Trench Wars Leagues and what future holds ..

[roxxkatt]

also for the record i am for unlimited res

[Shaddowknight]

I don't play wb enough to care either way but I do think removing res limits is a bad idea. Warbird is already the easiest ship in the zone, and it would only be made easier/more boring if people were forced to adjust to R4 becoming the new R1 due to unfairly large resolutions. My 2 cents.

Also adding medals for all this pointless shit like TWDT and TWLM is just plain stupid. If these people so desperately require recognition then put their names on the particular part of the website in which they want to feel special. This is the same level of stupid as Dezmond trying to add "Attack Tournament" medals for an EVENT that I hosted in which like 30 people total participated. I say save the "medals" for TWL only. If you must add medals why not add medals for the winner of each weekend event while we're at it. Equally as important as TWLM and equally participated in/cared about.

Last but not least just a suggestion for TWLB. How about instead of a race to 15 minutes each game, instead just a flat timer of 30:01 minutes? Or even better 40:01 minutes? What I mean is that the game MIGHT end 15:01-15:00 but it could also end 29:30-0:30 or anything in between. Generally speaking 99% of LB games are decided considerably before the timer runs out. To play the full 30 (or 40) every game would see higher kill totals and generally more/longer participation. I can see the downside being once Team A reaches the 15/20 minute mark, that Team B would lose any incentive to give a shit since they have no chance to come away with a W. The solution to that could be that to qualify for playoffs it would NOT be based on W/L record but instead TOTAL FLAG TIME or even use W/L to get into playoffs then seed the teams based on TIME DIFFERENTIAL ONLY. That way even if you can't win that particular game you still have a reason to keep playing hard and getting every second of flag time you can get because it might make a difference between the #4 seed in playoffs and spectating. Probably needs to be discussed a bit but in my head right now it makes sense and seems fun.

Getting to 15:01 in a 30 min timed game is a win already. Spec4rec. It's still a race to get to 15 minutes flagtime. Once you get there, why not troll all the twlm players and suicide 80 times? It literally doesn't matter once you have the win secured.

[Ricko]

LF - I don't think adding some individual medals is a bad thing at all, plus we're keeping it so they only show when you click on a player's individual profile, only TWL winner medals show on TWD rosters.

Players like individual recognition, look at every other game out there online you get trophies and medals for doing the smallest of things and they stick on that player's profile/history, in TW we have it so only the 20 people a year who win TWL get a medal? Doesn't make sense...not that I'd want the smallest of achievements awarded with a medal for TW, but stuff like winning TWEL or being on a winning TWDT team is worthy of recognition, it's no easy feat to be the best dueler in the zone in a ship or winning TWDT which has a similar structure to TWL (league then playoffs).

[LF]

Getting to 15:01 in a 30 min timed game is a win already. Spec4rec. It's still a race to get to 15 minutes flagtime. Once you get there, why not troll all the twlm players and suicide 80 times? It literally doesn't matter once you have the win secured.

You clearly stopped reading halfway through. Read the rest of it and I already addressed that issue.

And Ricko, TWEL I actually agree with because of its highly competitive nature. I'd say even add TWEL to the regular TWL medals but I still stand fast that twdt/twlm/attack tournament etc are bad choices for medals. If they want recognition put names on map and website to remind them how awesome they are and to give them a reference point of their awesomeness when trolling newbs in pub

[Shaddowknight]

Usng total flag time is still flawed. Its possible to win every game 15:01-15:00 and Lose to a team that gets 25:00 For most games and loses a few. How would forfeits work? 30:01 to winning team? Again the same problem. Still an issue of a team having more flag time than others not even needing to try at a certain point. Win 28:01 for three games is more flagtime than squeaking a 15:01-15:00 win for 5 games. Winning 5 games should be better than winning 3 games and losing 2. The only squads that would benefit are the super-stacked teams, which does not help the problem of well... superstacked teams.

