cRPG
cRPG => Events & Tournaments => Topic started by: joshko on April 09, 2011, 12:22:49 am
-
Because I couldn't make a new poll on the old thread....
After this plans can be made in earnest.
-
7v7 would probably be fairer to clans that cannot muster tons of people on the weekends
-
random teams might work if they'd be assembled by players themselves inagame. (most of the guys would make them ahead on forums but those remaining would join some existing team or would form up quickly the new one). than you'd have to come up quickly with some system for the tournament after the teams would be assembled. for sure it would be more difficult than with the clan tourney with registrations ahead. i plan to do the same with couples tournament (but i haven't really find enough courage to make something with bigger teams as it would be more complicated for organizing).
-
Make it Random teams with an emphasis on the individual and not the whole team. Each kill could be a point or something that add up to a total score. So instead of team X winning it will be individual Y then individual Z in second aand so on. Something along those lines... I'm sure some complicated formula can be dreamt up by those way smarter than me that wouldn't put an such a heavy emphasis on kills and the like.
This way people can be dropped and subbed in for teams as long as everyone plays the same number of matches.
Would be a bitch to put together clan matches would be oh so easier.
Oh didn't see it was already decided :oops: next time then
-
Have team sizes be 10 down to 7. So:
Team A shows up with ten players
Team B only has eight
Play eight on eight players. But if Team B shows up with 6 players then it's 7 on 6. This leaves some room for smaller teams to compete against the larger ones while still providing strong incentive to have a large pool of players. Perhaps larger teams should allow for swapping in/out guys each round depending on who they're playing.
So many possibilities :rolleyes:
NOTE: If team sizes are going to be small then there should be some gear restrictions. E.g. if everybody on one team showed up with all plated chargers then the other team would be trampled rather unfairly. With teams of ten we could, for example, restrict to a 1/2 ratio of huscarl users per team, a 1/5 ratio of top tier horses per team, and a 1/3 ratio of crushthrough per team. Y/N?
-
I completely agree with (modern days) Diomedes!
Make the teams 10 down to 7.
This way it's going to be less restrictive. A clan-less (button-mashing) hero might chose to go in a team of 3 or even 2 against a clan's 7. And that just makes it more spectacular and more flexible, considering that (some) people have real lives too. Or so I've heard some rumors...
It's more than twice as hard to get 8 people together at the same time than to get 4 together at the same time. And as the number increases, so does the ratio. But this flexible method will also allow large (or eager) clans to have 10 vs 10 battles, which will be fun. Moreover, it will be serious incentive to compete for the first n spots in your clan's team. For instance, mr. X is his clan's no.1 cavalry pick. And mademoiselle Y is her clan's no.3 shield-and-pick pick.
Pick?
About the item restrictions, however, it's a little more complicated, unfortunately.
The first idea I propose is a budget limit per team or per player. Better to be per team, though. And to try to enforce it and make things clear, every team must present the full list of items they spawn with at the beginning of the battle, so that the discrepancies between the list and the real action are easier to spot.
-
I like the idea for a budget, either screenshots or just trustworthy (I can see a guy in full black armour).
-
I like the idea for a budget, either screenshots or just trustworthy (I can see a guy in full black armour).
(Goretooth + six naked guys with torches :shock:)
-
I don't agree with the budget thing, everyone should be able to compete unrestricted in their best gear. Sounds alot more fun.
-
I don't agree with the budget thing, everyone should be able to compete unrestricted in their best gear. Sounds alot more fun.
Until you face team lance throw, and then what? D:
-
yeah it's gonna be black armor vs lance team...
Are cavs allowed ? that'd suck to see a team of 10 cavs vs 10 inf
-
Until you face team lance throw, and then what? D:
Buy shields
yeah it's gonna be black armor vs lance team...
Are cavs allowed ? that'd suck to see a team of 10 cavs vs 10 inf
Someone's having flashbacks. A squad with good teamwork and communication can adapt to any kind of lineup.
-
What about people without clans?
-
What about people without clans?
