ESOCommunity

Aight so here's an idea for a possible TR tourney. Gimme your thoughts and critiques.

-Played on the TR patch.
-Round Robin Tourney structure, NOT elimination.
-3 person teams, 4 teams total.
-Team has combined Overall ELO of approx 6500.
-Each team fights an opposing team a total of 3 times, with teams playing a total of 12 games.
-All 14 civs in rotation, but each civ can only be played 3 times total, across all 3 players of the team, for the entirety of the tourney. So for example, one team could have each player play France in one game, but then for the rest of the tourney, they would not be able to use France again, even vs different teams.
-Team gets a total combined pool of 720 Home city cards to use over the course of 12 games. That averages down to 20 cards per player per game. How you divide the cards among players is entirely up to the team, and is not set in stone until ingame and the player actually chooses their deck.

All the games would be fought on a new map which would split the 3 players apart evenly, so each player would essentially be playing ina different arena, heads up vs their opponent.
Conceptual map design: http://imgur.com/a/s0J1q
Red circles = TCs.
Blue Squares = Native posts.
Green Line = No team doubling past this point. (Team doubling is only allowed defensively)

Round Structure:

Game 1:
Team X chooses where each of the 3 players start.
Team Y gets to respond and place all three players after Team X chooses.
Team Y then picks all 3 civs.
Team X gets to respond and picks all 3 civs.

Game 2:
Team Y placement
Team X picks placement
Team X picks civs
Team Y picks civs

Game 3:
Team X placement
Team Y picks placement
Team Y picks civs
Team X picks civs

ETC.
By the end of the tourney, each team will have 2 slightly advantageous rounds, and 2 slightly disadvantageous rounds.

Still need to give this some thought, but perhaps implement a handicap system where the winning team is subtracted 3 cards from total card pool, and the losing team is given 3 cards to their card pool.

too complex

Yeah I think much too complex and limits the amount of innovation and creativity players can have.

I like it except for the card limit.

i like it except for the treaty part. make it sup.

Now that I think about it more I think the idea of teams having limited resources (cards, Civs) and players having to decide how to distribute these among players and games is pretty cool. I think an avg of 20 cards per game is way too low tho. Maybe 23 cards per game.

Also the doubling line seems confusing to me. Either allow it or don't imo.

AOEisLOVE_AOEisLIFE wrote:i like it except for the treaty part. make it sup.

those are the kind of comments why esoc should have a downvote button.

dicktator_ wrote:Now that I think about it more I think the idea of teams having limited resources (cards, Civs) and players having to decide how to distribute these among players and games is pretty cool. I think an avg of 20 cards per game is way too low tho. Maybe 23 cards per game.

Also the doubling line seems confusing to me. Either allow it or don't imo.

the 20 card avg was arbitrary and I agree that 23 avg sounds much better.

A more simplified rule would be one single line at HM. The idea was to prevent cheesy strats and doubling, while still allowing for bases to be defended so games aren't instantly over due to skill gaps. But perhaps the rule is misguided. If the green line or equivalent is scratched, then picking TC placement could be scratched too, since MUs aren't guaranteed anymore. That's not a bad thing.

I don't understand the prohibition on "doubling". Doesn't banning teamwork kind of defeat the point of playing a team game? How would this rule even be enforced (would players be DQ'd if they helped their teammates outside of the mandated zone)? It just seems like a stupid rule all around TBH. If someone is skilled enough to hold down their main fight with less than full pop, why shouldn't they be able to help out their ally?

Papist wrote:I don't understand the prohibition on "doubling". Doesn't banning teamwork kind of defeat the point of playing a team game? How would this rule even be enforced (would players be DQ'd if they helped their teammates outside of the mandated zone)? It just seems like a stupid rule all around TBH. If someone is skilled enough to hold down their main fight with less than full pop, why shouldn't they be able to help out their ally?

Yeah the placement picking and the doubling line is trashed, silly idea

I like this idea. The HC cards could be a pretty cool ideas and would create more diverse gameplay as it limits some options. I believe this would make civs that need more cards to boom however at a disadvantage, such as Dutch.

