Submitted by Bloodstorm on Fri, 24/02/2012 - 12:40.
Recently there has been a bit of talk about insuring everyone who wants to play competitively gets some game time in matches. Through talking to the Bod and the leaders of our gaming we have come up with a few ideas that could work but it really comes down to what you guys want to do.
So please vote and put a comment on here as to what you think we should do.
Submitted by Mattatuide on Fri, 24/02/2012 - 13:46.
we need to figure out how we split the team. do we have a A snd B team , o do we spread the skills into both teams.
Limpet and I thought about this for BC2 but could find a fair way to split it.
Also if we do go the A/B team we will need more people to step up to be a captain for matches, Limpet and I can help you with how things work(in game and on the sites) you just have to ask.
That being said I would love to see a extra 4v4 team in the ladder, I think we have not only the skill within the team but we also have the drive with in the team to do well in the ladder.
one last thing I dont think the rush ladder 10v10 will get off the ground, only 4-5 teams have signed up for it.
Submitted by Fishey101 on Fri, 24/02/2012 - 16:22.
well i think more 8v8 matches cause ive played a friendly 4v4 and there hard so if theres a B team it might be shit cause we would vs all the good teams and if we have an 8v8 team (not including the 4v4 people) it will be more fun as thers more of us and also better people to play
Split the team into an A and a B team. The only issue with that is finding a captain who is regularly online. If you ask me, I would not want to compromise the A team by moving one of the members to the B team. You want the best in the A team, and then whoever else wants to play (either because they aren’t around often, or are not skilled enough to be in the A team).
There is the hard part of telling people to be in the B team. However, skill is a fact. There are people better than me, and not as good as me. Skill comes with both natural talent, and also practice. Anyone in the B team can practice, and become good enough to play in the A team.
the games should be shared, be it 4v4, 8v8 or 64v64, there should be equal chance for everyone to play… 1st and foremost we play as friends.
at the moment i dont think its being equally shared, which disipoints me.
everyone here is equal, and their ideas are equal… I know people who have quit our team because they dont think their ideas and strats are valued or listened too. I know I’ve recently been in a match where we got raped by a tank… over and over, but was shouted down at every “maybe we should try a different approach” suggestion – hey I wasn’t the captain… but its pretty poor form and we lost 0-300 odd tickets (and then the people “rage quit” after the match? Made the poorer shooters among us feel bad, unfairly!
I’ve also seen/heard of people being abused of late for “submitting challenges”, again poor form
sharing the workload is a better option then 2 teams. it will end up with an elite A-team and Mediocre B-team unless we split the talent… which drives in the face of “playing with mates”
8 v 8 matches are good for all of us to play and work as a bigger team. In regards to splitting the squad rush teams, I’d prefer an A (leet) team and B (less leet) team.
The A team can be the more competitive team and have a crack at getting up the ladder as much as possible, while the B team can simply play for fun, experience
Submitted by Fishey101 on Sat, 25/02/2012 - 12:44.
yeh if anything i agree with step up, the A team goes for gold while the B team tries to move up but doesn’t compete against the better teams. they stay like in the 40s or 30s
Submitted by Mattatuide on Sat, 25/02/2012 - 14:12.
Not only getting into games, but also getting practice working as another squad.
It’s not like the b team would have to play against the top teams, they just challenge mud to lower teams.
And Shad the people who a quit the team over that had no real reason to quit and really should stop being brought up as it is done and dusted.
Submitted by Mattatuide on Sat, 25/02/2012 - 20:17.
But the two you are taking about, one was a misunderstanding and the other was just someone who needed to harden up.as to you, you have never said anything about your concerns that I have yet to hear about any of it.so yes in the case of what happened in the past it is done and dusted.I haven’t even been playing or setting up matches so don’t lay all the blame at me, if you have a problem tell me.
Recently there has been a bit of talk about insuring everyone who wants to play competitively gets some game time in matches.
Therefore, you should be able to attain that there has been an issue brought to our attention, its NOT just me Matt… people have brought this concern to our attention, and while I may be able to shrug it off… other whose heart is in the right place may appreciate being “included” as part of the team. And this isn’t holey directed at you matt… its directed at all of us! to encourage all of us focusing on team…
I continually point out that we are NOT a Gaming Clan… We are a team (community) who games! (see the order of precedence in the language of the title). You constantly point out that “majority of people are here to game”… So I say let them! however, I’d like to say that I believe the correct way to say it is “Majority of people are here to game…. together!”
inclusiveness, willingness to hear each others ideas, and accept each other for their strengths and weaknesses!
People dont play deliberately with the intent of being “a poor shooter”, nor do they enter a game with the intent on letting anyone down. Under the environment which we live as part of IPX, people DO come here to feel welcome, able to share ideas, be listened to, and ultimately feel good about being part of a team which upholds these values! They dont come to play together to lose a game and be left in the server feeling horrible about losing… especially when they did what they were told!
Part of being a good leader is the ability to stop and go back to help the weakest man and bring him up with the rest of the pack… ensuring that no one is left behind. Not cutting half of YOUR team loose because they are “lesser” beings, choosing to be part merry little band of elite soldiers leaving the “weak” behind – pity those weaklings were your team mates, who joined up to a ladder team, often at request, to game as part of a holistic team, yet find themselves part of the “B-team”
I personally dont support any move to create segregation, nor the foundations of animosity!
but hey, in this beautiful thing we have here, I am only one voice! One among many, and that is why its beautiful!
back a step here. I don’t think we are talking about splitting leet players and less leet players. For one, none of us are that good (maybe deadite), its more about a group within the team wanting to take one ladder a little more serious. There’s some here that are on 5 to 6 nights a week playing, practising, coming up with strats and have asked a question.
