we played individual tournaments on the English Channel map, the perfect map for 1 vs 1 gameplay
[img]<a href=[/img]">
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.
Torpedo28000 wrote:
The 1v1 map is good, but it is ofc very small, it would maybe work for a limited number of players? So if we get maybe 20 players interest could work well for that. If we want to do a larger one than a larger map would work better perhaps.
The problem IMO with the 1v1 map is games could be over in 5 days or 30. We would want to ensure games end at a certain reliable point IMO.
SupremeToaster wrote:
i think what we should do is have the minimum level at 35 or 40. This is how I think it could work out:
Everyone gets matched up against a random competitor on the Channel map. Everyone play a total of 7 rounds and whoever each round against their opponent gets 1 point. Whoever has the most points out of everyone else wins the tournament. If there is a tie, then there can be a tie breaker match
Torpedo28000 wrote:
Level 35-40 sure.However, you in my mind highlighted the issue of the 1v1 map. If 20 players sign up, to determine the best of those 20 you need to do 19 matches. Is this feasible? Not at all.SupremeToaster wrote:
i think what we should do is have the minimum level at 35 or 40. This is how I think it could work out:
Everyone gets matched up against a random competitor on the Channel map. Everyone play a total of 7 rounds and whoever each round against their opponent gets 1 point. Whoever has the most points out of everyone else wins the tournament. If there is a tie, then there can be a tie breaker match
While sure it does sort out the 'better' and 'worse' players to a degree, that map is not a good example of late game strategy in CoW. Furthermore, in 7 rounds, if your the 8th best player really, but lose the other 7, you will come last or down the bottom.
I really believe a larger map, possible at 2x speed, maybe not, but room for players to expand a little to get a stronger economy so that we can all use our late game strategies, as in my mind, that is what determines the better player, not how they manage a few units at the start of the game, not the first 1-5 troop builds they make, but the 1-50 troop builds they make, how one builds a stack, moves and uses it, manages their economy, reacts to the enemies unit builds.
These are some of the things that make a player good, not just how they manage a small piece of land, economy and army.