Papist wrote:I don't understand the prohibition on "doubling". Doesn't banning teamwork kind of defeat the point of playing a team game? How would this rule even be enforced (would players be DQ'd if they helped their teammates outside of the mandated zone)? It just seems like a stupid rule all around TBH. If someone is skilled enough to hold down their main fight with less than full pop, why shouldn't they be able to help out their ally?

There is no honor if you double an opponent. Hell, some opponents might argue that moving your camera away from your heads up fight is a breach of the honor codex already!

Gichtenlord wrote:

Papist wrote:I don't understand the prohibition on "doubling". Doesn't banning teamwork kind of defeat the point of playing a team game? How would this rule even be enforced (would players be DQ'd if they helped their teammates outside of the mandated zone)? It just seems like a stupid rule all around TBH. If someone is skilled enough to hold down their main fight with less than full pop, why shouldn't they be able to help out their ally?

There is no honor if you double an opponent. Hell, some opponents might argue that moving your camera away from your heads up fight is a breach of the honor codex already!

It's borderline cheating tbh. Doubling/splitting that is.

Moving screen away is a much lesser offense. Idk what you're on about. Probably only worth a pest and move on.

Wtf how do I only notice this thread now.
Well the idea seems nice, I'm not too sure what to think about the card limit.
Also yeah, why make it a team game when doubling is prohibited anyways xd

I also like the idea of forcing players to play more than 3 civs or something, there are way too many players who are good with max 1-2 civs though :/

Lukas_L99 wrote:Wtf how do I only notice this thread now.
Well the idea seems nice, I'm not too sure what to think about the card limit.
Also yeah, why make it a team game when doubling is prohibited anyways xd

I also like the idea of forcing players to play more than 3 civs or something, there are way too many players who are good with max 1-2 civs though :/

Completely agree. There's no incentive to get good at multiple civs. So many players just play port and france. Both really solid civs, kind of all rounders. Would love to see more diversity especially with the TP. I've been trying to do this with Aztec/Iro and I can say games are way more entertaining, regardless of result.

For me it's all good, but isn't there a treaty tournament on the way? Or is this the way that tourney will play. (was with 2 players no?)

Confused.

ocemilky wrote:

Gichtenlord wrote:

Papist wrote:I don't understand the prohibition on "doubling". Doesn't banning teamwork kind of defeat the point of playing a team game? How would this rule even be enforced (would players be DQ'd if they helped their teammates outside of the mandated zone)? It just seems like a stupid rule all around TBH. If someone is skilled enough to hold down their main fight with less than full pop, why shouldn't they be able to help out their ally?

There is no honor if you double an opponent. Hell, some opponents might argue that moving your camera away from your heads up fight is a breach of the honor codex already!

It's borderline cheating tbh. Doubling/splitting that is.

I'm not sure if you're serious, so I'll ask: are you, though?

@Asateo , there is another team treaty tournament, this seems as just an idea for another one.

pecelot wrote:

ocemilky wrote:

Show hidden quotes

Gichtenlord wrote:

Papist wrote:I don't understand the prohibition on "doubling". Doesn't banning teamwork kind of defeat the point of playing a team game? How would this rule even be enforced (would players be DQ'd if they helped their teammates outside of the mandated zone)? It just seems like a stupid rule all around TBH. If someone is skilled enough to hold down their main fight with less than full pop, why shouldn't they be able to help out their ally?

There is no honor if you double an opponent. Hell, some opponents might argue that moving your camera away from your heads up fight is a breach of the honor codex already!

It's borderline cheating tbh. Doubling/splitting that is.

I'm not sure if you're serious, so I'll ask: are you, though?

Immense sarcasm. For some reason it's the sentiment that has been around since NR has been around. Lots of people will pest you if you just use the whole map. There are man civs that won't win MUs head to head, but actually have a chance when fighting in multiple spots at the same time. Take Aztecs for example. The only MU they win head to head is vs otto and maybe russia. But they're a really good civ to assist your team mayes. Erk are an amazing unit but aztec just lack a decent skirm, so if youre able to mass erk and a mate masses skirm/art you are in a much stronger position.

I wish people would man up and l2p. Its not hard to counter.