If the two of you are going to argue over which maps are good or bad, perhaps you should consider the subjectivity of such an argument, and that no favorable conclusion will be reached.
Kryand, I have noticed during my participation on this forum that you generally consider your opinion to be fact. Such has been the case in a number of threads. For instance conversations in which a member will state they like/dislike a specific mod. Typically you will discredit the mod in question as being inferior to a mod you play/enjoy(V2, base probably several others). While we do share the opinion that classic is fun, we do not share our method of conveying our likes and dislikes to other members. Where you will quite simply state that yours is best for a number of reasons, I will simply say that I like a mod, or weapon, or tactic.
You probably wouldn't get into so many futile arguments if you would just say you like something rather than pointing out all the reasons why your way is better than someone else's way, and above all else, avoid insulting those who have a different way/taste than you.
Every claim I have ever made can be (and has been) objectively measured. That's why I say them as if they are fact - because for all intents and purposes, they are. But judging from what I have seen so far, if I tried to explain these measurements, you would accuse me of being argumentative or off-topic.
Here's an example though... the word "better" is what most would call a subjective term. However, any logical person would not object to a statement like, "the New England Patriots are better than the Clear Lake High School Falcons". You could argue irrelevant semantics all day, but that kind of thing is only hurtful to a discussion. Every claim I have made is analogous to the above example.
Other mentionable maps that I hate but others seem to like:
IceRidge, Snowblind, Surreal, Sub-Zero
Good server side maps that don't come with the game: Quagmire 2008, Tenebrous CTF (not good for large number of players)
Pretty much any map that comes with the game that I didn't mention is terrible and should probably not be on the server rotation.
I can also recommend for you some very reputable admins who have been running servers for years, if you're interested.
Katabatic! The dust2 of the old T2 community. It's definately my favourite map, yet everytime I vote it on Goon Haven nobody wants it
I know that we've sort of left the topic of the Goon haven server but it must be said and I must agree, Goon Haven does have it's selection of great players. I've not even TRIED mid-air shots yet as I'm still getting back into the game, learning ski-routes, trying to keep vertical speed instead of horizontal!
But I already have names in my head, names I see and remember and I 'avoid' getting into a 1 v 1 situation with these guys (The Warden, The Policeman, Proxy etc) as I'd probably end up loosing, but if I left the server all I'm confronted with is servers which are 24/32 (16) and the likes. If I wanted to play against bots, I'd host my own game.
We need a greater variety of servers, agreed. But we can't be having bots on them!
Try Rebels Kata, that the defacto map and you have to vote to change it.
Every claim I have ever made can be (and has been) objectively measured. That's why I say them as if they are fact - because for all intents and purposes, they are. But judging from what I have seen so far, if I tried to explain these measurements, you would accuse me of being argumentative or off-topic.
Really? I'd love to see such objective measurements.
If you are trying to argue with me, I can assure you that you have no idea what you are talking about. You probably shouldn't bother.
I can assure you, I have every idea what my own personal opinion is, so I know exactly what I'm talking about.
Other mentionable maps that I hate but others seem to like:
IceRidge, Snowblind, Surreal, Sub-Zero
Good server side maps that don't come with the game: Quagmire 2008, Tenebrous CTF (not good for large number of players)
Pretty much any map that comes with the game that I didn't mention is terrible and should probably not be on the server rotation.
I can also recommend for you some very reputable admins who have been running servers for years, if you're interested.
Katabatic! The dust2 of the old T2 community. It's definately my favourite map, yet everytime I vote it on Goon Haven nobody wants it
Because most of us have played 24\7 Katabatic servers for the last eight years. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but your statement comparing it to Dust2 is more accurate than you think.
Every claim I have ever made can be (and has been) objectively measured. That's why I say them as if they are fact - because for all intents and purposes, they are. But judging from what I have seen so far, if I tried to explain these measurements, you would accuse me of being argumentative or off-topic.
Really? I'd love to see such objective measurements.
If you are trying to argue with me, I can assure you that you have no idea what you are talking about. You probably shouldn't bother.
I can assure you, I have every idea what my own personal opinion is, so I know exactly what I'm talking about.
My point is that not everyone agrees with you.
First of all let me introduce you to a little thing called "balance". In particular, balance between offense and defense. In order for the game to be fun for everyone, balance is required. Otherwise you'll be forcing one side to coordinate, while the other side barely has to do anything to stop them. The mod itself plays a huge part in this balance, but the map plays a huge part in it as well. In incredibly unbalanced maps such as Lakeside, Reversion, Archipelago, etc. the offense has to mount an huge effort to even get to the enemy base. All it takes is a single player on defense to completely overthrow ANY amount of teamwork the offense tries to employ. That, objectively, makes those maps terrible.
Another objective measurement you are looking for is the fact that these maps used to be played, and now they aren't. The reason for this has nothing to do with people not liking teamwork, but instead has everything to do with what happens when these maps are played: the game completely degrades and nothing happens.
In any case, I can tell from your use of statements like "cater to a strong defense" and "capping involves teamwork or effort" that you lack the necessary experience to actually analyze maps. Your own personal opinion makes me think you'd be happier playing on a base server... or a Battlefield 1942 server... I'd recommend those before you try to turn a classic server into something classic was never meant to be.
First of all let me introduce you to a little thing called "balance". In particular, balance between offense and defense. In order for the game to be fun for everyone, balance is required. Otherwise you'll be forcing one side to coordinate, while the other side barely has to do anything to stop them. The mod itself plays a huge part in this balance, but the map plays a huge part in it as well. In incredibly unbalanced maps such as Lakeside, Reversion, Archipelago, etc. the offense has to mount an huge effort to even get to the enemy base. All it takes is a single player on defense to completely overthrow ANY amount of teamwork the offense tries to employ. That, objectively, makes those maps terrible.
So, in other words, when the maps favor offense, it's more balanced?
On slapdash, you only need one capper, but you need several people defending. That's unbalanced in favor of the offense. That's not a bad thing, it simply means that the teams need to focus more on defense.
Another objective measurement you are looking for is the fact that these maps used to be played, and now they aren't. The reason for this has nothing to do with people not liking teamwork, but instead has everything to do with what happens when these maps are played: the game completely degrades and nothing happens.
The reason behind this, is because classic managed to take over the game. In general, classic players don't enjoy those maps. Again, nothing wrong with that.