You can fight for me Miley! =D
-
Someone's having flashbacks. A squad with good teamwork and communication can adapt to any kind of lineup.
I don't think this is a reasonable standard. Even a team with great teamwork and communication is limited by their gear, skill, and terrain. Ten plated charges in plate charging a mix of infantry on a cavalry map have a definite advantage.
-
I don't think this is a reasonable standard. Even a team with great teamwork and communication is limited by their gear, skill, and terrain. Ten plated charges in plate charging a mix of infantry on a cavalry have a definite advantage.
plated chargers are garbage, coursers would mop them up 2 to 5
-
If the infantry are working together cav isn't going to be a problem since they'll all be carrying pikes. I recall playing some small battles recently (15 vs 15 maybe) where we had the cav advantage (5-7 cav vs 1 funny guy on a sumpter). Needless to say the first two rounds we took easily as they were still disorganized but when some arm chair general took command and got those randoms to huddle in a ball of pikes they crushed us. I know we were hardly organized to deal with their organization but if we were, then it might have been even. I'd still give the advantage to the infantrymen though, I don't think a cav's role in this game is to attack people who are paying attention to you.
-
I don't agree with the budget thing, everyone should be able to compete unrestricted in their best gear. Sounds alot more fun.
Seriously?
If we even enter, we're here to compete and see who's the most skilled, not who's the fattest nerd living in their mother's basement with the best phat lewts.
On topic: 10v10 would disqualify most of the clans out there, as most clans would struggle to field 10 actives.
-
Seriously?
If we even enter, we're here to compete and see who's the most skilled, not who's the fattest nerd living in their mother's basement with the best phat lewts.
On topic: 10v10 would disqualify most of the clans out there, as most clans would struggle to field 10 actives.
i dont think i ever seen 10 bks befor... i belive it is like a 5 guy clan :(
-
No offense...but anything less than 10 isnt a clan...its a squad
-
If we even enter, we're here to compete and see who's the most skilled, not who's the fattest nerd living in their mother's basement with the best phat lewts.
What kind of gear are you thinking of?
plated chargers are garbage, coursers would mop them up 2 to 5
I said they were against infantry. The only real remedy would be for everyone to bring a pike, and I know that most players don't do that every round because they can generally expect teams in Battle not to spam heavy horsemen. My point is that there are teams which can find advantages through spamming certain gear and that these cases, which I don't find very fun, can be mitigated with ratio-based precautions.
-
No offense...but anything less than 10 isnt a clan...its a squad
And anything more than 10 isn't a clan, its a mob.
Only at precisely and exactly 10 does one exist as a clan.
-
No offense...but anything less than 10 isnt a clan...its a squad
That's why professional clans play Counter Strike with 5v5, right Ecko?
In your RP world, it may seem that the acme of "skill" is using "tactics" such as "everyone camp, 1 shield guard each archer!" and that in order to be a true "clan" you must use "tactics" to coordinate with huge numbers of people.
I'd argue that's more roleplaying than competitive FPS play, and if we are, indeed, having a tournament I'd imagine the goal here is to compete, not to RP, so I'd say 5v5 or 7v7 is absolutely fine and totally acceptable as a "clan".
-
Off-topic I like this guy he speaks funny words.
-
Buy shields
Someone's having flashbacks. A squad with good teamwork and communication can adapt to any kind of lineup.
haha the old buy a sheild. Durrrr i never thought of that one ,but there is one small problem they have bonus to sheilds, and usually shatter sheilds.
With how many players that should be allowed to compete. I have to agree with Rhade 5v5 , and 7v7 are totally acceptable for a clan ; in addition , with 10v10 the possibilities of turning to range spam and lets all camp in this tiny room greatly increase. Also some of us are here to compete and have some fun with some scrimmy scrams. Not RP sheild walls which was very boring no offense.
-
That's why professional clans play Counter Strike with 5v5, right Ecko?
In your RP world, it may seem that the acme of "skill" is using "tactics" such as "everyone camp, 1 shield guard each archer!" and that in order to be a true "clan" you must use "tactics" to coordinate with huge numbers of people.
