*DAMN R6 Forum

Alright here we go:

For both ladders the 2 won game differences will be removed a "best of" cb will changed to a real "best of" cb, which means in a Best of 7 cb you play at max. 7 games and then the team with the most wins is the winner! Ties will count as well to the 7 games! If you have a tie after the 7 played games the team that wins the next game will be the winner!

First there will be a 1vs1 ladder for R6 and RS with the same rules as the team ladders have. The competition ladder for R6 and RS are unmodified: still Team Survival.

For Ghost Recon we have to think about a competition ladder where camping doesn't have a chance: Siege won't work because one clan has to camp: but Hamburger Hill and the Warzone game mode could be useful: could someone point out the differences between HH and Warzone pls!?

I would love to set a 5min limit and 3 respawns: I know 5mins sound short to recapture the zone but on the other side HH and Warzone are mods that run until the last second of the timer so a 10min time limit would be too long. -> average cb time with chatting and set up between 60 and 80mins with 10min time limit >< 30 - 50mins with 5min time limit. The task would require extremly fast assaulting and securing the hot spot and much more teamwork than Last Man Standing.

Further I could imagine to start a fun siege ladder and a FFA ladder. c| what experiences did you make at your own FFA ladder!? Did it work out? Was the submiting a problem and what happend if players that weren't on the FFA ladder joined a game!?

America's Army probably won't be supported in season 5 but will be added in season 6 once we all know the game better and can decide what game modes we want to play! May GameRanger support will come!? If not we will open the *DAMN BL AA ladder also for PC Players!

I don't think a 1vs1 GR ladder makes much sense but the FFA ladder would also allow 1vs1 cbs.

Further changes in season 5: an autosubmit system: currently we have 2 ideas: Simply a clanmember can submit scores from a cb his clan played and the score appears immediatly at the ladder.

(All players of a clan have to sign up at the BL league and the clan leader adds them to the clan. So the script only allows players to post that are really members of the clan picked by the clan leader. )

Or the other clan/an admin has to confirm the submition first before the cb gets posted to prevent double postings but that would mean we don't have "live" scores.

There will be a minimum requirement of clans to start a competition ladder: at least 10clans have to sign up and play at least 1 cb in the first 2 weeks or the ladder will be autoclosed. If a clan signs up he can choose from many ladders but only the ladders with a minimum interest will finally appear!

You can only join in the first 3 weeks of a season or you have to wait until the next season starts.

If a clan merges you have to start from new: You can only change your clan fullname but not your clantag within the season.

Clanleaders have full control about the claninfo and can also announce co-leaders with resistricted editing functions. If your clan disbands you can selfremove it from the ladders and all members will be clanless again. Members of a clan can retire themselves but not add themselves to a clan.

Each ladder will have highscore stats shown at top like most wins, most season wins,...


That's it for the moment: please add your suggestions and further required rule changes/additions for the different ladders!

Thanks,

Mauti

Well I see as an admin with all the new ladders I'm going to have some work to do and maybe a new computer to get into these new games like AA and RvS.  I hope things will become more clear and then I'll make some of my ideas.  I like shortening the season a little but I still think the clans should be able to play the game for a while, that's what they are made for, many RS clans have been around for a couple of years.

I like only having finals for the main games and the other smaller ladders just being for statistics.

That sounds good,
The difference between War-zone and Hamburger hill is very small. In warzone your job is to control an area for 2 minutes (it might be longer, but i forget), and with hamburger hill the team which has controlled the zone for the longest amount of time total is the winner.

I personally like warzone better, however the maximum timelimit might need to be set higher than 10 minutes because there is a higher chance of draws happening (maybe not because of the lack of a respawn).

About the auto submit thing. Most PC ladders and the BTs ladder have a member of the  winning clan report the match and then the loser has to either confirm or challenge the cb.

I could see the War-zome and Hamburger Hill settings being very fun.

The thing about games like SAR (Search and Rescue) and HH...

Since the fileds are set in the middle... (guys and base)
All you have to do in order to win is to camp out around the edge and shoot everyone till they are dead... You win game regardless of how many points the other team aquired...(or if the other team grabbed 2 of the 3 guys)

If you make a game like HH or SAR 5 minutes you then run the risk of playing on maps like wilderness which neither team would have enough time to rescure all 3 guys... Maybe make it to the middle in HH for like 1 second get shot then its back to the races again...

And Haz... Looser first reports the loss (Adds in which maps played an how many kills per player) then the winner goes in an reports the win adding the maps they won and then each kill per player also a final score count being something like '3-2'

     In Hamburger Hill, there is a central base in the map. To control it, a man from your team must be physically in the base at all times. Each second that your team controls the base, you gain one point. The team with the most points at the end of the time limit wins. Killing the entire other team also results in a win.

     In Warzone, there is a central base in the map. To control it, someone from your team only has to tag it (like in Domination). Sitting in it is not required to maintain control. If your team controls the base for three minutes continuously, you win. If control is lost, even for an instant, you must control for another three minutes to win. Killing the entire other team results in a win.

     Hamburger Hill is inferior to Warzone in my eyes. First, HH runs for the entire time limit, unless a team is killed. This often leads to stupid situations where one team has held the base for half the time limit + one second, and so they can't lose, but the game keeps playing. The winning team just has to hide to keep from being eliminated, which means that the last five minutes or so of a HH game are frequently just the loser team running around looking for hidden people. Extremely anticlimactic. On the other hand, winning Warzone is dependent on defensive ability, since if the other team gets a man into the base even for a millisecond, you've got to start your three minutes over. Reversals happen in Warzone, especially when the teams are even (when the teams are uneven in skill, Warzone games usually last three minutes + however long it took the winning team to run to the base). It's usually a very fun and exciting mode to play.

     Ten minutes is needed for Warzone. If the base is held by a team when time runs out, the game is a draw. The shorter the time limit, the more draws will happen. Warzone games that actually take time mean that the teams are evenly matched, because the game ends when somebody has the base for three minutes. If nobody can hold it for three minutes, there's action taking place and the game shouldn't be stopped early because of a time limit.

So warzone would stop after 3mins of defending the zone or killing the other team!?

Should we use respawns for this gametype or not!? I ask because HH and Siege games are always played with at least 3 respawns!

Bye,

Mauti

I personally like having no respawns, it puts more pressure on you to make that life count, and makes you play differently.  If you have multiple spawns, it takes tactics out of the gameplay.  In a regular game, you figure out where the enemy position is, and base your actions upon that by trying to surround them, flank them, etc.  If you have multiple respawns, you can never set up a perimeter due to the fact that the enemy location changes instantly after a kill.

Personally, i like the old fashioned last man standing way of playing.  Sure it gets campy, but so what.  To me CBs are like chess, you plan and move carefully, with an occasional burst of fast activity.  CBs last season on a whole where way faster than in season 3. Out of our 43 CBs, the average CB lasted about a half an hour.  The more skilled the team, the longer the CB was usually, because both teams become more careful, because they know if they make a mistake, then POW, you take one in the head.  But that's what it's all about, THE DRAMA!!!.  hehe.  It makes winning them that much sweeter, and losing them that much harder.

I may be in the minority here, but I would like to see the old way stay, and maybe tack on a warzone ladder in addition.  The warzone ladder does sound exciting though, but it's a different way of playing.  Tactics are different when the objective is to over take a team, versus secure an area.

I've never taken any official polls, but it seemed the large majority of clans that we played had no problems with the LMS style of gameplay.  You're going to have people unhappy with any style of gameplay.  People will surely complain about being robbed if we switch over to warzone (take embassy for example.  The warzone is placed inside the embassy grounds.  Almost every single game that i've seen has been won by the team that got there first.  That embassy is a bitch to try to penetrate).

Anyhow, that's my 2 cents.

Warzone is usually played with a lot of respawns or infinite respawns. Many respawns is a bad idea with 2 orginized clans facing off. This is because there is probably only 1 superior strategy that is very simple

1. rush into position to cover middle
2. secure your position
3. now either slowly turtle towards the middle or send out lone individuals on suicide missions

Now that is considering you have a map with fair spawns and not many maps do. If one team has a closer distance to the middle than the other, then they can easily just send one person to the middle and then procede to camp their way to victory.

So, this means that the only way you could do it is with 0 respawns. You might be able to do it with 1 respawn, but I too like 0 respawns.

First,
Loth did a great job of describing Warzone vs HH.  And yes Mauti, if a team controls the warzone for 3 continuous minutes, it ends the game right then, no matter how much time is left.

Second,
I'm not big on respawns, but if we did them in a battle league, I'd want TEAM RESPAWNS, not individual.  Since clans are teams, Team Respawns would be more representative of the actual clan, not just one individual.  I know most people don't like playing with team respawns on, because some random noob uses all the respawns, but in this case, it would be your own clan.  So if you have a death loving rambo noob on your clan, you have to deal with it as a team (both in the game, and afterwards).

Third,
10 minutes is the right time for Warzone.  One some of the bigger maps, you'd never make it back to the zone after one respawn even (if that's the way you go).  5 minute games would just end up with too many draws.

Fourth,
Splinter, I did read and hear lots of complaining about camping.  Everyone hates it (or at least says they do).  Too many LMS games are just who will get the first kill and then out camp the other team.  By adding a goal (like the warzone) to the game, it makes camping not effective (sniping still works though, but you have to get there, not just snipe from 6 inches from where you spawned).

     I'm with Splinter regarding not killing the LMS ladder. An additional Warzone ladder would be most welcome (not to mention a Siege ladder), but LMS is The One True CB. : ) Would it work to have the game type be open? That is, have rules for LMS, Warzone, and Siege CBs, then let the CBing clans decide which mode they'll play? A victory is a victory is a victory, I'm thinking, so it shouldn't require an additional ladder(s).

     Warzone requires respawns, in my opinion. In most maps, the location of the warzone is highly defensible (Stronghold and Embassy are the two most obvious examples, but also Wilderness, Vilnius, Tank...), and so whichever team wins the initial footrace to the 'zone can simply set up an impenetrable perimeter and the game will be over in moments as the other team's people try to assault and get picked off. With respawns, the defending team at  least has to work at it.

also, there needs to be a list of approved maps for play with warzone...

Doing training would be such bullshit with that gametype.

I do like bucc's idea of team respawns. I think it would be fair to give a clan a number of spawns thats half of the amount of people in the cb on one team...
So its a 4v4, there will be 2 extra team respawns for each team. 8v8 would be 4 spawns per team, ect. The only issue is what to do with numbers that aren't divisible by two. There might be some punishment if you are in a 7v7, or an 5v5, i think rounding down is fair enough.

Also, mutliclan cbs would work under this gametype.

About having one LMS, Siege, Warzone ladder: in Austria we have a saying: " Was der Bauer nicht kennt, isst er nicht!" translated "what a pawn doesn't know, he won't eat!". Most clans would stick with LMS simply because they know it.

I personally wouldn't see Warzone replacing LMS it is like extending LMS by an objective! After the discussion I agree with using a 10min time limit. You fight not simply against each other you fight for a hotspot. And once you have occupied it you can leave the hotspot contrary to Hamburger Hill(if I understood your posts about Warzone right). So you have to move fast and straight forward to the hotzone and conquer it. The team that first reaches the location has to defend and secure it while the other team tries to regain control. Ghost Recon isn't a plain team deathmatch game it is made for tactical teamplay and movment and Warzone would support this military pattern. We still can go back if it doesn't work out after season 5 and for season 5 I'll open a fun, non competition, LMS ladder.

About map resistrictions: Siege and Warzone need both a map list. It would be great if someone could post a list of maps he thinks won't work for these gametypes!

About respawns for Warzone: some of you are against it on the other site the first team that reaches the hot spot has for some maps an unfair advantage! Well all in all it is about to capture the hotspot so we have to test Warzone with 0 respawns and 3teamrespawns. The experiences will decide what to use.

Bye,

Mauti

     Warzone with no respawns = LMS. Warzone can be won by killing the entire other team, so playing with no respawns will emphasize that strategy. It will be LMS with the added distraction of a central base. Respawns are a must.

**SK Again**

Hey look a thread called bs ladder, hmmmm mb we should have that on there!

**Changes direction looking at mauti, than elandran, back and forth intill they submit**

0 respawns is probably ideal. Bucc brought up a good point that in LMS clans would get a kill and then procede to camp the rest of the match. If you play warzone with 0 respawns it has high potential to spice up LMS. The only way to win the game is by either going for the middle and holding it for all 3 minutes, or elimiating ALL the opposition. Warzone would eliminate those who just prefer to camp at their base. I feel that warzone should be played with 0 respawns or not at all. The reason being that once you add even 1 respawn each death has a lot less of a meaning and every action has a lot less risk.

Well as Valdar stated one reason why we change the competition ladder to warzone is to avoid camping and unlike HH it allows to end the game by holding the zone or killing the other team. In my opinion 0 respawns could work out great simply because you still have to move carefully but you are not allowed to move too carefully or the other team captures the zone. On the other hand having 3 TEAMrespawns could be interesting because the team must be careful because the all together have only 3 "extralives" So it isn't that you move completly different because the most uncareful person consumes your teamrespawns...

As said we must test both so if you gonna host some GR games just host some warzone games with 0 respawns and some with 3 teamrespawns!

Bye,

Mauti

Instead of 3 lives how about something like just 1 respawn... kinda like your last chance life? I'm thinking that with 3 respawns on smaller maps your going to get clans bitching at each other for spawn killing...

