We want your feedback!
- lemmings121
- Jaeger
- Posts: 2673
- Joined: Mar 15, 2015
- ESO: lemmings121
Re: We want your feedback!
Snuden wrote:lemmings121 wrote:thebritish wrote: People dont even try to make a comeback. If they fall back in a certain area even if its just a bit, they resign.
That is just wrong, players resign when the game is over, is disrespectful with the viewers and the opponent to make a game longer then necessary after its already over. I didnt remember a single game in the whole tournament where the player who resigned wasnt 100% dead, what I do remember is you walling and making a game that was already over take more 30 mins with me, and then by a coincidence that game oos'ed after I spent days sieging walls.
What you remember or don't remember is irrelevant to... pretty much everything discussed here.
However, what is of the utmost relevance is that the ESOC Media Team market a tournament, which will bring the most revenue, because only by doing that can they attract the best players.
:)
how is that response even remotely relevant to what I said?
you want players spreading vills on the map after the game os over just to make the "show" last longer?
- Mr_Bramboy
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 8219
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: [VOC] Bram
- Location: Amsterdam
Re: We want your feedback!
Could we try to be a little more on topic please? I am going to process all of your feedback in this thread and we're already at 7 pages so it'd be a shame if half of the good feedback is buried in off topic comments!
- P i k i l i c
- Howdah
- Posts: 1271
- Joined: Nov 17, 2015
- ESO: Pikilic
- Location: Dijon, France
- GameRanger ID: 7497456
Re: We want your feedback!
Taunt 50
Re: We want your feedback!
What you remember or don't remember is irrelevant to... pretty much everything discussed here.
However, what is of the utmost relevance is that the ESOC Media Team market a tournament, which will bring the most revenue, because only by doing that can they attract the best players.
:)[/quote]
how is that response even remotely relevant to what I said?
you want players spreading vills on the map after the game os over just to make the "show" last longer?[/quote]
Great... I just opened a new bottle of cerveza. (0.5L)
Click... puff puff... exhale... Yes. How is it relevant?
I assume that you have watched Aizamk strims, so I will base my explanation on that.
Some of the best games I have watched is when a player come back from a seemingly hopeless situation - and win. I know I have.
That is EXACTLY what viewers want, nobody want to watch a certain BO played over and over again, often with predictable outcome. Besides, I am fairly sure that ESOC Media Team(!) would like games to be as long as possible, longer games, more viewing time, more ad revenue, more prize money!
I (and I assume most viewers) want to see great comebacks and innovative play, if that means that they have to spread out vills all over the map for a while, so be it.
So again, what you do or don't remember is irrelevant. What is relevant is to make viewers keep watching.
I remember, when I first played this game back in 2007-2008, there was a player called "Swinger" he could make people download his recs (no strims back then) because he came with strats that would make Aizamk jizz his pants.
You get it now?
However, what is of the utmost relevance is that the ESOC Media Team market a tournament, which will bring the most revenue, because only by doing that can they attract the best players.
:)[/quote]
how is that response even remotely relevant to what I said?
you want players spreading vills on the map after the game os over just to make the "show" last longer?[/quote]
Great... I just opened a new bottle of cerveza. (0.5L)
Click... puff puff... exhale... Yes. How is it relevant?
I assume that you have watched Aizamk strims, so I will base my explanation on that.
Some of the best games I have watched is when a player come back from a seemingly hopeless situation - and win. I know I have.
That is EXACTLY what viewers want, nobody want to watch a certain BO played over and over again, often with predictable outcome. Besides, I am fairly sure that ESOC Media Team(!) would like games to be as long as possible, longer games, more viewing time, more ad revenue, more prize money!
I (and I assume most viewers) want to see great comebacks and innovative play, if that means that they have to spread out vills all over the map for a while, so be it.
So again, what you do or don't remember is irrelevant. What is relevant is to make viewers keep watching.
