Jump to content


Photo

Tournament Formats, Rules and Restrictions.


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 SwiiTcHBacK

SwiiTcHBacK

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts
  • AC Type:
    Light biped

Posted 28 September 2015 - 07:44 PM

Just before posting Dominant Legend brought up collaboration for community rule-sets for tournaments in the SkillBreakR tourney thread and I thought "Why not start now?". So this is a thread for the discussion of rule-sets for tournaments, the reasoning behind them, what people would like from them, whether people think they're good/bad/why.

 

Some more specific points I would like to see discussed are:

 

What was good/bad about the recent skillbreakR tournament format?

What did people think of the tournament's rules after playing it compared to before?

What are some restrictions you think should be in place in a future tournament and why?

Are you in favour of restrictions at all?

 

I guess that's all for now, hopefully people are interested and some worthwhile/interesting discussion is had.



#2 rogan

rogan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,685 posts
  • AC Type:
    Cannon whore

Posted 29 September 2015 - 04:50 AM

The last time the community made a gentleman ban list was Last Raven if I recall correctly.

 

I would favor some restrictions, however they would be very limited if the tournament was to be taken seriously. There are only two, maybe three that I can come up with:

1 - Sawarabi LRJ legs: I don't think anyone should be surprised here. No further comments required imo.

 

2 - 003 tuned murakumos: The hitbox is simply too big on these and when combined with LRJ legs and animation cancels the weapons become surprisingly safe and very difficult to punish. I don't see an issue with power tuning, its just the accuracy versions.

 

**3 - 300 tuned Au-C-B19: Super Streks. Which very literally don't care what they are shooting at since they will hit for effective damage anyway. However, I don't think these are really broken per say. Just mind numbingly easy to abuse given their absurdly high CE attack power.

 

I can't speak too intelligently about the Skillbreaker tourney because I didn't take part. I would be interested in playing in one for fun provided it wasn't in the 1v1 format. Even if it had more restrictions than the original one.


Anything can be solved with the proper application of explosives

#3 o-iii

o-iii

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • LocationWEST SIDE, CA
  • AC Type:
    Light RJ, Mobile, Close Combat
  • PSNID:
    oliverwiii

Posted 29 September 2015 - 07:21 AM

As a Murakumo user, I don't like your suggestion at all.  Everything comes with a price and just cuz a player has tuned his physical blade for accuracy doesn't mean he's getting over at all.  At the end of the day, we still have to get in there and penetrate the opposing AC's defense, which can easily end ugly if you're not skilled enough. 

 

Personally, I don't like any restrictions on tournaments.  Players should bring what they bring and let the chips fall where they may.  If certain weapons turn out to be the most successful in the tournament, let's document it and review after the tournament is done.  No holds barred tournament.  Let's just scrap and see what's up.  Just my opinion.


O.III

 

No PS4 til the next Armored Core


#4 rogan

rogan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,685 posts
  • AC Type:
    Cannon whore

Posted 29 September 2015 - 07:25 AM

As a Murakumo user, I don't like your suggestion at all.  Everything comes with a price and just cuz a player has tuned his physical blade for accuracy doesn't mean he's getting over at all.  At the end of the day, we still have to get in there and penetrate the opposing AC's defense, which can easily end ugly if you're not skilled enough. 

My only issue with the accuracy version is that they have a hitbox wider than a tank's boost charge. Which is pretty big. The damage they can produce doesn't bother me. The animation cancels and being almost impossible to punish applies to any tuning on them. Its just that power tunes don't have a hitbox the size of a battle ship.

 

EDIT: Just thought of something else.

 

Something that would be very interesting to try could be a "No Shields" rule. Shields have had such a huge impact on the game that I think it would be interesting to play without them. At least to get a feel for things.