[LF]

You are going to have stacked teams regardless. There has only been a handful of players who have strayed from the usual 1-2 "super squads" while the rest ride the coattails of everyone else. If you wanted you could use W/L just to determine the playoff teams then use total flag time to seed them accordingly. How often does a 15:00-14:5X actually happen in TWL? At most MAYBE once a year? More realistically more like once every 4-5 years so having it happen every game is unrealistic. For the sake of argument say it did happen, a team that goes 4-2 and wins all 4 games by a convincing margin is likely a stronger team anyways than a team that goes 6-0 that wins by less than a minute every time. My suggestion doesnt cure any of the existing problems, all it does is increase playing time for everyone involved which in my eyes is a win. Hell you could even use HALF of the idea and make total flagtime irrelevant (Except for tiebreakers) and just play every game to 30 minutes regardless. If I play and lose a game 25-X its still Y minutes longer than playing a game and losing 15-Z. So you could change nothing except that the clock doesnt stop once somebody reaches the magic #15 and all it would mean is that people get to play more. Simple as that and nothing negative about it

[Iron]

Its time to accept it, change the damn res.. i cant stand play windowed and my ship looks very bad and weird playing on full res 1024 or 1440.

[Jones]

play with something like 1200x800 and if you feel like you are at a disadvantage you know why people are opposed to bigger res-limits

[Ricko]

the res I use is 1366 x 768, fits my screen the best, I could go higher but then I feel I'd just spend my time lobbing from a mile away, which is no fun.

[Rab]

play with something like 1200x800 and if you feel like you are at a disadvantage you know why people are opposed to bigger res-limits

The disadvantage isn't because it's smaller (although I don't really deny that that is a disadvantage) - the much bigger disadvantage is when you have to change res to play one division, when you're used to playing your native res for the other divisions. It totally screws you up... can't aim, can't dodge... may as well not play it.

[maketso]

Rab? Use that same wb reso for all 3 leagues u dum fuk

[Jones]

The disadvantage isn't because it's smaller

ok.

in twdt i can use 1920 and i do good, in twl i am forced to play with 1280 and i suck

pretty much every arena in tw had a res-restriction for a really long time.

i play spider better with lower res and jds are harder (for me) with huge res. the res isn't as significant but bigger res would help in the long run, that's a subjective prediction

i understand everyone wants to play this game smoothly, like iron over there, it really sucks playing on windowed, i did that a few seasons ago when my old laptop died. i got a new one (same model, school brought in lots of them) sometime after, which i'm currently using. i totally get that the game looks fucked up on many screens.

i wish some oldie (epi, 4n etc) would come in and tell us why they chose to use 2048x1536 instead of 1280x1024 back in the day when it was allowed in leagues

[Jones]

oh and ******s

Your only argument is that strays are dodgable on both resolutions due to huge time frame, whereas the res disadvantage isn't because of the stray reason. You are really stupid, if you omit the crucial factors such as positioning, team swarm and general awareness of team-enemy relationship, which is obviously CLEARER when you can see the moving and pointing ships on YOUR SCREEN, instead of guessing off radar, which is also much more laggy than your screen. The 'more skill argument' from your side is yet another clueless argument made by some nerdy javelin/baser you are, since put in 4 high res players vs. 4 1280x1024 ones and you will see where im getting at. High res player does not need to risk playing in close range, because he can successfully aim off at enemy from afar and have enough time to shoot again before the low-res guy gets dangerously close. Since radarbattles will be lost vs. every high res player, so those poor guys will focus on rush, which will not work because 4 guys clearly see them upcoming and have time to fire of 2 shots.

Why are people still arguing about whether there is or isn't an advantage? There is an advantage and if you want to argue it, stop, you are NOT a good warbird nor were you ever. Anybody that was ever a decent warbird or is a decent warbird now can immediately notice the advantages of being able to see further. Ok enough said on that topic.

higher resolution means more visibility of teammates, which is definitely more valuable than having more visibility of enemies. its more valuable cuz it means that you can maneuver better as a team as you can see yr teammates from a further distance. it means the game relies more on teamwork. it all has to do with the team dynamics of the match. this is what i think we should be going for, more teamwork and strategy, it increases the depth of play that 5v5 TW wbs struggles for. shuld do everything we can to make it not seem like 5v5 elim imo.

Let me respond to a few things here since no one has come to defense of raising the resolution.

