It was three years ago that the Crossfire Prizefight Challenge moved to Enschede for the first time. On the wings of the fresh breeze that was Enemy Territory being played at shgOpen, the second Crossfire event reached higher numbers of attendees than ever before. Three years later, a lot of things seem very familiar. In fact, three players who came first at CPC2 now came second with their team at CIC7. If not for Night having had exams back then, the same would have been the case for recent weekend's winning team Dignitas. It seemed a little like Bill Murray waking up to the same old tune from his alarm clock every day - except that everybody loved the way in which it repeated itself roughly every six months. The one major difference though was that the number of players went down by one - after Quakecon and PGA, Crossfire decided to go for 5on5 this time.
Plenty of articles, columns and comments have been written about the 5on5 debate, ever since it all surfaced as a possible option to make ET more accessible to the public and event organizers. That was four years ago, and it doesn't require a very keen eye to see that the number of players did not have any effect at all. shgOpen picked it once and never again, but it could not have done so anyway because it did not take place anymore after 2007. Quakecon chose 5on5 for logistics and picked other games afterwards, which is not surprising for a trade show of the newest id software games. The only event that stuck has been and probably will always be a community event. Because it wants to cater to CoD as well and for simple reasons of space and logistics, CIC7 chose ET to be played by just 5 players.
Since leagues were considering themselves caught in the middle of a fight between two rivaling team sizes, ESL's and CB's highest admins decided to take a stand and make it 5on5 once and for all, so the community would not be split.
Arguments for and against 5on5 are countless in numbers, they range from necessary restrictions to the destruction of established tactics and teams. Some maps are deemed unplayable with only five players while more than a few praise the newfound quality of gameplay that comes with removing one player. Surely the most vocal of them will not hesitate to cite CIC7 situations and compare them to past events to show the failures or the success of the 5on5 model.
Essentially though, all arguments are pointless. Teams that existed for the LAN will split up because there is little that keeps them going. New teams will form, old players will return no matter what the team size may be. The whole debate is filled with an importance it doesn't posess. When players go to Enschede they want to have a good tournament, but it is about so much more than simple winnings and who gets most frags. The combined entrance fee is higher than the overall prize money, but noone cares because all they expect a weekend filled with Enemy Territory and its community, and that is exactly what they get.
Crossfire has good reasons to play 5on5 at its event, but there are also good reasons to play 6on6 when you're not on a LAN event. There is no reason to force a certain way of playing onto the community, to close ladders and restrict the ways in which ET is played competitively. Enemy Territory has not made its way to the center of electronic sports, but people are still having fun playing it. If some of them prefer 6on6, do not take that away from them. If 5on5 is the only option for your community event to still be held, swallow the pill even if it is a little bitter. The differences are not as big as they are made out to be. Be aware of how valuable it is to play a game that is not influenced by commercial interests in any way - don't screw that up by not being ready to compromise every once and again.
Plenty of articles, columns and comments have been written about the 5on5 debate, ever since it all surfaced as a possible option to make ET more accessible to the public and event organizers. That was four years ago, and it doesn't require a very keen eye to see that the number of players did not have any effect at all. shgOpen picked it once and never again, but it could not have done so anyway because it did not take place anymore after 2007. Quakecon chose 5on5 for logistics and picked other games afterwards, which is not surprising for a trade show of the newest id software games. The only event that stuck has been and probably will always be a community event. Because it wants to cater to CoD as well and for simple reasons of space and logistics, CIC7 chose ET to be played by just 5 players.
Since leagues were considering themselves caught in the middle of a fight between two rivaling team sizes, ESL's and CB's highest admins decided to take a stand and make it 5on5 once and for all, so the community would not be split.
Arguments for and against 5on5 are countless in numbers, they range from necessary restrictions to the destruction of established tactics and teams. Some maps are deemed unplayable with only five players while more than a few praise the newfound quality of gameplay that comes with removing one player. Surely the most vocal of them will not hesitate to cite CIC7 situations and compare them to past events to show the failures or the success of the 5on5 model.