Its like junior soccer all over again. You have 16 players who would play one game a week, practiced once a week as a team but there was 11 players that wanted to get the team into the top division next year. They practised at home after school and at lunch they were getting good. They had a great goalie and a great striker. The other 5 players were great people, but had busy lives and couldn’t commit to the same training. First game of the season they play with the best 11 just buy chance, smashed the other team. All 16 feel proud. Next week 5 of the top team are not played. They are beaten by a lesser team, things a said, everyone feels shit. What’s right? I don’t know. The players that couldn’t prac as much feel shit, because they let the others down, the better players feel shit because they lost and that they yelled at the others.
This is meant to be fun so what ever is decided needs to be fun for all.
shad quote
“I know I’ve recently been in a match where we got raped by a tank… over and over, but was shouted down at every “maybe we should try a different approach” suggestion – hey I wasn’t the captain… but its pretty poor form and we lost 0-300 odd tickets (and then the people “rage quit” after the match? Made the poorer shooters among us feel bad, unfairly!”
Suggesting we should try a different approach is fine. Nobody actually suggested a diff approach, except saying maybe we should try something different which isn’t a suggestion. If someone had said “lets try rushing the tank down main rd. get to rubble with three engies and set up a cross fire position” that would be diff story. Not sure if I was cap or Mat. but a bad plan is better than no plan. and the plan at that stage was to kill the tank with 5 engies so we could get out of the spawn. nfy who we played are a dame good team so losing by 300 tickets was probably fair enough. But hey if you wanted to be captain shad you should’ve put your hand up instead of criticizing it 3 weeks later.
Back to the vote, I’m not going to vote because I’m happy to do what ever as part of the team. This game is starting to make me rage more and more and don’t like been like that. If we decide to split the team into 2 4v4 then cool we can all play to improve whether its an A and B team or team 1 and team 2 or team barbie and team analmunches. If not then we need some way of choosing a team. If you ask me as Captain I’ll always choose the strongest team available on mumble. If you don’t want me to captain that’s fine to, because i never asked to be.
2 part response (most of my response deals directly with a 2 team split based on skill – which seems to be the current suggestion)
Part 1 A: My concern is, not what youve raised above. What you raise above int he 1st part with the “soccer” analogy is reality… I have absolutely NO problem with this. I am fully aware that I would be one of the last people to be able to play. be it my availability, or skill or apparent lack of interest. Yes I agree – support people who put in the effort! (which is pretty much the IPX way). (I personally fall into the category of the “B-Team due to availability – but i dont have an issue with that – see the second part of my answer) But herein lays the problem.
We have some individuals who love the game, put in a decent chunk of effort is setting up things, have practiced enough to become a decent player… doing all the same a the rest… but they have indicated to us, and we have observed they are not being played!! this is MY issue here! what are the causes? Not being part of a social tighter click? Personality clashes? who knows! But this is the crux of the problem!
Your thoughts of picking the best players on the night is valid! If you’ve got 6 people of equal skill, effort whatever, whatever and only 4 can play… you’ll need to share it around! how? Currently all indications are it isn’t happening. I think YOU limpet ALSO raised this as a concern!
Part 2: The example I use RE the tank, a suggestion was made – it was “avoid the tank” with numbers going to the flags futher from the tank, we could cap the flags before the tank arrived, therefore taking tickets, we stood a chance in an infantry firefight, nullified the tanks involvement y making it chase us and by moving on. (VERY guerrilla warfare) Robag and I both raised this as a tactic! However as the captain, (which was you limpy) which I have ABSOLUTLY no problem with, chose to continue the planned strat! NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL! I accept you were the captain, it was your call. We didn’t do a Kevin Rudd and undermine, we executed the strat to the best of our ability!
NO issue here at all – All i raise this issue/example is to point out that it DOES happen, and people my feel like their ideas and contributions arent being heard! (no issue with YOU as a captain limpy! – I said all along the best way to ensure your strat/idea is being implemented is to be captain/make a strat – but would a person who is of lesser skill be prescribed the same amount of respect as a captain?)
what I DO have a problem with was, after the match, you and about 5 or 6 remained to discover HOW that tank was able to survive… it was actually lesser skilled players in the main who did this… it was valuable to see HOW we got raped (Good) however some of the better skilled players rage quit – it was implied that we lesser skilled players couldn’t shoot/time our RPG attacks, and made people feel awful! (BAD) (funnily enough the disection/post game investigation indicated that we would NEVER have taken the tank down with the number of engies we had, even with all 5 RPGs perfectly timed!)
so my example ISNT about someone being captain and sticking to the strat (which I fully support) – its about NOT making your team mates feel bad, when they did their best! (Im NOT critising the captaincy, you or your choices.. im just using it as an example – the post game “rage” and feeling that we let YOU down is what im driving at!) (I dont want to be captain, ill make some suggestions as a good Non-Com officer should… ill execute your orders – and did)
finally, there are much greater issues with splitting the team, ones which people MY not instantly think of… (i discussed some of these with Micro/Blood last night)
an example of a few
1. New players: a new player/pub random see’s our A Team… becomes friends with someone in the A Team… wants to PLAY with the A Team… but! he puts in all the effort, but is of lesser skill? or is of greater skill but puts in fuck all effort…. what team does he go into? is it right or wrong to deny him playing with the people he intentionally joined to play with? is it right or wrong to put him before others in the B team working their way into the A team through effort and practice?