I, unfortunately, enjoy those maps, base gameplay, and classic gameplay. You're giving me the impression that you think there's something terribly wrong with that.
In any case, I can tell from your use of statements like "cater to a strong defense" and "capping involves teamwork or effort" that you lack the necessary experience to actually analyze maps. Your own personal opinion makes me think you'd be happier playing on a base server... or a Battlefield 1942 server... I'd recommend those before you try to turn a classic server into something classic was never meant to be.
Experience? I play the game because I enjoy it. But maybe you're right, I'm not some elitist player. I'll go find a populated base server, because I do tend to enjoy playing on those more, for a couple reasons. The players there usually act more like they enjoy the game because they have fun playing it, rather than because it's providing practice for serious competetive play. And also because they're much less of a democratic voting simulation, and more of a game of Tribes 2.
Kryand plz stop spouting your opinion as fact; you look at the T2 gaming community from the viewpoint of competition, but we are discussing a pub server with 64 slots! This is not a scrim discussion about maps for 7 vs 7 or 10 vs 10. The maps are balanced; well Lakeside favors offense so that could be unbalanced!
Lakeside is a decent medium size map that favors offense!
Reversion and Archipeligo are huge maps; not meant for 7 vs 7 or even 10 vs 10, they are meant for the big brawls usually found on most vehicle servers! When you add the vehicles available in a 20 vs 20 or more, then those maps are interesting and fun.
The most unbalanced defender friendly map of all time is "Recalescence"! (IMHO)
Your opinion is based on competition not pubbing; the maps you mentioned are not preferred by cappers because of the size of the maps and slow motion due to water. Also those maps can be easily dominated by Air Superiority and heavy tank fire!
Due to small team sizes they hated all the maps you mentioned. But for pub servers with big crowds, they love those maps because the players need room to spread out.
When I used to schedule large special event scrims of 4 tribes (2 vs 2) or 6 tribes scrimming (3 vs 3), most of the maps you dislike were in the pile for consideration. For comp and comp style pick-ups I'd agree with you; but for 40-60 player pub servers with a regular player base you have no idea what you are talking about.
Actually, maps like that, even on a pub, tend to frustrate people and cause them to leave. People hate being dominated, and at the same time, hate standing still with no one to fight.
It's rare to find a team that actually wants to coordinate instead of doing there own thing. So a balanced map is a good thing.
So, in other words, when the maps favor offense, it's more balanced?
On slapdash, you only need one capper, but you need several people defending. That's unbalanced in favor of the offense. That's not a bad thing, it simply means that the teams need to focus more on defense.
... That's not what he said. Did you even read it? He gave a couter-point to a defensive focused map?
Flags are not always ment to be played directly from the stand, but also in the field. And both teams should be able to take a flag, not just one with a strong offense to break another team. This creates stand offs and more intensive gameplay as well.
The reason behind this, is because classic managed to take over the game. In general, classic players don't enjoy those maps. Again, nothing wrong with that.
I, unfortunately, enjoy those maps, base gameplay, and classic gameplay. You're giving me the impression that you think there's something terribly wrong with that.
There has always been seperations, however this is NOT the point. At this point, I'd say things have been de-railed.
Experience? I play the game because I enjoy it. But maybe you're right, I'm not some elitist player. I'll go find a populated base server, because I do tend to enjoy playing on those more, for a couple reasons. The players there usually act more like they enjoy the game because they have fun playing it, rather than because it's providing practice for serious competetive play. And also because they're much less of a democratic voting simulation, and more of a game of Tribes 2.
Elitist would be the term your using. In most cases when approval and advancement is made, it has been done by the very focused part of communities or development teams, not an average player; I'm sure you are well aware. You prefer base, which is fine, however most of us "Elitests" started in the base days, played on the large and small scale, played competition and evoloved with the game.
If you have played competition, you would understand the players prefer a higher quality pub and they're definantly not used for practice. While most may be intimidated by the level of play in these "elitist" servers, everyone there is having a good time and not competing. Trust me, it's nearly complete bullshit.
Get off his nuts and try to understand another perspective maybe? He can certainly understand yours.
So, in other words, when the maps favor offense, it's more balanced?
On slapdash, you only need one capper, but you need several people defending. That's unbalanced in favor of the offense. That's not a bad thing, it simply means that the teams need to focus more on defense.
Uhhh... no. Maybe you need several bad players to stop one good capper. But one good defender vs one good capper, it will be fairly even. That's balance.
The reason behind this, is because classic managed to take over the game. In general, classic players don't enjoy those maps. Again, nothing wrong with that.
I, unfortunately, enjoy those maps, base gameplay, and classic gameplay. You're giving me the impression that you think there's something terribly wrong with that.
You know why classic players don't enjoy those maps? Because those maps are bad. It's alright if you like bad maps, just don't try to act like they aren't bad.
Experience? I play the game because I enjoy it. But maybe you're right, I'm not some elitist player. I'll go find a populated base server, because I do tend to enjoy playing on those more, for a couple reasons. The players there usually act more like they enjoy the game because they have fun playing it, rather than because it's providing practice for serious competetive play. And also because they're much less of a democratic voting simulation, and more of a game of Tribes 2.
That's fine. In that case maybe you should stick to playing and not try to get in over your head on forum discussions.
When I used to schedule large special event scrims of 4 tribes (2 vs 2) or 6 tribes scrimming (3 vs 3), most of the maps you dislike were in the pile for consideration. For comp and comp style pick-ups I'd agree with you; but for 40-60 player pub servers with a regular player base you have no idea what you are talking about.
So you are trying to talk about pub servers, and then you mention tribe scrims to support your point? Surely you see the problem here. You are also missing the big picture. There shouldn't be any pubs with 40-60 players. 60 player Archipelago actually requires more coordination than a competition match in order to actually get anything accomplished. Sounds to me like you're confusing yourself with your own argument.
So, in other words, when the maps favor offense, it's more balanced?
On slapdash, you only need one capper, but you need several people defending. That's unbalanced in favor of the offense. That's not a bad thing, it simply means that the teams need to focus more on defense.
... That's not what he said. Did you even read it? He gave a couter-point to a defensive focused map?
It's called sarcasm.
Flags are not always ment to be played directly from the stand, but also in the field. And both teams should be able to take a flag, not just one with a strong offense to break another team. This creates stand offs and more intensive gameplay as well.
I understand that. What's wrong with more intensive gameplay? His point is that this is simply bad, my point is that his is an opinion, and some people have a different opinion.
