Another Survivor?...

[html]

fishy-dj please stop arguing there is no best method. Only opinions.


as for the trump card, multiple immunities per map, voting other team, multiple map kick immunity etc etc...

as event organiser i can tell you its pretty much impossible to pull through, i already had somewhat of a hard time after introducing the 3 topfrags in a row = perm rule ; to keep track of everything. Keep in mind that the only time you have to do the votes is the end of the map before it changes (15 seconds?) then the 2 min before the next map starts (it would be impossible with 1 minute) where you have to finish asking whos voted out and then explain the immunitys for the new map at hand.
gl typing " 01 vote anyone off your team except 53, 46, 32 and 02 vote anyone off your team except 99 44 53", without typos and within 15 sec every + noting down who got all the immunties on a sheet + noting down topfrags

i can just see so many fail scenarios in my head:
01 votes 02 out but 02 is like BUT I HAVE A TRUMP CARD, then 01 doesnt remember who was lowest frags so he votes the best player off his team randomly cuz he has no clue -->FAIL

ppl not fully understanding the rules of multiple immunities and argue when they are voted that they had an immunity 3 maps ago/last map or whatever and refusing to leave server, what are you gonna do then tab out to check your screenshot of 3 maps ago?? pause the game and pissoff players waiting in server? -->FAIL

maybe im wrong but everytime i see more rules to make it less random but more complicated all i can foresee is confusion in server and ragequits maybe even leading to a failed event if 2 many ppl ragequit.






on another subject now if i may explain my mapchoices as i havent done it anywhere:

manticore: one map i think no one really knew, I was gonna choose either that or indefiniteAL but indefinite is a bit too big. Manticore isnt really suited for 12v12 but i wanted an unkown map to put some top players uneasy and throw them off balence (zomg a non balli,desert,bridge,siege,golgo,auto,riv3 environment wut do?!)

gladiator: simply the best map suitable for any amount of players above 8v8, 6v6 the map is ok but feels a bit too big and empty, it was the map for the biggest amount of players in every survivor event and for a reason, also the response from the community in the first event was 100% positive.

from this moment on i alternated 1 popular map with 1 less popular map to make the 3 topfrags in a row = perm harder to get

bioassault: a version specifically edited for above 6v6, smant and I went over the defence spawns to move quite a few of them back to ease up the big chokepoints of the map, shame teams were unfair though it didnt get a valid balance test but i think he did a good job. Also the though process behind picking that map was that it was THE most popular map in #naat pugs kinda like ballistic or bridge in utapug that are picked every single pug, and with a reason, its a very intense map, as soon as you spawn both on attack and defence you are within the action immediately, very few other AS maps can boast that, also its one of the few maps where attackers repeatedly get higher frag counts than defence I thought 11v11 would simply bring that intensity to a peak and it would be fun for all.

siege: perhaps the league map most suited for above 8v8 play plus i wanted the guilty pleasure of watching 10 people go for the shieldbelt at the same time

dustbowl: i let zyx choose the format he wanted to play dustbowl in, he said 9v9, dustbowl is a good map, shame zyx had conn problem and ended up sitting his place

bridge: self explanatory, handles 8v8 just fine probably the 2nd best if not the only other league map that can handle 8v8 or above np (golgo1 hurons would suck, desolate gen room mite be a prob too if 6 ppl at always at the ramp)

7v7: i wanted to scare people using siege 3 (i did consider really using it but in the end i didnt want to pissoff ppl 2 much) it was funny, in my head anyway, seems like not many ppl laughed and 1 smartass even typed listmaps and saw my ruse ahead of time, I did get scared a bit though as when the map switched to siege 3 about 3 or 4 blues dropped and i got scared they ragequitted and i thought i mightve just fucked the event, ideally i wouldve let the map start a lil before saying the immunities were fake , as for scarab i picked what i thought is 1 of the most balanced/liked custom out there, my choice was either that or tydium but i was afraid tydium might take too long.

6v6: regular player setup for possibly the most popular assault map, if not the most popular then definitely top 3

5v5: lava, i wanted to give tricksters a chance to shine through, plus 5v5 is a bit less spammy!