2. the B Team: while looking past the instant negative connotations… the concept ha a number of flaws: what likelihood does this team stand (due to availabilities etc) of being able to consistently pull together a team? due to availability/variable commitment what chance does this team stand of being able to co-ordinate and win a match? (both these risk people “not enjoying the game” not wanting to play…. and quitting playing – the whole of IPX loses
3. HOW logistically does a player “work their way up to the A team”? teams would need to be locked. and there is a conundrum now…. we have a team B captain putting in effort, strats, organising, pracing (technically putting MORE effort in then the lower A team people – is that fair? If the B team captain gets promoted, where does that leave the B team? How do we think the “relegated” A team player is going to feel? All issues
4. Once the rosters lock, what happens if a team is short? there is very little support/back up
anyway, this is long enough.
again my suggestion is: More 8v8 games giving everyone a run…. using the 8v8 roster and games as a “talent Pool” to resource the 4v4… everyone in this instance gets a game in 8v8, and has equal chance (if done properly) to be involved in the 4v4 matches
i don’t think we have quite enough keen people to run two teams. You would need at least 6 per team. at the moment we have about 8ish, but putting two teams, would insure more game time for all, diff strats for diff teams.
If we went the a team b team way, they only way you could split it would be on ability and it would be a harsh reality for all. If we called it social team, comp team, it might be less harsh. Comp team is performance based only. If you sign up (and anybody can sign up) for this team you WILL be judged on performance so don’t be surprised if you/I don’t get picked for the match. Theres no crying to the BOD if you don’t get picked. Social team, as is, having fun mixing everybody up sharing the load.
As in your suggestion of “avoid the tank” in game i’m sorry but that wasn’t much of an option in my opinion in that game, thats why I shot it down pretty quickly. I don’t actually recal much of a rage quit at the end there since we had 8 still on to test the theory. And if you felt bad or anybody else felt bad let me give them some hugs now. It was never the intention i’m always gutted when we loose.
No issues with not following the suggestion… you were the captain. Im just using that example as one which I was involved with, to highlight that people DO make suggestions! (and when they suck, we dont laugh at them, that is all at IPX )
I didnt take any offence to you NOT using it! it was you call you were the captain NOT an issue!
as above the issue i and others had was over the treatment by a few “mature” and “senior” team members who made US feel like we were shit, even though we executed the strat! especially considering at this match we only just had the numbers, and we scraped the bottom of the barrel to field a team (indicated by ME being in the game obviously)
I agree with your second paragraph, but we’d still need to addess the items (1-4 which I raised above)
Submitted by Mattatuide on Sun, 26/02/2012 - 15:01.
anything to say?
Limpet,Shad and I can’t be the only ones with thoughts on this,everybody needs to have a say so that we all know whats going on and how to look into the future.Like shad said “no right or wrong onions opinions!”
Submitted by Don-Robbery on Sun, 26/02/2012 - 15:28.
I think if we wish to become competitive on a regular basis we need to put ground work in. whether it be single 8v8 or two 4v4 teams there needs to be a mix of great/good players with the up and coming.
An example is the dojo I train in. Two years ago I attended a night of kick boxing as a spectator. There were a few first time fighters and while we practise technique etc in class all that went out the window come fight time. It was a flail of arms and legs. It was decided last year that a big push on us instructors to improve fight skills for those who wanted to fight. Students are now taught how to work more effectively with pads and in sparing. Idea being the partner you are with is training you and the instructor comes by every now and then to assist, correct and PRAISE.
Earlier this year (some 4 fight nights since the above) the skill of first time fighters has increased in such a way that people had no idea it was peoples first fights, outstanding team work made the whole club lift to a level we are all very proud of. One of our guys recently won the South Island amateur title as a result.
In my opinion to do the same if we want to be competitive we need to mix the teams. Maybe 1 up and coming player in 4v4 with 3 outstanding players for a round every now an then. For 8v8, same again, 6 great/good players and 2 up and coming players rotated through. This mix keeps us competitive and helps push the newer comp players along, down the track we’ll see the results of such work.
Feedback to players and a debrief of rounds needs to occur with any such plan, without discussion of what worked and what didn’t no-one learns including our masters. Players need to be aware that constructive feedback will occur and we will all make mistakes its simply important to understand that it should never be personal and that PRAISE needs to be given especially for our younger players.
It all comes down to the direction you wish to take the team. I for one joined for the social aspect so am happy either way. I also have no delusion that I’ll be a deadite, matt of limpey but I do appreciate the assistance and coaching in my game play which I’d never get from you lot without playing in the same team as you competitively.
In saying all of that, the players that have time to dedicate 4-5 nights a week playing and feel they have the ability to compete in a 4v4 ladder and go far shouldn’t be stopped, just remember there a those of us that benefit from playing with and watching your handy work. An example is limpet teaching us during a match where we got raped to peak shoot and move back, letting someone else peak and shoot. This alone helped me in ways I would have never learned on my own.
Amazing h0w it c0mes d0wn t0 this discussi0n again….
Again U say, yep this exact c0nversati0n was made back in the etqw days and it’s 0utc0me was;
IPX game t0 have fun and if we win great but n0 A 0r B teams
Other etqw clans had there A & B Teams and they failed s0cially even t0 the p0int that 0ne 0f th0se A/B teams left and f0rmed there 0wned team allt0gether…..
IPX is a s0cial team 1st and f0rm0st we d0n’t all game 2 win n0r sh0uld we…….
I w0uld never supp0rt an A and B team as it lessens the team as a wh0le…….
Make a r0tati0n r0ster
Make the Captain aware that U missed the last 3 games then y0ur fell0w ipxer sh0uld step aside
But never think f0r a sec0und we are here t0 win, yes it’s nice t0 win but it’s better t0 say we played as a team…
Dons suggestions are very pertinent re development… is separating the team going to achieve this?