3 teamrespawns is that the first 3 guys that die get a second chance not that everyone respawns 3times! So spawncamping shouldn't be such a problem - all in all you have to defend your warzone.

I think we have now enough and I can start working on the scripts nevertheless if you have any other inputs post them please.

Regards,

Mauti

mauti, are you evan considering the bs laddeR?


-sk

@ bs ladder: I looked at it but I don't think c4 and nade wars have anything lost in a ladder: Most c4 games will end in a tie. Further RS is quite dead and I even doubt that we will get the required 10active clans for a competition ladder so only the 1vs1 fun ladder would be online.

About the FFA ladder spider sent me some suggestions and map resistrictions however I still don't know how you would handle it if other non ladder members join a FFA cb because you probably won't know all FFA ladder members!?

Bye,

Mauti

Alright Mauti, here?s the dirt on the c| FFA ladder.

It was pretty successful.  We had about 90 matches in 45 days.  The finals kinda flopped, but the regular season was pretty strong.  Learned a lot of lessons, here are a few:

Not sure what you had in mind for the DAMN FFA ladder, but this is the breakdown of the c| FFA Ladder.

Anywhere from 4-10 players.  4 rounds of 5 minute infinite spawn.  Each player then submits what place they got for each of the rounds.  Points where given for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd places (The higher the place, the more the points), 4th place or below, you get no points.

I definitely realized early on that an automated system as essential for this type of score reporting to work effectively.  Before we had the automated system, people would very often report that they placed in areas that they did not.  Once the automated system was in place, it had an error checking script to make sure that all the places that the contestants reported added up.  (4 rounds, so there had to be 4 1st places, 4 2nd places, etc).  It would wait for all the players to report their scores.  If all the scores added up, then the match would be automatically posted.  If the scores didn?t add up, it would give an error message and allows the contestants to enter their scores.  This definitely cleaned up a lot of issues.  As the season went on, there were less and less misreported scores.

There was only 1 instance of a person that wasn?t on the ladder entering a game. Each player has their own username and password for the system, and when you log in to the home page a rotating password was displayed to be used for locking the rooms ensuring that only players on the ladder could enter.

A few of the negative issues where these:

Grenades:  2 problems.  If you get a lot of players, they introduce a lot of lag.  As well, you had people that got nade happy, and got a lot of kills, but also killed themselves in the process.  Not a whole lot of skill involved in that.  A suicide rule was eventually made, stating that each suicide had to be deducted from your kill total.

Host Advantage:  The host had a major advantage in these matches, especially the ones that had a lot of lag.  Surprisingly the host didn?t end up with the best places all of the times, but people that could host, would host a lot of games in a row, and shoot up the ladder quickly.  Same sort of issues on the DAMN Ladder?the clans that play the most, go the highest up the ranks.  A modifier was introduced to compensate based on the ranks of the players.  If you did well against players that were ranked higher than you, then you got more points.  

Sensors:  A few people complained that people would drop a sensor on a small map, and find a nice cozy corner and pop off all the people as they spawn.  As a result kit restrictions was set to no sensors.  The whole idea of the league was to be as fast moving as possible and test people?s reaction timing.  Camping is about as far from that as possible.  

That?s what I can remember for now, if anything else pops into mind I?ll post more.  Also, anyone who participated in the league is welcome to add any comments.

Hope this helps ya Mauti.

 Never going to happen, SK.

For one, you're intending to exclude some members of this community from it, making it something that *DAMN can't support.

Two, most players don't enjoy that kind of bullshit. Whenever a host restricts something other than C4 or lag guns, I leave instantly, as do lots of people.

 

So let me see if i got this, your going to kill the reg LMS ladder to test the warzone ladder?  Cant we do 2 LMS and WZ ladders?  I'm open to new things, and this WarZone ladder does sound cool.  But for good team tactic LMS is it.  You take WZ, and you get things like spawn camping, and unfair spawn points...

  my .02?

Thanks Splinter for the info - you helped me a lot. I come back to your post soon. Random password is a great idea and also the submit pattern. Btw did you selfscript your ladder or did you use a prewritten system!?

Dr. No for season 5 there will be a LMS fun/statistics ladder. Warzone will be the competition ladder. There will be some testing fun warzone cb before season 5 starts to ensure quality. I don't think spawncamping will be such an issue because first the enemy has to defend the base and second how often does occur spawncamping with only 1 respawn at max.

General about teamrespawns: the number will probably by dynamical, as Jeb suggested, only with the difference that the teamrespawn number is always 2 below your player numbers (4vs4: 2; 5vs5: 3;....)

Bye,

Mauti

I wrote all the scripts on my own.  Took a lot of hours, but it seemed to work out well.  I haven't seen any other FFA ladder out there, and with the unique nature of the gameplay, seemed that writing my own was the best/only option.

Not thrilled that warzone is going to be the main competition ladder, especially with spawns.  I'd like to hear how other clans feel about this.

Wow great job, Splinter, you didn't exagerate when you applied as BL admin and added that you have good php knowledge!

One question regarding the FFA ladder: did the players also submit the kills and deaths or only their rank!? because if we go by kills and deaths we could make a ranking basing on killratio and ranks.

About Warzone as mainladder - give it a try - you don't have to lose much except 50days - and may it will turn out as great fun ladder  ;) And once again we don't have regular spawns only teamspawns so your movement tactics won't differ much from a 0 spawn game because if you play uncareful you damage your own team by using their spawns.

Bye,

Mauti

People only submitted their placements.  It seemed though that a lot of people had a hard time remembering where they placed in each of the rounds, so I wanted to keep the level of detail that each person had to remember down to a minimum.  

But as I said, although it was rough going in the beginning with this, it smoothed out as people got more used to the system.

     Too bad we couldn't get Evill to add some hooks for a stat system to the GhR plugin, as long as he's adding to it for cheat prevention anyway.

     When a game finishes, the stats for all players are sent to a server, and any interested leagues or websites can poll that server to get the latest data. : )

     Ah, dreams are fun.

"Command and Conquer"  vs  "Get the Base!!!"

Ideally LMS is the better style to play.  The one and only problem was:  the terms in which teams won hinged on who had the most lives left at the end of a game.  This allowed the team with the upper-hand to camp in a small protected area of the map.  After one kill, cb's turned into siege matches in which the defending team (more players alive) had a huge advantage suddenly.  Some teams would strategically wait (camped) to get the first kill, and then camped out the rest of the game in that one spot defending their lead.  This was the best way to take advantage of the more aggressively skilled teams.  Once all the teams caught onto this advantage, the clan battles became slow moving and more defensive.  Defense vs defense got us all stuck in long frustrating games.

Essentially even though the more offensive team controlled 85% of the map or more, the defensive team would win by means of strategically camping.

Warzone effectively corrects this.  The team with aggressive map control, finally has the advantage.  But control of the warzone base should only be a secondary deciding factor in a cb.  And the true correct style of LMS (no spawns) should be the primary deciding factor in a battle, the way it should have always been.    

If that team in control of the warzone wants to camp in the base or spread control of the map is their own decision.  Strategies go both ways in taking and controlling the base vs controlling the map.  

My main point here is this:  by adding spawns you take away the control of the map aspect.  The reason is because there would be an area you can never fully control, the opposing spawn point.  When traveling the map you essentially clear the areas you are passing.   Fighting within or at the brink of a spawn point is a sticky issue.   It's hot, and sometimes unpredictable, when really it should be as easy as kill and clear.

By adding spawns we mistakenly emphasize the battle being fought around the control of one central base, instead of evenly emphasizing the effective control of the map or an opposing team.

Not to mention the more intense excitement when playing with only precious life.  

If we want to have a siege-like clan battle with spawns, then I think that should be a whole other ladder, instead of replacing or confusing the classic LMS style.  

The idea of including the warzone game mode was a brilliant adjustment to LMS (Bucc).  And that is all it should be, an adjustment and not a replacement.  

     Have you guys played Warzone? It plays out one way and one way only: a footrace for the warzone, then defense of the zone. You complain about defensive camping CBs, yet a no-respawns game of Warzone is exactly that; with one key difference: the team that didn't reach the base first HAS to attack the fortified position, or they'll lose anyway. Arrange some test CBs (public random-noob games play out differently) and try Warzone with no respawns. I suspect that the only thing that will result is an almost guaranteed win for whichever clan spawns closer to the warzone.

Yo Loth

big difference in the type of defensive camping.   Camping in the middle of the map is no easy feat.  For most maps (+0 spawns), I think the team going for and trying to hold the base is gonna struggle more than the team controlling the map.  The team that can manage both will win out.  

you're right, I'ts all theory based on past cb experience and random warzone rooms.  

Let's get some tests going.  Loth I'll take your suggestions as a test challenge, MP vs c|.  

BTs
MOD
X1
one
GG

everyone get involved.  We need answers!!

I am completely with C| Splinter on this.  I believe the true test, one which tests skills, memory, tactics, sneakiness, and teamwork, is LMS.  Warzone, in my opinion, is almost worthless and not fun to play.  LMS ALL THE WAY!!!!!

I think the lms cbs must stand.  the way it has been has worked fine and ofc with a few minor adjustments, it would be picture perfect(minor adjustments)
as mentioned in a post earlier - lms 0 spawns, really show the skills of each player and team. its a more realistic game, thus more exciting. if people camp and wait for the oposition to come to them...well then they do.
as far as i remember, the top clans of this season where all out and good at it. if a clan camped - they would be hunted down.

i see no reason to change something that has worked so well. warzone should be a whole different ladder for the clans that want that. but my bet is that most of the active clans, would like to see the ladder work the way it has worked(and handled excellently by u guys(kiss ass)

mauti, i suggest that u have a meeting with the leaders of all the active clans, in GR. and let them speak for their clans and offer u their point of view(yeah i know it can be done in forums duh) but active chat can often solve things quicker.
and i do think that the hardcore gamers have more say in matters like this

thanx for all the hard work and the good ideas, but this is not one of them

just my point of view

[one]rampage

My 2? on the gameplay style of next season's GhR ladder:

Without debating the issues of camping and spawn killing and how the various games cope with them, I would argue that if you are going to add a second ladder, the new Warzone ladder should be the experimental, or "fun" ladder, and the the competitive ladder should remain LMS.  After the text season, we would be in a much better position to decide which style should prevail.  I guess I am seeing it like a new sport in the Olypmics, you have the trial season first to see if it works before making it the standard.

now i've read pretty much read all the posts in reg to this topic...and come to the conclusion that this idea is really really bad(as the one ladder)

sorry mauti, u do xcellent work for all of us, but this i feel is destructive for the community. i started playing ghr because of the "realness" and strategy about it. this was after years of action games - ctf etc. ghr is not a everyone run to a destination, shoot em up sorta game. LMS is totally fair, from the getgo, both clans have the same advanteges or not, but it is fair. if a clan camps after a kill...well tough luck, then the clan under, will just have to adjust to that and use even more skills and tactics to get the win or draw. it has been done many times, and most of us can tell u about it.

i dont believe this will solve the camping issue(is it such a big deal?) 4vs4- two hold base(camp) two attack etc etc. i dont think this is the sollution and there are clear spwan and base location dissadvantages on many maps.

im all up for new ideas and constructive changes, but plz plan the warzone ladder as an alternative to the LMS ladder and if it works.

 anyhow, im not pissing on your idea m8, i just have a feeling we might loose people to other games

thanx again

[one] Rampage

 :P

Like I said the "ideal LMS" is the prefered battle, but LMS the last couple seasons has changed to less than ideal.  

Instead of "come out and fight like a man" type play, its all about counting and protecting your blessings.  the battles are beginging to get less and less interesting because everyone's over protective and not moving.  The control of map has little value.

I had assumed the initial suggestion of the Warzone game mode wasn't to change the battle towards capturing and defending a base, but more about forcing the overprotective teams to come out and fight.  I really like the idea of warzone.  I say keep the spawns to zero, and basicly you have your classic LMS with another little interesting challenge.    

You dont have imput on whats going to happen, so dont say so

Sounds like *DAMN!/AK Turny, dosnt it??? yah , shut up


Well most players dont like you, so were evan, and who cares, if we get enough ppl to play, mb evan get jeb and some of the other GhR players to come back for it, it would help RS stay alive


Thats because you rely on the PDW, and you cant get a kill without it, ppl bann hbs's, i dont leave, i just adapt something you definatly cant do





Mauti, i beg you to put a ladder up for this, me and gnome have aculy hoped for this for about 1/2 of a year, plz, i think alot of players would join, it would be alot of fun, and will bring back some GhR players because they loved the bs.

Btw you said most C4 matches end in a draw, thats what the tie breakers are, its very fun to, and the matches are C4, Pistols, Skorps, Sniper assult, and Shoties, only one that could end in a tie is c4, and again, thats what the tie breakers are for, plz , i think a 2vs2 ladder would do great for the RS community and bring it back from the grave, thanks
-*DAMN Silent Killer,

p.s Plz

p.p.s  Same as above

p.p.p.s Typhy, your not welcome

Maybe start a thread and get people who would participate to say that they would join the bs ladder and maybe that would give Mauti a reason to actually host it other than that you and gnome want it.