I remember, when I first played this game back in 2007-2008, there was a player called "Swinger" he could make people download his recs (no strims back then) because he came with strats that would make Aizamk jizz his pants.
You get it now?
[Sith] - Baphomet
Re: We want your feedback!
4th place should get some $ - seems to be in agreement with most people.
Having less big tournaments seems like a bad idea, 2 a year is perfect.
Bringing back a Saturday Smackdown type of stream once a week would be nice and keep the community involved/get new people. Could even change themes weekly (2v2s, only water maps...etc.)
This is what actually brought me back to the game after 10 years away.
A couple things that I haven't seen so far:
-The woman reading the donation messages gets annoying in game during tense moments when people spam, no problem with the visual of donation.
-BO9 seems a little long/tedious, BO7 should be sufficient. BO5 leading up to finals... leading to next point.
-There should be a strict time limit between matches - 5-8 minutes or so.
Having less big tournaments seems like a bad idea, 2 a year is perfect.
Bringing back a Saturday Smackdown type of stream once a week would be nice and keep the community involved/get new people. Could even change themes weekly (2v2s, only water maps...etc.)
This is what actually brought me back to the game after 10 years away.
A couple things that I haven't seen so far:
-The woman reading the donation messages gets annoying in game during tense moments when people spam, no problem with the visual of donation.
-BO9 seems a little long/tedious, BO7 should be sufficient. BO5 leading up to finals... leading to next point.
-There should be a strict time limit between matches - 5-8 minutes or so.
Re: We want your feedback!
Why should 4th place get money? I don't get that?
Re: We want your feedback!
For the record, we kept around 600 viewers (peaked at around 684) for more than 3 hours, so I doubt the concerns about the series' length are reasonable
Why are you always so disrespectful and arrogant in your statements, which for the most part are blatantly false?
There you go, you can identify the problem! Now please, do a brief fact-check
thebritish wrote:The games in the Finals are usually over in like 10 mins. People dont even try to make a comeback. If they fall back in a certain area even if its just a bit, they resign.
Why are you always so disrespectful and arrogant in your statements, which for the most part are blatantly false?
thebritish wrote:As for the last Tourney which BlackStar_OP won, more time was spent in the lobby than actually playing the games. (At least it looked like it).
There you go, you can identify the problem! Now please, do a brief fact-check
Re: We want your feedback!
First, I think that there are 2 clients here : the players and the spectators, and we need to try to satisfy both of them.
I don't think the level of games were worst than before, however I agree they become stale. We are eating since end of 2015 semi-FF or nr 10 games. Why that ?
I think the civ rules is cool for main events, but we can try it in a small one to see how it goes.
I don't think the level of games were worst than before, however I agree they become stale. We are eating since end of 2015 semi-FF or nr 10 games. Why that ?
- I take the responsability for the maps diversity. Maps are not as unique as the RE ones. Think about Silk Road, Ceylon, Regicide Honshu, etc. That's one of the reason I want to remove Manchac for instance. There is btw the possibility to remove maps and have seasonal maps like in some other games. We currently have 27 esoc maps. Maybe 15-20 would be enough for an event. Moreover, I gonna try to release maps that are more unique and provide a different gameplay because right now most of maps fully support semi-FF confort zone for players.
- The balance. The balance is good because all civs are pretty on the same level, however there is a bit less diversity of strategies avalaible. We didn't see any single water games, natives are totally absent. The more diversity you get, the more the game is entertaining and I guess that's the purpose of this game since it got 14 civs. I think I'm a bit alone to think this, but the balance should just start again from scratch and only fix imba RE mechanics like genitours or iro rush and also fix bugs. Btw, just imagine if natives were just decent, how intersting this game would be.
I think the civ rules is cool for main events, but we can try it in a small one to see how it goes.
Re: We want your feedback!
it would be interesting if a Bo21 happen between the 2 best players of the community, like in AoC.
Re: We want your feedback!
Sadly our best players have too much epenis to Playa bo21
Re: We want your feedback!
