a big part too, but it wasn't as huge as it is now.
+
I miss playing Fop :(
+999999999999999999999
Playing fop in 6on6 is a big different!
But tbh, if TosspoT say's cic8 will be 4on4 everyone will switch to 4on4
don't ask me what, but I'll eagerly watch the LAN games to see how it looks like.
personally I've played 5on5 kinda little
soon panzer and riflegrenades will be disabled or atleast limited because they cause too much spam for 5on5. after that it's pretty much an smg game, isn't that fucking awesome?
Actually in real life, democratic, i vote for someone who feels the same about how he should improve my country. Indeed, after my vote he can do whatever he wants but he probably wont last for long if he just do shit :D hopefully you get what i mean
DIS
SHIT
AGEN
Especially with random comments while u played 2 5v5's.
Ye, its harder to attack.
Ye, its harder to defend.
-------------------------------
Everything is harder, lets move back to 6v6 where there are more teammates to carry me.
more players, more kills, more tactics, more fun. Like snoop says, action is lowered in 5on5 and less entertainment for all.
5on5 should remain optional when both teams agree, never forced like right now.
Now everyone seems to forget that 5on5 already existed, players that decided to play 6on6.
lan boys= 5on5, rest of the community and vast majority of players= 6on6.
Will 5on5 teams get pissed with 6on6? dont think so, have 6on6 teams got pissed with 5on5, no doubt.
In the last days of RTCW on clanbase they also tryed 5on5 for the last cup, but that made it go away even faster.
I think it would be best if we go back to 6on6, OR stay with 5on5 but rethink some server settings, like the rifle doesn't make much sense in 5on5.
5 players - not anymore
I understand advantage of "easier lan'z", less people needed for teams, and so on, but as gameplay concerns, 6on6 > 5on5
it's not that bad, but it's missing alot
ET has over the years evolved so much in 6v6 - that it feels like rape when playing 5v5 for me.
6on6 is just way more fun to play, even though 5on5 isn't so horrible after all.
5on5 -> online, whats the reasoning? I quite enjoy both tbh, cept 5on5 makes some maps quite one sided.
It's made the game more challenging i agree however the new map pool will just make this a bit worse tbh.
Braundorf(main, base etc)/Frost(service) and Delivery are are rifle maps. This will be annoying but i guess we will see more rifles coming through.
Rifles will be on higher demand than ever before.
That format was already tested loads of times and never resulted.
I understand tosspot point about cic7, but online 5o5 just suck.
no need to get that aggressive btw
and to be honest i haven't seen a decent cup since cpc2
We are "forced" to 5on5 format in competitions, thats why we are moaning here.
Just with the quotes of the top players and with the comments here im glad im not the only one pissed with this 5on5 shit, lets hope killerboy for once listens to the community and brings 6on6 back.
how about you unite and don't sign up for the competitions. the leagues would lose players and that's most likely not what they want
They should think the damage they are doing to this game, even if 5on5 was ever succesfull it will never be as fun as 6on6 and we all know that.
All what we do against them will fuck this game so the only thing we can do is moan.
I blame the initial decision to go for 5on5 to benefit one short event
BUT there was no need to run NC in 6v6 mode (narional teams usually don't pracc that much or don't even pracc at all). Also during NC season there aren't many big cups (OC, ESL League, WL or anything else) soooo there aren't many clans praccing! After the LAN there will be no reason to play/still force 5v5 so what then? We will switch back to 6v6? We could just wait through those 2months and play 6v6 after that. There was no need to hurry and move everything to 5v5...
Also it just shows how small and dead scene is, one guy with his lan can completely change the major rules of the game we play(ed).
does not compute :) you meant 5o5?
BTW6on6 all the way!
5on5 PRO?
difficult to defend
nice spam action can turn a game
more aim action ( need more aim skills )
6on6 PRO?
zzZZzzzZzzz
5on5 CONTRA?
nothing
6on6 CONTRA?