Anything can be solved with the proper application of explosives

#5 Reyleones

Reyleones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • LocationEverywere
  • AC Type:
    Versatile in all forms of combat
  • PSNID:
    Reyleones

Posted 29 September 2015 - 08:29 AM

So why are they impossible to punish? Ummmm i have a few ideas....eh ehm short range missle, any fast lock missle, but ce short range dual launch literaly will have a sawarabi runing from you instead of attaking, umm hows about some ce machineguns? Orrrrr hows abouttt pulse machinguns, ooooo shotguns werkk gewd oooh hows about some good ol lazer riffle spam, cuts thru them like butta, in a cqc setting how about lazzzer canons? Literally will take 2n half shots to kill mmmyeeea me thinks there are thingss not as impossible as plp say
Why errrone complain bout shields??? Doood it takes less than a second to get rid of any shield, u just have to go prepared cant belive i actually hav to say that jeez

#6 Sash

Sash

    Fucking Tryhard BR Meta-whore.

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,498 posts
  • AC Type:
    Based 003 3BR God
  • PSNID:
    @JP SashPerennial
  • LIVE Tag:
    Sash X64

Posted 29 September 2015 - 09:16 AM

Forgive me for derailing the thread here, I saw something I felt compelled to correct.

 

So why are they impossible to punish? Ummmm i have a few ideas....eh ehm short range missle, any fast lock missle, but ce short range dual launch literaly will have a sawarabi runing from you instead of attaking, umm hows about some ce machineguns?

 

Sawarabis can outrun Mathuras. I don't even play an LRJ kumo build and I bet I could do it in a pinch. Some missiles may have great tracking but they cannot chase something with 400 High Boost. Likewise, just one CEMG is inadequate in most cases. To catch a Sawarabi with a CEMG, you have to get them on the approach - and I guarantee a CEMG doesn't trade as well as a Murakumo will. One might think that a CEMG is a great option, and it is, but the problem is that the game's corrective auto-aim which compensates for the enemy AC's boost movements during red lock will throw the shots wild and all the Sawarabi needs to do is jump or boost at semi-regular intervals and the CEMG will have a hard time connecting. The player needs to be glide boosting or otherwise very close to the LRJ for the shots to hit. The same thing happens with some lightweights as well.

 

 

Orrrrr hows abouttt pulse machinguns, ooooo shotguns werkk gewd oooh hows about some good ol lazer riffle spam, cuts thru them like butta, in a cqc setting how about lazzzer canons? Literally will take 2n half shots to kill mmmyeeea me thinks there are thingss not as impossible as plp say

 

Sawarabis typically buff PMG. Shotguns do not stun or stagger Sawarabi legs, not to mention they don't have the reach to touch them. Laser Rifle spam is pretty decent but only works with zoning techniques otherwise the user ends up out of energy with a Kumo getting dropped on them. In close up combat, a Laser Cannon is not going to be able to charge and lock unless for some reason it is being run on a wide lock FCS and the LRJ makes a conscious effort to remain in the players lock box. If we're talking LCWA, that's a different story, but a niche counter.

 

- - - 

 

The complaints about Accuracy Kumos come from how the enemy players perceive the Kumo hits. To them, the Kumo user does not even need to connect with the blade for damage to occur. I might have a good video of this happening but I'd have to dig pretty hard. Essentially, good Kumos are difficult to punish because they can get in a hit and be back in the air without having to actually collide with their opponent, at least on their opponent's screen, making them very hard to track because the player has to constantly consider whether the Kumo player can actually hit them or not because of the way the game treats lag.

 

Basically, you could stand completely still and have a Kumo guy coming straight towards you, boost away preemptively and completely avoid them, but still take damage as if you were hit directly. Now that you've dodged, you don't have a way of punishing the Kumo guy in time, since all he's gotta do is tap his jump button and get ready for another go at you.

 

This is really only a problem with Accuracy Murakumos. I've been told it applies to Laser Blades and Piles in some cases, but it is definitely most pronounced in the case of 003 Murakumos. I personally wouldn't press for a ban, but I wouldn't be opposed to one either. Sawarabi Kumo builds are absolutely aggravating to fight in certain matchups.


you fucking tryhard

 Rix-Today at 9:17 PM

I banned someone because they posted porn in a porn topic

 

AvalonFive-Today at 9:25 PM
I like being both top and bottom so the middle sounds nice
 
Kappa

 


#7 rogan

rogan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,685 posts
  • AC Type:
    Cannon whore

Posted 29 September 2015 - 12:48 PM

wat sash said

 

EDIT: maybe I should also clarify a little: While "being prepared" is all fine and dandy you are completely forgetting to take common kumo builds into account. More often than not they are also carrying their team's CWIS, not only can they evade or outrun a lot of missiles in the game all they have to do is hit their scan mode button and the CWIS shoots them down.