I'd argue that's more roleplaying than competitive FPS play, and if we are, indeed, having a tournament I'd imagine the goal here is to compete, not to RP, so I'd say 5v5 or 7v7 is absolutely fine and totally acceptable as a "clan".
Lol Ecko. You got called an RP'er. :D
I'd say that Rhade thinks you've gone native, but I guess here it would be you've ceased being Native.
-
That's why professional clans play Counter Strike with 5v5, right Ecko?
In your RP world, it may seem that the acme of "skill" is using "tactics" such as "everyone camp, 1 shield guard each archer!" and that in order to be a true "clan" you must use "tactics" to coordinate with huge numbers of people.
I'd argue that's more roleplaying than competitive FPS play, and if we are, indeed, having a tournament I'd imagine the goal here is to compete, not to RP, so I'd say 5v5 or 7v7 is absolutely fine and totally acceptable as a "clan".
Your right rhade...i like to roleplay as if i'm better than allers...you should know something about that....
-
Your right rhade...i like to roleplay as if i'm better than allers...you should know something about that....
hey its not like it was a 1v1 duel.... oh wait it was? :lol:
-
Just limit the amount of ranged weapons, two 2-3 stacks per team. So no one can throw 20000000 million things at you :)
Personally I prefer smaller battles, and I think they are more thrilling but in the end its all about sticking together and teamwork. Make some videos of your crazy NA tournament :)
-
Whole lotta lobbying going on here, on both sides. Rhade is in a very small group and wears light armor, and therefore would like a 5 on 5 with a small budget. Of course. I'm part of a large group and play a cavalry character, and would like to not be held back from using proper equipment for my class and actually employ tactics in a 10 v 10, which is one of the most fun things you can do in this game. It seems some people really just want to duel 5 people in a row, not have Battles.
-
Whole lotta lobbying going on here, on both sides. Rhade is in a very small group and wears light armor, and therefore would like a 5 on 5 with a small budget. Of course. I'm part of a large group and play a cavalry character, and would like to not be held back from using proper equipment for my class and actually employ tactics in a 10 v 10, which is one of the most fun things you can do in this game. It seems some people really just want to duel 5 people in a row, not have Battles.
Thus, 7 v. 7 would be best.
-
Your right rhade...i like to roleplay as if i'm better than allers...you should know something about that....
If you're talking about the time the guy showed up to a duel in heavy armor, taking me ten swings to kill him simply one time, then yeah.
Also, I went naked and aced him 2-0.
He was supposed to come to BkS_Central to duel on native but bitched out after he got his ass handed to him wearing heavy armor whilst I was naked. Harmless peasant frapsed it.
The guy is not good, he just shows up to a duel in heavy armor with a "dueling build" and takes a million swings to kill. It was actually the perfect example for why us having a tournament on a cRPG server is a bad thing:
He shows up, in heavy armor to duel me because he wants to prove he's "better."
I hit him 5 times, he hits me once, I die.
People thinks he's a better player.
Obviously there's an issue, and I nor any skilled player I know wants to enter a tournament where these types of things are going to be happening. Tournaments/duels are for proving who's the most skilled, not who has the BEST BUILD or MOST EPIC WOW STYLE PHAT LEWT ARMOR.
-
Obviously there's an issue, and I nor any skilled player I know wants to enter a tournament where these types of things are going to be happening. Tournaments/duels are for proving who's the most skilled, not who has the BEST BUILD or MOST EPIC WOW STYLE PHAT LEWT ARMOR.
You didn't answer my question. Playing consistently can generate a lot of money, I don't see why players who can afford to buy the gear they want have some sort of advantage over you. I play in medium-heavy medium armour. If I had the opportunity to use Goretooth's gear I wouldn't, because that's not the way I want to play. But if I want to take my unique warhammer into battle, something I'm quite practiced with, then why shouldn't I? I think I'm just honestly missing your point here.
-
You didn't answer my question. Playing consistently can generate a lot of money, I don't see why players who can afford to buy the gear they want have some sort of advantage over you. I play in medium-heavy medium armour. If I had the opportunity to use Goretooth's gear I wouldn't, because that's not the way I want to play. But if I want to take my unique warhammer into battle, something I'm quite practiced with, then why shouldn't I? I think I'm just honestly missing your point here.
