How this game can be a worthy competitive game



  • Hello,

    Counter-Strike’s competitive nature is based on the fact that it is a “Last Man Standing” mode with an objective. Shifting from mindless DM to more focused objective play with one life allows players and their respective classes to shine in different situations, and thus much more team reliant game play can be found. Please consider adding a mode that is like “Last Man Standing” but with an objective. Maybe even copy Counter-Strikes defuse objective and have Masons planting some bomb or the like while Agathi(?) has to defuse it. This will also give the competitive community a great mode to scrim on, which is what you really need in a competitive game. Or in Call of Duty, the 'Domination" game mode could be a potential mode for 2 teams to scrim on.

    Another thing, in “Team Objective” maps, the spawning system is highly biased against the attackers. Defenders have the natural advantage of positioning and where they spawn and to balance you need to have defenders spawn slower. Realistically, attackers will always outnumber defenders, and a slower spawn would show that.

    From my experiences with this game, it is highly technical and it very well can be a legitimate competitive game if the developers understand just how to proceed with it. I can see clutch moments and highly in-depth team compositions and strategies being fleshed out. I can visualize how teams will place their knights in specific areas that will let them fight without having to deal with people out-maneuvering them, I can also see groups of Man-At-Arms roaming around and threatening objectives. With how technical this games combat is, it requires proper game modes and maps to facilitate it even further.



  • I have been up all night, so is it just me or does the following paragraph contradict its self on more than one occasion…

    @PornGuy:

    Another thing, in “Team Objective” maps, the spawning system is highly biased against the attackers. Defenders have the natural advantage of positioning and where they spawn and to balance you need to have defenders spawn slower. Realistically, attackers will always outnumber defenders, and a slower spawn would show that, but realism should take a backseat when it comes to making a quality game.



  • It doesn’t matter what people think should be a competitive standard or what gamemode should be added even if it will be. If there is no support from the developers for basic features like a competitive config that allows readying/pausing/recording as well as support from big name streamers and $$$ from either the devs or the community for tournaments it ain’t gonna happen.



  • try to consolidate this discussion by adding to here viewtopic.php?f=5&t=371



  • @NeoRussia:

    It doesn’t matter what people think should be a competitive standard or what gamemode should be added even if it will be. If there is no support from the developers for basic features like a competitive config that allows readying/pausing/recording as well as support from big name streamers and $$$ from either the devs or the community for tournaments it ain’t gonna happen.

    I didn’t know “competitive play” meant “big esports title 1 million dollar tournaments”. But you make a good point about configs.

    @Po1ymorph:

    I have been up all night, so is it just me or does the following paragraph contradict its self on more than one occasion…

    @PornGuy:

    Another thing, in “Team Objective” maps, the spawning system is highly biased against the attackers. Defenders have the natural advantage of positioning and where they spawn and to balance you need to have defenders spawn slower. Realistically, attackers will always outnumber defenders, and a slower spawn would show that, but realism should take a backseat when it comes to making a quality game.

    I’m saying defender advantage means its necessary to increase the spawn time on defenders.



  • @PornGuy:

    I’m saying defender advantage means its necessary to increase the spawn time on defenders.

    Ah yes I see, sry :?

    I’m sure I read in another thread that they are looking into this very issue.

    @Vox:

    try to consolidate this discussion by adding to here viewtopic.php?f=5&t=371

    “You are not authorised to read this forum.”

    Denied :(



  • @NeoRussia:

    It doesn’t matter what people think should be a competitive standard or what gamemode should be added even if it will be. If there is no support from the developers for basic features like a competitive config that allows readying/pausing/recording as well as support from big name streamers and $$$ from either the devs or the community for tournaments it ain’t gonna happen.

    Okay mr. negative nancy!

    but really this is true. as it is right now i don’t even think there is a server command to restart the round rather than having to restart the map itself to go live (i could be wrong here)



  • I disagree. Just because the game is primarily a first person title where you kill the other guys doesn’t mean it’s identical to counterstrike and can only be competitive in the same way counterstrike is.

    I would say the game’s combat is more analogous to a 3D fighter than an FPS - by that standard, the competitive game type will be duel mode.

    At the same time, AoC was based almost solely on the Team Objective game mode, and a lot of the current Chivalry clans are from an AoC background, so Team Objective is right now considered the primary competitive game type for the potential leagues already forming.

    And of course your view, that one-life game modes are more competitive, is probably the one held by the majority of players who come from FPS backgrounds, which would make Last Team Standing the competitive standard.

    I say, why the need for only one of these? I think the game is enjoyable and highly competitive to both play and watch in all of the above game types. I do agree with you on one point, though - Last Team Standing would be better with an objective, as right now both teams are encouraged to employ a few archers and camp a defensible position while taking potshots at one another. This also makes the asymmetrical maps - Ruins, Stones village, etc. - highly imbalanced for one side.