 

Usually the way to kill Kumo bots is a pair of CEMGs AND missiles. Unfortunately thats far from a sure thing and if they have a CE Shield you won't get through anyway. None of this even touches what sash pointed out about the hitbox or animations (or lack thereof) of the 003 kumos themselves.

 

While its pretty easy to point all this out in theory its much harder to hold up in practice. I've seen too many games on JP where a kumo bot pulls a 4v1 out and makes it look easy regardless of the opposing set ups. I'm certain there are vids of this on YT if you look.


Anything can be solved with the proper application of explosives

#8 RomannamoR11

RomannamoR11

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 41 posts
  • AC Type:
    Bipeds, all pant sizes
  • PSNID:
    RomannamoR11

Posted 29 September 2015 - 02:59 PM

Just wondering... why not Sawarabi? 

Kumos don't bother me, neither do Streks. 

Also, I'm referring to 1v1 not CQ. I say this because Team Play is a different animal altogether.

 

What was good/bad about the recent skillbreakR tournament format?

I enjoyed the rules for this tourney. No dual wielding/ dual shoulder was fun. My main builds use dual shoulder so I had to create one just to enter. I rarely dual wield just because there is so much variety out there, as far as opponents and weapons.  

The Bad part for me was the maps. But that's my own fault. I'm not familiar with any CQ maps. I will remedy that in due time.

 

What did people think of the tournament's rules after playing it compared to before?

I don't mind playing again under the same rules. It just adds another level of difficulty and changes up the norm.

 

What are some restrictions you think should be in place in a future tournament and why?

I'll get back to you on that one. There's not much I don't like out there. 

 

Are you in favour of restrictions at all?

That depends on what they are. As I said, it justs adds another level of difficulty.

 

The biggest drawback from the tournament was the amount of waiting to actually fight. Granted it was a good turnout, but a lot of players didn't even show up. I dropped from lower bracket because I needed to go feed my family. Shyt gets crazy with no food around here. 



#9 Reyleones

Reyleones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • LocationEverywere
  • AC Type:
    Versatile in all forms of combat
  • PSNID:
    Reyleones

Posted 30 September 2015 - 01:55 PM

Im talkin conquest mode n if the lrj can out run shortrange missles then they are doing their job making the lrj get away from me while he runs i chase with more missles yay also u dont need a wide lock in cq for lazer cannon vs lrj its called flushing him out so while jes dodging your tanmatrs attak u take advantage n shhot wm from far away..thought that was self explanitory, n acc kumos don do ish to tanks...what 3k dmg? Without a uw to weigh em down acc vs tanks equals 50 hits ti kill tank, thats all im comentin on the rest also work too

#10 Gripheenix

Gripheenix

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 205 posts
  • LocationLittle Podunk Town
  • AC Type:
    Jack of All Trades
  • PSNID:
    Rakiokon

Posted 30 September 2015 - 02:41 PM

Rey, for one, this isn't technically a discussion about CQ.  It's a discussion about tournament regulations, which usually means 1v1, maybe 2v2, both of which are very, very different beasts from CQ.  For two, if it's taking you more than 3 hits to kill a tank with ACC Kumos, then you are, in fact, doing it wrong.  I have been chunked away 30k at a time, in my tank, by ACC Kumos.  And, these aren't people using the OW method, either.  They're Archibald LRJs with either dual snipers/dual subs, with back-up Kumos, or they've just got the Kumos, with Mathura or CIWS in the shoulder.

 

As for ACC Kumos, in general, they are pretty stupid easy to use, if you understand the mechanics, and how to get an optimal hit.  Hell, you can swing early, and 'slide' into a late hit, and still manage some good damage.  Not to mention that they hit from about 25-30m out.  Oh, and also, they have an instant animation cancel, which means that as soon as you swing, you can high boost once, before the blade is even out of the sheath, in the animation, be on your way, and still do your full damage.