My point is that a cRPG tournament provides far too many variables:
A) Gear advantage/disadvantage due to who has played more (really? is this wow?)
B) Are you level 30? Are you going to sit at 30 the whole tournament? Probably not, thus you will be at a disadvantage.
C) Does your clan have the perfect scrim composition? If not, you can't adjust to other strats on the fly, your build is permanent thus hamstringing any amount of creative tactics.
D) Heirlooms
E) Skill
F) Tactics
as opposed to what I suggested, meaning the variables would be:
A) Skill
B) Tactics
+ the advantage to all players of not being forced to not retire, also allowing players to adapt on the fly to different class types.
It's pretty cut and dry which is the better *tournament* style. I like cRPG a lot, I enjoy playing casually, but this is not the way to do a tournament.
-
I don't see the difference between that kind of tournament and a Native tournament. If it's about discerning who has the most skill then that seems like almost the same as test for who "sits around all day with no life." Most video games aren't hard to get good at given enough time, but finding the right equipment, builds, and team in cRPG takes a discerning eye. I get what you're trying to say now - I just don't think it's a very good tournament for cRPG mod players.
-
I don't see the difference between that kind of tournament and a Native tournament. If it's about discerning who has the most skill then that seems like almost the same as test for who "sits around all day with no life." Most video games aren't hard to get good at given enough time, but finding the right equipment, builds, and team in cRPG takes a discerning eye. I get what you're trying to say now - I just don't think it's a very good tournament for cRPG mod players.
There's a difference between someone who is naturally talented and someone who has played and grinded out x3 heirlooms in every armor piece, or has extremely expensive gear purely through time played. Don't confuse time spent with skill, but you can say that time spent = gear = success.
I disagree entirely with " Most video games aren't hard to get good at given enough time." Some people have been playing since beta and are absolutely terrible while myself, Vanidar and kyky all were absolutely dominating servers within a few days of playing. Anyone can grind (thus the success of WoW), not anyone can rise above the rest on an even playing field.
-
If you're talking about the time the guy showed up to a duel in heavy armor, taking me ten swings to kill him simply one time, then yeah.
Also, I went naked and aced him 2-0.
He was supposed to come to BkS_Central to duel on native but bitched out after he got his ass handed to him wearing heavy armor whilst I was naked. Harmless peasant frapsed it.
The guy is not good, he just shows up to a duel in heavy armor with a "dueling build" and takes a million swings to kill. It was actually the perfect example for why us having a tournament on a cRPG server is a bad thing:
He shows up, in heavy armor to duel me because he wants to prove he's "better."
I hit him 5 times, he hits me once, I die.
People thinks he's a better player.
Obviously there's an issue, and I nor any skilled player I know wants to enter a tournament where these types of things are going to be happening. Tournaments/duels are for proving who's the most skilled, not who has the BEST BUILD or MOST EPIC WOW STYLE PHAT LEWT ARMOR.
WO WO WO, you talking about allers? Hes been telling me to "get more ps" and that it is fair that he has a str build and plate armor due to his 60 ping when we duel,
meanwhile, my one hander bounces, stutter hits(stutter and does very little dammage), i wear tunic over mail and I have the range disadvantage- he also refuses to meet me in a native duel server as well
So be it, he shall be a useless sack of S@#$ once strategus comes
-
WO WO WO, you talking about allers? Hes been telling me to "get more ps" and that it is fair that he has a str build and plate armor due to his 60 ping when we duel,
meanwhile, my one hander bounces, stutter hits(stutter and does very little dammage), i wear tunic over mail and has the range disadvantage- he also refuses to meet me in a native dual server as well
So be it, he shall be a useless sack of S@#$ once strategus comes
ya but unlike rhade you didnt say "let go to the duel sever" then get beat down :rolleyes:
also strategus is a lie, just like the cake!