There has always been seperations, however this is NOT the point. At this point, I'd say things have been de-railed.
Fair enough. I won't bring it up again.
Elitist would be the term your using. In most cases when approval and advancement is made, it has been done by the very focused part of communities or development teams, not an average player; I'm sure you are well aware. You prefer base, which is fine, however most of us "Elitests" started in the base days, played on the large and small scale, played competition and evoloved with the game.
The competetive part of the community has always been much more vocal. The more casual part has not. Think about it... why would, when everything was changed in the competetive's favor, the game quickly die soon after? Sure, it might be a coincidence. I find that hard to believe though. Also, are people who enjoy the game as it already is really going to complain about it?
Circumstances show that the changes made in the final patch stabbed Tribes 2 to death. Classic servers were everywhere, base was almost impossible to find. Players stopped playing. I adapted to classic, despite preferring base.
If you have played competition, you would understand the players prefer a higher quality pub and they're definantly not used for practice. While most may be intimidated by the level of play in these "elitist" servers, everyone there is having a good time and not competing. Trust me, it's nearly complete bullshit.
Just what I've seen. I've played many a round on a base server where the game ended 0 to 0, and everyone talked about how much they enjoyed the match despite this. I've never seen this happen on a classic server, despite seeing games end with the same score. I can only speak from what I've experienced myself.
Get off his nuts and try to understand another perspective maybe? He can certainly understand yours.
Whoa, what? What were you reading? He states that my perspective is wrong, and that his is the absolute truth.
When I used to schedule large special event scrims of 4 tribes (2 vs 2) or 6 tribes scrimming (3 vs 3), most of the maps you dislike were in the pile for consideration. For comp and comp style pick-ups I'd agree with you; but for 40-60 player pub servers with a regular player base you have no idea what you are talking about.
So you are trying to talk about pub servers, and then you mention tribe scrims to support your point? Surely you see the problem here. You are also missing the big picture. There shouldn't be any pubs with 40-60 players. 60 player Archipelago actually requires more coordination than a competition match in order to actually get anything accomplished. Sounds to me like you're confusing yourself with your own argument.
Dude, I hate to say I told you so but... I told you this would happen. You can't go around telling people they're idiots/inexperienced/ill-qualified for an opinion, for disagreeing with you. Your opinion is(guess what) an OPINION. You're not right about any of it, it's just what you like. Maps are maps, and a certain map may be more suited for one situation that another, but that doesn't mean that someone isn't entitled to like a map that is less suited for ONE SPECIFIC SCENARIO.
I'm sorry man but these frustrating arguments happen because of you kryand, you can't go around telling people what to like and expect them to just accept that.
When I used to schedule large special event scrims of 4 tribes (2 vs 2) or 6 tribes scrimming (3 vs 3), most of the maps you dislike were in the pile for consideration. For comp and comp style pick-ups I'd agree with you; but for 40-60 player pub servers with a regular player base you have no idea what you are talking about.
So you are trying to talk about pub servers, and then you mention tribe scrims to support your point? Surely you see the problem here. You are also missing the big picture. There shouldn't be any pubs with 40-60 players. 60 player Archipelago actually requires more coordination than a competition match in order to actually get anything accomplished. Sounds to me like you're confusing yourself with your own argument.
No Kryand,
I mentioned the past scrims because the tribal leaders specifically requested the maps you dislike, that's all!
Unlike you; I spent most of my time in pub servers. Big maps were always prefered because people need to spread out. Not everyone in a pub server wants to do anything team related. Some peeps get on the same team just to bomb together, defend the gens together or mount an assault together. You can try to coordinate, hope to coordinate but it's a PUB!
Here's my point:
1. Pubs servers can be chaos, on a good map... orchestrated chaos.
2. Look at the maps you listed as favorable; to a server provider of a busy server those are medium size maps good for a 10 vs 10 but cramped at 20 vs 20 but for Goon Haven when it's at 50, I don't think so! That's like Machineheads or Dangerous Crossing in Rebels Kata 2 mos ago, total overkill.
3. Pubs are where noobs learn basic skills from occasional vets on a feeding frenzy, and where squads from a tribe practice team tactics.
I understand your points and some are valid when discussing maps for bonifide scrims ; but this discussion was about a pub server. We've had this conversation numerous times on numerous forums. You like Pick-ups, you have a TWL ingrained perspective and that is cool if your accept that it is TUNNELVISION! You maybe excellent at hosting pick-ups but this conversation is about a busy pub server; you have no idea what you are talking about.
The competetive part of the community has always been much more vocal. The more casual part has not. Think about it... why would, when everything was changed in the competetive's favor, the game quickly die soon after? Sure, it might be a coincidence. I find that hard to believe though. Also, are people who enjoy the game as it already is really going to complain about it?
Circumstances show that the changes made in the final patch stabbed Tribes 2 to death. Classic servers were everywhere, base was almost impossible to find. Players stopped playing. I adapted to classic, despite preferring base.
Not true. Tribes 2 had many factors killing it from the start.
Dispite everything, it would be the Base community who didn't keep up if the casual players are in large numbers, as you say they are. And a decline in servers should not have been a direct hit from the majority of the competitive community. If so, this would prove the casual tribes player did prefer classic, base++ or whatever direction Tribes 2 took. Anyone has the ability to perform a flat installtion and play Base, no modifications were required. If that many people enjoyed the game, they should of complained about change and put up their own servers. Nothing was stopping these people!
The classic patch did not kill tribes. This was an addition to the game players could easily seek out. There has never been a lack of information to aquire these additions and were not added to the general base game forcing players into change.
*turns on an air conditioner, notices how apropos the thread title is now*
Aside from the opinion-as-fact allegations flying around here, what I think is standing as the core of these arguments is that some maps are better than others. This falls in line with a certain "proverb" I recall, which goes "all hardware sucks, all software sucks". Applied, it means that some maps are better for some situations than others. It doesn't mean that any one map is the best ever, nor does it mean any one map is the worst map ever. We've all got our opinions on best and worst maps, which could be indicative that there are some maps we enjoy playing on and some we don't.
This thread originally started with a mention that Goon Haven was having an incursion of people with no purpose but to wreak havoc on their own team. Somewhere we got to discussing whether a variety of maps would help balance things out. And now it's mutated into a holier than thou war over who plays what map types.