 

Sawarabi legs are also fairly strong, but not necessarily due to their own merits.  It's more of a map design problem, than anything.  Mobility-wise, Ruiz (Sawarabi-non-Archibald), is almost the same as it was in ACV, and people didn't have any issues with them in that game.  Not that I was aware of, anyway.  So, why now?  Because 75% of the maps in VD are flat, barren, open fields, with stuff scattered about that pretends to be cover.  With a single jump, most LRJ builds can completely negate just about any cover in the game.  Combine this with the abundance of energy that VD provides, and it allows for infinite pressure.  And it's not even pressure that you can out damage-race, because just by boosting about, and going from jumping to landing, you can be virtually impossible to hold a lock on.

 

Streks aren't really a thing to be concerned about, honestly.  Sure, they hurt like Hell, but they're really only an issue when you get crept up on in CQ, which, again, we aren't actually discussing here.  If you're going to ban Streks because they're impossible to block out, then you might as well ban all laser rifles, any cannon-type weapon, sniper rifles, melee, most missiles, etc.  Streks aren't used in duels for a reason.  Not even in ACV, where they were even more popular.

 

So, Skillbreaker...  I'll be honest, it had more people on the roster than I expected.  Then again, more than half of them didn't show...  That said:  Everyone talking about balance, and making a fuss about build diversity...  Did they not see the same matches I did?  After the first round, where all the newcomers and 'less-than-hardcore' players were eliminated, there were basically two builds:  Biped/LRJ with shotgun, pulse gun, 3BR, and shield.  And Pseudo Lazyquads.  Real diverse...  Sure, there were a few 'different' builds here and there, but an overwhelming number of builds used the afore-mentioned.

 

So, it doesn't matter what you ban.  People will always figure out what the strongest strategy is, given the ruleset, and flock to it.  Ban Archibalds, everyone steps down to ULG-30.  Ban Kumos, everyone brings ACC ULBs.  The only way that you're ever going to make something completely balanced and fair, for everyone, leaving it entirely up to piloting skill, is to put everyone in the same exact build, and eliminate diversity completely.  And, since I know that the AC community would sooner die off, than give up the ability to 'use their own custom, personal setup' (Let's be real, folks, when you're playing competitively, there really isn't room for originality.  You either use meta, or you get your shit pushed in.  End of story.), I propose a different look at it:

 

Instead of having a tournament with a list of bans, spin it another way.  Have a themed tournament.  Rather than "All blades are banned!" make it "This is a guns only tournament!"  Maybe instead of "No LRJs allowed!" make it "Heavyweight brawls.  Only AC above xxx weight!"

 

I'll be honest, even though certain things are very, very strong, in the game, I don't agree with ban lists, be they by part, build, tactics (like the one that everyone loves to hate:  AP Stalling), or even by what region of the world you live in.  You're never going to make everyone happy.  But the least you can do is try to include as many people as you can, by not limiting who, or what playstyles can participate.  If it ends up being a slugging match between a bunch of identical builds?  Well, I'd say that's actually pretty normal.

 

But, if you are going to have a ban list, then at least go balls deep with it, and turn it into something with a theme, something fun, more unique than "Everyone's allowed, but leave your sniper rifles at the door."


(Cool things happen when you click on Megaman's face.)

sig-1.png


#11 helamasa

helamasa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 36 posts
  • LocationFinland
  • AC Type:
    Goat laboratory tech
  • PSNID:
    helamasa

Posted 30 September 2015 - 03:01 PM

I propose a cosplay tournament, acs from earlier ac games :P


"Helamasa needs his own wikipedia article to understand these inane self-referential memes he's created."