TOOOO MANY ENEMY'S
BAAAAAAAAAAD
ALL THE GOOD SHOOTERS WHERE PLAYED AS 5on5
dont get a reason why esl and cb are moving back to the failed concept because of it
such a fucking failers makes me puke rly
ROFL, you can force people to play ET 4on4 using only pistols and you will have even more sign-ups because only nerd zombies left in ET. They will accept every modification you made, they just wanna play&play.
I like the novelty of it, it's something the game needs at a time when the game was losing players.
It's preferable for LAN.
It gives more freedom for individuals to move, and more individual pressure.
It's also an opportunity for new tactical styles of play to be implemented.
Furthermore, it allows us to use maps which were previously not ideal, and refresh the mappool.
I think that was the mappool on cc6 & I think most of the people would like to play those maps again on the upcoming event. The only map I personally think that could be good is frostbite.
make a fuckin POLL!
online: 6vs6
not that i care much cause i dont play et anymore -,-
Everybody whining about rifle and fop, dont really get it.
In my opinion rifle is good only if you are a really good and clever player, else its useless. Same goes to fop, use it with brain.
You either have something straight out all the way or you don't have it all. By the way, why hasn't anyone created a particular site that handles only 6 on 6 , why even attempt to sway the change to how it was, since its already been decided. Take matters into your own hands and do not let others dictate to you what you feel has no place in your choice of gaming.
you might think that creating a new league is easy and you can run things your own way but that's only for fools to think, in reality you have to gather everyone that's already used to something else and you will still have the split in the community
the only thing that could be done atm to "take matters into your own hands" is that everyone that wants to continue playing 6on6 boycotts the lan and I think that's unlikely to happen
The back end of organizing such a task is extremely time and money consuming, but that does not mean it cannot be done. Sure, i myself understand and appreciate the 6 on 6 aspect of et gaming, i myself find it far more visually stimulating watching 6 on 6 rather than 5 on 5. But at the end of the day, if there are 100 people who wish to be a part of a 6 on 6 then i suggest you all get together and speak amongst yourselfs and get yourselfs organized.
It is very obvious that cf has opted for 5 on 5 for various reasons, by trying to sway that choice in another direction will only lead to bitterness and insults. Again, i urge people to do something positive rather than spending time posting. create your own org that will cater for players who wish to take part in 6 on 6.
My opinion is that a 6 on 6 will go far further as a separate entity and might just motivate other mgo's to take up sponsoring teams again. I am not suggesting that mgo's have stopped doing so due to the 5 on 5 rule, but lets face it, a 6 on 6 is far more eye pleasing as most old schoolers and mid schoolers (if i may use that term) have trained and fought along those guidelines, therefore its natural to see some big names becoming active in the 6 on 6 scene again.
"every action has an equal and opposite reaction"
I though this topic on crossfire will have many more 5on5 supporters (with all the lan boys registered), I was wrong.
Many other active players from 6on6 are not even registered in this grounds and still this topic and its comments speak for himself.
Players want 6on6 and thats cristal clear here.
It's not that 6on6 teams and players have to leave and make something to survive, is that admins, crossfire, esl and cb have to realise this and make something about it.
A lan changed the format of an online game, we can discuss on who is to blame, but most of us will agree that a lan for a minority of players can never be the leading way for an online game.
I understand how frustrating this can be and obviously how non productive according to the various posts regarding the change from 5n5 to 6n6. However, as you pointed out and sadly the responses gathered do need some sort of rational thinking. Crossfire has opted to use 5 on 5 for various financial and logistical reasons, therefore that only leaves one avenue for whoever wishes to continue a 6 on 6. That avenue would be to build a community as a separate entity who will only address the 6 on 6 aspect of pro gaming for who ever wishes to do so. This does not necessarily mean that you would distance yourself from cf, but it would definitely give a boost to those who see a 6on6 as a far more and obvious format to the competitive side of ET. A simple move and although i am not familiar with how this community operates, i would suggest opening a thread that is targeted directly to the 6 on 6 players making sure the post gives sufficient links to what a person is to click to be taken directly to either irc channels, simple website and if the human resources are available a modest site that handles only the 6 on 6. In any case, i am sure you can understand how simple or difficult this can be depending on the people who do actually want a 6 on 6 and how far they are willing to support it.