Take a deep breath, relax. Some maps are better than others for certain situations. For instance, some maps are better suited for pub servers, and within that are better for offense or defense. If there is a balance in those maps, now it's just a matter of the server. If you're not happy with a certain map, vote to change it. If the next map is "worse", go find another server or start your own. Tribes is a team game, remember, we can't all bend to one person's point of view. Let's quit nipping at each other and just get back to the game we all love.
The competetive part of the community has always been much more vocal. The more casual part has not. Think about it... why would, when everything was changed in the competetive's favor, the game quickly die soon after? Sure, it might be a coincidence. I find that hard to believe though. Also, are people who enjoy the game as it already is really going to complain about it?
Circumstances show that the changes made in the final patch stabbed Tribes 2 to death. Classic servers were everywhere, base was almost impossible to find. Players stopped playing. I adapted to classic, despite preferring base.
Not true. Tribes 2 had many factors killing it from the start.
Dispite everything, it would be the Base community who didn't keep up if the casual players are in large numbers, as you say they are. And a decline in servers should not have been a direct hit from the majority of the competitive community. If so, this would prove the casual tribes player did prefer classic, base++ or whatever direction Tribes 2 took. Anyone has the ability to perform a flat installtion and play Base, no modifications were required. If that many people enjoyed the game, they should of complained about change and put up their own servers. Nothing was stopping these people!
The classic patch did not kill tribes. This was an addition to the game players could easily seek out. There has never been a lack of information to aquire these additions and were not added to the general base game forcing players into change.
Death occured on its own!
I don't know; I don't blame classic for the downfall as much as a bad release of the game. Tribes 2 was rushed to market by Sierra; it was buggy and contained additions that the previous build T1 didn't have that the community accepted and got used to. A sucessful release would have included all the normal physics of the previous build with new graphics, weapons and vehicles, a tweak or two with new mods.
Instead they drastically redesigned the game pissing off the majority of the T1 comp vets. Noobs really wouldn't care; but if you developed a skillset only to have that knowledge taken from you with a new releas of your favorite game, you'd be peeved too! In an effort to save the product and the T1 community, patch after patch. The death knoll ws sounded when Dynamix was bought up and the Sierra too got gobbled up by VUGames. When T3 was released once again, someone drastically redesigned the game and was puzzled when the community wouldn't accept the product. Then the T3/T:V community decided to cut out vehicles all together with vanilla mod?
To view this correctly there is one community... Tribes! Tribes was split up with a rushed release of T2, creating T1 and T2. Subsequent bungled PR and patches created futher fragmentation, base, base++, classic and V2! Corporate takeovers split the community again with offering T3 aka T:V!
Although there was discussion about supposed community involvement; I don't know, you do not drastically redesign a game and expect a community to chomp on the bit. With each major product change the community as a whole hated the product. T1 to T2 and T2 to T:V! So you had three major communities with factions within each all due to bad PR with a community and hap-hazard releases.
When T2 cd keys were released for free the grim reaper reared his head when the accounts stopped and the game left to stagnant. When support was dropped; community features dropped, but game still not officially declared abandonwear, it was a done deal until T2 Bouncer and Tribesnext projects were released.
Just my opinion... mixed with some fact but I welcome discussion. we can always bash each other in the server later!
T2 was to be the update* to T1, and didn't pan out for many due to the "slowness" of base. Most players (T1 vets mostly) were looking for a game that at least played like T1 but with the better graphics and so on of T2.
If anything killed Tribes it was other games, especialy wow. Or the 1942 series. Clans also had their hands in T2's demise in the sense that clan players want to be where everyone else in clan matches are, meaning new games such as 1942 and cs source at the time when most vets stopped playing T2, and clanners could care less about gameplay. Gameplay is why they come back, but some also come back because T2 may be the best game designed yet.
* (but sierra decided lets sell a whole new game and milk this cow good)
Um, Tribes 2 died because there were no CD keys. If it was another reason, TribesNext wouldn't have worked. Just about every single person who I have heard say anything about Tribes 2 has insisted that they only were interested if there were classic servers around. Luckily there are. If the servers hosts all decided to run base instead, Tribes 2 would still be dead right now, rather than having 100 or so people on at any given time.
Other than that, too many people typing too much random stuff for me to bother reading now. I'll be back later.
The competetive part of the community has always been much more vocal. The more casual part has not. Think about it... why would, when everything was changed in the competetive's favor, the game quickly die soon after? Sure, it might be a coincidence. I find that hard to believe though. Also, are people who enjoy the game as it already is really going to complain about it?
Circumstances show that the changes made in the final patch stabbed Tribes 2 to death. Classic servers were everywhere, base was almost impossible to find. Players stopped playing. I adapted to classic, despite preferring base.
Not true. Tribes 2 had many factors killing it from the start.
Dispite everything, it would be the Base community who didn't keep up if the casual players are in large numbers, as you say they are. And a decline in servers should not have been a direct hit from the majority of the competitive community. If so, this would prove the casual tribes player did prefer classic, base++ or whatever direction Tribes 2 took. Anyone has the ability to perform a flat installtion and play Base, no modifications were required. If that many people enjoyed the game, they should of complained about change and put up their own servers. Nothing was stopping these people!
The classic patch did not kill tribes. This was an addition to the game players could easily seek out. There has never been a lack of information to aquire these additions and were not added to the general base game forcing players into change.
Death occured on its own!
I don't know; I don't blame classic for the downfall as much as a bad release of the game. Tribes 2 was rushed to market by Sierra; it was buggy and contained additions that the previous build T1 didn't have that the community accepted and got used to. A sucessful release would have included all the normal physics of the previous build with new graphics, weapons and vehicles, a tweak or two with new mods.
Instead they drastically redesigned the game pissing off the majority of the T1 comp vets. Noobs really wouldn't care; but if you developed a skillset only to have that knowledge taken from you with a new releas of your favorite game, you'd be peeved too! In an effort to save the product and the T1 community, patch after patch. The death knoll ws sounded when Dynamix was bought up and the Sierra too got gobbled up by VUGames. When T3 was released once again, someone drastically redesigned the game and was puzzled when the community wouldn't accept the product. Then the T3/T:V community decided to cut out vehicles all together with vanilla mod?
To view this correctly there is one community... Tribes! Tribes was split up with a rushed release of T2, creating T1 and T2. Subsequent bungled PR and patches created futher fragmentation, base, base++, classic and V2! Corporate takeovers split the community again with offering T3 aka T:V!