I'll tell you why I have been internally pushing against the fourth place prize and why I'm expecting that to be added next event.
Everyone calls for a fourth place prize, for no real reason. I've had small prizes <100$ and people will pm me and say "nah it's okay, just donate it back". It isn't going to provide the motivation you think it will.
The big game players join based on the first and to a much lesser extent, the second place prize. Even though I'm not promised either of those, those two numbers are what would bring me out to play.
Therefore, I think it's a majority getting it wrong to ask us to distribute cash down to a fourth prize. It requires the bump up of third prize and the narrowing of the prize distribution. If you are giving money to three people, each jump is bigger and more motivating.
Example: 1000$
1st $600
2nd $300
3rd $100
4th $0
1 $450
2 $275
3 $175
4 $100
The gaps in prizes become so small in 1000$ tournament that it doesn't even matter if you get one spot higher.
That being said, we are bringing in enough money that I think we can get over the $100 mark for a fourth place prize.
So just wanted people to hear that and know I haven't been ignoring that ask, but remain against it.
It seems to have gathered enough momentum that we have to give it a go.
It won't change anything.
Everyone calls for a fourth place prize, for no real reason. I've had small prizes <100$ and people will pm me and say "nah it's okay, just donate it back". It isn't going to provide the motivation you think it will.
The big game players join based on the first and to a much lesser extent, the second place prize. Even though I'm not promised either of those, those two numbers are what would bring me out to play.
Therefore, I think it's a majority getting it wrong to ask us to distribute cash down to a fourth prize. It requires the bump up of third prize and the narrowing of the prize distribution. If you are giving money to three people, each jump is bigger and more motivating.
Example: 1000$
1st $600
2nd $300
3rd $100
4th $0
1 $450
2 $275
3 $175
4 $100
The gaps in prizes become so small in 1000$ tournament that it doesn't even matter if you get one spot higher.
That being said, we are bringing in enough money that I think we can get over the $100 mark for a fourth place prize.
So just wanted people to hear that and know I haven't been ignoring that ask, but remain against it.
It seems to have gathered enough momentum that we have to give it a go.
It won't change anything.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 2549
- Joined: Jun 28, 2015
Re: We want your feedback!
rsy wrote:Sadly our best players have too much epenis to Playa bo21
i think its more due to no one of the best players really being active enough. If I was really into playing aoe id be willing to do a boXX but im not atm and neither is BSOP, H2o or any other decent player. Also aoc is a lot better for such long bos because of so many more maps that are playable and also a much bigger civ pool.
breeze wrote: they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 2549
- Joined: Jun 28, 2015
Re: We want your feedback!
Rikikipu wrote:First, I think that there are 2 clients here : the players and the spectators, and we need to try to satisfy both of them.
I don't think the level of games were worst than before, however I agree they become stale. We are eating since end of 2015 semi-FF or nr 10 games. Why that ?
- I take the responsability for the maps diversity. Maps are not as unique as the RE ones. Think about Silk Road, Ceylon, Regicide Honshu, etc. That's one of the reason I want to remove Manchac for instance. There is btw the possibility to remove maps and have seasonal maps like in some other games. We currently have 27 esoc maps. Maybe 15-20 would be enough for an event. Moreover, I gonna try to release maps that are more unique and provide a different gameplay because right now most of maps fully support semi-FF confort zone for players.
- The balance. The balance is good because all civs are pretty on the same level, however there is a bit less diversity of strategies avalaible. We didn't see any single water games, natives are totally absent. The more diversity you get, the more the game is entertaining and I guess that's the purpose of this game since it got 14 civs. I think I'm a bit alone to think this, but the balance should just start again from scratch and only fix imba RE mechanics like genitours or iro rush and also fix bugs. Btw, just imagine if natives were just decent, how intersting this game would be.
I think the civ rules is cool for main events, but we can try it in a small one to see how it goes.
honestly i think you should try to fix some of the RE maps. I mean that should be possible after all right ? It might be a lot more work for you ( or any of the other map creators) but no one is pressuring you to release maps within a certain time frame and having a few of the better RE maps in the pool would be kinda nice.