In terms of eliminating rushing. This is argument is a joke to me. Does it destroy the horizontal axis "surprise" rush; yes it does. Vertical axis rushes are still as effective, and people who fire, miss, and are low energy are just as susceptible to a rush regardless of resolution.

False, it does affect the quality of rushing.

The reason why a "surprise" rush is successful is almost 100% due to successful positioning. The reason why any GOOD veteran dies is because they are facing the WRONG direction when the other rusher pops up onto the screen. Resolution increase will basically eliminate the horizontal axises for sure and if u let the vertical cap be changed it's going to eliminate that factor of surprise. The reason good players don't die to rushes is because they are constantly checking radar to make sure their ship is positioned in a way that if someone surprises them they are facing the right direction and vice versa for good rushers (let's not even use rusher here, use surprise attacker) being successful is because of a high level of awareness required to identify the people who are facing the wrong direction and capitalize on those mistakes. If you increase resolution limits, it's giving everyone more vision and you can see what direction ships are facing so this entire element of "rushing" will be decreased...it won't be "eliminated' but it's effectiveness is going to significantly suffer.

The energy argument is bullshit - it's not because of low energy people die to rushes, any good wb with a solid understanding of energy recovery fundamentals knows that if you don't do anything from the moment an enemy appears on the edge of a 1280x1024 radar screen you will have enough energy to be able to get a shot off ASSUMING ur facing the right direction. The reason why they die is because they are caught in few seconds when they aren't moving and the time needed to accelerate to full speed isn't enough time for them to dodge the incoming rusher in time. Increasing resolution makes it WAY WAY easier to see someone coming at you in time to start moving to dodge an incoming shot.

YOU DONT DIE BECAUSE YOU DONT HAVE ENERGY YOU DIE BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT IN THE OPTIMAL POSITION / DIRECTION TO DODGE A BULLET.

Someone said something about people with larger res being able to see more on radar. Also false, in fact this is the biggest hindrance to 1920x1080. Unless the magnification of the radar is changed in the .lvz, you will always see 2000x2000 on your radar. In effect this distorts the proportion of your radar for those who are used to playing 4:3 aspect resolutions.

This argument has 0 credibility.

Who needs to look at a radar when you practically see the entire radar on your screen? Any good player will adjust to the distorted proportion of the radar anyways....it's not even a good representation anyways right now (radar = square, screen = rectangle). Don't even start the argument that higher res = smaller ship = harder to aim close ---again, any good wb will adjust.

I also think it "destroying the league" is hyperbole. As I stated, there are maybe 4 or 5 ppl who I would consider TWL starters who are using the increased resolution. In some senses it would "re-invent" warbird play more so than it would destroy the league. Rather than allow current practice to dominate, it would force people to learn a new set of skills.

Like I said, I have not made up my mind; but beyond the testimony of wb veterans and an understanding of fractions of a second more to react, I have little hard evidence against raising the res.

Listen to the vets

I'm telling you it will significantly affect the game even if the changes aren't that big - you simply (no offense) don't understanding wbing at HIGH level competitive play enough to make this judgment call. I really like kthx's argument that it's impossible to get "hard evidence" in terms of statistics...it's simply impossible (different players, different game, different lag, TOO MANY variables).

but sure let's use some poll

[roxxkatt]

why not lower res limit to 900x900 then?
everyone is still on a level playing field

[Tiny]

thanks for your input, and I'm well aware of the polls that we have had in the past, and even many of which we had in the recent times and even I have created two or three polls about the topic.

nevertheless, ...............

however, keep in mind that I am only strongly considering removing the limits if we are truly getting on Steam, which is still a good possibility, as in the long run this change would immensely help this zone. I prefer looking forward, and while we do have this stigma attached to our zone where most believe that change is bad, and people who make changes want to see the game fail, that is a big load of cow pie with no basis on truth or facts. I would not consider making any changes to the resolution limits if I truly believed this game had no future

but sure let's use some poll

I think you missed something jones. Turban basically saying he doesn't care about polls or what people think. In his mind the right change is to take off the cap if this game is to survive, but imo it will do the opposite.