If have read mixed feelings regarding cb, esl rules and when and to who the applied. I have nothing against those organizations, but i somehow feel a favoritism and non biased on applying rules across the board would have been far more productive rather than counterproductive.
I too have seen the same thing, although i tend to stay in the background of things i decided to voice my thoughts towards you, on the off chance some of the more high profiled players perhaps voiced their opinion on this matter too. But lets not forget, that this game is somewhat less attractive to organizations simply because its out lived its life and there is no new support either on a marketing level or from a game publishes point of view. As for the nail in the coffin, console gaming is the next generation for gaming on a higher level involving companies that set a budget for teams in excess of 50K per annum.
However, i do point out, that if this is not taken or attempted to be taken to the next level by organizations such as crossfire to elevate the quality of gaming, then i sadly only see that its demise is inevitable.
If this is true, that over 80% of the players wish to continue with 6 on 6 then i guess the lack of 6 on 6 support by the hardcore and high profile or active players should have voiced their opinion instead of taking a back seat.
Do you now see how serious people are when it comes to online gaming, the lack of support through this thread by such high profiled people or even by simple casual gamers is the result of the crossfire community often attacking people who wish to simply state their position on any matter. Frequent abuse and insults has resulted in a decline of posts with constructive points let alone voicing their opinion on a matter that they do not have any direct action to but do use ettv to spectate matches being played. I do feel this has indirectly contributed to organization that chose to stay away from sponsoring teams.
Lets not forget, that when a team is taken up, they tend to feel that they are gaming on a level similar to Quakecon when infact the reality of the situation is somewhat disturbing when one speaks to these so called high profiled teams. I guess the difference is that european teams fail to understand the fundamentals of professional gaming and what sacrifices that team and the organization must do before one is to secure a steady income and several contracts promoting gaming goods. This would also require that the lan organization has the ability to mass expose the lan to the world gaming community. Having said those simple points, the viewer begins to understand that a chain is as strong as its weakest link.
http://clanbase.ggl.com/rating.php?lid=984&hyb=N&num=108&start=0
That ladder was the most popular 3 months ago, and you will play 6on6 easy with many teams, nowadays if you find more than 4 teams to play 6on6 feel lucky.
And although you see more than 100 teams, actually playing you can't count more than 20.
Watch this http://www.esl.eu/eu/et/6on6/ladder/
It was never really popular but at least you had 20 active teams, now is completely dead.
5on5 was the start of the end of RTCW. We had not arrived to that point here yet with ET but now they made it possible. Ladders 5on5 + 6on6 are dead, even the recently started ESL 5on5
http://www.esl.eu/eu/et/5on5/ladder/
No need to comment on 6on6 cups, cause you simply wont find them.
So the option you have is to play 5on5 more or less happy or to leave the game.
They made the game for a minority and this is the result.
No individual here has nothing to do vs CB or ESL or Crossfire.
After this topic was opened you will see this http://www.crossfire.nu/?x=journal&mode=item&id=90948
speaking about rifle overpowered, fields ops charge bar, bremen adapted for 5on5.
No one ever corrected the rifle bug for etpro in 3 years and now they are planning to do all this, unnecesary for 6on6. Killerboy's ego will arrive to the point where he kills the game, same for the rest of admins that follow him.
In a few months, my comments and all the ones in favour of 6on6 will make more sense when they realise what they did to a game that was more than alive. Is like if we were demanding something strange when we are just saying we like this game, please let us play as we want.
Too much time wasted in a topic where admins wont even care to speak, they know what the reaction will be and thats why they simply avoid it.
BTW nice speaking with someone with brain in this flaming grounds.
Just a humble idea to those who write news articles within this community.