You know, this discussion wouldn’t be happening if:
a post went out which said “do you want to join the 4v4 team” – listing expectations (availability, skill requirements, amount of practice etc)” and this all occurred upfront (instead of the “shit we need numbers – accept the join request” situation which we had/normally have)
Id be more inclined support a “competitive” team if people had the option to in and out from the front… and it was made well known that there were “expectations” (id hazard a guess that we’d more great players, PROPER practice would be multiple nights, and regular scrims would need to be organised – this all requires a higher level of commitment then currently on offer (id guess you’d struggle to commit 4 people from the current roster to all that)). And aslong as the “whole team” takes precedence over a few: i.e if there is a greater interest in “casual” over “roid rage competitiveness” and there is a dispute the “whole team” option prevails!
a different “ladder” would avoid this “conflict situation” of two IPX teams wanting to participate in the same comp
Submitted by Bloodstorm on Mon, 27/02/2012 - 08:10.
Got to remember n0mad this isnt the whole of ipx splitting into two teams. This isnt even the whole bf3 part of ipx its just this one ladder. Just the 4v4.
Ok going on from your point shad then do we have a trial for the competitive team. But if we go by availability, skill and amount of practice it will be the same people who play most of them at the moment. Because they are the people who put the time and effort in to organising these matches, Configuring our server, spending several nights a week on strats. And its a little unfair on those people to make all their work wasted by forcing them to play members who dont listen when other members try to teach them how to play better or who dont show up to pracs and then in matches end up running around like a headless chicken because they havnt been through the strat like the other members.
Before a trial even is thought about some type of selection criteria needs to be made!
I’d hazard that “skill” is lower priority, then say practice attendance! (you can’t do a play off/last 4 men standing approach otherwise it’ll end up like the “1st death of 99” experience we in IPX had at 00:03 in jan 1st 1999)
What we don’t want is “social clicks” running the place! We don’t want an example of someone who is listening, is trying, has improved, but still isn’t picked! (and until there is a fair and measurable way to determine who is playing – how can people say split? Split based on what criteria!)I know how bout we split the teams by people’s names a-l, m-z? For example?
I’m NOT fighting a competitive team! I want people to THINK outside there box, put themselves in others shoes, assess the consequences and the methodology before jumping to a result!
Split into 2× 4v4 teams is a solution. Someone document me a process/methodooy to get to that result and why that’s the best outcome for IPX!
At the moment this discussion is all great info to how better to run the team!
Don, Limpy, Bl00d n0mad and Shad +1
this is a healthy discussion.
Bare with me as a work through this…..
Team Captains, are putting in a lot of effort. 6 full time players and 2 4v4 team would have us scrambling for numbers imo
Us IPX’s pride ourselves on being organised, I have no problem with a competitive A team in the 4v4, I don’t like splitting them. Looking at the current votes “ more 8v8” seems to be the trend.
The other IPX’s that want to play 4v4 can prove themself in the pracing and scrim with the 4v4 on training night. This will allow the captains of the 4v4 team to gauge who is improving, who may need help, as well as who is eager to play.
The talent pool for the 4v4 can be the 8v8, imo a better place to help people learn how to adjust their game play style for a team base comp.
Plus allow more IPX’s to have a go in a comp game, and put in the effort that is required to get better.
This allow the 8v8 and 4v4 teams to still have the numbers and subs if required, it also put all players on the same page so to speak. i.e. the core 4v4 players can scrim and prac with the 8v8 team and vice versa. We have our own BF3 server for this very reason.
A Roster for the 4v4 is very important, be it a weekly draw via the 4v4 team captains, based on criteria such as Prac and Scrim attendance, filling out the table and matches played
One other point on organisation is we need to have clear days for 4v4 Vs 8v8 matches, we are getting a lot of date cross over’s, I would personally like to have set days of the week or weekend for 4v4 vs 8v8
Submitted by Mattatuide on Mon, 27/02/2012 - 14:39.
You will get people with less skill not getting games, it’s unfair for you to say that the players that put on the time and effort have to miss out on a game because a less skilled player who hasn’t been to training our practiced much.
So we have two options
1 we keep going like we have been for the 4v4 and people will miss out on games
2 have a second team that challenges the mid to lower ladder to get games
This is all different to the 8v8 which we can get the numbers for its just Easier to get more games for the smaller format.
Submitted by Mattatuide on Mon, 27/02/2012 - 20:26.
in the sense of teams to play and the fact that you can have 3 challenges at once.
It is also easier to find teams to scrim against and get numbers for us to play/prac for.
I very much doubt that we could get the numbers on for more than a game and one prac night for the 8v8.
what blood said I agree with……i.e. people praccing, stratting more should get priority…….I don’t mind losing games IF I know my squadmates and I put in some preparation for the match. I’m over the playing games with 0 preparation and getting smashed now, especially with BF3, it’s a frustrating game.
also when I said I would prefer two teams it wasn’t it in the sense of dividing the team………….this is just one ladder, in one game, that ipx plays, so I don’t think people should feel like there would be some sort of division created
That 8v8 game we played last week was good fun so that’s a comp the whole team can aim in participating in.
However, as Limpy pointed out, we’d probably struggle in consistently fielding two teams in the 4v4 comp anyway, so all these points/arguments may end up not mattering.
Comments
Morning Guys
Recently there has been a bit of talk about insuring everyone who wants to play competitively gets some game time in matches. Through talking to the Bod and the leaders of our gaming we have come up with a few ideas that could work but it really comes down to what you guys want to do.