I will have to say warzone could be made to work by switching team colors every other round , but I still think it sucks. Especially with respawns !?!? I mean come on guys its the fear of one life that makes a cb thrilling and exciting. Not to be entirely negative I do understand the point made about cb's that teams just camp. I for one like to see a clan who has the balls to hunt down their prey and annhilate their camp zone , an I have seen it happen . Lms is the true game for competition its name denotes it.  LAST MAN STANDING . I would also suggest that if you wanted to add other team games ; then allow them only if challenging team ask for cb of given type and challenged team accepts. Apply lms cb  rules and take out the headache of reformatting the entire battle league. You wanna stop camping eliminate sensors.
                                  :-X  

Guys thanks for all your inputs! Well the honest reason why I immediatly want to put Warzone as competition ladder is that you all have to test it! Currently from your comments most never tried it out in a real cb like situation.

If you do pretesting we have the experience that could be useful for the season settings!

0 respawns is still open for me because then Warzone would be like LMS!!! You can hunt down the enemy as usual but if the enemy decides to camp you can simply conquer the warzone and they have to come out! That's the main idea behind the change to warzone as Sickboy pointed out: it should extend the LMS ladder by extending the tasks with realistic tasks.

Some clans will start to run like crazy to the zone while others will try to gain control the area around the zone and kill each one that tries to get in. It is more tactical than ever.

Just read Sickboy's post he said what I always tried to say about warzone.

Just play some test games and then we can continue arguing - one thing for sure is that warzone will come in one or the other way. May 0 spawns may some teamspawns. Testing will show how we gonna play it in the future.

Bye and start trying it please,

Mauti

I think that we should stay with The way the BattleLeague Rules were before-LMS with No Spawn. That is the true test of Skill, as far as I am concerned. If you want a Warzone Ladder make one, but keep the Ladder for LMS. I and 19 |3ID| Clan Members say: Not a good idea.
Just my 10 cents..
(2 cents plus inflation)
-Solidus

ok, with this issue I completely and wholeheartidly agree with the c| boys on this one.  When it came to gameplay there is no better style of gameplay then LMS.  Yes, sometimes it took a while while playing the game but I do believe that much more skill and talent is put into the LMS style of game instead of warzone.  In a LMS cb you have a beter style of gameplay, and with Warzone 90 percent of the time it is whoever get's to the center smoke first..  Here's the thing, if Warzone was really that popular I would have to assume that more people would be playing it in multiplayer games.  Unfortuantely the only clan i see ever really playing this is |MP|.  Another thing I agree on is that you will lose many players of this ladder if you enforcee this as the main style of playing.  In fact it should be the other way around and that the LMS should be the main game type and Warzone should be a fun ladder.  Plz do not take out the LMS style of this ladder. Mauti, you have built the best ladder I have ever participated in, but if you do this, it will change the whole idea of the laddder.  I speak for my whole clan when i say this, please dont go to Warzone for the main ladder.


+MOD+Saberian

Just hosted a warzone room with no spawns.  

all skilled players involved but with random teams.  I know this isn't exactly the way a cb would play out, but you can get an idea of what a serious match might be like after a number of games.

Not one game (out of about 25 games) except the very last (swamp) did anyone win by conquering the warzone.  Every win was by elimination.  All played out like LMS.  

Players quickly learned that going directly after the warzone was suicidal.  Gradually play began to lean towards normal LMS type playing.  The only time the Warzone became a factor was when it was down to 2v1 or 1v1 and the team with the map control advantage could take the warzone and force the opponent to attack or lose the match.  I'd say about 10 out of the 25 matches came down to this.  And I think with time really cool strategies to overcome this will get very exciting.

All games were less than 10min.  Avg about 3 min.  This will slow down considerably with a real cb.  The pressure to attack and gain map control had the game moving along much quicker.

Planning to have more serious games or mock cb's later on (spawns and no spawns).  Hopefully tonight.  

******
You guys who are die hard LMS only, please consider warzone (0 spawns).  Try it out.  I think you'll find that it plays exactly like LMS minus the slow defensive tactics like camping (blah blah blah).  I'm still looking for the negetive side-effects of warzone.  You guys play and post.

Other clans, besides MP, that have hosted this style of warzone before:

Virus - same idea warzone no spawns (LMS effect)
c| Me -  I started hosting this occasionally to keep noobs from camping, and yet have the LMS style play.  Works really well.  

I am hesitant to agree that a MOD designed by a participating player be "allowed" to be used in official competition.  Something about it doesn't seem right.  I figure that Ghost Recon clan battles should be played with original "packaging" only...

I'm not married to this conviction and let it be known that I have played Warzone many times and do find it to be enjoyable.  I would like to see 2 separate ladders but I fear this would divide our clans and lead to the destruction of both ladders.  

That "council" thing might come in handy now in making a decision where I would vote in favor of LMS but this is Mauti's league and he can do what he wants....

ok, so without having to read all that stuff, what ladders are there going to be in next season, i hope you have a WZ and a LMS ladder, i personally agree with LMS staying the main ladder cause its the easiest game to practice at, and its the best test of team skill.

     Wickedson, to clear up a misconception, WarZone was designed by a PC player (Major Pain or Payne, I think he calls himself). Certainly not a "participating player".

Yeah, I'm certainly with Splinter on this one as well.

I don't think that WarZone would work as a COMPETITION ladder, but could work as an additional ladder for fun.

As many others have already mentioned, the idea of spawns in a CB situation seems to defeat the purpose - spawnkilling WILL become a problem, and no real test of skill is upheld, but, if no spawns are involved, the mode will simply be LMS with a smoky plume in the centre, unless 2 incredibly skilled, or stupid clans are involved.

Also, introducing any element of chance into a CB situation doesn't quite seem right....:o

I think if you do a survey of all the clans who participated in season 4, many are willing to test the warzone idea, but still want to keep LMS as the main ladder.

If anything, I think more testing should be done with the mod before you go ahead with your decision.

Worried. :(

Jedda.

So, I may end up eating my words here  ;D

c| did an internal 3v3 practice CB with no respawns, and I do have to be honest, the gameplay was not what i expected (for the better).  The strong majority of it resembled a regular LMS CB.  out of the 15 or so rounds, only once did one team win by holding the warzone for 3 minutes.  About a third of the time no one even captured the warzone in the first place.  We learned that going directly for the warzone right off the bat would get you killed almost everytime.  The only times that the warzone came into play, was like what ssick said, when it came down to a 1v1 or 1v2 situation.  And it does have an interesting effect, forcing the other team to take quick action to kill the rest of the enemy or retake the warzone in under 3 minutes.

I do still hope that no respawns will become the policy of the DAMN BL.  It kept the intensity of the LMS CB gamestyle, and still allowed covential tactics to continue to be in play.  Even in maps like embassy, where i used to think that it would be a footrace to get the warzone, ended up differently.  It was easy enough to set up and make a kill of the team running to the warzone before they captured the base, or at least make a kill and retake it relatively quickly.

This could turn out to be a good change after all, but I still would like to see more testing, and a consensus from the majority of clans.  c| would very much enjoy to invite any clan that wishes to test the new style of playing in a mock CB.  It's one thing playing your own clan where you know their tactics, it's something else playing against a different clan that can pull some surprises on you ;)

yes, splinter is right, after playing several games of this last night in cb style, it seems like a less camped almost more fun LMS, this could easily be a hit, or it could also easily flop, i still think that the only solution is to add this as a mini ladder for fun, to the main LMS ladder.

I played a couple games of Warzone on the c| host and it seemed just like LMS until you were the last alive and you ran to the warzone then camped it. I think it would be better with the LMS ladder as the main ladder because it has been tested already and the warzone ladder as an experimental ladder because that is what it is.

Exactly. We're onto something now! ;D

Not that you need to hear another co||ective voice, but after doing a few mock-cb's and hosting a bunch of random rooms on the Warzone mission type, I'd just like to suggest everyone keep an open mind on this. We have some time to try it out and get some familiarity with the game type before getting hot under the collar, for or against.

Personally, my least enjoyable cb's in the past have been the 2 or 3 hour marathons when we all spend too much time moving incredibly slowly or not at all. Everyone hates camping, but it will always happen when people feel that they are disadvantaged by spawn position, the loss of key team members, etc. I'm not criticizing anyone for doing this, but I find the battles where the clock runs out very aggravating, in particular when they end in a draw.

So far, it seems like Warzone is a great solution to this. It forces teams to confront one another. Especially when the battle gets down to 1v1 or 1v2, as others have mentioned.

Also, even though we're playing all the same old maps, they have a new dimension to them. The old strategies we are all used to generally work, but they have interesting new twists and turns to them. Makes it more interesting, imho.

Last, one question- can we 'fix' the mission file - maybe issue an official DAMN version (with whomever's permission) - so that the text messages match the team colors we use, so that there is an internal clock to display the base-held-time (as in Hamburger Hill, etc), and any other bugs we discover? I've personally had about 10% of the games I've hosted not end when one team was eliminated, forcing me to 'End Mission'. If we're going to use this for CB's, it really needs to be flawless, or at least more predictable.

Just a quick note from a very busy [V] Dutchman.

I haven't read all contributes, but my personal choice goes to warzone WITHOUT spawns. Like Mauti and some of the Collective guys allready stated: Warzone would be LMS with a small twist (and hopefully that twist will prevent camping a bit more than LMS).
For the people who like to cb with spawns I would suggest trying Unreal Tournament or Quake ;)

Back to work ... hope to get back to this later....

Ciao!
Dutchman / ViRuS

The version that DAMN has on their server is an old one.  Had some problems downloading the newer version off of the main site (http://www.geocities.com/majorplaying), but Ssick got me a copy and I've uploaded the latest version onto the co||ective site here:

http://www.thecollectiveclan.com/downloads/MPsTeamGames.zip

I doesn't change the Team Color bug (infact in the FAQ that he has on his site, he says, I know about that bug, and if you really want it fixed, do it yourself).  Not sure if it fixes the other problem, and it still doesn't have a timer.

If you open them in a text editor it's half XML and half pre-compiled code, making it impossible to edit.  There is a program that comes with the PC version of the game called IGor, which is basically the built in editor of Ghost Recon, so there is a good chance that that could be used to tweak, but I seem to be having a hard time finding a copy of it.  Got the PC, don't got the program.

I can understand that you guys want to change things around but the simple fact of this is that so many of us like the LMS style of gamplay.  It just allows us to focus on the enemy instead of throwing another mission into the mix of things.  Plus I would believe that it is more satisfying eliminating the enemy then winning thru a mission that is put into the mix.  I have played Warzone before and never had much likeness for it.  And I can also understadn that putting 0 respawns would make the game slightly different.  The problem with that is that this game is never really equal from the start with the spawn points and the center spot is never quite the center.  In either case I can see that you want to test the game for cb style.  My suggestion would that it would be made the secondary cb style and the primary still be LMS for the fact that we all have come to agree and accept the LMS style of gameplay.  Well , almost all of us.  But I do believe that you will find that most people will have more of a problem with the warzone style more then they would with LMS.  It seems that there is more and more people trying to make other battle league's and it makes DAMN think that they must change.  Well, I do  not believe that changing the whole playing style of the game is what this ladder needs.  Just more players.  And remember, the Ghost recon ladder was finished this last season, so why change something about the ladder that works.  there will always be small issues with clans against clans, that is a given, but the Warzone style, I do not believe it will change any of that Mauti.  it will just create more dis-satisfaction with the players in the cb.

+MOD+Saberian

I used to be against it Sab, but after doing a few practice CBs with [one], 3ID, and a lot of internal ones, it plays almost exactly like LMS.  The focus still is the eliminating the other team.  I've probably played about 100 or so rounds of CB style warzone and only once has it come down to the timer.  What it has done is make the last few minutes of the match alot more exciting.  All the warzone does is make one team come out and try to kill the other.  And having the control of the warzone near the end isn't always the best.  I've seen lots of situations where the remaining players captured the warzone, and were focused on protecting the warzone, ended up easier to kill cause they weren't as focused on protecting themselves.

The regular warzone format with multiple spawns is what i've played before this mostly.  That is a completely different game, and that is what i was thinking of when i made my first posts.  After playing it CB style, it's a whole new bag of chips.

Anyhow, c| and MOD should do a practice CB this week or sometime this weekend, so you guys can get a feel of what it would be like in a CB situation.  We've had notoriously slow CBs in the past ;), and i think this new format will keep the feel of the game the same, but speed it up and make it more exciting.

If after we play, you still hate it, that's totally fine, and you should say so.  This new format should be decided by all.  I just know from my personal experience that I hated it until I played it CB style...then it was all goodness :)

I would like to hear from [one] and 3ID to hear what they thought of our practice CBs.  They seemed to like it more in the CB, but I don't want to put words in their mouths.

PLease dont forget... Season 3 and 4 was not all smooth sailing.  There are imperfections to our normal LMS style cb's and thats why this idea of warzone was proposed.  It's not just some random ladder shake-up.

Season 4 LMS cb's:   A team only needed one single kill in order to win the battle.  This caused the game to slow down, and evenly matched teams had draw after draw making the battles even longer.

Warzone (0 spawns):   A team must eliminate the entire opposing team in order to win.  Despite what you may think, this is how warzone plays out in about 95% or more of the cb's.  So far after numerous battles it has only ended in a draw when the last two guys killed each other at the same time.  

Ssick and Mauti, you have the right idea.  Actual combat centralizes around control of objectives, not wiping the floor with your opponents.