#12 Reyleones

Reyleones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • LocationEverywere
  • AC Type:
    Versatile in all forms of combat
  • PSNID:
    Reyleones

Posted 30 September 2015 - 04:40 PM

Ya griph i own one if those snipper with kumos only mine are power i can still dive down or glideboost also my ac has a 415 hb, i dabble in melee so i also know about momentum and critical hits , honestly if a non uw acc kummo got u in a tank for 30k i have a few questions, is tor ke def 1300? Were you just sitting there? Or did you boost toward the attaker while he was boosting to attack you?also uf were talking non cq and 1v1 its just as easy to build a lrj equipped with an enteroge of ish that cuts thru archibald like hot knife t butter idk why everyone says they are unfair yea they move fantastic but it also comes at a price just like everythi g in the game...weapin arms much? No? Otay il go to practice my melee again see if i missed anything tankas yous

#13 DominantLegend

DominantLegend

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 165 posts
  • AC Type:
    AC Red Sun
  • PSNID:
    DominantLegend

Posted 30 September 2015 - 05:06 PM

It's still too early to really make a statement, but I'm going to say that Griph is strongly echoing what I've been saying.

 

The fact is, turnout is going to be about the same no matter what rules are being chosen, and so far I don't believe FromCheng, as much effort as he's been putting in, has any intention to change his method of rule deciding so far and is going to rely on private surveys and ignore threads like these. I think if we want to see his tournaments change their approach, if this becomes a regular thing, there would need to be a detriment to the actual running of the tournament, not just a polemic discussion against it. 

 

For further Reference, here's a summation of my prior posts on this:

 

 

"Against part bans, people aren't happy, best 2 out of 3 sucks, re-examine the rules, please."

(I would recommend reading Griph, Rogan, Switch, Soren, and Sash's post in the thread too)

"Is the rule set a success?"

"How should rules be decided beforehand? (this post prompted this thread)"

 

 

A copy of the advice I offered FromCheng prior to the tournament: 

 

Spoiler

 

There was another followup post where I proposed a set of rules, involving a qualification series (everyone gets to play several randomized matches, no one is knocked out right away) followed by a top 4/top 8 double elimination bracket. I believe this was not chosen because it was both more work and would require more mods/spectators. Given that he said he had several moderators involved 

 

 

What I have learned since: 

 

1. I believe that turnout is going to be the same regardless of rules.

 

I honestly believe that there's enough players who want recognition and prizes that choosing arbitrary or confusing part bans is not going to diminish the turnout, just the inter-match metagame. 

 

2. ...which means that using "success" of the tournament to judge "fairness" is a bad idea.

 

The purpose of SkillBreakeR was to get hype and noteriety so that multiple tournaments could be run. It was not to produce a highly competitive fair environment, ultimately. The part choices were chosen in hopes of getting exciting matches.

 

3. The rules are going to be decided by surveys, not participants. We're wasting our time in these posts. 

 

Even if we come up with a comprehensive, creative and effective list of rules and formats that would be expected to be enforced, unless we start running our own tournaments or actively trying to get people not to participate, it is not going to have any effect on future tournaments. Again, the goal of SkillBreakeR is to gain notoriety and perpetuate itself, arguing against the rules is not a threat to change them, because it has no tangible effect on the turnout or viability of future tournaments unless it is an extremely vocal opposition. 

 

4. People care a lot less about maps and didn't abuse them.

 

I was surprised how many players just chose "random mock" for the map, especially given how important map choice is to winning. I don't know if this was because people were unfamiliar with the maps, or that level of play and metagame just wasn't viable yet because many people only had a handful of eligible builds they were using (and they weren't customizing builds and strategies for specific maps and players). This shows a reduction in overall competitive effort compared to a serious match where there were no restrictions, possibly because there was a short amount of time people had to get used to their altered builds.

 

 

 

 

A few answers to the initial questions

 


1. What was good/bad about the recent skillbreakR tournament format?
 
Good: Switch to Best 3 out of 5 later on. The stream format was good. Commentating was....interesting. Some was weird near the end but I blame the exhaustion of the announcers. Bring more water and rest your voice better.
Bad: Double elimination format went on way too long, most players didn't get more than 1 or 2 matches, especially given how many were DQ'd. AP lead play was painfully visible in most matches. Dual weapon bans significantly narrowed the possibility of ultimate builds, and required a training period for participants who had to switch their styles up to compete, often to mixed results.
 
 
2. What did people think of the tournament's rules after playing it compared to before?
 
Before, there was fairly vocal concern. Unfortunately, that did not translate into any action, because a majority of the people who did participate were going to participate regardless of bans, as long as the bans were semi-reasonable. 
 