Although there was discussion about supposed community involvement; I don't know, you do not drastically redesign a game and expect a community to chomp on the bit. With each major product change the community as a whole hated the product. T1 to T2 and T2 to T:V! So you had three major communities with factions within each all due to bad PR with a community and hap-hazard releases.
When T2 cd keys were released for free the grim reaper reared his head when the accounts stopped and the game left to stagnant. When support was dropped; community features dropped, but game still not officially declared abandonwear, it was a done deal until T2 Bouncer and Tribesnext projects were released.
Just my opinion... mixed with some fact but I welcome discussion. we can always bash each other in the server later!
Fair enough. I probably blame classic more than I should, mainly because it's release made finding base servers a pain in the ass. A few of the servers I played on regularly had switched over to classic, and the varient servers dropped off pretty quickly due to lack of players. I honestly believe the sudden popularity of classic mod had something to do with it though.
But yeah, all rather got off topic. Back to the original point, and post, that started this all. I love some of the maps you hate, and so do some other players. Call them bad, whatever. I enjoy bad maps. I also dislike Minotaur because it removes many of the things of Tribes 2 that made the game Tribes 2 for me.
The competetive part of the community has always been much more vocal. The more casual part has not. Think about it... why would, when everything was changed in the competetive's favor, the game quickly die soon after? Sure, it might be a coincidence. I find that hard to believe though. Also, are people who enjoy the game as it already is really going to complain about it?
Circumstances show that the changes made in the final patch stabbed Tribes 2 to death. Classic servers were everywhere, base was almost impossible to find. Players stopped playing. I adapted to classic, despite preferring base.
Not true. Tribes 2 had many factors killing it from the start.
Dispite everything, it would be the Base community who didn't keep up if the casual players are in large numbers, as you say they are. And a decline in servers should not have been a direct hit from the majority of the competitive community. If so, this would prove the casual tribes player did prefer classic, base++ or whatever direction Tribes 2 took. Anyone has the ability to perform a flat installtion and play Base, no modifications were required. If that many people enjoyed the game, they should of complained about change and put up their own servers. Nothing was stopping these people!
The classic patch did not kill tribes. This was an addition to the game players could easily seek out. There has never been a lack of information to aquire these additions and were not added to the general base game forcing players into change.
Death occured on its own!
I disagree. The death of Tribes 2 came when every server was running some kind of mod that changed the gameplay in some fundamental way. Trust me, I was there, because in the beginning you could have found tons of 24/7 vehicle servers and whatnot. And at the end you couldn't join a single server without running into some new kind of weapon mod or something that gave the shrike machine guns instead of lasers or slowed it down so it could not outrun missiles. And it wasn't just one or two servers, it was all of them.
The game was fundamentally changed from the way it had been, and that was not what we wanted to play. So we left.
It was always my opinion that a small yet vocal minority of ex-Tribes 1 players would not shut up about trying to change Tribes 2 into the first game. The devs listened to them, foolishly, at the end of Tribes 2 and again with Tribes Vengeance. And it killed us.
And a word about the maps debate. No map is a "bad" map unless its poorly coded or has glitches\bugs. Trust me when I tell you that I have reviewed some AvP2 maps in my time so I know what a bad map looks like. Tribes 2 doesn't have any bad maps. And about the competition vs. public argument, sixty four people as someone said is controlled chaos. If someone wants competition play then they should never go into a 64 player public server and expect that. The large maps were designed for a large amount of public players, not competition. At this point no good map should be voted out because a small subset doesn't like it, that short changes the mass majority of players that might like to play on that map.
"If the servers hosts all decided to run base instead, Tribes 2 would still be dead right now, rather than having 100 or so people on at any given time."
If that is so, why has the ewo and rebels servers been mostly full for the last few years pre tribesnext, and no classic servers in sight? Is it becuase no classic player was willing to front the cost to host? Guess the classic players could care less.
"If the servers hosts all decided to run base instead, Tribes 2 would still be dead right now, rather than having 100 or so people on at any given time."
If that is so, why has the ewo and rebels servers been mostly full for the last few years pre tribesnext, and no classic servers in sight? Is it becuase no classic player was willing to front the cost to host? Guess the classic players could care less.
Because there's always something left at the bottom of the barrel. The same 30 players every single day is a far cry from 100 at most hours, with a completely different 100 as the day goes on. And yes, money is the exact reason. Classic was more popular than V2 until classic servers kept going down because the hosts got tired of paying. First NixFix, then Mofo's. After that, everyone moved on. EWO and Rebels didn't get the memo I guess. Probably because they were never a real part of the Tribes 2 community, but that's a whole other discussion.
"If the servers hosts all decided to run base instead, Tribes 2 would still be dead right now, rather than having 100 or so people on at any given time."
If that is so, why has the ewo and rebels servers been mostly full for the last few years pre tribesnext, and no classic servers in sight? Is it becuase no classic player was willing to front the cost to host? Guess the classic players could care less.
Because there's always something left at the bottom of the barrel. The same 30 players every single day is a far cry from 100 at most hours, with a completely different 100 as the day goes on. And yes, money is the exact reason. Classic was more popular than V2 until classic servers kept going down because the hosts got tired of paying. First NixFix, then Mofo's. After that, everyone moved on. EWO and Rebels didn't get the memo I guess. Probably because they were never a real part of the Tribes 2 community, but that's a whole other discussion.
MUAHAHAHAHA!
EWO was passed the torch from MV, I was in the server that night when the admin chimes due to the change over rang on and on... just because they didn't troll the TWL forums didn't make them any less of the T2 COMMUNITY! In fact EWO and Rebels had several members that were part of TWL, OSL, BEML and other comp league teams in the past.
The fact that their server providers had donations to help foot the bill to maintain their server proves they had an active and loyal player base. If classic was so popular then donations shouldn't have been a problem, that's simple logic... you need to get out more!
Actually it isn't logic at all. It's probability and psychology. And trust me, I have a much greater education in all three of those subjects than you do, and can tell you that your conclusion is completely false. I might concede that EWO was a part of the community, but Rebels absolutely was not.
Actually it isn't logic at all. It's probability and psychology. And trust me, I have a much greater education in all three of those subjects than you do, and can tell you that your conclusion is completely false. I might concede that EWO was a part of the community, but Rebels absolutely was not.
Kryand. Kryand. Kryand. You are aware that you're exposing your flaws to the entire community by behaving in this way.