So please vote and put a comment on here as to what you think we should do.
Cheers
if we go with the extra 4v4 team
we need to figure out how we split the team. do we have a A snd B team , o do we spread the skills into both teams.
Limpet and I thought about this for BC2 but could find a fair way to split it.
Also if we do go the A/B team we will need more people to step up to be a captain for matches, Limpet and I can help you with how things work(in game and on the sites) you just have to ask.
That being said I would love to see a extra 4v4 team in the ladder, I think we have not only the skill within the team but we also have the drive with in the team to do well in the ladder.
one last thing I dont think the rush ladder 10v10 will get off the ground, only 4-5 teams have signed up for it.
well i think more 8v8 matches
well i think more 8v8 matches cause ive played a friendly 4v4 and there hard so if theres a B team it might be shit cause we would vs all the good teams and if we have an 8v8 team (not including the 4v4 people) it will be more fun as thers more of us and also better people to play
A new 4v4 team
Split the team into an A and a B team. The only issue with that is finding a captain who is regularly online. If you ask me, I would not want to compromise the A team by moving one of the members to the B team. You want the best in the A team, and then whoever else wants to play (either because they aren’t around often, or are not skilled enough to be in the A team).
There is the hard part of telling people to be in the B team. However, skill is a fact. There are people better than me, and not as good as me. Skill comes with both natural talent, and also practice. Anyone in the B team can practice, and become good enough to play in the A team.
That’s what I reckon :-)
quite clearly
the games should be shared, be it 4v4, 8v8 or 64v64, there should be equal chance for everyone to play… 1st and foremost we play as friends.
at the moment i dont think its being equally shared, which disipoints me.
everyone here is equal, and their ideas are equal… I know people who have quit our team because they dont think their ideas and strats are valued or listened too. I know I’ve recently been in a match where we got raped by a tank… over and over, but was shouted down at every “maybe we should try a different approach” suggestion – hey I wasn’t the captain… but its pretty poor form and we lost 0-300 odd tickets (and then the people “rage quit” after the match? Made the poorer shooters among us feel bad, unfairly!
I’ve also seen/heard of people being abused of late for “submitting challenges”, again poor form
sharing the workload is a better option then 2 teams. it will end up with an elite A-team and Mediocre B-team unless we split the talent… which drives in the face of “playing with mates”
so I suggest more games / Sharing the play around
i vote for more 8 v 8 and two 4 player teams for squad rush
8 v 8 matches are good for all of us to play and work as a bigger team. In regards to splitting the squad rush teams, I’d prefer an A (leet) team and B (less leet) team.
The A team can be the more competitive team and have a crack at getting up the ladder as much as possible, while the B team can simply play for fun, experience
yeh if anything i agree with
yeh if anything i agree with step up, the A team goes for gold while the B team tries to move up but doesn’t compete against the better teams. they stay like in the 40s or 30s
I think it's more about
Not only getting into games, but also getting practice working as another squad.
It’s not like the b team would have to play against the top teams, they just challenge mud to lower teams.
And Shad the people who a quit the team over that had no real reason to quit and really should stop being brought up as it is done and dusted.
I say we call a team meeting
For some b time this week to sort out what we want to do and get everybodys thoughts.
Matt it is ALL relevant!
considering the two people I know you are referring to are NOT the only examples… nor the most recent to raise these concerns!!
Shit I even raised a personal concern above… are you dismissing that as “done and dusted”?
no Shad I'm not
But the two you are taking about, one was a misunderstanding and the other was just someone who needed to harden up.as to you, you have never said anything about your concerns that I have yet to hear about any of it.so yes in the case of what happened in the past it is done and dusted.I haven’t even been playing or setting up matches so don’t lay all the blame at me, if you have a problem tell me.
I quote bloods original
I quote bloods original post
Therefore, you should be able to attain that there has been an issue brought to our attention, its NOT just me Matt… people have brought this concern to our attention, and while I may be able to shrug it off… other whose heart is in the right place may appreciate being “included” as part of the team. And this isn’t holey directed at you matt… its directed at all of us! to encourage all of us focusing on team…
I continually point out that we are NOT a Gaming Clan… We are a team (community) who games! (see the order of precedence in the language of the title). You constantly point out that “majority of people are here to game”… So I say let them! however, I’d like to say that I believe the correct way to say it is “Majority of people are here to game…. together!”
inclusiveness, willingness to hear each others ideas, and accept each other for their strengths and weaknesses!
People dont play deliberately with the intent of being “a poor shooter”, nor do they enter a game with the intent on letting anyone down. Under the environment which we live as part of IPX, people DO come here to feel welcome, able to share ideas, be listened to, and ultimately feel good about being part of a team which upholds these values! They dont come to play together to lose a game and be left in the server feeling horrible about losing… especially when they did what they were told!
Part of being a good leader is the ability to stop and go back to help the weakest man and bring him up with the rest of the pack… ensuring that no one is left behind. Not cutting half of YOUR team loose because they are “lesser” beings, choosing to be part merry little band of elite soldiers leaving the “weak” behind – pity those weaklings were your team mates, who joined up to a ladder team, often at request, to game as part of a holistic team, yet find themselves part of the “B-team”
I personally dont support any move to create segregation, nor the foundations of animosity!
but hey, in this beautiful thing we have here, I am only one voice! One among many, and that is why its beautiful!
lets take it
back a step here. I don’t think we are talking about splitting leet players and less leet players. For one, none of us are that good (maybe deadite), its more about a group within the team wanting to take one ladder a little more serious. There’s some here that are on 5 to 6 nights a week playing, practising, coming up with strats and have asked a question.