3. What are some restrictions you think should be in place in a future tournament and why?
 
I think if you're going to make a competitive tournament, you need to focus on the format not the parts. Create a format where exploitation of a single match has minimal effect on the final match. It's a well-documented fact that I think a 2-consecutive win format (time-outs do not count) where the loser counterpicks the map (aka, win once under even circumstances, win again under adverse circumstances) is the best format for ACVD, as it diminishes the effect of any single match on overall wins. You can't, in that format, use the same AC twice and win unless you're able to win with a build/map disadvantage. 
 
This is obviously less viable in a tournament setting, because matches could go on for ages. I would say 5 matches with loser counterpicking, where 2 consecutive wins would win or best 3 out of 5 if neither player can win consecutively, is the best format, with time-outs being decided on the highest % of AP left, rather than the in-game decision making.
 
Issues with my proposal: this gives a preference to the player who can win the first match, obviously, since he doesn't have to win twice in a row to win the round, just trade wins back and forth, as he'll win the 3rd and 5th match also. It also gives preference to high powered low-ammo weapons and shields, as they would not affect the AP % left. It punishes melee, UW, and sniper cannon use.
 
I also don't think a single or double elimination format is worthwhile. I think a qualification format (with points allotted based on who was fought and how they won, perhaps using a sort of ranking system or sorting algorithm similar to chess tournaments) followed by brackets would be ideal, but I spoke on that in the above text also. 
 
4. Are you in favour of restrictions at all?
 
In a strictly competitive sense? No. As a fun/different tournament format? Sure. The type of "theme" tournaments that Griph suggested are something very fun, and I would encourage that far more than I would a strictly competitive tournament with part bans.

 

 



#14 South Q

South Q

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • AC Type:
    whatever

Posted 01 October 2015 - 06:23 AM

Thought I back things up with evidence since Reyleones is sprouting half truth regarding Murakumo.







Reyleones, I suggest you watch this THOROUGHLY before you shrug off other people arguments.

#15 Reyleones

Reyleones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • LocationEverywere
  • AC Type:
    Versatile in all forms of combat
  • PSNID:
    Reyleones

Posted 01 October 2015 - 08:31 AM

Good video thanks

#16 SwiiTcHBacK

SwiiTcHBacK

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts
  • AC Type:
    Light biped

Posted 02 October 2015 - 07:25 PM

Well I'd have liked to have seen more discussion on the over-arching topics rather than just sawarabis. However there's some good stuff spread around.

 

 

So, Skillbreaker...  I'll be honest, it had more people on the roster than I expected.  Then again, more than half of them didn't show...  That said:  Everyone talking about balance, and making a fuss about build diversity...  Did they not see the same matches I did?  After the first round, where all the newcomers and 'less-than-hardcore' players were eliminated, there were basically two builds:  Biped/LRJ with shotgun, pulse gun, 3BR, and shield.  And Pseudo Lazyquads.  Real diverse...  Sure, there were a few 'different' builds here and there, but an overwhelming number of builds used the afore-mentioned.

 

So, it doesn't matter what you ban.  People will always figure out what the strongest strategy is, given the ruleset, and flock to it.

 

SkillbreakRs rules seemed to be very interesting to play under.. And from my opinion they gave a unique sense of balance that most players did not really explore much of. While the no dual wielding rule is extremely limiting in build choices and as such we saw a lot of the same weapons and loadouts for certain playstyles, the rules seemed to make matches with players of relatively similar skill closer because they weren't punished as heavily by stacked burst or insanely low lock times. Matches became more about outmanouvering, positioning and trading better than your opponent given your weaponset/playstyle. Comebacks were seen more because you need to be consistent throughout a longer match in order to best your opponent, not just get one lucky oppressive rush.

 

I think the ruleset was definitely not explored to it's fullest, players stuck with what they knew and I think most didn't experiment with much other than how to make their old stuff work. The close range biped/LRJ is actually extremely punishable by many frames as it lacks range, defenses and attack power to deal with heavier ACs. Heavies were scarce, tanks were scarce, there even weren't many well built quads and it's a shame because they were buffed heavily (pun not intended) by this format.