Speaking of psychology, do you have an inferiority complex that you feel the need to belittle your debate opposition rather than agree to disagree? Do you want everyone to think that you're smarter than them due to low self confidence?
Up until now I have given you the benefit of the doubt. I had considered you bitterly intelligent if such an adjective applies. However, any intelligent person knows that when personal tastes are insulted an argument, not a discussion is created. Is that you goal as a participant? Do you feel the need to create discord within our fledgling community?
You have the potential to be a leader. If I were you I would consider my conduct. The community deserves better than the way you have been posting on this forum like you are the one and only authority on tribes2.
The last time I challenged your motives, you informed me that you opinions can be objectively measured. I do not see how the following comment can be objectively measured:
Kyrand - version2 belongs in the trash along with all the idiots who actually like it.
I played version2 along with classic and base for years. I like all three. Am I an idiot? No. Unlike other members on this site I have been studying your posts and forming an opinion of my own. And my opinion is this, you're here to turn Tribesnext into a negative experience for many of us. And many of us do not appreciate that.
Although I doubt you will change, the option is there. We would strongly appreciate a fresh, positive attitude from you Kyrand because of your ability to lead, and because you could be considered a pillar of the Tribesnext community.
Please do not consider this insulting, but rather informative. I appreciate you contributions to the community, but please, find it within yourself to be more accepting of the differences between you and other members of our community.
Actually it isn't logic at all. It's probability and psychology. And trust me, I have a much greater education in all three of those subjects than you do, and can tell you that your conclusion is completely false. I might concede that EWO was a part of the community, but Rebels absolutely was not.
Right, I've kept out of this topic, bad craic and idiots like you posting in it.
As previously mentioned:
You can't go around telling people they're idiots/inexperienced/ill-qualified for an opinion, for disagreeing with you. Your opinion is(guess what) an OPINION.
How true that is. How are you to know every forum users level of education, Kryand? For an 'educated' man like yourself you don't seem to be able to read what's infront of you, the true things being put before you. Then coming out with absolute shit like that? "I'm Mr.Educated" - Tard :-*
Kryand you are a competitive fellow, in game and in forum threads... every conversation is about winning some point. Insults, barbs, little distractions to keep from the truth. The truth is that Tribes 2 is about more than just competition it's about fostering and in some cases nurturing a community.
You are primarily concerned with one facet of this T2 community, competition and the hell with the rest. You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm interested in more than just competition. For T2 to flourish, the community as a whole must be the main concern to those that don't want this game to wither and die.
Mainstream competition in T2 has been dead for a long time, CTF pubbing kept this facet of the community on life support. If T2 flourishes, the CTF facet won't simply be satisfied with one choice of base or classic or even V2. Already in this forum there's discussion of other mods; additional flavors of T2.
These discussions only occur with growth; now if you trully want competition to take off, you would help foster that growth in CTF pubbing. This is where new prospects for competitive tribes are observed; besides recruits in IRC, sending t-mail/email or joining forums for consideration and training.
Comments
Here's an example though... the word "better" is what most would call a subjective term. However, any logical person would not object to a statement like, "the New England Patriots are better than the Clear Lake High School Falcons". You could argue irrelevant semantics all day, but that kind of thing is only hurtful to a discussion. Every claim I have made is analogous to the above example.
Try Rebels Kata, that the defacto map and you have to vote to change it.
I have no idea what Team icup is, so I'll say no.
Really? I'd love to see such objective measurements.
I can assure you, I have every idea what my own personal opinion is, so I know exactly what I'm talking about.
My point is that not everyone agrees with you.
Because most of us have played 24\7 Katabatic servers for the last eight years. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but your statement comparing it to Dust2 is more accurate than you think.
Another objective measurement you are looking for is the fact that these maps used to be played, and now they aren't. The reason for this has nothing to do with people not liking teamwork, but instead has everything to do with what happens when these maps are played: the game completely degrades and nothing happens.
In any case, I can tell from your use of statements like "cater to a strong defense" and "capping involves teamwork or effort" that you lack the necessary experience to actually analyze maps. Your own personal opinion makes me think you'd be happier playing on a base server... or a Battlefield 1942 server... I'd recommend those before you try to turn a classic server into something classic was never meant to be.
So, in other words, when the maps favor offense, it's more balanced?
On slapdash, you only need one capper, but you need several people defending. That's unbalanced in favor of the offense. That's not a bad thing, it simply means that the teams need to focus more on defense.
The reason behind this, is because classic managed to take over the game. In general, classic players don't enjoy those maps. Again, nothing wrong with that.
I, unfortunately, enjoy those maps, base gameplay, and classic gameplay. You're giving me the impression that you think there's something terribly wrong with that.
Experience? I play the game because I enjoy it. But maybe you're right, I'm not some elitist player. I'll go find a populated base server, because I do tend to enjoy playing on those more, for a couple reasons. The players there usually act more like they enjoy the game because they have fun playing it, rather than because it's providing practice for serious competetive play. And also because they're much less of a democratic voting simulation, and more of a game of Tribes 2.
Lakeside is a decent medium size map that favors offense!
Reversion and Archipeligo are huge maps; not meant for 7 vs 7 or even 10 vs 10, they are meant for the big brawls usually found on most vehicle servers! When you add the vehicles available in a 20 vs 20 or more, then those maps are interesting and fun.
The most unbalanced defender friendly map of all time is "Recalescence"! (IMHO)
Your opinion is based on competition not pubbing; the maps you mentioned are not preferred by cappers because of the size of the maps and slow motion due to water. Also those maps can be easily dominated by Air Superiority and heavy tank fire!
Due to small team sizes they hated all the maps you mentioned. But for pub servers with big crowds, they love those maps because the players need room to spread out.
When I used to schedule large special event scrims of 4 tribes (2 vs 2) or 6 tribes scrimming (3 vs 3), most of the maps you dislike were in the pile for consideration. For comp and comp style pick-ups I'd agree with you; but for 40-60 player pub servers with a regular player base you have no idea what you are talking about.
It's rare to find a team that actually wants to coordinate instead of doing there own thing. So a balanced map is a good thing.
... That's not what he said. Did you even read it? He gave a couter-point to a defensive focused map?
Flags are not always ment to be played directly from the stand, but also in the field. And both teams should be able to take a flag, not just one with a strong offense to break another team. This creates stand offs and more intensive gameplay as well.