For the liberals among you, I have a counter proposal (offered only for debate purposes).  If we really want to convert to map control over simple combat, why not use domination instead of warzone?  That way there are multiple "checkpoints" on the map for team progress, and annihilating your enemies still gives you victory.  Downside is that you don't win for having control when the game's time runs out, it is scored based upon the battle's entire length as opposed to the results.  Another up-side, domination is not a mod so everyone already has it.

My personal opinion is in favor of warzone, but a case can be made for domination as well.  Or, another option is here for your debating pleasure.  What if a warzone-domination-hybrid was made, providing the 5 smoke locations of dom with the more effective conditions of warzone (being control at the end)?

I also plan to host a bunch of warzone, 5 min, no spawns.  I think 10 is proper for cbs, but for friendly play i get more joiners with 5 min games.

GARBAGE!

Warzone = garbage...

Well... it's like LMS, so why do we need another ladder? Like LMS?
I think this game is a great excuse to camp... I played a little bit of it and on some maps some teams would sit up on a hill an keep an eye out...

Once that guy is dead in a regular (WZ) cb... how quickly will the action move then? Just as quick as these practice cbs? NEGATIVE!

All warzone does is give the team with less people a slight chance to win.
ALL games i played were LMS, played till the teams were done.

Lets have a gametype that differs from LMS or its pointless....

The thing with warzone is once a team captures the warzone, then the other team has 3 minutes to either wipe out the other team, or recapture the warzone, so you have no choice but to move.

and say, your are the team down, and the other team has the warzone.  Yeah, they might camp, but they will be doing it smack dab in the middle of the map, which is a lot easier to attack then if they were camping in the corner which is what usually happens.  And if they are camping in the corner, than it makes it that easy just to retake the warzone.

and if a team is sitting on top of a hill just watching the warzone, then don't go for the warzone, go for them!

Every clan that we played went in hating the idea of warzone and left liking it better than LMS.

eight, how about c| and BTs have a few practice CBs.  If you still hate it, that's cool, but give it a shot...consider it an informal rematch ;)

I thought of something to add.  We are at least talking about changing from pure game modes to promote realism/more fun during play.  Why not continue in this goal?  This is sort of an old thread, but it is a problem that really bugs me. http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/yabbse/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=4305 (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/yabbse/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=4305)

(For those who will no doubt make the comment, yes I would use them and I would still win firefights, not because of my gun but because I am a good player who knows how to adapt to the flaws of my weapon.  We are about becoming better here gentlemen, and I would take the m16/m203 against any factory processed OICW user and win more often than not...ok so i don't use the pkm and no one ever should...)

I do not care for argument, you should all know this, but I would like it if I am not ignored.

     Aramarth, Warzone is a server-side mod. Only the server needs to have it installed to play it. As for fixing the binocular kits, I'm for it, but I honestly don't think it would make any difference in CBs. Changing those four kits could be done server-side with some caveats or client-side and be perfect. If it was done server-side, only the host would see the correct kits. Everyone else would still see "Gun + Binoculars", but if they took that kit, it would have sensors/claymores in-game. So it works, but it requires explanation. Doing it client-side ensures that everyone sees the same thing, but then you're talking about everybody downloading the mod. It wouldn't be too big a deal, though. Just fixing those four kits would result in a mod that was under 1K to download.

Yeah!

I fully agree. If WZ is so similar to LMS, why do we really need the change?

Yes, there are imperfections in LMS and camping can become a problem, but, these problems are generally with less experienced clans who are still learning the so-called 'art'.

Please don't make CBs anymore complicated than they need be.

As I always say - If it's not broken, don't fix it.

One thing that i've noticed from playing on PC servers, is how stuck up most of us are. For instance, there is no bitching about spawn killing when unlimited spawns are on. Spawn killing isn't a problem in warzone, because you don't win the game by kill amounts, you win the game by capturing the warzone. I know that games with unlimited spawns are looked down upon by practically everyone here because its "not realistic", but it makes the game much more intense, especially in games where kill totals don't win the game. The same applies to siege games.

If you really want to see what a different game this is, play it with some respawns, or unlimited respawns.  The game shifts from everyone playing LMS style, to a massive battle for the warzone.

Good points loth.

Jeb, I can only answer you one way.  If you want a bloodthirsty, heaped bodies, who-clicked-first fragfest, get a different game!  The style of play you suggest is well done and enjoyable in Unreal Tournament 2003, not in a realism-based game.  If I want killing for killing's sake give me UT, but there comes a time for strategy, sneaking around, even a well-laid ambush, and you can't do any of this if your enemy stands back up after you kill him.

i wonder why respawns were put into GHR. Shit GHR is hardly realistic, if it was the only guns with zoom aside from the sniper rifles would be the SA80, and the OICW/GL.

But the fact remains, if you want to experience a game where only holding the warzone is the objective, then spawns need to be in place.

If no one wants to even think about having a few respawns, fuck warzone, it won't work... but its a novel idea.

Yes.

I agree that warzone does need spawns to have any real change from a simple LMS game, but i think the point that people are trying to make is that the dont want any spawns in CBs.

For that reason, warzone simply wont work.

     The other day, a few of us MPs did a CB-style game (no respawns, ten minute rounds) of Warzone with c|. I'm gonna flaunt good rhetorical style and put my summary first: you all need to try it before you knock it. It keeps the good points of LMS CBs, such as the need for caution and for skillful tactical placement of troops. It also changes LMS in one major way: you literally cannot camp. In most maps, ones where the warzone is not in an exceptionally defensible position, the game plays out PRECISELY as a game of LMS, except when it gets down to the last man or two on a side. In LMS at that point, both teams would most likely be camping, moving with extreme caution, trying not to lose a man. In Warzone, each time that situation arose, one team made a dash and tagged the warzone. Bam, now the other team has three minutes before they lose. That serves as a nice little kick in the ass and makes you get up and get a move on, lemme tell you.

     The upshot is, Warzone CBs with zero respawns have the good points of LMS without the bad points. Try it, try it, try it, THEN come and argue about why it won't work. Right now, most of you are just talking out of your asses for lack of knowledge.

Could not agree more, Loth!

I was against having warzone as the main ladder, but having participated in a number of mock CBs over the last week, I have totally reversed my opinion.

Warzone with no spawns is both challenging and enjoyable.  The start and middle action of the game plays like LMS, but the endgame is much quicker and more dramatic.  You can not sit back with a man advantage and wait the clock out.... the ONLY ways to win are to eliminate ALL enemies, or hold the base for 3 minutes.

Playing without spawns, and with skilled and organized teams was a completely different experience than my prior experience with Warzone.  Loth's right: try it!   The co||ective will gladly join you for a practice battle.

Count my vote for Warzone, no spawns.

I also like the LMS for CB's...... in WZ or HH you would kinda eliminate the snipers b/c like you said .. it is more fast paced and a sniper is not a fast paces weapon. I personaly am a sniper and i feel that players like me would not play as much... but thats just my opinion. ::)

hey im going to give u guys my opinion on this whole issue

ok i would hate to see the LMS ladder go away, i would ruin the

damn league. so in my opion u guys should just keep the main

ladder as LMS and put warzone as the "fun ladder"

hooks ::)

Let me get this straight...

Your taking off the LMS ladder an making warzone the main ladder?

I would be sad to see the traditional Damn R6  Ghost Recon Battle League perverted and tainted by a mod.  I favor the pure GhR experience as the basis for the Ladder.  If MP wants to play warzone so much they can host and play it on their servers--I have played warzone with them on their servers and have had fun--but not as much as I have playing CB style.  I would hope that MP and c| can't just steamroll warzone into the Prime Damn BL format.  I believe that Warzone encourages (and actually enforces) camping--first the campers who spawn closest race to the zone and then camp it out defending it--real fun,

                   BTs_ST u RM[SER] ::)

     Try CB-style Warzone. Then come here and complain about why it won't work. Until you try it, your opinion is worthless.

Hey guys,

All those opposed to **the adjustment** seem to miss the point, and I haven't heard any sound arguments yet defending the old flawed LMS.

It's not your average Warzone multiple spawn fiasco, once you kill the spawns.  Please stop damning it until you test it within a cb environment (period).  

DAMNIT LOTH I HAVE TRIED WARZONE CB STYLE AND I WAS GOING TO EXPLICITLY ADD THAT TO MY PRIOR POST FOR THOSE LIKE YOU WHOSE MANTRA IS "I CAN"T HEAR YOU, YOU DIDNT TRY IT".

I TRIED IT MANY TIMES

I DON'T LIKE IT YET

I WILL TRY IT MORE

DON"T TELL ME I DIDNT TRY THE MOD AND/OR MY OPINION DOESN"T MATTER CONCERNING SAID MOD, PLEASE.

CONVERSELY I COULD POSTULATE THAT MP's OPINION ON THE WARZONE MOD IS WORTHLESS BECAUSE IT IS FROM A CLAN WHO CAN'T WIN THE BL THE STANDARD WAY AND IS ONE OF THE TWO CLANS WHO IS PUSHING SO HARD FOR THIS MOD TO BE THE SOUL OF THE DAMN R6 GhR BATTLE LEAGUE.

AT THIS POINT I STAND BY MY JUDGEMENTS EXPRESSED PREVIOUSLY IN THIS THREAD,



                 BTs_ST u RM[SER] ::)

"Adjustment" my ass!!--You are talking about KILLING the Damn R6 Battle League!!

The first and only argument needed to defend LMS CB style is that....


THAT"S THE GAME--IT'S CALLED GHOST RECON--CHECK IT OUT

Until you try it, your opinions are worthless!!

          BTs_ST u RM[SER] ::)

     Yes, yes, your outrage is very pretty. I didn't see you say at any point that you had already tried CB-style Warzone. It was therefore a valid assumption that you had not tried it.

     What didn't you like about it?

Hmm, and I'm pretty sure I could postulate that BTs camps more then a troop of boyscouts and that's why they don't like warzone.  I'd probably be just as wrong as your sorry ass with your previous statement though.  

BTs used to bitch openly in this forum about campers, and how they hated them.  But I bring up warzone as a way to make things less about the guys that just set up camp at their base and wait things out, and more about fighting, you don't talk about that.  You make this a clan thing.  It was never a clan thing STURM, there are lots of guys out there that like the warzone and assassination mods.

So stop yelling and screaming and make a good point.  Maybe then it wouldn't be brushed off.  Because right now you are sounding more like a girlscout.

     I only made that statement as a mock-flame while in defensive posture responding to your claim that my opinion had no merit.  You guys know that I am always one of the first people eager to try out betas of new mods.  I enjoy the change of pace from the base Ghost Recon game--but I do not favor making a Battle League out of a 3rd party-why-the-hell-cheesy mod.



You know that BTs doesn't camp--back that up bro!!! (My statement (which was in jest) was an unrefutable FACT, while yours is known by most to be DIAMETRICALLY CONTRARY TO FACT and therefore MUST BE A JOKE.

I posted above my primary reason for disliking this mod (try reading)-- How can anyone say this will curtail camping WHEN IT IS THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF WARZONE 180 TO CAMP THE WARZONE (CAMP 3 minutes HERE and YOU WIN)?

I have had nothing but respect (until the last few posts--yours and mine) for MP and it's members--I haven't met an MP I didn't like, despite their efforts  ;D


    BTs_ST uRM ::)

PS--Why don't you tell everyone your actual reasons for your attempted hijack of the Damn R6 Battle League through the introduction of a 3rd party mod.  (Its funny how you think your and MP's position are untouchable gospel but that my lone differing opinion is either not valid or must be biased--I am just stating my opinions in this thread about a proposition I feel may jeopardize the Damn R6 GHOST RECON BATTLE LEAGUE)

PPS--Maybe Damn could change the Ladder mod every season to suit the desires of different non-finalist clans.  MP mod is on deck and X1 Xtreme Combat is in the hole.

PPPS--PLEASE MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE DAMN R6 GHOST RECON BATTLE LEAGUE. (If this entails MP starting their own Warzone league so be it).

I made no such claim.


Oh, you are saying that I've never seen a BTs camping in a game?  Yeah, sure I haven't.  You just keep believing that one.


So, let's see.  Which leads more to camping.  A game where you have no objective but to stay alive, with a secondary goal of killing others, or a game where there is an objective away from your base?  There is a large difference between trying to control a spot on the map, that is usually out in the open (not very campable) and just dropping at your base and finding something to hid behind.  Now, we've all seen the second in CB's here, haven't we?

Now, this is warzone we are talking about.  Let's look at a couple of maps for a second and talk about camping.  Let's start with creekbed.  Yeah, going to be loads more camping there when someone ACTUALLY HAS TO GO OUT IN THE RIVER.  Ok, I know, how about Aurora or the other night maps?  Yeah, nobody ever camps those, do they?

Oh, and you seem to make an assumption that any one team can just run right up and take the base and set up camp.  What's the other team doing at those times?  I mean, while we take up our "campsites" all around the base, and someone runs into it, what is the other team doing?  Having a quick smoke?  You make it sound as if this is siege, where the base is right at someone's starting point, and they have all day to set up a defense.  It's not that way at all.

BTW, I've been in many games where the base was taken back and forth.  


What last few posts of mine?  Show me please?

And I'm sorry to say that I can't say the same about BTs.


I don't consider it a hijack at all.  Have I used force?  Have I been on other clans boards asking for them to join forces on it?  I think we know who is organizing and who isn't, and BTs are right in the middle of it.  But more to the point, I made a suggestion, and gave my opinion about it.  Others have agreed, still others have disagreed, tried it and jumped on.  Where's the hijacking there?  Has anyone heard one word of threat?