 

I think the no dual shoulders rule was the main contributer to creating these types of games.. While allowing dual wield does allow some oppressive combinations back into the game (dual sawas/12 shots come to mind), it also allows a lot more variety in build choices as a whole. So if SkillbreakR's format isn't well recieved then I'd at least like to see no dual shoulders re-visited in future.

 

 

Let's be real, folks, when you're playing competitively, there really isn't room for originality

 

The strongest/easiest builds will indeed be adopted by anyone being competitive if these builds become known.. Once a format becomes well-established the meta will be well defined and therefore should be some of the strongest stuff going. Newer formats or newer games are where creativity flourishes the most and that's why getting into games early in their life is so much fun for me. Better balanced competitive games/formats have less dominant meta strategies and/or are more skill intense requiring difficult player input and game knowledge/strategy to compete well.

 

The problem of the lack of originality is very apparent with the internet age. Once a few people catch onto one of these strong strategies, it will be passed around the world and to everybody who plays the game in no time. The world is a giant think tank and is pretty damn good at finding out what works creating very stale environments in many games. While this is arguably "better" in a competitive sense as the game is played at a higher level, it is often nowhere near as interesting as seeing more new/interesting ideas/strategies.

 

 

I think if you're going to make a competitive tournament, you need to focus on the format not the parts. Create a format where exploitation of a single match has minimal effect on the final match.

 

I don't think this is the case. I think part bans are extremely helpful in not only shaking up the game, but also in creating environments that are either more balanced, or where different builds can shine to the norm. People learn what is dominant, learn how to abuse it and will use that to their extremes as Griph said earlier. This can often make up for a lack of player ingenuity, skill or flexibility, particularly if the build has no worthwhile counters.

 

Ideally what I would like to see are a few different tournament formats with different bans held at fairly regular intervals. That way you can have one completely unadulterated tournament with no bans/restrictions at all. One of the restrictions I would like to see though, is a ban on high capacity generators as they are the bringers of the insanely long, oppressive glide boost rushes combined with HB spam, that or just banning all high accel boosters perhaps. The already had skillbreakR format or no dual shoulders would be another. Possibly even a heavy AC tournament, nothing above 275 HB or so which griph also suggested (possibly not as seriously). No shields is one I missed in the original post, but I feel is a needed format.

 

Unfortunately the problem with skillbreakR being the first tournament in a while is it was way too limiting for it being the only tournament going, much like that heavy only ruleset would be. If there were other tournaments with more forgiving rule-sets it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

 

I find it strange how so many people are against bans in a competitive sense when many competitive scenes in games have bans/restrictions in place in order to foster a more skill based environment. The problem with tournaments in this game is nobody has time to get used to complicated ban lists as they'd only be used once and it's a lot of effort to go through just for a one-time-thing. Not only that but any ban will put off somebody who likes a strategy that is affected.. Our playerbase is too small to limit who might actually turn up that way whereas other games it wouldn't be as much of an issue. Target-banning specific problem parts or combinations would be cool, but you'd end up with a long list if you want to take out some of the most oppressive combinations and then you have a problem of accessibility. So one of the good things about skillbreakR's format was it was simple for anybody to pick up.

 

 

 

 
 It's a well-documented fact that I think a 2-consecutive win format (time-outs do not count) where the loser counterpicks the map (aka, win once under even circumstances, win again under adverse circumstances) is the best format for ACVD, as it diminishes the effect of any single match on overall wins. You can't, in that format, use the same AC twice and win unless you're able to win with a build/map disadvantage. 
 
This is obviously less viable in a tournament setting, because matches could go on for ages. I would say 5 matches with loser counterpicking, where 2 consecutive wins would win or best 3 out of 5 if neither player can win consecutively, is the best format, with time-outs being decided on the highest % of AP left, rather than the in-game decision making.

 

I cannot get behind the 2 consecutive win idea because it makes your efforts in earlier rounds fruitless and I think it is a bad competitive choice. There should not be a "reset button" for your losses.

 

I also cannot agree with timeouts being decided by the % of AP left because heavier ACs like tanks leverage their AP to win games over faster ACs. Timeouts I believe are a big problem though and I believe finding some sort of middle ground, perhaps timeouts being worth less than a destruction based win would be the way forward that discourages stagnant play.. However then you'd have people running to stop the opponent gaining the full win.. It's a very difficult problem to deal with.