-
Most video games aren't hard to get good at given enough time
I'd say that is somewhat true, actually. Mount & Blade has a high skill ceiling, but it's not too hard to reach it if you are very dedicated. When you compare this game with something like Starcraft, it's a joke indeed. However, realize that you grind in every game you play, even if there are no objective levels. You can't come into a game like Mount & Blade on your first day and expect to be the best player (although natural talent has a lot to do with it), you can only get better through experience.
-
ya but unlike rhade you didnt say "let go to the duel sever" then get beat down :rolleyes:
also strategus is a lie, just like the cake!
wait what, Im confused now. Also my grammar in that post was atrocious :(
-
Don't confuse time spent with skill, but you can say that time spent = gear = success.
I disagree entirely with " Most video games aren't hard to get good at given enough time." Some people have been playing since beta and are absolutely terrible while myself, Vanidar and kyky all were absolutely dominating servers within a few days of playing. Anyone can grind (thus the success of WoW), not anyone can rise above the rest on an even playing field.
Almost any game I spend over a 100 hours on I get fairly competent at. I'm not saying some people don't have ingrained biases towards certain kinds of gameplay but really, a neurotypical given enough time almost always becomes good at this sort of thing. Almost completely regardless of the gear they have most people with 100+ hours on one class or another are going to be good at it. With the exception of KotOR I've played only RTT/RTS my entire life (and Clue). Now, after more than 100 hours, I'm often a leader on the scoreboard.
But thatis beside the point. I don't see the difference between the kind of tournament you described and a Native tournament. The issue with having a Native tournament is that it's not a cRPG tournament. cRPG includes crafting specific characters with specific styles of play. If we're going to water down these choices and niches into the very gameplay we joined cRPG to escape then I want no part of it. It's not about having uber|337 gear but having our gear. It's not that players are nothing without it, it's just that we don't care to be.
-
ya but unlike rhade you didnt say "let go to the duel sever" then get beat down :rolleyes:
also strategus is a lie, just like the cake!
Getting pretty tired of hearing about this.
The guy showed up to duel in heavy armor vs me practically naked. I hit him 2x more than he hit me, but somehow he still "won." The only duels he won were when my swings glanced off of him (precisely why no heavy armor is never ever used in duel tournaments) and his swing failed to be interrupted.
I fought him completely naked, he lost 0-2.
He was supposed to come to BkS central to duel on Native so we could be on even footing, but he bitched out.
I really don't see how I got "beat down", tbh.
Either you're trolling or you're stupid, but most likely a mixture of both. It's funny because all you haters always love talking but none of you will ever duel me on even footing, ever, period, because you know you're going to get your shit pushed in.
Almost any game I spend over a 100 hours on I get fairly competent at. I'm not saying some people don't have ingrained biases towards certain kinds of gameplay but really, a neurotypical given enough time almost always becomes good at this sort of thing. Almost completely regardless of the gear they have most people with 100+ hours on one class or another are going to be good at it. With the exception of KotOR I've played only RTT/RTS my entire life (and Clue). Now, after more than 100 hours, I'm often a leader on the scoreboard.
But thatis beside the point. I don't see the difference between the kind of tournament you described and a Native tournament. The issue with having a Native tournament is that it's not a cRPG tournament. cRPG includes crafting specific characters with specific styles of play. If we're going to water down these choices and niches into the very gameplay we joined cRPG to escape then I want no part of it. It's not about having uber|337 gear but having our gear. It's not that players are nothing without it, it's just that we don't care to be.
There's a difference between "fairly competent" (being able to do ok in pub servers) and being top tier at something.
But you're talking a knowledge vs talent argument, really.
-
Either you're trolling or you're stupid, but most likely a mixture of both. It's funny because all you haters always love talking but none of you will ever duel me on even footing, ever, period, because you know you're going to get your shit pushed in.
An equal footing duel would be one in Mount & Musket Russia (insert any other mod that both sides don't play regularly in), or a straight Level 1 cRPG peasant duel.
-
An equal footing duel would be one in Mount & Musket Russia (insert any other mod that both sides don't play regularly in), or a straight Level 1 cRPG peasant duel.