Its like junior soccer all over again. You have 16 players who would play one game a week, practiced once a week as a team but there was 11 players that wanted to get the team into the top division next year. They practised at home after school and at lunch they were getting good. They had a great goalie and a great striker. The other 5 players were great people, but had busy lives and couldn’t commit to the same training. First game of the season they play with the best 11 just buy chance, smashed the other team. All 16 feel proud. Next week 5 of the top team are not played. They are beaten by a lesser team, things a said, everyone feels shit. What’s right? I don’t know. The players that couldn’t prac as much feel shit, because they let the others down, the better players feel shit because they lost and that they yelled at the others.
This is meant to be fun so what ever is decided needs to be fun for all.
shad quote
“I know I’ve recently been in a match where we got raped by a tank… over and over, but was shouted down at every “maybe we should try a different approach” suggestion – hey I wasn’t the captain… but its pretty poor form and we lost 0-300 odd tickets (and then the people “rage quit” after the match? Made the poorer shooters among us feel bad, unfairly!”
Suggesting we should try a different approach is fine. Nobody actually suggested a diff approach, except saying maybe we should try something different which isn’t a suggestion. If someone had said “lets try rushing the tank down main rd. get to rubble with three engies and set up a cross fire position” that would be diff story. Not sure if I was cap or Mat. but a bad plan is better than no plan. and the plan at that stage was to kill the tank with 5 engies so we could get out of the spawn. nfy who we played are a dame good team so losing by 300 tickets was probably fair enough. But hey if you wanted to be captain shad you should’ve put your hand up instead of criticizing it 3 weeks later.
Back to the vote, I’m not going to vote because I’m happy to do what ever as part of the team. This game is starting to make me rage more and more and don’t like been like that. If we decide to split the team into 2 4v4 then cool we can all play to improve whether its an A and B team or team 1 and team 2 or team barbie and team analmunches. If not then we need some way of choosing a team. If you ask me as Captain I’ll always choose the strongest team available on mumble. If you don’t want me to captain that’s fine to, because i never asked to be.
limpy
2 part response (most of my response deals directly with a 2 team split based on skill – which seems to be the current suggestion)
Part 1 A: My concern is, not what youve raised above. What you raise above int he 1st part with the “soccer” analogy is reality… I have absolutely NO problem with this. I am fully aware that I would be one of the last people to be able to play. be it my availability, or skill or apparent lack of interest. Yes I agree – support people who put in the effort! (which is pretty much the IPX way). (I personally fall into the category of the “B-Team due to availability – but i dont have an issue with that – see the second part of my answer) But herein lays the problem.
We have some individuals who love the game, put in a decent chunk of effort is setting up things, have practiced enough to become a decent player… doing all the same a the rest… but they have indicated to us, and we have observed they are not being played!! this is MY issue here! what are the causes? Not being part of a social tighter click? Personality clashes? who knows! But this is the crux of the problem!
Your thoughts of picking the best players on the night is valid! If you’ve got 6 people of equal skill, effort whatever, whatever and only 4 can play… you’ll need to share it around! how? Currently all indications are it isn’t happening. I think YOU limpet ALSO raised this as a concern!
Part 2: The example I use RE the tank, a suggestion was made – it was “avoid the tank” with numbers going to the flags futher from the tank, we could cap the flags before the tank arrived, therefore taking tickets, we stood a chance in an infantry firefight, nullified the tanks involvement y making it chase us and by moving on. (VERY guerrilla warfare) Robag and I both raised this as a tactic! However as the captain, (which was you limpy) which I have ABSOLUTLY no problem with, chose to continue the planned strat! NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL! I accept you were the captain, it was your call. We didn’t do a Kevin Rudd and undermine, we executed the strat to the best of our ability!
NO issue here at all – All i raise this issue/example is to point out that it DOES happen, and people my feel like their ideas and contributions arent being heard! (no issue with YOU as a captain limpy! – I said all along the best way to ensure your strat/idea is being implemented is to be captain/make a strat – but would a person who is of lesser skill be prescribed the same amount of respect as a captain?)
what I DO have a problem with was, after the match, you and about 5 or 6 remained to discover HOW that tank was able to survive… it was actually lesser skilled players in the main who did this… it was valuable to see HOW we got raped (Good) however some of the better skilled players rage quit – it was implied that we lesser skilled players couldn’t shoot/time our RPG attacks, and made people feel awful! (BAD) (funnily enough the disection/post game investigation indicated that we would NEVER have taken the tank down with the number of engies we had, even with all 5 RPGs perfectly timed!)
so my example ISNT about someone being captain and sticking to the strat (which I fully support) – its about NOT making your team mates feel bad, when they did their best! (Im NOT critising the captaincy, you or your choices.. im just using it as an example – the post game “rage” and feeling that we let YOU down is what im driving at!) (I dont want to be captain, ill make some suggestions as a good Non-Com officer should… ill execute your orders – and did)
finally, there are much greater issues with splitting the team, ones which people MY not instantly think of… (i discussed some of these with Micro/Blood last night)
an example of a few
1. New players: a new player/pub random see’s our A Team… becomes friends with someone in the A Team… wants to PLAY with the A Team… but! he puts in all the effort, but is of lesser skill? or is of greater skill but puts in fuck all effort…. what team does he go into? is it right or wrong to deny him playing with the people he intentionally joined to play with? is it right or wrong to put him before others in the B team working their way into the A team through effort and practice?