 

Sawarabis could be a part worth target banning in most events.. They see a lot of play because of their obnoxious mobility and the combination with accuracy kumos is strong. I don't think accuracy kumos themselves need to be targeted personally.

 

Edit: I feel I might not have been clear enough in a couple of key points.. So, on competitive bans: Good bans are there to allow the skills players develop in playing the game to be rewarded but not over-rewarded. The best bans achieve this while still keeping the majority of the playstyles in the game intact. SkillbreakR did limit a lot of player choice which was bad.. But I believe it achieved a great deal in competitive balance. Finding a point somewhere between where players have more freedom in builds but holding the feel of the games of SkillBreakR would be what to aim for.



#17 o-iii

o-iii

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • LocationWEST SIDE, CA
  • AC Type:
    Light RJ, Mobile, Close Combat
  • PSNID:
    oliverwiii

Posted 09 October 2015 - 11:36 AM

Thank you, South Q, for posting that footage.

 

Ever notice how everyone has a theory on certain weapons/parts being unfair?  All these theories but rarely do we have footage to back it up.  I was talking with my team about this last week. I think the community should do a better job of documenting the pros and cons of weapons/builds and support it with actual footage. 

 

Here's what I propose...

 

Next tournament, let's not ban anything.  Just let everyone come with what they want - but let's make the purpose of the tournament to actually study the successful builds and their weapons.  Instead of players disagreeing on what parts/weapons/modifications yield and unfair advantage or not, let's seriously catalogue these events so there's no more ambiguity.  Then (if need be) we can start banning weapons and parts that have proven to be unfair.  Until I see some hardcore data and footage, I really don't think its fair to just start banning parts and weapons. 

 

On another note, I think it would be fun as a community if we structured our tournaments in a way to really dissect this game and the pros/cons of parts and weapons.  And document the results so we can all agree on mechanics/build results/weapon loadouts. 

 

To quote Jay-Z, "Men lie, women lie, numbers don't."

 

O.III


O.III

 

No PS4 til the next Armored Core


#18 RomannamoR11

RomannamoR11

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 41 posts
  • AC Type:
    Bipeds, all pant sizes
  • PSNID:
    RomannamoR11

Posted 10 October 2015 - 12:07 PM

How about a one time use rule. Whatever was used in first round cannot be used in next (frame, weapons, or both, up for discussion). Just an idea. This way, common builds will be out early, or wacky builds will be out first. Some food for thought

#19 SwiiTcHBacK

SwiiTcHBacK

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts
  • AC Type:
    Light biped

Posted 10 October 2015 - 04:55 PM

That's kind of an interesting idea and it makes for a lot of choices by the player.. Although then players would just bring enough strong builds for the amount of rouds if it is small (which I presume it would be for time constraints)



#20 Reyleones

Reyleones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • LocationEverywere
  • AC Type:
    Versatile in all forms of combat
  • PSNID:
    Reyleones

Posted 11 October 2015 - 09:05 AM

Thank you, South Q, for posting that footage.

Ever notice how everyone has a theory on certain weapons/parts being unfair? All these theories but rarely do we have footage to back it up. I was talking with my team about this last week. I think the community should do a better job of documenting the pros and cons of weapons/builds and support it with actual footage.

Here's what I propose...

Next tournament, let's not ban anything. Just let everyone come with what they want - but let's make the purpose of the tournament to actually study the successful builds and their weapons. Instead of players disagreeing on what parts/weapons/modifications yield and unfair advantage or not, let's seriously catalogue these events so there's no more ambiguity. Then (if need be) we can start banning weapons and parts that have proven to be unfair. Until I see some hardcore data and footage, I really don't think its fair to just start banning parts and weapons.

On another note, I think it would be fun as a community if we structured our tournaments in a way to really dissect this game and the pros/cons of parts and weapons. And document the results so we can all agree on mechanics/build results/weapon loadouts.

To quote Jay-Z, "Men lie, women lie, numbers don't."

O.III


Yes i agree thank god someone with sense still exist




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

IPB Skin By Virteq