An even footing duel is where both sides have the same gear, and characters.
Obviously it's never going to be "OMG 100% EVEN PINGS", but a native duel where both players have identical gear and characters is a lot more of a determination of who's better than cRPG duels where people have better armor/builds/characters/heirlooms.
Native and CRPG combat is identical, it's the same fucking thing, all cRPG does is add items/customization/builds. Combat is the same.
Surely you see this simple idea?
-
An even footing duel is where both sides have the same gear, and characters.
Obviously it's never going to be "OMG 100% EVEN PINGS", but a native duel where both players have identical gear and characters is a lot more of a determination of who's better than cRPG duels where people have better armor/builds/characters/heirlooms.
Native and CRPG combat is identical, it's the same fucking thing, all cRPG does is add items/customization/builds. Combat is the same.
Surely you see this simple idea?
Surely you see mine?
Weapon speeds, lengths, and animations differ in Native and cRPG. These are large factors, and just knowing them is enough to win or lose a duel.
You know Native, and we know cRPG. How hard is that to get?
-
There's a difference between "fairly competent" (being able to do ok in pub servers) and being top tier at something.
But you're talking a knowledge vs talent argument, really.
I don't think I am. It's the same premise that feeds the stereotype that Korean gamers are the best at [everything]. The basis of this isn't a natural talent inherent to the Korean peoples but because they've got the time and single-mindedness to invest over a thousand hours into a video game.
As for the knowledge vs talent, I don't think that's the case either. One can be very well informed about cRPG gear and stats but still not be very good at playing the game. Even players who aren't very well informed, in that way, can still be awesome players. What players do come to know is their own particular build. How weak their armour is, how fast they move in it with X agility, and what kind of tactics do they need to use against Y players. When they know that, and are able to use it (i.e. have some skill), then they can play and adapt quite well. It's this kind of composite skill set that I think a cRPG tournament should be testing.
-
Surely you see mine?
Weapon speeds, lengths, and animations differ in Native and cRPG. These are large factors, and just knowing them is enough to win or lose a duel.
You know Native, and we know cRPG. How hard is that to get?
I've been playing cRPG for less than a month and I'd still be willing to say that because I know native, I can beat 99% of people here in even duels. If you know native, it takes you a few days to learn cRPG's small differences, and if you know cRPG it takes you a few days to know native's differences. You're nit-picking extremely small differences in combat at this point, and a talented player would be able to adjust to them rather quickly.
I don't think I am. It's the same premise that feeds the stereotype that Korean gamers are the best at [everything]. The basis of this isn't a natural talent inherent to the Korean peoples but because they've got the time and single-mindedness to invest over a thousand hours into a video game.
As for the knowledge vs talent, I don't think that's the case either. One can be very well informed about cRPG gear and stats but still not be very good at playing the game. Even players who aren't very well informed, in that way, can still be awesome players. What players do come to know is their own particular build. How weak their armour is, how fast they move in it with X agility, and what kind of tactics do they need to use against Y players. When they know that, and are able to use it (i.e. have some skill), then they can play and adapt quite well. It's this kind of composite skill set that I think a cRPG tournament should be testing.
Koreans aren't the best at Starcraft because they somehow magically have more hours in a day than us, or all sit at home unemployed more often than us. This is completely unfounded and simply attempting to defend those who fall short and need to lay the blame somewhere else than "maybe I'm just not good enough" and find a scapegoat in the mentality of, "well, if I played as much as he did I'd beat him." Sure, someone who just picked up a game is going to lose more often than not, but I've seen amazing players pick up Warband and join the elite 1% of the community in less than a week, and I've seen players playing since beta that play at least 30 hours a week and they're still absolutely terrible. I can invest thousands of hours into singing, even millions, but I will never be a singer; I do not have the talent, so investing all that time is rather fruitless and a waste. The idea that "if you spend a lot of time, you will be good at x" is completely and utterly false -- sure, you'll be better than when you started, but it's your talent that is going to be the catalyst that determines whether you advance to the elite few in whatever you choose to do, not time invested.