Why not interview 5 high profiled teams and 5 middle class teams and even 5 lower class teams. Ask the players what their opinion is on this matter regarding changing from 6 on 6 to 5 on 5. I assure you what the outcome of such a thread would be most interesting on the part of what question's would be asked and the individual players responses. Obviously the particular thread would need to be heavily moderated as to kill reply's such as (x player sucks cocks his not high+ his low+) etc...etc...
Lets face it, writing news articles is a very demanding job, well that applies to news writers who are currently employed by high profiled gaming sites. Perhaps news article writers from within this community should seek out and understand the term "journalism". Quality always out weighs Quantity.
The point of such news is to understand how some of these higher profiled players think and rationalize such a game. Many would be surprised as to the answer's they would present to the general public. I, myself, would definitely look forward to such a thread, instead of the monotone question, reply from a single article writer to a group of players not numbering over 4-5.
Crossfire administrators certainly have their hands full on this one, they also do have the opportunity to turn what may seem as a negative issue into a positive and constructive re establishment of the et community within the crossfire community. Its all about perception and how one see's the future and at what level they could ascend to.
5on5 needs a proper global config imo and needs a whole lot of new maps.
I like that its more aim-based and less spam although the rifle does more damage. Personally i think it would be nice to tweak damage & power of the weapons or even remove the riflenades but that would upset alot of people.
6on6 will come back I think because its how things have been done for years & how people prefer to play. Why change something that isn't broke?
more effort should be made in trying to grow & improve the community rather than changing a constant of the game.
but really do whatever people will adjust. or maybe the game will die. who knows :D
6v6 > 3v3 & 2v2,> resto es mierda.
Its like a car and a motor..
If you have a car and you remove 2 wheels without adjusting the car, the car is shit?
But if you adjust the car so that it would work with 2 wheels, you get a great new vehicle?
Imo same thing with this 5v5/6v6
This has actually added some interest to tactics and the game style that you play since now people need to adapt. It will open the discussion around the configs and the way the game is played, kinda back to how it was in the good old days.
@ Tosspot, something interesting might be to gather a group of people at lan and have a discussion on the format of the game, the configs and possible ways to improve it on a live cast at the lan, get your own debate show going for 30 minutes or so?
:DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Clearly it is favored atm, but that to me is merely due to it being familiar and it's what ppl are accustomed with and have adapted their playstyle to.
Personally i don't have that big of a preference, both formats have their advantages.
But i do think 5o5 is a bit more brain-oriented, as stated by many ppl who support 6o6, in 5o5 a single mistake causes much greater upset as opposed to 6o6. Same goes for any multi man take down or spawnkilling for full spawn. Thus i'd say 5o5 requires more gamesense, to not make these mistakes, and to make sure these things don't happen.
Also 5on5 favores more consistant players, as ppl who have high extremities skillwise are going to weight the team down more; in 6o6 it was perfectly possible, for example, to hold the tank on goldrush with 5 ppl, mines, nade spam etc, and have 1 maybe awesome aimer or panzer ninja annoying the opponent and disrupting their attack. However in 5o5, one such rambo as to call it, would immediately disadvantage his team for their is more risk attached to his playing style, him missing a spawn or not getting the desired effect on his ramboness, involves putting his team a man down who is essential seeing the reduced mines in this format (decreasing for example rifle splash/nade splash could even increase this effect further).
An other maybe not as convincing argument for 5o5 is the mere fact it's easier to get players together. Sure this differs based on different situations, but it's a clear fact it's easier getting 5 ppl together than getting 6! And to me personally this argument weighs heavy.
You could also go into depth about the arguments given here can also be turned around as to be arguments used to plea the case of 6o6 (5 players holding tank and 1 rambo is better etc). But this is merely a case as to which side of an argument do you give more value...