Ok, as for actual reason, I gave it.  I don't like the campers in the game.  I hate a CB where there is next to no action because one or both clans are camping.  Did you not understand that?  Do I need to use smaller words for ya?


No, you aren't just stating opinions.  You are veiling insults and accusations in them.  I asked for opinions, and I haven't badmouthed anybody but Eight (who's opinion was to leave and join the BTs League).  But that doesn't mean I'm going to sit there and let you turn this into something it is not.  You seem to keep turning this into an MP thing, it's not.  Yes, I suggested it, but to the community at large.

As for your opinions, all you do is say it's camping, you don't talk about it vs LMS, you don't talk about why LMS is better, just calling it camping.  Not much there to consider, is there?


LOL, nice try.  Yeah, there's an example of you "just stating your opinion" again.  And I'd have a lot more respect for BTs if they didn't come out and challenge us publicly and then back down on GR.  And that is a fact you can't deny (eight already admitted to it in another thread).


Actually, that's more BTs style, now isn't it?  But one thing is for sure, at least I'd know how to do the math and how the scripts worked =P

OK here is my 2 cents again on this warzone crap.

My concern with this mod is as follows....

I have tried it and i didn't like it.
We played against c| and they were very clever when it came to playing warzone.
As they have always been when it came to playing any style of GHR.
Be it LMS, Siege, warzone etc...

They were smart enough to make the move inside and have guys run on the outside of the warzeon to catch the other team off gaurd.

My concerns aren't because of c|.... It's for thos clans who would camp it up on spawn points... Yes it's annoying yes i hate camping.

This warzone game (which i have tried many times) promotes camping.

Maybe c| plays in a diffrent way that doesnt promote camping like i say. But my worries are for those clans who I have bitched about in the past. This wz introduces a new style of camping. 1 that just takes the whole surprise out of the game....

Even though i hate campers it is kinda nice to back the enemy up into a corner at their spawn point... shoot 1, then back off so they walk into your sensor net.
This game somewhat eliminates the element of surprise in my eyes.
Every game i have played (not including the c| ones)... The team to run to the wz first pretty much wins by camping it up around the wz...

Imagine this scenerio....
1 team closest to the wz gets inside.... sets up camp nicely...
The other team spawns across the map... Being that it is a LMS style game, in REAL cbs everyone moves 10 times slower.... So now you have to worry about your 3 minute time limit in order to get either the wz or kill all of the other members... With no active clock to show how much time u have left till the wz time limit is up...

Ok so 45 seconds into the game and your still not close the wz... BUT WAIT! u see a guy! YOU KILL HIM! only 4 more guys to go! and only 2:15 seconds to kill them all or go grab wz...!
So in other words the team who spawned fartest away is now up a man yet can still loose the game because of some expert campers... and on top of this they have less then 2 minutes now to kill everyone or loose the game.

Yes LMS style games were slower paced... Yes camping is annoying....
But yet that was the fun of these CB Styled games... It was a chess game which sometimes moved really fast and other times were really really slow.

You think it's hard to kill a bts or a c| member now? Try killing 4 of them in under 2 minutes while all of them have setup camp in or around the warzone...

So you get close to the wz because there is 1 minute left before u loose only to get shot from someone camping the outside entrance? maybe u get inside only to find someone inside the wz? Either way i have seen nothing but camping fromt his mod.

Yesterday i played WZ on a public server... I ran up to the smoke (This had multiple respawns by the way) I setup a sensor, and i went to the bathroom... took a nice long poo... came back and my team camped out the location so needless to say... 3 minutes were up an we won. yay!

That was the funnest poo i have ever had... At least with lms you can expect the enemy to either be hiding in all the nook an crannies of each map or actually trying to hunt u down....

And yes bucc u have seen us camped...
We camp out the campers... if you camp us out believe me we will camp u out. So yes we have camped you out! campers =P

All i have to say is if it aint broke why fix it, i mean the reason we all love the damn BL is coz its fun! If we wanted to play mods, we would just join the BTL league. Which (no offense BTS) isnt very popular. Now lets think why? I think it is becasue they have alternate which most people dont like. I loved the damn BL last year, and i think this will just widen the gap between new clans, and the pro's. More losses for newb clans = less longevity for noob clans = less future competition. That MY 2 cents. Hey maybe well start an X1 Clan BL!!! and guess what no mods, classic game style... (copywrites for name and ideas belong to X1 clan) lol.... ok maybe not, but still.

maybe it will be more popular if this DAMN league takes up WZ which a few clans love to death, and other hate to death. Its kinda conflicting, but if DAMN wants to host this WZ crap, then BTL hosts LMS, then there will be clans playing in both leagues. This whole problem is solved by having 2 separate ladders.

Hey six...

Why do you think i am going to post against having the mod in competition... and then host modded ladders?

ON BTL the team games are all classic LMS.
we also have 1v1 (NO MODS) 2v2 (NO MODS) and of course the Close Quarters Battle Ladder which uses a mod to change the whole game.

None of this warzone crap!

I say change the warzone to hamburger  hill! Works for ghostrecon pc ladders  ;)

     If a clan is stupid enough to play Warzone like it was an LMS camp-fest, then you get an automatic win by holding the warzone. Instant punishment for camping. What's the problem?



     Playing a game where the players are actually running around and trying to kill the entire enemy team, instead of setting up a defensive network at their spawn point, takes all the surprise out of it? You must have a different defenition of surprise than I do.



     Every game of Warzone I've played normally is won by capturing the warzone, yeah. Every game of Warzone I've played CB style (no respawns, teamwork) has ended within two to three minutes when one team was completely wiped out. The only time the warzone actually meant anything was when the both teams had been nearly wiped out and the last two or three men were being cautious. Whenever that happened, one team tagged the warzone and forced the other team to hunt them down. Again, fast games with a ready way to end any camp-offs.



     Once again you're assuming that the clan furthest away from the warzone is sitting down for a nice circle-jerk before they bother getting into action. There are a couple of maps which give a nearly guaranteed win to the closer spawn (Castle night is one) due to an extremely defensible warzone. If you're not playing in one of those maps, rushing the warzone gives no benefit whatsoever. You rush in and tag the warzone. Now the other team knows exactly where you are, and can come in on the warzone like angels of death, probably taking out a good number of your guys.

     Or, say you tag the warzone and then have a couple of guys run away to set up camp so that the other team can't take you out like that. Then you're just going to lose control of the warzone if and when the attacking team takes out the warzone's defenders. Again, CAMPING DOESN'T HELP. Warzone has a built-in anti-camp feature: you camp, you lose in three minutes.



     Once again, for probably the fiftieth time, I'll say that a pickup game with spawns IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM AND PLAYS COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY THAN CB-style Warzone. Telling horror stories about pickup Warzone does not provide evidence against Warzone CBs.

Again a nice strong post from MP...

Yet when do u guys ever play?
I would love to see these warzone games played when it means something...

These mock cbs dont proove anything at all... Everyone runs around without a worry... which will explain why every game is so quick for u...

And as for the scenerio no im not assuming that the team furthest away is camping I AM assuming that BOTH teams in a REAL CB will move alot slower. So this whole 3 minute time limit sucks... especially if they are campped around and inside the wz...

Like i said before... You ever try killing 4 c| guys with a time limit of 3 minutes? Not so easy... and yes to toot my own horn... ill give u 3 minutes to kill all of bts guys... See how you like this mod then....

I'm still wondering why every BTs member makes this seem like it's about the MP clan, and not about a simple suggestion?

im gonna stay neutral in this, but whatever is best for the community is what should be done.

I'm just saying your never playing ghr... you barely played ghr the last 2 seasons yet you have this great idea for the game...

LOL eight...   listen,

drop the flame.  This has nothing to do with MP.  It has nothin against BTs.  It has everything to do with making a more competitive ladder.

Thank you for the descriptive feed back, but your arguments feel warped.  I can do better making arguments defending old LMS, and yet I still feel WZ is the better ladder gametype.

In response to sixshooter.  Damn BL is fun... it's fun because its competitive.  please read up, way up in this forum.  "dont fix it if it aint broke"  it is a little broke.  If I'm not mistaken, it seemed most of BTs (then DEA) was up in arms about the teams begining to camp in cb's of season 3, I was too.  And as you can tell from the past few posts, we all admit to camping now.  We all love the idea of LMS, but the ideal LMS has changed.  To play a dead serious cb match it's unavoidable to camp.  The evenly matched games become a maddening deadlocked camp-off.  I seriously don't understand why you guys are defending this Eight.  ??=(?

Bottom line... Both types play like LMS.  Both invite heavy team tactics. One game is much slower, less action.  The other moves faster, more action, quicker decission making.  And I still don't feel like many people have been seriously considering this.    

   

Eight, I probably play more hours of GhR then you do a week, since whenever I'm on, I just see you in a locked room advertising your league.  So don't be talking about things you just don't know (even though you are well practiced at it.).

Well said Ssickboy.  It's like BTs don't want this just because of who suggested it, not because of the game itself.  They bring up MP more in their arguments then they talk about the points made.

well let me think about why i don't play GHR all the time these days...
internship + summer quarter takes up 14 hours of my day... homework is another 2 hours a day...
then my freetime is limited to 3 and 4 hours in which i usually choose to hang out with friends rather than spend time online.
I know that lots of the other "mps" are working, or on vacation.

so surely because i have a life outside of the internet i should not be allowed to talk about anything pertaining to the damn bl.

For my thoughts on the warzone ladder, I think it could work if it was kept separate from the main LMS ladder. But i don't think its ready to be the default ladder.

A little response to sickboy,
I'm completely confused why bts would complain about this, it would fix the problem that they always bitch about relating to camping. Plus you'd think they would like it if damn BL sucked, so more people would join their league...

The onus or burden of proof is upon those who seek to institute the change in the purity of the DAMN R6 BL as to why this mod is allegedly better enough than the STANDARD GHOST RECON LMS CB STYLE, not upon the defenders of the status quo.  You guys have your work cut out for you convincing the Mac Ghost Recon Damn R6 world that your favored mod should supplant the Damn R6 BL.  Those, like myself, who beleive in the Pure Ghost Recon experience are all ears but should not have kowtow to the whims of the minority of players/clans who wish to muscle a mod upon the community.  The ball is in your court--YOU GUYS are the people who need to make the cohesive arguments in favor of your revolution, and convince us, the rabble, that it must be so.  So far I am unconvinced.  Please try harder, I know you are capable of more effective rhetoric than you've fielded so far.  Make a beleiver out of me instead of argueing ad hominem,

                  BTs_ST u RM

PS--To me it seems--I (and eight) don't like Warzone mod taking over Damn R6 BL.
--Bucc and Loth would like to see Warzone 180 as the Damn R6 BL format.
--My opinion and others' opinions--all have merit.
--This are merely my opinions.

Let's not make this some kind of religious issue sturm. It's a game.

As a game, it's supposed to be fun, and it is. The battle league is also supposed to be fun, and in it's current form, it isn't. 5 hour camp-fests aren't much fun to me. Warzone fixes the camping problem, making the game more fun.

No system is ever perfect, even (especially) retail games. If there is a way to improve the system, should we not do it? Simple fact remains that warzone makes cbs more fun.

I encourage every person who plans on playing in the season 5 ghr ladder to speak up about this issue. Even if you have nothing more to say than a simple "I like it" or "I don't like it". But before you do, play a few rounds of warzone with no respawns in a mock cb. I think you'll find it a much more enjoyable experience than regular LMS.


I vote for warzone to replace LMS.

     A while back in this thread, I suggested establishing rules for different types of CBs, then letting all CBs count towards standing on the ladder. That will work nicely with the purse points system, in which only the victor matters, not how many kills were had or whatever. Why not establish or propagate LMS rules, Warzone rules, and possibly Siege rules, then let clans decide what to play in CBs?

     Let the people who enjoy playing a CB for four hours do so. Others will play Warzone.

Yes, and no.  This isn't a hostile takeover.  I posted a suggestion, others took up the suggestion.  The suggestion seem to have momentum.  However, if you want to convince people that the status quo is better, you have to actually say why, not just that it is.


Bullshit.  You haven't really responded to the points brought up so far.

And as for you being a "purest", isn't that your name on the Siege and CQB ladders on the BTs league?  Yeah, you sure believe in the "purity" of the game there.


What the hell are you smoking?  "KowTow"?  "Whims of the minority"?  and there you go using the big one again, MUSCLE.  Show me where we've applied the pressure to strong arm someone into it?

And here, yet again, you try and turn this into an |MP| vs the league thing.  What is your problem?  Look at the other people that have posted on this.  Look at Mauti's reaction.  No, it sure seems like you, Eight and SignTit care more about most of |MP| (not all of it either, btw) liking it, then you do about the actual mod or anyone else's opinions.  


Impossible, since you don't even talk about the points brought up so far.  You are just ignoring them, not responding to them.  Repeating your same old song.  If you don't open up and discuss it, don't bother asking.  It's as bad as calling out a CB and then backing down.

Honestly, either talk about what's been talked about, or just drop it already.  It's as bad as spam when you don't actually talk about it, just keep pointing fingers.

Loth, I think the heart of the problem is that they aren't actually reading the posts, they are just fighting it and pointing fingers at us.