What you're talking about in your second paragraph is simply knowledge. You're highlighting people being glorified number crunchers as the acme of talent and skill that should be tested, as opposed to players being given an even footing and seeing who is able to squeeze the most efficiency and results from the same exact thing the other player is given, which is the true difference of what makes a player good.
-
Koreans aren't the best at Starcraft because they somehow magically have more hours in a day than us, or all sit at home unemployed more often than us. This is completely unfounded and simply attempting to defend those who fall short and need to lay the blame somewhere else than "maybe I'm just not good enough" and find a scapegoat in the mentality of, "well, if I played as much as he did I'd beat him." Sure, someone who just picked up a game is going to lose more often than not, but I've seen amazing players pick up Warband and join the elite 1% of the community in less than a week, and I've seen players playing since beta that play at least 30 hours a week and they're still absolutely terrible.
There'll always be players on the fringe. That's for sure, and the reasons for it are often complex to the point of being almost inscrutable. I don't think Koreans live on a different planet than us with longer days, or that they're physiologically better equipped to play video games, but that they're part of a different gaming culture. I was wrong to use them as an example, as it's such an anecdotal case, but I think there's a good point to be salvaged here. Korean players in many western games, from RTS to MMOs, are often better. Not all, but enough that there's a common reputation for skill and extreme precision associated with them. There's obviously something that sets them apart, and it seems absurd to me to attribute this to some sort of inherent quality of a large ethno-cultural group.
What you're talking about in your second paragraph is simply knowledge. You're highlighting people being glorified number crunchers as the acme of talent and skill that should be tested, as opposed to players being given an even footing and seeing who is able to squeeze the most efficiency and results from the same exact thing the other player is given
It is knowledge, yes, but it's more intuitive than you make it seem. I find it better described as "tactical skill." I know to generally run away from axemen but I also trust myself to fight them if they seem to be moving in a certain way. If they're moving like Leman Russ I gtfo as fast as I can, but if they're moving less fluidly and more predictably than him then can often stand and fight. I know what I can do with my particular weapons, and what axes can do against my particular armour, and sometimes I can discern something identifiable in the variable that is my opponent's skill. I don't think this is the pinnacle of Warband expertise, nor should it be considered as such, but it's a unique quality of cRPG combat apart from combat skill. In Native combat, especially when using the exact same gear and stats as an opponent, it's mostly about standing and fighting till death or victory. There isn't the same tactical evaluation of personal or interpersonal style and armament as there is in cRPG - and I find that a loss.
which is the true difference of what makes a player good.
And this is where we differ. I think there's more to cRPG than grinding and combat skill. There's judgement, and tactical deception. HarmlessPeasant can beat me as a peasant even if I'm in Goretooth's gear, but I can beat many other skilled players with my hammer. It's not just because my hammer is awesome, though it is, it's because I'm familiar with the eccentricities of the hammer and they're not. Were I fighting in Native this balancing between known vs unknown quantities would be lost. In these tactical decisions I see another kind of skill that isn't present in Native. So yes, it is about what you know, but I think it's unfair to say it's just about what you know and not how you use it to your advantage.
P.S. I talked to some of the tournament organizers recently and I think they've decided to host the matches in cRPG servers.
-
You should check this (http://www.coachingmanagement.nl/The%20Making%20of%20an%20Expert.pdf) out, Rhade.
-
Once again I am forced to use this-
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
somebody post a summary
-
Once again I am forced to use this-
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
somebody post a summary
dont pretend like u didnt read all that...
lol
-
You should check this (http://www.coachingmanagement.nl/The%20Making%20of%20an%20Expert.pdf) out, Rhade.
And I can go find some other studies proving otherwise?
You really think that anyone can become elite at something simply by working consistenly at it?
No matter what I do, I will never be a professional singer, I am absolutely terrible at it and I have certain traits about me that block me from being professional at it.
-
No matter what I do, I will never be a professional singer, I am absolutely terrible at it and I have certain traits about me that block me from being professional at it.
Most professional singers have years of vocal training and practice under their belts. Perhaps what's stopping you is just your attitude.