Rethinking Team Contests - Page 2

**StarfoxFan2009** · 01-14-2011, 05:39 PM

here's the thing though, in my particular case i can't get AOX to work on the laptop but it works on the acer computer

**Wolf** · 01-14-2011, 05:51 PM

I love team contests, but for some reason I didnt play that much in this one, I think the main reason was the 24 hour window I was used to the marathon tournment or the tag team one that I was elimationed in the first round lol.

I have some ideas for new team contests if you are looking for ideas?

**Winnebagel** · 01-14-2011, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jozman3000

As always, your words are too kind. But I know my skills are not that finely honed.

Nah. It's true. I am always amazed at guys like you and Tails who do so well using only a key board. I would love to see how high you could reach if you used a controller.

**Kugyince** · 01-14-2011, 06:13 PM

Speaking as a player only my three issues with the contest were:

1. Time Consumption. 90% of my time on RU is spent modding. It has been about two weeks since I've played a game here. This potentially can be worked around.

2. Bickering. It's not enjoyable to play with grown men who at times act half their age.

3. Rules Lawyering. See above. Way too much of a headache.

I'm in favor of two team contests a year. One during each equinox thus avoiding the winter holidays and summer vacations. We can supplement those contests with single player contests during the off seasons.

**joz** · 01-14-2011, 06:15 PM

I say the more the better Wolfman.

---------- Post added at 06:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:13 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenser

I'm in favor of two team contests a year. One during each equinox thus avoiding the winter holidays and summer vacations. We can supplement those contests with single player contests during the off seasons.

This sounds like a good idea. I'm for this.

**Wolf** · 01-14-2011, 06:17 PM

one idea is a baseball type of scoring so you have the whole team contribe. I have to think of rules and stuff for this idea but I would like to do something like this.

**Kong** · 01-14-2011, 06:28 PM

I don't think random team assignment would be good. Like WB said, many people specifically want to be on their team and not just randomly shuffled around.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevencassidy13

Also coin op only.

Discuss. Does everyone agree with coin-op only?

**Wolf** · 01-14-2011, 06:31 PM

I think coin op is better

**joz** · 01-14-2011, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kong

1--Discuss. Does everyone agree with this?

2--I don't think random team assignment would be good. Like WB said, many people specifically want to be on their team and not just randomly shuffled around.

1: I think that's probably a good idea.

2: I can understand that. However, I still think that the teams need to go down in size though.

**elrod21** · 01-14-2011, 06:34 PM

Guess I should add my 2 cents.

1. For me it wasn't fatigue as I am relatively new here. But I can see how 4 contests a year can be a bit much.

2. I don't think anyone is bored with it. Competitions are always exciting.

3. Intimidation doesn't enter into my mind. I fully respect the abilities of my opponents and some game types I may feel gives them an advantage, but I will always give it a try when I can. I can see how some might feel intimidated though.

4. I don't think the Contest ideas are really bad in general. There may be tweaks that can be done here and there to make them better.

5. Bad timing. This I can see. Family had to come first and I didn't get to play when I normally would because of it.

6. I think the rewards that are already in place work. It gives the winning team players bragging rights which should be enough in my opinion. My fear is money could potentially make the civil less civil. It has a funny way of making people take a competition like this too seriously and I don't believe that would be healthy for this site.

I wasn't aware that there have been contests where you couldn't see the posted scores. As WB already pointed out that would avoid camping and level the playing field as you just do your best with the time you have then wait and see what happens.

I also echo the sentiment that 24 hours wasn't enough time for a round. I actually would have preferred this last contest if it had been 48 hours and 5 wins to take the competition. In 24 hours you may only get one shot at trying a game and if you have never played it before it may take to your second attempt to get into the "flow" of the game to post a decent score.

No matter what though I really appreciate all the hard work that goes into making these contests and running them and the site for free. It can be a thankless job sometimes I'm sure but just wanted to say thanks for creating such a great place to play the classics and compete with like minded individuals. Wish I had found it much sooner.