2. the B Team: while looking past the instant negative connotations… the concept ha a number of flaws: what likelihood does this team stand (due to availabilities etc) of being able to consistently pull together a team? due to availability/variable commitment what chance does this team stand of being able to co-ordinate and win a match? (both these risk people “not enjoying the game” not wanting to play…. and quitting playing – the whole of IPX loses
3. HOW logistically does a player “work their way up to the A team”? teams would need to be locked. and there is a conundrum now…. we have a team B captain putting in effort, strats, organising, pracing (technically putting MORE effort in then the lower A team people – is that fair? If the B team captain gets promoted, where does that leave the B team? How do we think the “relegated” A team player is going to feel? All issues
4. Once the rosters lock, what happens if a team is short? there is very little support/back up
anyway, this is long enough.
again my suggestion is: More 8v8 games giving everyone a run…. using the 8v8 roster and games as a “talent Pool” to resource the 4v4… everyone in this instance gets a game in 8v8, and has equal chance (if done properly) to be involved in the 4v4 matches
to be honest
i don’t think we have quite enough keen people to run two teams. You would need at least 6 per team. at the moment we have about 8ish, but putting two teams, would insure more game time for all, diff strats for diff teams.
If we went the a team b team way, they only way you could split it would be on ability and it would be a harsh reality for all. If we called it social team, comp team, it might be less harsh. Comp team is performance based only. If you sign up (and anybody can sign up) for this team you WILL be judged on performance so don’t be surprised if you/I don’t get picked for the match. Theres no crying to the BOD if you don’t get picked. Social team, as is, having fun mixing everybody up sharing the load.
As in your suggestion of “avoid the tank” in game i’m sorry but that wasn’t much of an option in my opinion in that game, thats why I shot it down pretty quickly. I don’t actually recal much of a rage quit at the end there since we had 8 still on to test the theory. And if you felt bad or anybody else felt bad let me give them some hugs now. It was never the intention i’m always gutted when we loose.
the suggestion
No issues with not following the suggestion… you were the captain. Im just using that example as one which I was involved with, to highlight that people DO make suggestions! (and when they suck, we dont laugh at them, that is all at IPX )
I didnt take any offence to you NOT using it! it was you call you were the captain NOT an issue!
as above the issue i and others had was over the treatment by a few “mature” and “senior” team members who made US feel like we were shit, even though we executed the strat! especially considering at this match we only just had the numbers, and we scraped the bottom of the barrel to field a team (indicated by ME being in the game obviously)
I agree with your second paragraph, but we’d still need to addess the items (1-4 which I raised above)
PS
this is robust disucssion here people, democracy at work!
No right or wrong opinions!
So speak up!
anyone else have
anything to say?
Limpet,Shad and I can’t be the only ones with thoughts on this,everybody needs to have a say so that we all know whats going on and how to look into the future.Like shad said “no right or wrong
onionsopinions!”imo
I think if we wish to become competitive on a regular basis we need to put ground work in. whether it be single 8v8 or two 4v4 teams there needs to be a mix of great/good players with the up and coming.
An example is the dojo I train in. Two years ago I attended a night of kick boxing as a spectator. There were a few first time fighters and while we practise technique etc in class all that went out the window come fight time. It was a flail of arms and legs. It was decided last year that a big push on us instructors to improve fight skills for those who wanted to fight. Students are now taught how to work more effectively with pads and in sparing. Idea being the partner you are with is training you and the instructor comes by every now and then to assist, correct and PRAISE.
Earlier this year (some 4 fight nights since the above) the skill of first time fighters has increased in such a way that people had no idea it was peoples first fights, outstanding team work made the whole club lift to a level we are all very proud of. One of our guys recently won the South Island amateur title as a result.
In my opinion to do the same if we want to be competitive we need to mix the teams. Maybe 1 up and coming player in 4v4 with 3 outstanding players for a round every now an then. For 8v8, same again, 6 great/good players and 2 up and coming players rotated through. This mix keeps us competitive and helps push the newer comp players along, down the track we’ll see the results of such work.
Feedback to players and a debrief of rounds needs to occur with any such plan, without discussion of what worked and what didn’t no-one learns including our masters. Players need to be aware that constructive feedback will occur and we will all make mistakes its simply important to understand that it should never be personal and that PRAISE needs to be given especially for our younger players.
It all comes down to the direction you wish to take the team. I for one joined for the social aspect so am happy either way. I also have no delusion that I’ll be a deadite, matt of limpey but I do appreciate the assistance and coaching in my game play which I’d never get from you lot without playing in the same team as you competitively.
In saying all of that, the players that have time to dedicate 4-5 nights a week playing and feel they have the ability to compete in a 4v4 ladder and go far shouldn’t be stopped, just remember there a those of us that benefit from playing with and watching your handy work. An example is limpet teaching us during a match where we got raped to peak shoot and move back, letting someone else peak and shoot. This alone helped me in ways I would have never learned on my own.
thanks for reading :) see ya’ll around
IPX is better than this
Amazing h0w it c0mes d0wn t0 this discussi0n again….
Again U say, yep this exact c0nversati0n was made back in the etqw days and it’s 0utc0me was;
IPX game t0 have fun and if we win great but n0 A 0r B teams
Other etqw clans had there A & B Teams and they failed s0cially even t0 the p0int that 0ne 0f th0se A/B teams left and f0rmed there 0wned team allt0gether…..
IPX is a s0cial team 1st and f0rm0st we d0n’t all game 2 win n0r sh0uld we…….
I w0uld never supp0rt an A and B team as it lessens the team as a wh0le…….
Make a r0tati0n r0ster
Make the Captain aware that U missed the last 3 games then y0ur fell0w ipxer sh0uld step aside
But never think f0r a sec0und we are here t0 win, yes it’s nice t0 win but it’s better t0 say we played as a team…
n0mad
Never played bfbc3
good points Don
Dons suggestions are very pertinent re development… is separating the team going to achieve this?