  • Spectating also needs some work… Namly perhaps some First person view and Name Plates showing up in Spectator.



  • @SlyGoat:

    I disagree. Just because the game is primarily a first person title where you kill the other guys doesn’t mean it’s identical to counterstrike and can only be competitive in the same way counterstrike is.

    I would say the game’s combat is more analogous to a 3D fighter than an FPS - by that standard, the competitive game type will be duel mode.

    At the same time, AoC was based almost solely on the Team Objective game mode, and a lot of the current Chivalry clans are from an AoC background, so Team Objective is right now considered the primary competitive game type for the potential leagues already forming.

    And of course your view, that one-life game modes are more competitive, is probably the one held by the majority of players who come from FPS backgrounds, which would make Last Team Standing the competitive standard.

    I say, why the need for only one of these? I think the game is enjoyable and highly competitive to both play and watch in all of the above game types. I do agree with you on one point, though - Last Team Standing would be better with an objective, as right now both teams are encouraged to employ a few archers and camp a defensible position while taking potshots at one another. This also makes the asymmetrical maps - Ruins, Stones village, etc. - highly imbalanced for one side.

    You agree with me, even though you said you disagree with me. I said that there are many ways to add an objective to LTS, and the defuse objective from CS is a good way to do it. I’m not saying LTS with objective is more competitive than Team Objective, i’m saying that LTS needs an objective to be competitive and more in-depth and Team Objective needs a way for the defending team to actually be defenders and not have the same spawn time so they can DM the attackers. I’m not advocating one mode, i’m just throwing ideas to make the game facilitate competitive play more.



  • Pure TDM/LTS is never good as at least one team needs to be encouraged to attack due to the scoring of the match.

    Map imbalance should never be a problem in competitive gaming as you should always play equally many rounds on both sides.

    You can do a lot of things with the league/ladder scoring system, like for LTS you declare one team as the attacking and the other one as defending. If the time runs out, the defending team is considered the winner of the round. Ideally you want to force people to take a stand on some place on the map to avoid the game being about running around.



  • i think objective based LTS would be greatly not liked by most.

    there are to many ways, when you MUST do a specific thing on a map, the defenders can just plan around and take you out from a far.

    have to stand on a treb to take it out , archers will just learn exactly where to stand in safty, and volly to that specific area, thats a no win scenario.

    oil dumped on the heads of the door breakers.

    i think there is absolutly a area for ibj based LTS, but i warn you, if you have maps with objectives that ABSOLUTLY require the attackers to be in one area, or pass thoug one area to go forward, they will get cheesed to death by meta gamers. there are ways around this.

    this gameplay woudl require new maps to do this, maps with multiple obj paths, with multiple paths to teh obj. it would need to be variable enough that this couldnt happen. if the devs do this IM ALL FOR IT, i think it will be fun. but the current maps or obj based set up would do a poor job of this. almost no current obj map has an area the defenders couldnt cheese.



  • While I think there should be one main game mode which is TO that should be supported and promoted WITH NEW DECENT MAPS. It wouldn’t hurt to have other game modes to freshen things up.

    You should check out Chiv + it has exactly what you describe. Nice name btw



  • @Sophax:

    While I think there should be one main game mode which is TO that should be supported and promoted WITH NEW DECENT MAPS. It wouldn’t hurt to have other game modes to freshen things up.

    You should check out Chiv + it has exactly what you describe. Nice name btw

    Its been more than a year since the last maps from tbs…



  • I don’t really know why so much time is being spent discussing this. I would have once spent loads of time and energy discussing things like this, but it seems pointless to me now. It is too late for a truly competitive chivalry. Perhaps if TBS had truly catered to the competitive community, this game could have had a serious competitive scene. This was not the case. Maybe i’m just being a negative nancy here, but all this just seems a bit late.



  • @lemonator74:

    Its been more than a year since the last maps from tbs…

    Wait, more than a year? It was released 31st January last year (god, ive been playing since more than a year now? holy)
    You’re of by a few days lemon.



  • @Darden:

    Wait, more than a year? It was released 31st January last year (god, ive been playing since more than a year now? holy)
    You’re of by a few days lemon.

    Eh, it’s the worst map in the game. Not really worth giving it the title, “new content”.



  • @Flippy:

    Eh, it’s the worst map in the game. Not really worth giving it the title, “new content”.

    Worst map? I’d call mine-shaft the worst map, by far.

    or w/e the duel map in the mine-shaft is called, if mine-shaft isn’t the name.



  • @Userper:

    Worst map? I’d call mine-shaft the worst map, by far.

    or w/e the duel map in the mine-shaft is called, if mine-shaft isn’t the name.

    Ya the fact that Shitadel is a TO map gives it some bonus points but it’s a shame that it has no competitive value. I tend to agree though. I cringe much more when I have to play on shit like shaft.


Log in to reply