My interesting competitive thoughts


#1

So iv been thinking alot about how Evolve can become an E-sport. We had the nerdist tourney that was very very entertaining. the matches were close and the competition was pretty fierce with all new players going at it. So i randomly thought of how I would have a team and what my set up would be. personally Id have a 4 man team so that I can play as trapper as well as the monster. but if the tourney rules HAS to be 5 players with one monster player then I would just be that. then i thought hmm…if we ended up in the finals for 100,000$ best of 5. that means that each of my match wins are worth 33,333ish$!. If we say did a coin toss, and I elected to go first (confidence op). and the match was dead even. at the end naturally if we had the choice id pick monster for the final match. What does that mean? that means that 4 other members are depending on me and me alone to carry the team to victory. How intense would that moment be!

Now id like to bring up League of Legends here. Wev seen many players quit, leave teams, go into deep depressions from the stress of playing alone. in fact one player in Korea i believe tried to commit suicide. now that game is 5v5, the pressure is spread even. what would happen to players that are facing 4v1 and 4 other members can blame/argue with your play as X monster…

Now i would hope if it ever got that big the community would revolt against the league-esque community. And that teams would never fight with their monster players to try to force them to do better or else.

Anyways that was my thought of the day lol the weight of the monster player for big money tournaments would be HUGE. in a best of 5 hed play a mandatory 2 matches. with a possible 3rd. thats…60% of the outcome.
Tell me what you guys think!


#2

I had some thoughts on this too Evolve an Esport?


#3

meh, in 5v5, 1 person could still fuck up and throw the game.

Also, compared to other team sports, you’re often hugely reliant on a single player, the quarterback in american football, the goalkeeper in soccer. My guess is also, you would never have a tiebreak be 1 asymmetric match. You would always make it fair. Like If both teams was tied after x number of even matches, there is 2 more matches and for those two matches, if the result is split again its who wins with the largest amount of remaining health or in the shortest amount of time or have it like tennis and have tiebreaks technically possible to last forever or have it 4v4 or 5v5 tdm as the tiebreak…


#4

im just goin based off of the e3 tourney. I actually dnt like the largest hp remaining/fastest time strategy for the win bcuz people will turtle and run and make sure everymatch goes to stage 3 and long timed matches. and I see soccers goalkeeper not similar as the team is spose to defend to make sure the opposing team doesnt get more shots against them. Football,ehh the quaterback could blow and you can still win running the ball + defense. the only similar thing would be maybe hockey when they do shootouts. they elect two v two (one goalie and one shooter) and it all comes down to who can score. that pressure again is really high.


#5

you know soccer has shootouts as well?

and with the quarterback, you make a bad pass or as a runningback you fumble, and you can easily cost your team the game.


#6

Oh yeah they do. i was just commenting on the goalie aspect in a normal game. but in all those examples your team sort of put you in that situation. and there is time to redeem yourself or for your team to swing the game back in your favor. for example you fumble or throw an interception with…2:00 minutes left. your team can still cause a fumble/interception or stop a 3rd down conversion. this topic was more about how much pressure is put on a single player more than how a fail would cost the game. because on the flip side. a single beast monster player could single handedly take his team to the finals ( hunters lose all matches and he wins all his, they still go to the finals if they got to pick the final match as the monster each time.)


#7

I have a team ready to go. We have been gaming together for almost 7 years now so communication with the team is key. We all respect each other, met IRL, know our real names etc… I think we plan to have a 6 man roster actually. Each one of us will specialize a class and have a backup class.

Example, I plan to be the medic, with trapper as my backup.

Our 5th man will be monster specific. And our 6th is our sub who can step into a roll. This is where the backup roles is key. If the sub is only good at one or two classes, we can all swap into our alternate roles. This is a worse care scenario as a team, but it is important to have a back up plan.

If some people become better at a certain monster than others, and if tourney rules allow for swapping people in and out of classes, we would probably rotate people in and out of the monster slot based on their skill… Again, that is why having people know many roles is key.

Just my thoughts so far.


#8

5v5 the hunters battle the other teams monster and vice versa. Have a hunter win carry less pts then a monster win?


#9

One of 3 things can happen in a Nerdist type tournament for the first two matches… Either your team won both their hunter and monster matches…Both teams won their respective hunter matches…Or Both teams won their respective monster matches. So having varying points for either type of win doesn’t really do anything to the outcome. You’ll still need to do a 3rd match for tie breakers.

As for teams, I’d go with 5 player teams for two reasons. One, if a tournament is going to have the first two matches of the series play out at the same time, then 4 man teams wouldn’t work. Second, teams can better practice if they have a dedicated monster player, instead of out-sourcing someone to play as the monster for practices. Better to have that player be on your team.


#10

creating a team is definitely a concern of mine. I want to play monster and I feel like most players want to play monster. I really doubt only 20% of comp players want to play monster while the others would rather play hunter. There is a ton of pressure on you alone and nobody to blame but you. This might deter some people, but I still think more than 20% will want to play it. With that in mind it will create a disparity in the community of people who just want to play monster and hunters. On a team of 5 maybe 2 or 3 wants to play monster but only one can, or maybe they can rotate?

i really hope tourney rules don’t lock players into positions i guess is what i’m getting at


#11

I seriously doubt a tourney will lock a player in a position… I just think having a designated monster player could be key because he can learn it in and out. But time will tell.


#12

Yeah if a team wants to rotate positions that is there prerogative. But I would say the best teams will probably have players that are dedicated to certain roles.

Just from a logistics point of view, you would want to have 5 players on a team for practices alone.


#13

Honestly I think there needs to be more inner-hunter conflict. You’ve aughta have some sorta internal conflict scoring system otherwise whats the point?

You’ve got 4 people trying their hardest to do the same thing every-time… kill the monster most efficiently…if there’s no conflict facilitated by personal scoring and side objectives to break up the bunch motivation wise…then you’re going to have a very 1 note team dynamic.


#14

you mean like in game objectives? I dont know what they could add in there but i get what you mean. in Game objective terms its very linear with nothing else to do but kill the wildlife and hunt the monster…you could always turtle for stage 3 lol…


#15

I personally disagree. The purpose is to kill the monster and that is how you win… Little side objectives will just slow that process down.


#16

I think this game is more comparable to the cod tournaments more than something like league. and alot of people think of dota and league when it comes to e-sports. even starcraft has alot going on at one time. but hey cod tournaments got aired at the X-games soo its not a bad thing. I like fast paced shorter matches. gives me time to do other things instead of watching league for 5 hours straight (finals X.X)

Side Note: Dota tournament this weekend will be on ESPN 2 & 3 and they are playing for a community raised 10.8 million dollars.


#17

If thats the case, then whats the point of playing the game period? Will we all need little side objectives to make the game interesting? I’m thinking probably not. If we enjoy the playing game, and enjoy watching others play the game, then competitive games will be fine.


#18

Just because you’re a team, doesn’t mean you don’t want inner-hunter conflict, or personalized scoring.

Even businesses know when to validate individuals within teams.

Its just a matter of making something more complex and engaging.

Seriously you’d think I’d asked for them to turn all the monsters into puppies.


#19

Elaborate on scoring system/side objectives… do the hunters need to do them? Because I wouldn’t. I would just play to win, that’s the competitive spirit.

I do see the value in having a scoring system to differentiate who is the best medic, trapper, assault, support but I wouldn’t want to see side objectives because then you’d get people just doing that instead of playing the actual game.


#20

Within a properly competitive scene the only people that would benefit from any kind of side objectives would be the teams taking the competition seriously and being able to capatalise vs a side that is distracting themselves with things that don’t matter!

I’d say let competitive teams validate within themselves, they don’t need some kind of game mechanic to do that. If someone played Lazarus to perfection then their team will let them know about it and congratulate them for it. Within this kind of environment (and the co-op nature of this game) it is only the validation of your teammates that really matters.

That said, there’s no reason not to have individual level scoring to help teams understand where they were falling short (if it isn’t immediately obvious). It’s just harder in a game mode like this. Does Bucket get points just for tracking the monster, or does it have to result in some kind of tangible result for him to get the “assist” points? That’s just one of no doubt many examples of where there are peculiarities in how to accurately award a score to someone’s contribution.