That only applies ofc if you would want to do that. If you dont want to that because its more exciting to create new maps than i could understand that too. In any case youre doing an amazing job :)
breeze wrote: they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
Re: We want your feedback!
Loool actually my post was for an internal staff topic xD
I guess I drunk too much tonight..
I guess I drunk too much tonight..
Re: We want your feedback!
Part of that Raphael is created by some of the top players. Who were quite harsh and outspoken about anything that was an Arkansas or a Kamchatka feeling map. I would actually say that was a major factor.
Even what we have now feels like it's pushing people out of their comfort zone.
Even what we have now feels like it's pushing people out of their comfort zone.
Re: We want your feedback!
I feel like ESOC puts too much emphasis on its gameplay content being from tournanments. Personally, I like the showmatches, casual games, guest streamers, and the Saturday Smackdown-type events more entertaining. In a tournament, it seems like the games dont get very interesting until the Ro16, or sometimes the Ro32, with most of the matches before that point being anywhere from fairly to incredibly imbalanced. And even once you get to only pr 35+ players left, so much pressure gets put on them that we begin to see oddly underwhelming series (i.e stuff like H20 vs, Garja last tourney, Mitoe vs. BSOP this tourney, Mitoe vs. Erik etc...). However, in a more casual atmosphere, where the only people that are all that invested in a particular outcome are the two players (i.e a showmatch or non-tourney play), I think we get to see a lot more really cool games with innovation and cool builds and stuff.
I also totally agree with LordRaphael that the Map Team should try to fix and balance some of the best RE maps, maps like silk road, new england, mongolia, siberia, andes, patagonia. I think some RE maps were slightly balanced for the EP, but not to the same standard as most of the ESOC maps have been made too.
Also, I think it would be cool to change the civilization rules for the later rounds of the tournament, like maybe no civ resets in bo5's and resets only on like the 5th or 6th game in a bo7. I think that being able to win 4 games out of 7 with a different civ each game is a lot more telling of a player's skill than winning 4 games out of 7 with only 2 or 3 civs.
I also totally agree with LordRaphael that the Map Team should try to fix and balance some of the best RE maps, maps like silk road, new england, mongolia, siberia, andes, patagonia. I think some RE maps were slightly balanced for the EP, but not to the same standard as most of the ESOC maps have been made too.
Also, I think it would be cool to change the civilization rules for the later rounds of the tournament, like maybe no civ resets in bo5's and resets only on like the 5th or 6th game in a bo7. I think that being able to win 4 games out of 7 with a different civ each game is a lot more telling of a player's skill than winning 4 games out of 7 with only 2 or 3 civs.
somppukunkku wrote:This is not a fucking discogame.
Re: We want your feedback!
I think this "4th should get a prize" thing is more a bandwagon than anything else, not necessarily something you need to give into. With $1000 or even $1500 prize pools it makes much more sense to have 3 prizes than 4, as you illustrated._H2O wrote:I'll tell you why I have been internally pushing against the fourth place prize and why I'm expecting that to be added next event.
Everyone calls for a fourth place prize, for no real reason. I've had small prizes <100$ and people will pm me and say "nah it's okay, just donate it back". It isn't going to provide the motivation you think it will.
The big game players join based on the first and to a much lesser extent, the second place prize. Even though I'm not promised either of those, those two numbers are what would bring me out to play.
Therefore, I think it's a majority getting it wrong to ask us to distribute cash down to a fourth prize. It requires the bump up of third prize and the narrowing of the prize distribution. If you are giving money to three people, each jump is bigger and more motivating.
Example: 1000$
1st $600
2nd $300
3rd $100
4th $0
1 $450
2 $275
3 $175
4 $100
The gaps in prizes become so small in 1000$ tournament that it doesn't even matter if you get one spot higher.