Loth,

     I think your last proposition would be the best compromise and am thrilled that you came up with it.  (Btw I appreciate your last post responding to my prior post as well =).  I only got uppity when MPs were saying my opinion was worthless.  I still only have respect for MPs.  And Jeb I am with you too as per yor last post on this thread--"Warzone as secondary NOT primary Ladder".  I will continue to beta test the WARZONE 180 mod and have not closed my mind on the matter.  Will MPs host some Warzone games and invite me please?  I am sorry if I get into the debate exhuberantly, but if I did not care I wouldn't even begin thinking, much less posting.  If I care I must post my conscience--I'm sorry it's my burden.  All in all, my opinion is just one man's opinion but it is as valid as the next.  I will see you guys in the Warzone so we can test it out more k?

                         BTs_ST u RM[SER] ::)

Which MP said your opinion was worthless?

   BTs_ST u RM[SER] ::)

PS--C'mon I try out all the new mods, I was excited every time the MP mod was updated, I am first in line to try out X1|'s mods (and Xaiver's pre X1| mods) and, (straddling the fence), mainmans CQB mods.  I am not anti-MP by any means.

Altough the idea is good, I don't think it will work.

Example:
Clan 1 is very good at defensive playing*cough* camping *cough* and plays LMS only.
Clan 2 is more into fast action and plays Warzone (or without sensors, or Hamburger Hill).

What if Clan 2 wants to challenge Clan 1 ? What do you play then? What if Clan 1 refuses to play Warzone or Clan 2 doesn't want to play LMS?

I think we should stick to 1 Official League with 1 gametype. Let's keep it simple.... we are gaming here ;-)

Did you happen to miss the "CB-Style" part in there?  

And, if you had tried it, then your opinion wasn't worthless, was it?  I didn't see anything there with your name on it, and it was on what, page 4?  So, which was it?  If you had tried CB style, why do you assume that message was for you?

And I haven't asked you why are you anti-MP, I've asked you why you keep making this about MP, when it never has been.

I think Dutch is right concerning the multiple game types.  It's gotta be one or the other.  similar situations happened in the last finals where MOD had an advantage playing 3v3 and we had an advantage playing 4v4.  Setting up the game was difficult.  We ended up switching off.  We could maybe consider switching out the agreed gametypes (somehow) during a cb.  Sounds difficult.  

Sturm... please keep the posts and dialogues comin.  I'm listening.  

 ;)

I don't know any of the DAMN guys well, and I sure haven't ever had a chat with Mauti, so I don't want to suggest that I actually KNOW what he's doing right now....

... but I have to think that he's either ready to trash this whole damn ladder out of frustration...

... or that he sits in front  this thread, bourbon in hand, laughing his @ss off.

Actually, I think I read he was taking a vacation right about now.

The evolution of this thread has started to make me sick.  The goal of this thread is to do one thing only: make the ladder more fun and competitive (these two things unquestionably go together).  Now, as I and others with me see it, camping is the biggest downside to gaming in this ladder, period.

I ask you all to respond to that statement before reading the rest of this post.

Ok, so what is the best way to stop camping.  Well, the obvious number 1 easiest way (and I would add the most combat-realistic) is to turn off the F%$&^ing sensors.  They may indeed exist in real life as I am sure many of you will point out, but troops use their eyes not crap like sensors.  Oh yes, an anti-terror team (aka R6, RS, and RvS) DOES use sensor equip, and constantly, that is their type of mission.  GhR, however, is special forces infantry, NOT your precious classic anti-terror team.  They go, see, shoot, blow stuff up, etc.  Use the single player mode and see the difference in how you play between this and the older games!  Special forces fight outnumbered almost exclusively, and they rely upon superior firepower and surprise to gain victory.  Anti-terror teams use surprise and timing, but they rely more on technology and knowledge of how-far-that-guy-is-from-the-door.  Have most of you read the book that started all this?  Note right now, such units have no time for sensors, nor to set up around a building of hair-trigger terrorists who they need to kill before the hostages eat lead.

Now I can see all your faces.  I am sure that one of you at least will not read this paragraph and begin your thread by ranting about how much sensors ought to stay around.  This section here is notice to all that any who bring that up are idiots who miss the point and lack proper reading skills.

I know and accept that sensors are here, and I don't make a big stink about it do I?  It will not change and I know this, I do not try to change that which will not.  So what is the point of this huge post (like so many others)?  The goal of this thread is to do one thing only: make the ladder more fun and competitive (these two things unquestionably go together).  :o Oh dear... a tie-in to my opening statement... someone call my high school english teacher!!!  (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/yabbse/YaBBImages/icon_bluh.gif) No, seriously.  The only way that the majority of you will accept an anti-camping change is to have it forced on you, because even if you hate camping, subconsciously you think you have the right to do so.  This also will never change.

What we can change, fellow gamers, is how useful or easy is it to camp.  Sure, someone could take the warzone and sit there, but the likelihood of success involved in a smoke rush is greatly less than the chance of success in a first-kill sensor-net camp.  To get to the smoke first requires you to run across the map like a chicken with its head cut off (yes, for you city types, they do run around after they are beheaded.  On one occasion, my poor mother was scarred for life at the age of 5...). I have not seen it work reliably.  After you see your enemies do it the first time, you know to expect it again, and you can be ready to gun them down when they try.  This is even short of mentioning how likely it is that they will get the right spawn for their rush.

So finally, the ultimatum.  One of you will start in on me about "well then it is random! who the victor will be is based upon the spawn." I have heard that before, and I would respond that only if you participate in such methods of thinking are they true.  The days of "but people will..." should end right now on this bl.  Throwing the blame like that instead of just policing yourselves is quite childish.  If you do not smoke rush, then half of the random winner statement is dead already.

The guys with only one play in the playbook can't win anymore.  With two ways to win as warzone presents, the smart and skilled will win the day, not the pathological rusher or sensor-net camper.  Isn't that what this is all about?

Aramarth, give me back my soap box this instant!

Nicely put, and back on topic.

I'd also like to add, that since this is talking about suggestions, that if there are maps where one spawn point has an obvious advantage in proximity to the base, then we can eliminate those maps from competition, right?

i agree with aramarth's post. However i think for the first season there should be a seperate ladder for warzone than LMS...

my feelings on warzone with no spawns has changed a bit, mostly because i look at warzone as a game in which you take the smoke at all costs, and not as a camper buster for lms games. If you want to play a king of the hill style game turn on spawns, but if you want to speed up a LMS game add smoke.
Personaly i'm not the type to go and hide when the ods are entirely against me, its more of an even chance of taking down scattered enemys who are running around looking for you, than camping somewhere and being located after 1 kill. However i see lots of people do this in cbs when they are the last one on their team, simply because a draw is better than a loss.

Well im doing what I tell others NOT to do.. 8)
Im posting without reading all the posts.

I have been on Vacation for 2 weeks so I missed alot of conversations about this.

I would NOT suggest that the DAMN Battle League ONLY use the Warzone mod for cbing. I really like playing on the DAMN BL but I like playing regular LMS cbs.

As for the camping issue, I think we proved last season that it doesnt matter if a team camps, we will find a way around it. So i personally dont care about the camping issue. I will come and get you, and if you keep doing it game after game after game.. Well i will give you a taste of your own medicine.........

Mauti you have a great ladder, dont screw it up  by just doing Warzone CBs please.

Hi everyone,

Just a few thoughts on the subject...  

I haven't tested the Warzone mod yet but, conceptually, it sounds as if it (the zero-spawn mode) would work.  And, I do see some amounts of "pure" GhR as being flawed in gameplay; LMS being the focal point in this forum.

As far as compromise is concerned (this may bleed a bit into another topic)...if the community is divided on the matter (though Mauti has final say, of course), how about the following scenario:

1.  Make BOTH LMS & Warzone part of the regular season format, on equal footing.

2. Make it a requirement for all clans to play a *minimum number* of games during the season (Since *some* teams retained very high stat credentials by playing *very* few games).

3.  Require all clans to divide their mininum season game quota evenly down the middle between both LMS & Warzone.

??Do this for one season, then tally all user input.  Then, for the tournament, do something similar.  Perhaps the majority will want one, or the other....or both.??

Just an idea... ; )

ok I didnt took my time to read everything its pretty much but heres some comment.

I played warzone and its cool
when you have the warzone its not camping its defending
the attackers know where you are so a good placed nade or rocket or a good teamassault can take out the defenders.
The defenders can chip you off if your running in like a chicken without a head but cant take you if you attack them from all sides at the same time.
So you need some good defending or attacking to win this game
so give this game a chance

why is there such a backlash about camping. good teams can defeat a camp. and good teams use camps. there are some boards in which teams camp on, we have and have gotten beat. the point of the game is stradegy, and if a team is using camping tactics, just  learn how to beat it.
lms the way it is, in my opinion is ok. its the point system that needs some thought. next someone will say the oicw shouldnt be used...lol...

as a few ppl have pointed out in their posts - is the camping issue really that big a deal in cbs? i for one like the pace of ghr as it is and i see no reason to "speed things up" if i want a faster game - i'll play another game and i think alot of ppl agree w me. Is time really an issue in the ladder? sure the games can haul out way too long, but thats the nature of this game and one of the things that make it so cool. if the majority of the community are in such a hurry to finish a cb or a game...well lets change the ammount of games played  in a game vs another clan then.

sure warzone is cool and i can see positive things about it, but i just come back to - if someone wins a game camping, well then i have to change my strategy for the next game. i'm almost never in a rush to get out of a cb, so time is not an issue either. if i do have to go...i'll sub.

as i mentioned in one of my earlier posts regard this issue - the clans that topped the ladder this past season did not camp. unless it was strategicly klever do do so(whatever the reason) the lesser clans that had camping as a strategy....well they lost now didnt they?

then i have another question. why is it that MP brought this suggestion out into the open? and not one of the clans that topped the ladder?(no insult MP, just curious) if it was BTs, c|, |n|, mod etc that complained about ppl camping them and came up with something like this, i would understand that to a certain degree. but i dont understand y MP has a problem with camping or time in a cb.

im probably repeating myself here...but after having played warzone(and yes i liked it) i still think LMS is the way to go.

thanx

[one] Rampage

live everyday as if its your last

     GhR is a quasi-realistic military game. Therefore, camping is the most powerful tactic. Real soldiers don't run in screaming, they move carefully and try to let the enemy come to them. GhR is designed to support that style of play.

     I have played in very short CBs with the LMS rules. I've never claimed that LMS CBs are ALWAYS slow as hell. But between clans of equal skill, it is a game in which the goal is to get one kill and then save that advantage. Thus, we have five-hour CBs. I have no interest in playing for that long, and I'm surprised that other people do.

     Warzone removes the ability to get one kill and then hide for the win because Warzone requires you to kill every member of the opposing team to win. Warzone makes camping in a hidden little spot off the beaten path unviable because of the inclusion of the warzone. Warzone forces the game to play out fully, rather than one to two minutes of action with both teams trying to get a point advantage followed by eight to nine minutes of both teams camping and not moving--the winning team because they don't want to give the other team kills, and the losing team because they can't attack a fortified position. After putting in over 30 hours to play around a dozen LMS CBs, nearly all of which played out in precisely the same way as though scripted, LMS CBs have quite lost their luster for me.

     LMS CBs demonstrate how good your clan is at lying in wait. Warzone CBs demonstrate how good your clan is.

Most of us MPs are old school RS/R6 players and have been quite active on this board and with mauti in discussions over the battle league. Frankly its not an "MP clans decision" i personally don't think that it should be the only ladder for GHR. As for us being vocal about this mod, we were one of the first clans to play this mod on our servers, and its great fun. I just don't see its place as the only ladder for GHR, especially since its not greatly tested.

A few of us are active in topics on suggestions for the next season because we came up with the purse/combat points system, and are glad to try to help out in the downfalls of the ladder.

and
note the first post...

Loth just desribed the scenario really well.  

Rampage, i know its a long thread but you should take a look at all the previous posts, along with testing.  c| does favor the warzone... I think more than MP even.  |n| merged into c|, and the ex-|n| guys favor warzone too.

the trend has been this:  initially most people resist to changing to WZ, and then after actually playing with WZ (0 spawns) minds change.  You need to see first hand what we're talking about.

Last Season:
When we played lowered rated teams in LMS we just barreled through whether they were camping or not (not as fun as it sounds).  But the real issue is when two evenly matched teams are battling.  that's when it becomes a serious camp off.  And yes the c| vs Bts match was a major camp fest which unfortunately we have gotten used to.      

Jeb, i dont want to discredit yur post, but I have seen warzone played quite a bit and feel confident about it.  But if you mean testing it all the way through an actual season, then I see what you mean.  What specifically are you thinking about?  I see possible problems if there are two seperate ladders.  

     I've seen really bad, showstopping bugs in Warzone, but only when playing with more than two teams. With two teams, there are no serious bugs that I've encountered or heard of, which bodes well for its fitness as an official mode.

Like what was said in prev. post.... GhR is a game not of running in but of taking your time and finding the enimies. Thats why there are snipers and other eliments of the game. In my opinion, Ii feel that I would want to keep the CB as close to actual battle as possible, and how many times has anyone ever heard of a REAL battle lasting only a few min. For players like me (who have played RS/R6, just not on the mac ladders) GhR is more my style, hunting out your oponents and trying to stay alive doing it. NOT tring to keep a smoked up area longer than the other guys.... thats just like arcade stuff to me. GhR was supposed to simulate specail forces recon team tactics.. and for anyone who has done any type of research into this subject (in which I do for fun) knows that they do not just go running in. They use snipers/scouts (yes that is what the US military calls there sniper teams) to scout out the enimies and then ether takes a shot or tells the team where the enimies are at and the best way to ge to them. I just feel the the warzone option would take away from the Gameplay the GhR was supposed to be. But thats just my opinion...I might be wrong

thanx for replying to my post so quickly guys. previous to writing my last post i had read every single post in regards to this topic and as u have seen my previous posts have a different angle to them, than i have now. i have played warzone and as i said, i quite like it..but i still feel that the "nerve" of the game somewhat gone(not totally ofc.)

im not being negative. and i do like a change for the better, but i dont feel this is. i will keep an open mind on this and play even MORE warzone games. i'm not against it, i just like LMS better, but could also be a matter of taste.
[one] will dl the mod and serve it. i'll be the first to tell ya if i change my mind ;-)

[one]Rampage

live everyday as if its your last

why not have two ladders, warzone and lms?its too bad assasination couldnt be traded off between teams and not a random decision. cause that would be a good game for the ladder. one team hunts and the other team defends(not a paticular spot, but a guy). i still like lms as the real ladder choice.

LeeHarvey, I am sorry man but you don't really know what you are talking about.  Wars last a long time, battles may last days or weeks, but individual engagements like those the Ghosts encounter last mere minutes.  Truthfully, the longer they last, the less the chances of survival are for special forces troops.  I said it before in my enormous post, and so I must repeat it, Special forces fight outnumbered almost exclusively, and they rely upon superior firepower and surprise to gain victory.

This means, for the lesser of mind, that they DO NOT have spare time.  Their job is to get in, win, and get out (or hide), because the other guy has 500 times their number, WITH armor and air support.

Sure, you don't run around like a maniac, but control of locations has always been the key to combat from roman times to today.  Not killing your enemy, and then making the rest of his unit find you.  War isn't fought that way.  The last thing a Ghost would do is leave evidence of their presence and then stick around for the consequences.

If it helps, think of it this way.  At the end of every cb's time limit, your enemy gets a full brigade of mechanized troops.  Your unit's goal was to simply slow their advance for evacuation to take place.  In this mindset, control of that location, an embassy, a road, a river crossing,an overlook, for as long as possible is what wins the day, not killing 4 men who will be replaced by greatly superior (albeit less elite) forces within minutes.

Don't feel like I am stomping on you man, I just have a unique educated viewpoint and am compelled to share it.  ;)

Well said Aramarth.

This is a special forces game, not regular infantry (like america's army). Special forces move fast, hit hard, and then get the hell out.

What's more is warzone makes cbs fun to play in again, and that's more important to me than realism anyway. If you want true realism, join the army.

     Well, the more I think about it the more I like the Warzone idea in a way.  I think my main issue is giving up a gameplay that I have been so comfortable with.  But to be honest, if you were to not have respawns in Warzone, the only thing left would be an addition of a goal to the game which all in all would not be an unrealistic thing.  I have been looking over some of the comments in this post and I am starting to see how most people react to this change of gameplay.  I like the statement, if ya dont try it, dont bitch.  Well, it wasnt said like that but the meaning is the same.  It's like when Clinton won for presidency and people were all bitching about it.  That is the first time I thought about that saying cause it was put up on signs while entering the freeway's in California.  "If ya didnt vote, dont bitch!"   Well, as for Warzone, the same can easily be applied.  I do understand why a lot of people dont want to play Warzone.  The Same reason actually that most people stick with PC's in the end.  Most people dont like change and are too ignorant to change.  Part of human nature it seems.
     In the end, if someone makes a small mod that allows people to actually use their brain a little more, more power to it, just no respawns plz.  That would make the game more unrealistic.  Although it has been stated as well that there are some issues with certain maps.  Maybe those particular maps can be changed for Warzone, and the others be left the same.  In either event, maybe Warzone isnt a bad idea.  As long as their are no respawns to cheapen the game.

+MOD+Saberian

i played a bunch of warzone this weekend, and it is a fun game. i still like lms for the ladder though, but if warzone is instituted here is what i would do...score a point for the team that has the most guys left as well as a point for winning the warzone.. so if team A has more guys left and wins the time in warzone, they get two points. if team A wins warzone but team B has more guys left, its a split 1-1. the first team that gets to 10 wins overall. win by 2...lol..just a thought.

Quick views on some season 5 stuff.

I'm not sure if anyone has brought these points to light, but if they have I am sorry.  I didn't feel like reading seven pages of stuff to see if my point was made.

FIRST POINT:     If you have respawns, you will have spawn killing.

SECOND POINT:     If you have spawn killing, you will have to have spawn protection.

THIRD POINT:     If you have spawn protection, there will still be spawn killing.

FOURTH POINT:     Warzone definitely adds spice, but we choose in which manner a CB shall be played?  Ex:  Clans agree on a Warzone CB or a standard LMS CB.  Why add spice if you are going to take away the main course?

FIFTH POINT:     If players have to register with the BL, which would declare membership to a clan of course, can these members include their GameRanger Account numbers as well?  It just seems that certain folks out there are becoming more savvy with playing under different accounts for no apparant reason.  I'm not saying that Tom Foolery has occurred, but things have been suspect in the past.

SIXTH POINT:     If a CB is going to be a best of 7, then why not give the team who picks the map the choice to pick the style of play?  Whether it's LMS, Warzone, Siege, Assassination, HH, and others.  If you lose and pick the map, then you also get to choose how you play the map you picked, or perhaps if you pick the map, then the other team picks the style of play.  I think it's an option worth looking into.

SEVENTH POINT (FINAL POINT):     The camping issue must be resolved.  I think Warzone would be ther fairest means of conducting CBs.  You can win Warzone by taking the base and keeping it for 3 uninterrupted minutes, or eliminating the other team.  It basically keeps aspects of LMS and HH.  You can camp, but it wouldn't be as advantageous as it was in the past because you would have to trade off camping for losing the Warzone.  

My points are stated and hopefully were done so in a clear, concise manner.  Good luck to all in Season 5!

--- Noto

I ubderstand that the debate continues, but when will we know if the WARZONE mod is taking over the DAMN BL format or if the pure LMS will continue?  Also, will there be a vote of some kind by clans or just Damn-associates or a decision by Mauti himself?  Just curious.  I am still trying out Warzone daily.

Again my problem with warzone...

I just think this mod unless further updated is kinda usless...

You have no timer what so ever! You have no clue how much time you have left after 1 team has gotton the wz...
So the way i see it the more guys you have in a cb the more chances of one team loosing. Like fridge said in another post for a map like embassy. Spawn near the bank would have close to no chance of winning vs a team spawning next to the garage. So what do we do now?
Say oh well? just a chance you have to take?

Have any of you notice while playing on public servers how some teams always spawn in the same spot for 3-4 games in a row? how annoying would it be if your going into a cb and oh well there went your fighting chance bcause 5-6 spawns were against your favor. SO do you think this will make a team with higher ranking spot feel like cbnig at all because the odds might just be against him.....

Do we then say? We'll just stop using most of these fav maps like creekbed an stronghold and embassy because of this? Maybe red square too? cause that also could be a campfest on the outside.

In most finals games... yes the action slowed down. But it then became more of a chess game.... Usually 1 person gets a kill then its up to the other team to infiltrate. Unless the attacking team stayed on offense.

And i do know all those guys we played with in the finals... said to us an we said to them "GGs" no matter how much dislike or anger there was between clans because thats what happend, it all slowed down but then it became the battle of wits....

For those who really hate the lack of timer (not just eight in particular): think of this as another test of ability! When you get the message that the enemy has the warzone, have someone on your side (who can subtract really quick) designated to call out the game time and the time at which the game will end. I did this is a public server the other day, and my team sure stepped up, knowing how little time they had.

     Say it like it is, Eight. They were campfests. You have bitched amazingly about camping in the past, and now you're relabeling camping and saying that it's hunky-dory. You can't have it both ways.

Ok, why are you guys, not all of you, so determined to change ghr to model how you see it should be.  I just don't get it, look at the game and try to tell me it is a game designed to be played balls to the wall.  The truth of the matter is that it isn't, and the truth of the matter is that it is a GAME, a game should be played anyway that suits the player, to each their own, (cheating excluded).  Camping is a part of the game, camping is a part of every game, camping is a style of play and if people have fun doing it then let them do it because it is how the like to play, no game is meant to be played any specific way and so why are you determined to take fun away from people in order to further yours?  The other truth of the matter is that camping has and always will exist, and no matter what you can suggest, there will be a pro and negative side to it on camping and gameplay, in one respect it will seem to hinder it, in another it will seem to further it, why is this, because no matter what you do, no game will ever suit only one style of play and this is how it is meant to be.  You guys are going to take too much from the game, and I think that the majority of people are happy with the game as it is and feel no need to change it.  If you just can't handle a slower paced game than other shooters then might I ask why you play ghr, when it is clearly suited for such.  Banning sensors, you can say it will stop camping and force people out, sure you can look at it that way, but you can also look at it as it will allow campers an easier time by ensuring them invisiblity until they have a shot or take a shot.  Warzone you can say will force players to the middle, but will also encourage camping once the goal is obtained and it also poses the problem of adding a much larger degree of luck to the game.  What are the problems with the current game? nothing other than the fact that you feel there is too much camping in a game which seems largely designed for it.  It seems also that this is only an issue which people complain about in the finals, which compose so little of the season, and basically you're here willing to severly piss off at least half of the whole community and stomp on many peoples fun throughout the main body of the season, so that in the little time spent in the finals the few who make it can have a better shot at putting an avatar under their name saying *DAMN BL Champions.  You're losing sight of things here, the game is fine how it is.

i totally agree...  :D

No doubt m8, youre right. things have probably gotten a little out of hand, since the start of WZ convos. Like u and many people before me have said - dont fix it, if aint broken.

well, to play devil's advocate, if we dont make any changes, we will still have the same camping situation and 6 hour cb's that we did last season( and the season before)

Well Brain I think what he said about camping was completely missed by ya there, I have to completely agree with fridge, he is right.  The game should be the way it is.  No one will be completely satisfied with the outcome of the changes, and there will always be someone that bitches about the outcome of a cb

+MOD+ Saberian

Yeah, fridge is right, and if u complain about cb's taking too long cuz of camping then find someone who has enough time to play through the cb.

In response to the fact that "people" want to change how the game is played...

The main reason warzone was suggested was because mauti thought it could have some potential to cut the length and camping in cbs. Then bucc started talking about warzone and it turned into an anti-mp fest,  some bullshit about people trying to change how the game is played, and that bucc has a plot to overthrow the internet.

I know bucc, and he doesn't care about warzone as much as you think, he was simply trying to address an issue that has been troublesome for the ghr ladder (camping). Bucc, Brain and I came up with the purse/skill points system thats being used next season,which will hopefully solve the issues that the skillpoints system had. Leaving the only other topic that people bitched about last season, which was camping and game length. Warzone is one option to address those problems, and i've seen a few other  good ideas. But if everyone hates it, its not the best direction for the battle league.

Before everyone rushes to judge me as an internet teen idol who takes bribes to voice opinions (actually that would be nice). just know that i don't support the warzone mod, i simply support the exchange of ideas in hopes of something great coming from them. I guess i'm not used to seeing such fanaticism against a suggestion.
-jeb

     You're a whore, Jeb. If you'll recall, the initial idea of basing a points system on boxing prize purses was mine all mine.

I think Fridge has hit it on the head.......

I think Jeb has a good point as well.
People should exchange Ideas, But lets try and respect others opinions, even if you dont agree with them.

LOL Loth.... You tell him......  ;D

Fridge good points, but...

I hope you are not thinking c| is bitter for losing first place, and thats why we want to adjust the BL?  Whether we got first or last, this is not a factor period.  

Whats wrong with competing balls to the wall?  Thats what makes the competition so exciting.  Thats what makes this fun to play.  Nothing wrong with playing a GAME serious.  If you wanna lolly gag through a game then go ahead.  I enjoy playing BTs the most because they DO play so hard to win, as do we, and that's what makes it so God damned exciting!  

Fridge seems to think we're out to ban campers.  Thats not the case.  Although a majority of us don't enjoy camping, the current rules inadvertantly give camping the advantage.  

Maybe the suggestions made are not perfect, and that is arguable.  But to lay back and do nothing gets us no where.  Instead of putting forth ideas to make this a better Damn BL (*applauds Aramarth), we have been arguing about whether it should be changed at all.  And unfortunately It seems those who'd rather the BL stay the same are in a majority (or is it?).  So all I can do is provide an opinion and hope it is clear.  

(IMPORTANT!)  You guys seem to forget, without the forum discussions and Mauti's hard work, the Ladder would not be where it is now.  Unfortunatley GhR didn't come with a built-in league ladder, so thats where we come in.  This is where such things are developed.  I feel like we're in the middle stages of developing a solid league.  Issues at hand are: point system, and game type.

There is no debate on at least one of your points fridge. Nothing we do will ever make the game perfect. However, by not trying one becomes a less productive person. The fact that there is debate and arguement over how to improve the ladder is a sign of strength (excluding post which have no thought behind them of course). Warzone, I do not believe, is the answer. Once I get my mod running, I will have an opinion on if it is a possible improvement. LMS, in its current form, is something we can no doubt do better than.

aye aye
i agree with Meat and Splinter
ad on adon
lms+warzone

dont remove lms!