Essentially though, all arguments are pointless. Teams that existed for the LAN will split up because there is little that keeps them going. New teams will form, old players will return no matter what the team size may be. The whole debate is filled with an importance it doesn't posess. When players go to Enschede they want to have a good tournament, but it is about so much more than simple winnings and who gets most frags. The combined entrance fee is higher than the overall prize money, but noone cares because all they expect a weekend filled with Enemy Territory and its community, and that is exactly what they get.
Crossfire has good reasons to play 5on5 at its event, but there are also good reasons to play 6on6 when you're not on a LAN event. There is no reason to force a certain way of playing onto the community, to close ladders and restrict the ways in which ET is played competitively. Enemy Territory has not made its way to the center of electronic sports, but people are still having fun playing it. If some of them prefer 6on6, do not take that away from them. If 5on5 is the only option for your community event to still be held, swallow the pill even if it is a little bitter. The differences are not as big as they are made out to be. Be aware of how valuable it is to play a game that is not influenced by commercial interests in any way - don't screw that up by not being ready to compromise every once and again.
its a shame though that the teams dont stick together after LAN... i guess really the question is what is there left do in ET ? what keeps people playing ?
CB = 5on5, no prizes
ESL = 5on5, fake prizes
what might keep people playing is 6on6
soo you're proposing a 6on6 cup? or ladder ?
a cup is do-able if someone wants to organise it, and would be good to get some prizes together (maybe make teams enter a small fee to play and use that to get some prize) but a ladder would be hard
i enjoyed coming to LAN meeting the people of the community - i just wonder how 'ET' based its gonna be in the future, the quakelive thing was good but it hardly binds crossfire together :(
CC1 100% 3
CC2 100% 10
CC3 100% 15
CC4 100% 18
CC5 50% 50% 56
CC6 100% 38
CC7 49% 49% 2% 150
CC8 33% 33% 33% 323
CC9 33% 33% 33% 432
CC10 25% 25% 25% 25% >9000
Ofcourse in % ET gets less attention but overal alot more people are reached wich possibly might result in a growing playerbase and other (big) organisations picking up the game. Ofcourse ET is fun fun fun but what keeps most people going is competition, challenges and prizes.
e: diagram is fucking up but you know what I mean.
to follow your ideas: when it comes to regulary online competitions with high prize money only ESL is the feature! but i think too many people didn't get the point yet. the ET community is always complaining about a terrible website (strange argument, esl page has improved so much), money that is waiting for some months (sorry, but you you know that esl pays it and how long have you waited for your clanbase money/are you sill waiting?). on the other side there are other "small games" which are really thankful for getting something like the EMS from ESL. when you are from turtle (esl) and should decide which game gets more prize money, how would you decide? i would give it to a game / community which is thankful for my leagues. you all should think about this please..
so, how much profit left after travel expenses and stuff from that 300e you got for second place at cic7? good business?
it's not exactly for the money, but a free weekend in holland is pretty sweet. don't get that with cb
Competition = 5on5
If people consider 6on6 to be THAT much more fun than 5on5 and prefer to play it instead of a more LAN friendly format then please make appointments with other players that like it more aswel and play with them but leave 5on5 alone. The benefits aren't really visible now but with some effort from people with influence it will in a few months or a year.
But it is also great with 5on5.
and it would also be great with 7on7 8on8 4on4 3on3 2on2 1on1
as long as it is ET.
u see how hard it is to find a good 6o6? i dunno how it actually is to find 5o5 but i guess bit more easier nowadays.
new games are coming, u cant stop it. so care if it is 5o5 or 6o6.
I love this game and i think that it doesnt matter in which format we play it, because it always stays ET.
:]
you are a woman. they are always right :) learned this rule !!
awesome stuff :)
not one team in the top 3 was actively playing together before the lan was announced, so saying your league would fall apart next lan is comeplete bullshit
Ow btw is the field ops class little dieing in 5v5?