**Kugyince** · 01-14-2011, 06:34 PM

Not at all. Too many good console only games out there to go coin-op only.

**Thunderlips** · 01-14-2011, 06:37 PM

I'm still the new kid in town but here's some thoughts...

I'd like to first thank those that put in the time setting these contests up for us. All we have to do is show up and play so big ups to you. Prize money is not necessary its all about the fun and sportsmanship.

I enjoyed being in a team contest. I dont feel I have the time to be a threat in individual contests so it was great to be able to chip in when I could. Nobody played more then half the rounds I'm sure, its just not possible as an adult. Whoever is playing 12 hours per round

thats unhealthy even for an unemployed twenty-something in mom's basement. I think and hour is reasonable though I admit to putting in more time the final night as we faced elimination (much to my wifes displeasure

)

I could be wrong but when E.C. got rolling and took the lead it seemed participation from the other two teams dropped right off. Sure the time zone thing was tough and people were away but bottom line E.C. won because they were the best "team". I'm not so keen on the "if you cant beat them, redistribute them" concept. It would be more satisfying to beat them in a contest as they are now then a watered down E.C.

If the idea of giving each player only an hour to post their best score can be done and policed for a future team contest I like the concept.

**Dudebro** · 01-14-2011, 07:26 PM

1. Honestly the contest times blur together for me so I don't care how many we have. But, since I know it effects some people to the point of being impossible I say we go to 2-3 times a year instead and see how that goes.

2. I don't think anyone is really bored with the concept, if they are they probably went inactive anyways.

3. Yeah. It is intimidating to log on and see huge scores from several different people in a game I've never played before. That was even worse this contest due to the 24 hour rule. Hiding contest scores would kinda help but in an "out of sight out of mind" kind of way.

4. Absolutely not. I can't think of a contest that was bad really. This one wasn't my thing but obviously some people loved it and had lots of fun. Can't please everyone.

5. For sure. Obviously I don't care about the holidays but it seems like most everyone else had limited time because of it. I'd like to think that's what happened to 90% of GOM but honestly I still have no idea.

6. I think real prizes might make the situation worse. More pressure to do well and less about the fun. Single contests seems like a great idea for this. I might even have some crappy PS2 games to give away, if I can find them.

Quote:

So what are your thoughts.

Team contests 2-3 times a year and more individual contests, even user submitted ones. For the single contests I'd love to see some user made ones, approved by the proper authorities though(unless there's no badge then it wouldn't matter).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenser

Not at all. Too many good console only games out there to go coin-op only.

100% agree with this. Why would we even consider only doing coin op? That makes no sense to me.

**Tails** · 01-14-2011, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winnebagel

I for one am in the above boat. Many of you don't know, and some of you do, but I have as of late have been strongly considering leaving team contests for good, but the thing that has kept me around is the closeness of EC's members. I guess I can't speak for everyone, but I believe all the EC members just enjoy hanging out with each other. I think that is also one of the main reasons the team has done as well as it has. EC is sort of like a team/support group, and I think that has been a major factor.

I've honestly thought of leaving contests too, due to demand, and this one totally conflicted with my schedule, which gave me half the time to play and most I didn't even like. But yes, everyone in EC has a bond. If one of us struggles another helps them succeed. It's always been this way, now EC can show it isn't WB and 8 other guys as some of you thought in other contests.

Fatigue. Too many contests. Or too intense of contests. - TOO MANY. I am infavor of 2, 3 is most.
Repetition. Just bored with the whole concept because it is no longer "new". - No, I like this way. Dodgeball and Clash of the titans were my favorites.
Intimidation. Competing directly against the 5 or 10 top tier players that we have (many of whom have multiple world records) seems futile and not worth even trying. - When you are on a short leash with no time, why even bother? I think it's a time issue with me if anything.
Bad contest ideas. - I think ones need to be reused like Dodgeball. That'd be cool to see.
Bad timing - holidays. - Yes, totally.
Lack of prizes and plunder. We need real cash and loot to give away. - No, that'd get more complaining.