Sounds better. I would greatly miss LMS were it to be lost. Warzone is kinda fun as are the other Game types... but I still think that LMS is the one for cb's. Its the most straightforward, true to life game type. No team can start with an advantage/dissadvantage, there is no going back, get shot and you die, and hell, it requires shit loads of tatics and teamwork.

ps. like aramarth said. wouldn't you just take a quick look at the timer when you see the enemy has the base... and subtract 3 mins? not particulally hard to do!

I've played each and every style of Ghr and although I love the warzone as a game I have decided, for myself anyway, that LMS is best for the official ladder.

I agree with Eight in that there is plenty of action in drama in no spawn LMS cb games especially when a team is down a man and must "infiltrate" the other "camp".  Yeah okay, maybe everyone sits around for a minute or two discussing what the plan is gonna be but that's the fun in it right?  Why should a team be penalized because they got the first kill.  

In every cb I play against BTs they run the risk of first strikes and everyone knows it.  That's why they do so well because they take you down quick....However BTs should realize, and I think they have, that that first strike tendency can backfire with losing a man early.  They shouldn't just expect the "underdog" team to come attacking them while they're a man up.  A win's a win, no matter how it comes.  Different clans have different styles, I was just using BTs as an example but it applies to all.

I play very aggressive and quickly so "camping" is really never an issue with me personally...I tend to die early and prefer to take one or two with me before I go down.  So I don't ever get "bored" in LMS games...

But there IS a BIG problem with spawn points on many maps with warzone.  I've said it before...Embassy, Red Square, Stronghold, and Farm Day all get completely fucked up...especially with the 3 minute time limit.  That just ain't alot of time.  And when the hell are we supposed to play Docks???  Warzone doesn't even sound fun at all on that map....a map which happens to be one of my Clan Battle favorites.

Please keep the LMS ladder.  There are going to be 9-10 very serious, organized clans this season who all have a great chance to win it all...that sounds pretty exciting to me.  I think some of these clans making the biggest lobby for change should concentrate on CBing more as opposed to messin with shit.  I love playing in, cb's win or lose but I doubt warzone will hold up as the same.

-wicked

You guys really seem to bend your own thoughts in order to defend LMS.  No one gets penalized for getting the first kill, whether it's WZ or LMS.  It's a reward no matter how you look at it.

Except in LMS, the reward for getting the first kill is huge.  Thats because you essentially only need that one kill in order to win.   And at this point, if you you're really good at camping out an edge of a map, you are rewarded again.  

The rewards (ideally) should go to the team with the best overall skill, teamplay, and movement control.  I think during the regular season this isn't a problem.  The cream will rise to the top.  Its in the finals where this LMS problem really makes a difference.  

Bah seven pages of complete bickering.  You make my damn eyes water.  Lets all just close our eyes and chant a mantra.

Wasn't that nice.

NOW FORGET THIS THREAD EXISTED.  

Let's just keep it all the damn same.  By the time this thread ends.  We will only be able to throw stones at 4 paces while 2 guys camp in the alley and the other guy tries to take my wallet.

For Christ's sake

Mauti, are you kidding me?  Do you not realize that there are about 2 clans supporting the warzone mod, c| and MP and everybody else pretty much hates it and hates the idea of it, after playing it also.  Mauti,  said it yourself, ghost recon is about tactical teamplay and warzone takes away from that, can't you see that?  It restricts the map to a small area, it forces a mad rush, it puts much of the outcome of the game into the hands of luck.  The tactical teamplay part of the game gets removed, it turns into a rush, and if you don't win the rush, often because of crappier spawns, you have 3 minutes  to win the game against odds.  It also makes it virtually impossible to win when you are outnumbered, there are no comebacks in warzone, because you can't play tacticallly, you have 3 minutes to take down a team, the thought is ludacris.  You can't hear a one sided argument from one person and decide, oh, that sounded convincing, warzone it is!  Try listening to both sides of the story, and also you say there needs to be a maplist, well the maps that have the most lopsided spawns are some of the most popular maps played, i.e. emassy and stronghold, do you want to take those out of ghr ladder play?  Mauti, no offense here, but I really don't think you understand ghost recon fully, or the whole warzone situation, the majority is strongly opposed to it and now you want to implement it based on a biased e-mail?  The game is meant to be played cautiously, it is not a balls to the wall game, look at the maps and try to come up with any argument to support that ghost recon is a game that is supposed to be played very aggressively.  Why are you trying to change the vision that the game was created upon?  Does every game have to be played the same? Ridiculous

to aramarth this isn't real war it is a computer game there are no armies or air support there are just a bunch of ppl at computer twitching their wrists and compressing keys we dont want to hear your army geek points.  were not playing the game to be wannabe soldier boy tryin to save the freeworld were playing it because its a fun shooter, well the majority of us at least but there are the odd geeks i suppose who tip their chair over backwards and make dying noises on the ground everytime their character gets shot but im happy to not be one of them

maytag and bobo... do you guys play in the ladder?  I think your posts are a great example of those opinions (even some from the ladder) that have little understanding about the issues we have been trying to address.  Check this... A list of those who put extreme amounts of time into competing on the ladder.  These guys are practicly the only one's with a great understanding of the issues at hand.  (I list the more established players involved on the Ladder)

BTs Eight                  
      Fusion
      Signtist
      HellBent
      Sturm
      Static
***Towards the end of Season 3 and begining of Season 4, BTs was the first to actively point out their displeasure of increasing camping tactics used by well established clans.  Towards the end of Season 4, BTs seemed to find their groove working within the LMS rules, and went onto win the Season.  They Don't support anything other than LMS.  They have kept an open mind and have thoroughly(??) and unbiasedly(??) tested out optional gametypes and suggestions. (?? help me out here)

[!]  Flies
      Dutchman
      Joka
      Ross
***Winners of Season 3, with exception of Joka (well experienced himself)  When they were virus they dominated with some of the first organized team tactics on the GhR ladder.  Things have changed since they have become more active again,  everyone has tactics now!!!!  Not exactly sure what their opinions are on LMS, but they have been very open to considering change, and providing very helpful feedback.  

.::N Diesel
       Gen. Billy
       Juggla
       Soc
       Noto
*** Some of the hardest hitters of all clans.  "Just F'kin PLay" seems to be their moto.  They will support anything.  There has been heavy evidence of their support for Ladder adjustments.
 
MOD BFG Gen
        Saberian
        Sivak
*** Very very crafty group of players.  Not sure what their overall opinion is, but this is for sure... they know exactly what I mean when I say, "LMS gives camper tactics an advantage and unfortunately it promotes more camping as a means to win."

c|     Dr. NO
        Splinter
        Valdar
        Lin
        Pyroman
***That's us.  Love the Macs, and innovative Multiplayer games.  All thanks to constant improvements, and relentless attempts to make it all better, one step at a time.  

|MP|  Lothario
         Buccaneer
         Jeb  
***(although not making the finals)  these guys were there throughout the season hosting a lot of the BIG matches.  They also were in the loop about serious battle discussion.  This clan is made up of all Vets to GhR and RS and have been around since the early days of the DAMN ladder.  These guys know very well the Ins and outs of GhR, and their opinion always mattered, despite the little time spent actually competing in season 4.  they know, they see, they hear.  They have many great ideas, and just like all good thinkers, not every idea is a perfect one.    


Sincere apologies to those who I missed that belonged on this list of players.  One reminder, this is Mauti's gig.  He makes whatever decission he wants, and its final.  Thankfully he has been open to opinions (actually I dont even know anymore)

I speak for BTs when I say this,

We have tried out warzone and have found our faults with the mod, we are however anxiously waiting to see Aramarths mod. I have talked with him in great lengths and I look forward to giving that a try.

Now I, Fusion, say that even though people camp in LMS it is still the best style of gameplay to me. Even if we would have lost the season, I still dont think I would be out to change it. Yes we get irritated with constant campers but, if that is how they want to play let them. This is a game for all to enjoy. We did find that alot of clans DID NOT camp constantly.  I hope this all gets resolved soon, we just want to play.

i know that my clan |GM| is a new clan but our senoir players are fairly experienced. As a clan we are against the WZ mod. I do see a need for change and im awaiting Aramarths mod to test it out. I look forward to a great season 5 and i hope that you guys will participate in some of the multiclan battles I will be hosting!! Trust me we did one tonight and everyone had lots of fun!! It was a good time for eveyone b/c we could joke around and relax but still get some good practice in!

k where i can dl the warzone mod :)
i want give it a try

http://www.geocities.com/majorplaying

 :)

I agree with Fridge but who says we have to stick to LMS, changing the game type is what Ghost Recon was made on, different game types a bit of variation from the old LMS.

I don't camp and I hate even getting pinned down under heavy fire because I might have to lay on my stomach and get my BTs uniform dirty, but neither I nor anyone can ban campers or camping.  
Camping is a part of the game even tho i don't like it.   I also favor LMS over Warzone mod.  And I think its true that campers will camp no matter what gametype.  
So I don't think the Warzone mod will lessen camping.  I believe it actually encourages camping the CAMPZONE, but I'm still testing it.  The only way to stop camping is for each person not to camp of their own free will.  But if people (fridge) want to camp they have every right!  CAMP ON TAMPONS!
 ::)

 Then count me in for "no one".

Whenever I get killed multiple times by someone who's camping, unless they're defense in a Siege game, I leave the game and go block them. Whenever I see someone who's on my blocklist host a game, I get their IP and ban them on my Firewall.

As a result of this, my block list is 62 people on it, and is rapidly growing. Every few months, I clear it out, and give people second chances, aside from those people like Mug who've earned a perminate spot there.

LOL!

I stand corrected Typhy!  Individuals may ban campers.  I meant no one can ban campers from cbing in the Damn Battle League even if I/they wanted to.  So it comes down to implementing anti-camping tactics to more effectively punish the floormats with extreme prejudice.  I wish GhR allowed players to squash the laydown campers' heads under our feet like melons after we stand over/behind them taking screenshots of their "skill" for 20 seconds. ::)

ty Narauko

Well, Typhy, that is one reason why u are so popular heh.  Yeah, anyway as for camping it is part of the game.  i do agree with not changing the game though.  Although if warzone was to be used with no respawns then i dont see a problem with that either.  All it seems to do it add the extra part of being able to take a base and hold it.  I doubt that everyone is gonna camp the center spot cause u are also very vulnerable as well to attack by doing that.  Most games I have played with Warzone and no respawns the were basically almost no wins by getting the center spot.  the center spot is also very vulnerable for the fact that once it's been taken they know where you are.  so for people camping the center zone, I doubt that unless it is Stronghold.  That is the only map that it seems to work with some affectiveness.  

+MOD+Saberian

I say that we should just stick with the normal lms with no spawns.  Another idea is to have the clan decide, and that would give the clans the option of choosing lms, warzone, or maybe even assassinate the general.  If we could talk to major player and get him to maybe make a new version of assassinate the general...one where both teams have a general, that could be a great new game.  The problem with warzone is that its a specific area that has to be controlled, so no matter what map, you are always going to the center cough * cough* BORING cough* cough*.  Also, if you have a game like siege where you have unequal objectives; defense and offense; it could unbalance the skill with luck or whatever.  If you ask me, 2 general assassination or LMS all the way.

P.S.- dont even think about puttin spawns in!! :-P

If you are not even in a clan then why the hell are you even here? If you want your opinion to be heard, join a clan. If for some reason people like bobo and maytag are even in a clan, then they should have the balls to post their real name + clan. If they can't do that, then their opinion does not deserve to be heard.

Please keep this thread on topic. All posts concerning Fridge should be posted here: http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/yabbse/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=4778 (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/yabbse/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=4778)

well i played warzone on X1/shogun 's server

its a cool game type!!

not sure if we needed so much resp (12 team)

anyway i still for add diff games type in the ladder
warzone, lms , assassination with our without sensors

it should definitely stay at 0 respawns... whatever gametype is played!

[one] Civic

well i do agree civi
0 spawn is the best
but what i liked in Mauti's speaks

its if u want play with sensors or not or blabla any type game its ok in rules as long  both clan agree it

and some clans still like lms 0 spawn random insert  etc

so more game types and not only warzone should be a must be

If its unavoidable that wz will become a game mode in the DAMN ladder. Then i hope for 2 diff ladders, replacing the existing one is a bad idea.

And if you made 2 diff ladders then you could cb the same clans more times.

Maybe you should read the *DAMN main news from time to time: Warzone and LMS will be in one ladder. The clan that choses the map also choses the game mode! And both will of course be played with 0 respawns.

Bye,

Mauti

Great Mauti !

Oh, didnt see that one. My bad

so is this topic pretty much toast, as season 5 is already set?

Season 5 will probably start this weekend or early next week. Elandrion is already doing the final debugging however expect that you still find some bugs while season 5 runs. 10000+lines code allow much space for bugs...

Bye,

Mauti

nice work damn doods!

Season 5 will be cool!

wOOOOt!
ty mauti!
ty *DAMN
finally season 5, woOt!

Season 5 is about to start and i get hit by a huricane... loose power (have mice in a wheel powering the powerbook), looses clable and now im stuck in 56k land for a few days (maybe a week) grrrrrrrrrrrr