You know, this discussion wouldn’t be happening if:
a post went out which said “do you want to join the 4v4 team” – listing expectations (availability, skill requirements, amount of practice etc)” and this all occurred upfront (instead of the “shit we need numbers – accept the join request” situation which we had/normally have)
Id be more inclined support a “competitive” team if people had the option to in and out from the front… and it was made well known that there were “expectations” (id hazard a guess that we’d more great players, PROPER practice would be multiple nights, and regular scrims would need to be organised – this all requires a higher level of commitment then currently on offer (id guess you’d struggle to commit 4 people from the current roster to all that)). And aslong as the “whole team” takes precedence over a few: i.e if there is a greater interest in “casual” over “roid rage competitiveness” and there is a dispute the “whole team” option prevails!
a different “ladder” would avoid this “conflict situation” of two IPX teams wanting to participate in the same comp
-
Got to remember n0mad this isnt the whole of ipx splitting into two teams. This isnt even the whole bf3 part of ipx its just this one ladder. Just the 4v4.
Ok going on from your point shad then do we have a trial for the competitive team. But if we go by availability, skill and amount of practice it will be the same people who play most of them at the moment. Because they are the people who put the time and effort in to organising these matches, Configuring our server, spending several nights a week on strats. And its a little unfair on those people to make all their work wasted by forcing them to play members who dont listen when other members try to teach them how to play better or who dont show up to pracs and then in matches end up running around like a headless chicken because they havnt been through the strat like the other members.
Blood
Before a trial even is thought about some type of selection criteria needs to be made!
I’d hazard that “skill” is lower priority, then say practice attendance! (you can’t do a play off/last 4 men standing approach otherwise it’ll end up like the “1st death of 99” experience we in IPX had at 00:03 in jan 1st 1999)
What we don’t want is “social clicks” running the place! We don’t want an example of someone who is listening, is trying, has improved, but still isn’t picked! (and until there is a fair and measurable way to determine who is playing – how can people say split? Split based on what criteria!)I know how bout we split the teams by people’s names a-l, m-z? For example?
I’m NOT fighting a competitive team! I want people to THINK outside there box, put themselves in others shoes, assess the consequences and the methodology before jumping to a result!
Split into 2× 4v4 teams is a solution. Someone document me a process/methodooy to get to that result and why that’s the best outcome for IPX!
At the moment this discussion is all great info to how better to run the team!
my 2 cents worth
Don, Limpy, Bl00d n0mad and Shad +1
this is a healthy discussion.
Bare with me as a work through this…..
Team Captains, are putting in a lot of effort. 6 full time players and 2 4v4 team would have us scrambling for numbers imo
Us IPX’s pride ourselves on being organised, I have no problem with a competitive A team in the 4v4, I don’t like splitting them. Looking at the current votes “ more 8v8” seems to be the trend.
The other IPX’s that want to play 4v4 can prove themself in the pracing and scrim with the 4v4 on training night. This will allow the captains of the 4v4 team to gauge who is improving, who may need help, as well as who is eager to play.
The talent pool for the 4v4 can be the 8v8, imo a better place to help people learn how to adjust their game play style for a team base comp.
Plus allow more IPX’s to have a go in a comp game, and put in the effort that is required to get better.
This allow the 8v8 and 4v4 teams to still have the numbers and subs if required, it also put all players on the same page so to speak. i.e. the core 4v4 players can scrim and prac with the 8v8 team and vice versa. We have our own BF3 server for this very reason.
A Roster for the 4v4 is very important, be it a weekly draw via the 4v4 team captains, based on criteria such as Prac and Scrim attendance, filling out the table and matches played
One other point on organisation is we need to have clear days for 4v4 Vs 8v8 matches, we are getting a lot of date cross over’s, I would personally like to have set days of the week or weekend for 4v4 vs 8v8
My thoughts
Ta
Robag
Set Times
Set days/times would be great but the ladder rules are you have to offer the other team 3 different days and a couple of different times per day.
plus if we keep one team
You will get people with less skill not getting games, it’s unfair for you to say that the players that put on the time and effort have to miss out on a game because a less skilled player who hasn’t been to training our practiced much.
So we have two options
1 we keep going like we have been for the 4v4 and people will miss out on games
2 have a second team that challenges the mid to lower ladder to get games
This is all different to the 8v8 which we can get the numbers for its just Easier to get more games for the smaller format.
?
Quantify that its “easier” to get 4v4 game over and 8v8 game?
yes it is
in the sense of teams to play and the fact that you can have 3 challenges at once.
It is also easier to find teams to scrim against and get numbers for us to play/prac for.
I very much doubt that we could get the numbers on for more than a game and one prac night for the 8v8.
in the words of Limpet
“For one, none of us are that good (maybe deadite)…”.
That is all.
mmmkay
what blood said I agree with……i.e. people praccing, stratting more should get priority…….I don’t mind losing games IF I know my squadmates and I put in some preparation for the match. I’m over the playing games with 0 preparation and getting smashed now, especially with BF3, it’s a frustrating game.
also when I said I would prefer two teams it wasn’t it in the sense of dividing the team………….this is just one ladder, in one game, that ipx plays, so I don’t think people should feel like there would be some sort of division created
That 8v8 game we played last week was good fun so that’s a comp the whole team can aim in participating in.
However, as Limpy pointed out, we’d probably struggle in consistently fielding two teams in the 4v4 comp anyway, so all these points/arguments may end up not mattering.
very quiet
outcomes from this are??
Post new comment