There has always been seperations, however this is NOT the point. At this point, I'd say things have been de-railed.
Elitist would be the term your using. In most cases when approval and advancement is made, it has been done by the very focused part of communities or development teams, not an average player; I'm sure you are well aware. You prefer base, which is fine, however most of us "Elitests" started in the base days, played on the large and small scale, played competition and evoloved with the game.
If you have played competition, you would understand the players prefer a higher quality pub and they're definantly not used for practice. While most may be intimidated by the level of play in these "elitist" servers, everyone there is having a good time and not competing. Trust me, it's nearly complete bullshit.
Get off his nuts and try to understand another perspective maybe? He can certainly understand yours.
You know why classic players don't enjoy those maps? Because those maps are bad. It's alright if you like bad maps, just don't try to act like they aren't bad.
That's fine. In that case maybe you should stick to playing and not try to get in over your head on forum discussions.
So you are trying to talk about pub servers, and then you mention tribe scrims to support your point? Surely you see the problem here. You are also missing the big picture. There shouldn't be any pubs with 40-60 players. 60 player Archipelago actually requires more coordination than a competition match in order to actually get anything accomplished. Sounds to me like you're confusing yourself with your own argument.
It's called sarcasm.
I understand that. What's wrong with more intensive gameplay? His point is that this is simply bad, my point is that his is an opinion, and some people have a different opinion.
Fair enough. I won't bring it up again.
The competetive part of the community has always been much more vocal. The more casual part has not. Think about it... why would, when everything was changed in the competetive's favor, the game quickly die soon after? Sure, it might be a coincidence. I find that hard to believe though. Also, are people who enjoy the game as it already is really going to complain about it?
Circumstances show that the changes made in the final patch stabbed Tribes 2 to death. Classic servers were everywhere, base was almost impossible to find. Players stopped playing. I adapted to classic, despite preferring base.
Just what I've seen. I've played many a round on a base server where the game ended 0 to 0, and everyone talked about how much they enjoyed the match despite this. I've never seen this happen on a classic server, despite seeing games end with the same score. I can only speak from what I've experienced myself.
Whoa, what? What were you reading? He states that my perspective is wrong, and that his is the absolute truth.
Dude, I hate to say I told you so but... I told you this would happen. You can't go around telling people they're idiots/inexperienced/ill-qualified for an opinion, for disagreeing with you. Your opinion is(guess what) an OPINION. You're not right about any of it, it's just what you like. Maps are maps, and a certain map may be more suited for one situation that another, but that doesn't mean that someone isn't entitled to like a map that is less suited for ONE SPECIFIC SCENARIO.
I'm sorry man but these frustrating arguments happen because of you kryand, you can't go around telling people what to like and expect them to just accept that.
No Kryand,
I mentioned the past scrims because the tribal leaders specifically requested the maps you dislike, that's all!
Unlike you; I spent most of my time in pub servers. Big maps were always prefered because people need to spread out. Not everyone in a pub server wants to do anything team related. Some peeps get on the same team just to bomb together, defend the gens together or mount an assault together. You can try to coordinate, hope to coordinate but it's a PUB!
Here's my point:
1. Pubs servers can be chaos, on a good map... orchestrated chaos.
2. Look at the maps you listed as favorable; to a server provider of a busy server those are medium size maps good for a 10 vs 10 but cramped at 20 vs 20 but for Goon Haven when it's at 50, I don't think so! That's like Machineheads or Dangerous Crossing in Rebels Kata 2 mos ago, total overkill.
3. Pubs are where noobs learn basic skills from occasional vets on a feeding frenzy, and where squads from a tribe practice team tactics.
I understand your points and some are valid when discussing maps for bonifide scrims ; but this discussion was about a pub server. We've had this conversation numerous times on numerous forums. You like Pick-ups, you have a TWL ingrained perspective and that is cool if your accept that it is TUNNELVISION! You maybe excellent at hosting pick-ups but this conversation is about a busy pub server; you have no idea what you are talking about.
Not true. Tribes 2 had many factors killing it from the start.
Dispite everything, it would be the Base community who didn't keep up if the casual players are in large numbers, as you say they are. And a decline in servers should not have been a direct hit from the majority of the competitive community. If so, this would prove the casual tribes player did prefer classic, base++ or whatever direction Tribes 2 took. Anyone has the ability to perform a flat installtion and play Base, no modifications were required. If that many people enjoyed the game, they should of complained about change and put up their own servers. Nothing was stopping these people!
The classic patch did not kill tribes. This was an addition to the game players could easily seek out. There has never been a lack of information to aquire these additions and were not added to the general base game forcing players into change.
Death occured on its own!
Aside from the opinion-as-fact allegations flying around here, what I think is standing as the core of these arguments is that some maps are better than others. This falls in line with a certain "proverb" I recall, which goes "all hardware sucks, all software sucks". Applied, it means that some maps are better for some situations than others. It doesn't mean that any one map is the best ever, nor does it mean any one map is the worst map ever. We've all got our opinions on best and worst maps, which could be indicative that there are some maps we enjoy playing on and some we don't.
This thread originally started with a mention that Goon Haven was having an incursion of people with no purpose but to wreak havoc on their own team. Somewhere we got to discussing whether a variety of maps would help balance things out. And now it's mutated into a holier than thou war over who plays what map types.
Take a deep breath, relax. Some maps are better than others for certain situations. For instance, some maps are better suited for pub servers, and within that are better for offense or defense. If there is a balance in those maps, now it's just a matter of the server. If you're not happy with a certain map, vote to change it. If the next map is "worse", go find another server or start your own. Tribes is a team game, remember, we can't all bend to one person's point of view. Let's quit nipping at each other and just get back to the game we all love.
I don't know; I don't blame classic for the downfall as much as a bad release of the game. Tribes 2 was rushed to market by Sierra; it was buggy and contained additions that the previous build T1 didn't have that the community accepted and got used to. A sucessful release would have included all the normal physics of the previous build with new graphics, weapons and vehicles, a tweak or two with new mods.
Instead they drastically redesigned the game pissing off the majority of the T1 comp vets. Noobs really wouldn't care; but if you developed a skillset only to have that knowledge taken from you with a new releas of your favorite game, you'd be peeved too! In an effort to save the product and the T1 community, patch after patch. The death knoll ws sounded when Dynamix was bought up and the Sierra too got gobbled up by VUGames. When T3 was released once again, someone drastically redesigned the game and was puzzled when the community wouldn't accept the product. Then the T3/T:V community decided to cut out vehicles all together with vanilla mod?