That being said, we are bringing in enough money that I think we can get over the $100 mark for a fourth place prize.
So just wanted people to hear that and know I haven't been ignoring that ask, but remain against it.
It seems to have gathered enough momentum that we have to give it a go.
It won't change anything.
Re: We want your feedback!
Mappool wise I think its fine for tournaments but as a random map pool the maps are too all over the place. If you wanna seriously play a mu you sometimes just have to rehost a few times or pick a map. For a tournament off maps are fine but they sometimes give unfair advantages in terms of civ picking (look for example at how impossible it was for bsop to counter raphas aztec pick on indonesia).
Re: We want your feedback!
600
250
100
50
That's how I would split it. It is just unreasonable to not grant a prize for all top4. 4th place needs a symbolic prize for the semi final achievement.
250
100
50
That's how I would split it. It is just unreasonable to not grant a prize for all top4. 4th place needs a symbolic prize for the semi final achievement.
Re: We want your feedback!
Rikikipu wrote:I don't think the level of games were worst than before, however I agree they become stale. We are eating since end of 2015 semi-FF or nr 10 games.
I think it's just a myth. Let's have a look at the most recent finals:
Game 1: Portuguese vs Portuguese (Mendocino) — nilla-like 2-rax musk & bow spam in the center of the map
Game 2: British vs Dutch (Florida) — maybe here the fight was prolonged, but it's due to the nature of the civs
Game 3: Dutch vs Russians (Thar Desert) — early aggression from Russia
Game 4: Indians vs Aztecs (Indonesia) — Colonial warfare, Agra sieged down very fast
Game 5: Russians vs French (Gran Chaco) — Russian pressure to stop the French age-up
Game 6: Ottomans vs Germans (Herald Island) — Jan rush
Game 7: Spanish vs British (Bonnie Springs) — early-Fortress skirmishes
Game 8: Indians vs French (Manchuria) — Sepoy pressure
Re: We want your feedback!
Yep that sums up that arguement pecelot :)
Re: We want your feedback!
Well these finals were as lucky as they could get in term of diversity. 8 games and different MUs with almost no mirrors. While it is auspicable it isn't realistic that it will be that way again.
Still we miss real rushes and water play.
Still we miss real rushes and water play.
Re: We want your feedback!
Rushes happen all the time. As a player in my last event, part of what burned me out was how often pr 35+ players were just pressuring early in a lot of my games . I really don't enjoy those games and a lot of my casual games on QS involve it.
Plus "rushing" is just one timing of many. There are timings scattered from 6 minutes up to 10.
You are right on water is absent. Rushes however are represented for sure.
Plus "rushing" is just one timing of many. There are timings scattered from 6 minutes up to 10.
You are right on water is absent. Rushes however are represented for sure.
Re: We want your feedback!
pecelot wrote:Rikikipu wrote:I don't think the level of games were worst than before, however I agree they become stale. We are eating since end of 2015 semi-FF or nr 10 games.
I think it's just a myth. Let's have a look at the most recent finals:
Game 1: Portuguese vs Portuguese (Mendocino) — nilla-like 2-rax musk & bow spam in the center of the map
Game 2: British vs Dutch (Florida) — maybe here the fight was prolonged, but it's due to the nature of the civs
Game 3: Dutch vs Russians (Thar Desert) — early aggression from Russia
Game 4: Indians vs Aztecs (Indonesia) — Colonial warfare, Agra sieged down very fast
Game 5: Russians vs French (Gran Chaco) — Russian pressure to stop the French age-up
Game 6: Ottomans vs Germans (Herald Island) — Jan rush
Game 7: Spanish vs British (Bonnie Springs) — early-Fortress skirmishes
Game 8: Indians vs French (Manchuria) — Sepoy pressure
And in game 2 there was a lot of early interaction: BSOP planned to pressure, lordraphael shipped colonial militia and then BSOP changed his bo. He even sieged down a dutch house in the early game. For as far as I can tell, the nr10 meta is dead.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests