I can't seem to create polls. So here's a lazy man's poll. Post your responses within this thread, and I'll tally the answers later. The best bit is that you'll be able to justify your choices (if you so choose)!
*Edit*
-----------------------------------
Poll is now closed. Thanks to everyone who took participated.
-----------------------------------
Question 1: What's your preferred gametype between Missile Assault, Siege, and Team Deathmatch. Please pick only one. If you're indifferent, say so.
Question 2: Are you against playing more than one gametype within a single TPG match?
Note: The results of this poll will not determine our S3 gametype - at least not definitively. Its purpose is to provide TPG admins a window into community opinion, not to dictate selection through vote. (I trust democracies about as far as I can spit)
Current Results
Missile Assault: 15
Siege: 8
TDM: 9
Indifferent: 8
Against multiple gametypes within a single match: 15
Not against: 21
------------------------------------------
Alongside this poll, I'm going to post my personal opinions. There's been a lot of drama and LOUD NOISE MAKING re: gametype selection, and I think I can provide a balanced (emotionally and otherwise) overview. Previous community opinion threads can be found here and here.
First, a quick disclaimer: I'm posting from the perspective of TPG Hawken's Head Admin, and from the perspective of Omniscient's captain. As the latter, I couldn't care less about which gametype is selected. As the former, I - alongside our other admins - care only that we select a gametype which the community will either enjoy or come to enjoy with experience. Our gametype of choice should also provide strategic depth while remaining free of gamebreaking defects.
Here are my thoughts on the various gametypes:
Team Deathmatch:
- Emphasizes tactical fluidity and rapid repositioning
- Obvious emphasis on shooting skills
- Provides a nice balance of map strategy and small-group tactics (where on the map will you engage, how will you engage, and how will your team respond to shifting scenarios during engagement)
- Weaker teams, or teams with less strategic and tactical intelligence/coordination, have difficulty breaking strong map positions and often assume that they're unassailable
- Score disparities can be large
- Matches are quick to complete. The timer can encourage teams to drain the clock through passive play (which, depending on your perspective is either annoying and lame, or "tactical)
- Strategy-wise, this gametype provides the most options – assuming teams of similar skill. Large skill disparities severely limit strategic and tactical options.
-
Largest map selection (although some are terrible)
Missile Assault:
- Emphasizes map strategy and team coordination
- Small-group tactics still present, but not as complex as 6v6 TDM
- Shooting skills de-emphasized. Still present and important, of course.
- Score disparities tend to be lower – especially on triangular maps. Can be better for morale.
- Provides weaker teams (DM-wise) their best shot at beating stronger teams – especially if the stronger team isn't properly controlling spawns on triangular maps.
- This gametype punishes overly-passive play.
- Multi-point gametypes are typically well-balanced and difficult for designers to get wrong. They've been around for awhile (in UT99, MA was called Domination).
- Match length is limited by the missiles constantly chipping away at base health.
- Good map selection.
Siege:
- Emphasizes team coordination. Might provide for some interesting strategies revolving around energy collection and ship launches.
- De-emphasizes map strategy since the main battle will always occur over the AA. Certainly some room for tactical positioning around the AA, though. (Hint: Don't stack all your players on a small point without barriers)
- Perhaps a middle ground between TDM and MA re: emphasis on shooting skills.
- May render less popular items and mechs more common (e.g., barriers and Predators)
- Potential for large score disparities. Given the map structures and gametype objectives, it would not be difficult for Omniscient to 3000-0 most teams. Might be disheartening. That being said, I could be wrong: the TPG Cup saw some weaker DM teams beat stronger opponents through coordinated pushes.
- Potential for long games. Unlike TDM and MA, there's no set length. Games between closely-matched opponents might be excruciatingly long. Or very exciting. Depends on perspective again, I suppose.
- Hasn't featured during a TPG season. Might be interesting to try something new.
- Small map pool. Were Siege selected, it's unlikely we'd limit maps. Teams would have to develop strategies to overcome certain map shortcomings.
Keep this discussion civil and perhaps with a few less dramatics than we've observed in past threads. Specifically, I suggest avoiding the "THIS MODE OR I'M NOT PLAYING" route. It'll get you as far as ultimatums got my last ex.
Edited by Nept, 06 June 2015 - 04:04 PM.
Sign In
Create Account




Back to top