To view this correctly there is one community... Tribes! Tribes was split up with a rushed release of T2, creating T1 and T2. Subsequent bungled PR and patches created futher fragmentation, base, base++, classic and V2! Corporate takeovers split the community again with offering T3 aka T:V!
Although there was discussion about supposed community involvement; I don't know, you do not drastically redesign a game and expect a community to chomp on the bit. With each major product change the community as a whole hated the product. T1 to T2 and T2 to T:V! So you had three major communities with factions within each all due to bad PR with a community and hap-hazard releases.
When T2 cd keys were released for free the grim reaper reared his head when the accounts stopped and the game left to stagnant. When support was dropped; community features dropped, but game still not officially declared abandonwear, it was a done deal until T2 Bouncer and Tribesnext projects were released.
Just my opinion... mixed with some fact but I welcome discussion. we can always bash each other in the server later!
If anything killed Tribes it was other games, especialy wow. Or the 1942 series. Clans also had their hands in T2's demise in the sense that clan players want to be where everyone else in clan matches are, meaning new games such as 1942 and cs source at the time when most vets stopped playing T2, and clanners could care less about gameplay. Gameplay is why they come back, but some also come back because T2 may be the best game designed yet.
* (but sierra decided lets sell a whole new game and milk this cow good)
Other than that, too many people typing too much random stuff for me to bother reading now. I'll be back later.
Fair enough. I probably blame classic more than I should, mainly because it's release made finding base servers a pain in the ass. A few of the servers I played on regularly had switched over to classic, and the varient servers dropped off pretty quickly due to lack of players. I honestly believe the sudden popularity of classic mod had something to do with it though.
But yeah, all rather got off topic. Back to the original point, and post, that started this all. I love some of the maps you hate, and so do some other players. Call them bad, whatever. I enjoy bad maps. I also dislike Minotaur because it removes many of the things of Tribes 2 that made the game Tribes 2 for me.
I disagree. The death of Tribes 2 came when every server was running some kind of mod that changed the gameplay in some fundamental way. Trust me, I was there, because in the beginning you could have found tons of 24/7 vehicle servers and whatnot. And at the end you couldn't join a single server without running into some new kind of weapon mod or something that gave the shrike machine guns instead of lasers or slowed it down so it could not outrun missiles. And it wasn't just one or two servers, it was all of them.
The game was fundamentally changed from the way it had been, and that was not what we wanted to play. So we left.
It was always my opinion that a small yet vocal minority of ex-Tribes 1 players would not shut up about trying to change Tribes 2 into the first game. The devs listened to them, foolishly, at the end of Tribes 2 and again with Tribes Vengeance. And it killed us.
And a word about the maps debate. No map is a "bad" map unless its poorly coded or has glitches\bugs. Trust me when I tell you that I have reviewed some AvP2 maps in my time so I know what a bad map looks like. Tribes 2 doesn't have any bad maps. And about the competition vs. public argument, sixty four people as someone said is controlled chaos. If someone wants competition play then they should never go into a 64 player public server and expect that. The large maps were designed for a large amount of public players, not competition. At this point no good map should be voted out because a small subset doesn't like it, that short changes the mass majority of players that might like to play on that map.
If that is so, why has the ewo and rebels servers been mostly full for the last few years pre tribesnext, and no classic servers in sight? Is it becuase no classic player was willing to front the cost to host? Guess the classic players could care less.
MUAHAHAHAHA!
EWO was passed the torch from MV, I was in the server that night when the admin chimes due to the change over rang on and on... just because they didn't troll the TWL forums didn't make them any less of the T2 COMMUNITY! In fact EWO and Rebels had several members that were part of TWL, OSL, BEML and other comp league teams in the past.
The fact that their server providers had donations to help foot the bill to maintain their server proves they had an active and loyal player base. If classic was so popular then donations shouldn't have been a problem, that's simple logic... you need to get out more!
Kryand. Kryand. Kryand. You are aware that you're exposing your flaws to the entire community by behaving in this way.
Speaking of psychology, do you have an inferiority complex that you feel the need to belittle your debate opposition rather than agree to disagree? Do you want everyone to think that you're smarter than them due to low self confidence?
Up until now I have given you the benefit of the doubt. I had considered you bitterly intelligent if such an adjective applies. However, any intelligent person knows that when personal tastes are insulted an argument, not a discussion is created. Is that you goal as a participant? Do you feel the need to create discord within our fledgling community?
You have the potential to be a leader. If I were you I would consider my conduct. The community deserves better than the way you have been posting on this forum like you are the one and only authority on tribes2.
The last time I challenged your motives, you informed me that you opinions can be objectively measured. I do not see how the following comment can be objectively measured:
Kyrand - version2 belongs in the trash along with all the idiots who actually like it.
I played version2 along with classic and base for years. I like all three. Am I an idiot? No. Unlike other members on this site I have been studying your posts and forming an opinion of my own. And my opinion is this, you're here to turn Tribesnext into a negative experience for many of us. And many of us do not appreciate that.
Although I doubt you will change, the option is there. We would strongly appreciate a fresh, positive attitude from you Kyrand because of your ability to lead, and because you could be considered a pillar of the Tribesnext community.
Please do not consider this insulting, but rather informative. I appreciate you contributions to the community, but please, find it within yourself to be more accepting of the differences between you and other members of our community.
Right, I've kept out of this topic, bad craic and idiots like you posting in it.
As previously mentioned:
How true that is. How are you to know every forum users level of education, Kryand? For an 'educated' man like yourself you don't seem to be able to read what's infront of you, the true things being put before you. Then coming out with absolute shit like that? "I'm Mr.Educated" - Tard :-*
You are primarily concerned with one facet of this T2 community, competition and the hell with the rest. You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm interested in more than just competition. For T2 to flourish, the community as a whole must be the main concern to those that don't want this game to wither and die.
Mainstream competition in T2 has been dead for a long time, CTF pubbing kept this facet of the community on life support. If T2 flourishes, the CTF facet won't simply be satisfied with one choice of base or classic or even V2. Already in this forum there's discussion of other mods; additional flavors of T2.
These discussions only occur with growth; now if you trully want competition to take off, you would help foster that growth in CTF pubbing. This is where new prospects for competitive tribes are observed; besides recruits in IRC, sending t-mail/email or joining forums for consideration and training.