Would have wanted to write a column about this issue, but don't have time as i've got an exam monday, and a paper due friday. :(
LoLz
oh wait
5v5 ftw
Perhaps new map designs to address the individual classes would solve that problem. We have often and become obviously bored seeing a single engineer with a rifle grenade bounce his shots only to kill 3 attackers or defenders. Considering the small tight maps, were it did become as entertaining as monochrome screen. So i guess a redesigning of maps would obviously change the results and close the gap between teams. Lets face it, you have players that have played the same maps for over 2 or 3 years and know exactly what to use and when. Given a complete new map change from a design point would seriously alter all the current prediction between teams and perhaps give that vitamin boost to a community that obviously is need of one.
The 64k question is, who is able to do the designing and which community would support such a radical move involving map playing.
Evidently, no-one..!
No one corrected the bug for rifle nade or the stats bug at etpro for years, we dont have a decent anti cheat system and we get have 1 or 2 new maps since 2007.
And the only thing we had for sure, was a decent and well though 6on6 gameplay system and instead of working in what it was really needed (anti cheat or new maps) they decide to ruin this.
I was also under the impression that such a thread was to be heavily filtered as to keep the level at higher standard than the rantings of a 5 year old drinking endless amounts of Red Bull. Sadly....the thread has deteriorated into nothing more than complete waste of my time and post. I am still mystified as to how and to what level this community actually believes it can project itself. Perhaps i was given false impressions that there is a serious side to this community. I guess i was wrong, although i was told to keep an open mind. Those who do know me know me well enough that i think way beyond the box.
1) The owner or owners / moderator or moderators have no inclination of how such a site should be either filtered or seperated from the rantings of over excited teens who have nothing more to do than simply post idiotic and at times abusive posts to the point were people like myself red flag such sites as complete irrelevant to gaming with a *re-visit in 12 months stamp across the paper work. Is it so hard to moderate your community ? I somehow do not think so.
2) Sadly the second almost overlaps the first. Anyone would have seen and by know would have noticed that if the community truly wanted the organizer of crossfire to raise the level of lans, then a re-structuring of the competitive side to gaming would be a must. If the organization was truly on such a professional level of gaming then perhaps crossfire should have set a side a budget and employed a professional map creator for the obvious, to re-designing the map/s. Sounds simple enough to achieve right..? , Wrong...Why....Simply because its purely a fun issue and every attempt to act as if its a professional gaming community is as close to reality as me posting this from the ISS.
Thread in qustion as to the level of input from its so called community...i will refrain from posting my true thoughts as it will obviosly result in a ban of some sort. But for your entertainment, enjoy the professional side of Crossfire
http://www.crossfire.nu/?x=news&mode=item&id=5359
In closing, "calaverax" , i do see your frustration simply because you enjoy the game and care for it. In my experience, when confronted with such a dilemma, i simply move on to more professional community's who do not tolerate this behavior. By the term tolerate, i am referring to the fact that most are either in game studios as intern's or they simply apply both online game play to real life scenario adaptation to particular games purely for obtaining the learning experience. So when the day arrives and they need to submit a resume to a game studio, its always accompanied with a dvd showing a modded version of game. I have been scouting the site for the past six months trying to find a descent thread to interact with but sadly out of the hundreds per month only about 2 or 3 caught my attention. The rest were simply a waste of bandwidth, or perhaps as i often have seen and shown above with the link. A good thread is totally derailed either by intention or by simple stupidity and due to the lack of moderation, therefore the thread deteriorates into a racist, verbally abusive and ethnic slur. It seem that this method of posting here is accepted and as such is worth its virtual weight in gold. Meaning 0
maybe it would be better, if there would be a WORKING anticheat instead of modifying the number of players
Only 6on6 is ET, thats a reason for me, to play ET not other games.
But I think ppl got used to 6on6 after 9 years, so hard to change =)
the entire balance of the game changes and its simply not as fun as 6v6
hell yeah, back to massive infightproning 8D
5on5 however opens up changes, new tactics, not as many deffense domination stages. Of course there are maps that suffers from one less, but i have the hope that they can now be more easily replaced!
You are adapting this game for a minority going to a lan and this are the results.
Once more GTFO with 5on5.