Anyways, I am sick and tired of every contest being a complaint. I won't go on but I'm tired of it. Why can't we have fun instead of someone hawking at something when it don't go their way? =/

**Wolf** · 01-14-2011, 07:52 PM

the one day I was thinking about doing a video game marathon which would be mastering 26 games by myself I might try that. if anyone like that idea maybe we can do that has a free for all contest

**Demon-Mask** · 01-14-2011, 07:58 PM

Okay, so I've never participated in one of these contests, so my input is probably invalid, but I'll give it a shot anyway.

Placing a contest near the holidays, a time which people spend with their families, is bad for participation.

There are too few teams, or too few members allowed per-team, meaning that there isn't many people who are even eligible to participate in these contests, as you must be a member of one of these teams to participate.
I have a good solution for this:
You set up several tiers of teams, top tier being those that exist now, and then some lower tier teams, of which there will be more of, but the same number of members per team. Have each contest multi-tiered, as in there will be a top-tier winner and a winner in each tier, as well as an overall winner.
More people would be eligible to participate, meaning more would. Take me for example, I've been interested in a few of these contests in the past, yet I have no team affiliation, as it should be since I am not a top-tier gamer. So, I am not eligible to participate in these contests, therefore I don't. If I were eligible, I would participate. I don't have many high-scores, as I am not a score driven gamer, but if there were a contest involved, I'd be more interested in playing for competition, at which point my true skills would shine through, though I guess they'd be shockingly dull.

**Winnebagel** · 01-14-2011, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenser

Not at all. Too many good console only games out there to go coin-op only.

Agreed Ten. I don't see why it would only be kept to Coin Op for the simple reason that it would dramatically limit the pool of games you can choose from for contests. Also, I agree that there are many great systems to ignore.

**Dudebro** · 01-14-2011, 08:05 PM

Quote:

now EC can show it isn't WB and 8 other guys as some of you thought in other contests.

I always thought WB was one guy controlling like 3-4 accounts?!?! I just figured he was really into role playing.

**Demon-Mask** · 01-14-2011, 08:07 PM

I still like my tier idea. But maybe that's just me wanting a shot at the contests like all of you gaming gods, though I'm just a knight.

**Tails** · 01-14-2011, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudebro

I always thought WB was one guy controlling like 3-4 accounts?!?! I just figured he was really into role playing.

**Wolf** · 01-14-2011, 08:08 PM

lol I know it all along winnebagel is also gamenguru and bluej

**joz** · 01-14-2011, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demon-Mask

Okay, so I've never participated in one of these contests, so my input is probably invalid, but I'll give it a shot anyway.

Placing a contest near the holidays, a time which people spend with their families, is bad for participation.

There are too few teams, or too few members allowed per-team, meaning that there isn't many people who are even eligible to participate in these contests, as you must be a member of one of these teams to participate.
I have a good solution for this:
You set up several tiers of teams, top tier being those that exist now, and then some lower tier teams, of which there will be more of, but the same number of members per team. Have each contest multi-tiered, as in there will be a top-tier winner and a winner in each tier, as well as an overall winner.
More people would be eligible to participate, meaning more would. Take me for example, I've been interested in a few of these contests in the past, yet I have no team affiliation, as it should be since I am not a top-tier gamer. So, I am not eligible to participate in these contests, therefore I don't. If I were eligible, I would participate. I don't have many high-scores, as I am not a score driven gamer, but if there were a contest involved, I'd be more interested in playing for competition, at which point my true skills would shine through, though I guess they'd be shockingly dull.

Did you ever ask to join any team? That's what I did the first time. I agree that there need to be more teams, but there just aren't too many members willing to play. It took me roughly about a month to gather 7 members willing to join a team.