4v4: desert, probably another top 3 map in popularity and i think it handles 4v4 pretty well

3v3: vampire, my favorite non-bam map, its simply so good in any setup between 1v1 and 6v6 i played it well over 200 times if not 500 times in #naat pugs and i had a blast every single times. All the morons who argue that the map is only good for insta or sucks 6v6 can suck my cock and rot in hell. also note that the map is nearly identical to desertstorm: bunker/wall + delayed O spawn to give D time to setup, new O spawn, first objective rather easy to get scud/waterwheel (D has shieldbelt), samsite/the switch hardest obj to get, attackers can go through the D spawn launches can help but not land u directly on obj., underground/doorlock easy obj to get + gives O a new spawn, gen/chain, rather easy to get 2 ways in launch possible.... the only reason why it didnt make it in the regular league is prolly cuz its more shock oriented and all this community likes is minigun/sniper /spit

 

[Useless]

About the immunities, how about this:

The two teams play both rounds of Bridge, and reds win the map. Each team has one player who got the map's primary immunity (ie. Charge 4). Because red won the map, their player gets first choice of whom to vote out.

But this time the rule is that a player with an immunity can vote anyone out, on either team (as long as they don't have a permanent). So, red can either vote whoever he thinks is the weakest player on his team, or whoever he thinks is the strongest player on the other team.

If the red player votes someone on his own team out, the blue immunity winner has to vote someone on the blue team out (to keep the teams even). And vice versa.

Players would be fighting hard to win immunities and frags to avoid being voted off by their own team (for being the weakest player), but at the same time they would also have to keep in mind that they could just as easily be voted out by the opposing team for being too strong.

I think this might balance things out a lot more, no more Twnz-style monopolies on fragcounts and immunities, a 'weaker' team has more control over the strength of the opposition, and by the time the 2v2 arrived the match should be much more balanced if people are voting smart.

Any problems with this?

 

[html]

well should the events repeat itself and teams become imbalanced early and get worse as the event progresses aka red winning all maps, and if red once again vote their weakest players out, this wouldnt change a thing, red would get first vote and would vote their weakest fragger than blue would be forced to vote someone off their team anyway, i dont see how that favors a weaker team really.


Other probs:
assuming red wins every map but doesnt wanna vote their worst player but instead the enemys best player, it might be the nail in the coffin for the blue team. Even if blue can vote a top fragger of red out.

if both teams just decide to vote the biggest threats on the other team off, no one will want to play good to be on top, ever. is that really what we want? the current system kinda rewards doing good and impressing your team, unless people like fishy get immunities on your team

if both guys with immunitys can vote anyone off except ppl with perms, i can just see the guys with immunitys voting each other off. (first guy pisses off the other one who in turns votes of his kicker) and that could maybe lead to a streak where no one even wants the immunity because its a greater risk of getting kicked


however it MIGHT help and i don't think its overly complicated to fail. I dunno hard to tell rly.

 

[Stylefish]

well should the events repeat itself and teams become imbalanced early and get worse as the event progresses aka red winning all maps, and if red once again vote their weakest players out, this wouldnt change a thing, red would get first vote and would vote their weakest fragger than blue would be forced to vote someone off their team anyway, i dont see how that favors a weaker team really.


Other probs:
assuming red wins every map but doesnt wanna vote their worst player but instead the enemys best player, it might be the nail in the coffin for the blue team. Even if blue can vote a top fragger of red out.

if both teams just decide to vote the biggest threats on the other team off, no one will want to play good to be on top, ever. is that really what we want? the current system kinda rewards doing good and impressing your team, unless people like fishy get immunities on your team

if both guys with immunitys can vote anyone off except ppl with perms, i can just see the guys with immunitys voting each other off. (first guy pisses off the other one who in turns votes of his kicker) and that could maybe lead to a streak where no one even wants the immunity because its a greater risk of getting kicked


however it MIGHT help and i don't think its overly complicated to fail. I dunno hard to tell rly.

In a survivor where people are using their brain (so this is prolly not what is gonna happen) players wouldnt vote off players from the other team just for the reason they would become a threat to the rest of the good players (which are the people that usually get to vote so u obviously dont want them to be against u).
So the only moments where it makes sense is when u either got a permanent immunity or when teams are down to 4vs4, maybe 5vs5. So u have to keep in mind that such a rule would make it way harder for the best players to survive the 4vs4, they pretty much have to get the immunity if they dont want to be kicked (under the assumption people are playing clever, else such a rule would either end up in everyone kicking someone of the other team, so we can have a US-only final maybe or noone does it so this rule doesnt matter at all).