PDA

View Full Version : PVE Guilds and PVP Teams



HyenaNipples
08-19-2013, 07:40 PM
I'm not sure how many people made it far enough into the HexTCGPro interview with Cory (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=27073) that went up today, but he mentions that they are now thinking of making guilds mainly for PVE and utilizing a different system of 8-16 man "teams" for the PVP side of the game.

Stok3d
08-19-2013, 07:54 PM
I enjoyed the interview, but began to have a bit of a problem with the audio. Is there a transcript available by chance?

Let me try listening again on a headset. Thanks for pointing this info out.



http://hextcgpro.com/?p=1055
20minute mark he starts talking about it

Mokog
08-19-2013, 07:59 PM
The idea has merit. It could allow for cross guild teams and great parings in large tournaments. Teams also help foster the E-sport mentality. They may want to reduce the size to 4-8 if they intend significant guild integration. If CZE wants independent teams then 8-16 is a good sized support group.

I wonder how much regionalization will occur for the team building. Will we have mixed teams from the US,UK and Australia or will we form around the nationalities? Might there be a big Euro-zone team up? There are so many possibilities it can make you giddy.

hex_colin
08-19-2013, 08:09 PM
I'm not sure how many people made it far enough into the HexTCGPro interview with Cory (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=27073) that went up today, but he mentions that they are now thinking of making guilds mainly for PVE and utilizing a different system of 8-16 man "teams" for the PVP side of the game.

Cory talked about the guilds and teams subject at length on Friday night. I really like the idea of the 2 activities having some sort of separation, and to be able to ally myself (in a team) with a few of my closer friends in the game for PVP deck testing, tournament preparation, etc. whilst still having the freedom to join/create a guild for a broader social community.

Chiany
08-19-2013, 08:22 PM
I'm not sure how many people made it far enough into the HexTCGPro interview with Cory (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=27073) that went up today, but he mentions that they are now thinking of making guilds mainly for PVE and utilizing a different system of 8-16 man "teams" for the PVP side of the game.

As long as being in one doesn't exclude you from the other, I like the idea behind it.
No idea what Cory actually said, waiting for the transcript.

MoikPEI
08-19-2013, 08:58 PM
Around 22:30 it kinda sounds like he may be saying Team is a sub-component of Guild? But all I can hear is rabble rabble rabble :/

hex_colin
08-19-2013, 09:01 PM
Around 22:30 it kinda sounds like he may be saying Team is a sub-component of Guild? But all I can hear is rabble rabble rabble :/

That wasn't the plan he outlined at the Dragon Lord dinner - they'd be 2 completely separate groups. You could be in a guild and on a team, and there wouldn't need to be any relationship between the 2.

TheKraken
08-19-2013, 09:09 PM
From what I can hear, guilds and PvP teams are connected - each one of us will have a "banner" that identifies us; on one side will be our guild, and on the other side will be the pvp team in the guild.

MoikPEI
08-19-2013, 09:12 PM
I'm thinking a key piece of context may be obscured by the backround noise. My gut says it was a response to a theoretical question.

Malicus
08-19-2013, 09:17 PM
It would make sense if guilds were pve and teams were separate akin to arena teams in wow, this would be a pretty cool feature - even the possibility of being in multiple teams if there were size based team vs team competitions

felmare
08-19-2013, 11:00 PM
I hope they are seperated. It would be very limiting if you could only create a pvp team with only your guild. Doesnt really make sense to me

Cory_Jones
08-19-2013, 11:20 PM
It would be separate but others players can see both of your affiliations
My current thinking is 8 man teams

Chiany
08-19-2013, 11:26 PM
Thanks Cory for the Clarification.

This sounds pretty awesome.

TheKraken
08-19-2013, 11:59 PM
It would be separate but others players can see both of your affiliations
My current thinking is 8 man teams

Thanks Cory! I definitely agree that the smaller, the better. For those live tournaments, having 16 people (2 teams) on stage for the grand finals is pushing it. 32 would definitely be too many.

locust
08-20-2013, 03:39 AM
It would be separate but others players can see both of your affiliations
My current thinking is 8 man teams

Thanks, that probably is the better way to go.

I agree with 8 man teams, seems like the perfect number, awesome to train drafts.

Will our "affiliation" be represented by a customized team logo? like an uploaded image, or just text?

jaxsonbatemanhex
08-20-2013, 03:44 AM
8's also a good number when you consider decktesting for constructed - you get 4 matches going at once, so a lot of combined information coming in from a single test session.

I'm used to 4 people myself, but 8 seems good in an online format where you can share all your information, thoughts, theories and findings on an online forum.

RobHaven
08-20-2013, 07:07 AM
...even the possibility of being in multiple teams if there were size based team vs team competitions

I'd be against this.

About 7? years ago, I created a soccer league. Year after year the same players played with new teams coming in each year. A lot of the teams didn't have names or uniforms - they were referred to by the last name of the team's captain and they wore (mostly) matching shirts. Year four I made uniform shirts and a team name mandatory. The idea was to create a team identity - something people on the team can get behind, and something for other teams to recognize. It changed the league completely. Rivalries began popping up, team affiliation became a big deal, and the league started getting a lot of social media activity.

The reason I mention this is because identity is crucial to competition. You can look at any major competitive arena and see it: Olympics, every major sports league, gaming leagues. So with that in mind, I'd discourage multi-teaming. If you want to really grow the concept of identity among teams, make people identify themselves as A team.

Seems a bit long to get a simple message across... Hopefully you guys get where I'm coming from.

Mr.Funsocks
08-20-2013, 07:32 PM
I'd be against this.

About 7? years ago, I created a soccer league. Year after year the same players played with new teams coming in each year. A lot of the teams didn't have names or uniforms - they were referred to by the last name of the team's captain and they wore (mostly) matching shirts. Year four I made uniform shirts and a team name mandatory. The idea was to create a team identity - something people on the team can get behind, and something for other teams to recognize. It changed the league completely. Rivalries began popping up, team affiliation became a big deal, and the league started getting a lot of social media activity.

The reason I mention this is because identity is crucial to competition. You can look at any major competitive arena and see it: Olympics, every major sports league, gaming leagues. So with that in mind, I'd discourage multi-teaming. If you want to really grow the concept of identity among teams, make people identify themselves as A team.

Seems a bit long to get a simple message across... Hopefully you guys get where I'm coming from.

And if 1 guy on the team wants to get a group going for a tournament mode his team isn't up for?

I agree though, making being on a team mean something, by restricting how membership works, is important. If teams were aimed at each game mode that they can compete in, so you can be on separate draft, limited, constructed, etc. teams. Any team would reserve their team name across all modes, and could then make a team for the other game modes with the same people. But if your team specializes in a few modes, and you want to moonlight on another, you still could.

Dakx
08-20-2013, 11:02 PM
Larger team play is fun and is a great idea to implement. Here's hoping they go through with it

Malicus
08-21-2013, 01:13 AM
I'd be against this.

About 7? years ago, I created a soccer league. Year after year the same players played with new teams coming in each year. A lot of the teams didn't have names or uniforms - they were referred to by the last name of the team's captain and they wore (mostly) matching shirts. Year four I made uniform shirts and a team name mandatory. The idea was to create a team identity - something people on the team can get behind, and something for other teams to recognize. It changed the league completely. Rivalries began popping up, team affiliation became a big deal, and the league started getting a lot of social media activity.

The reason I mention this is because identity is crucial to competition. You can look at any major competitive arena and see it: Olympics, every major sports league, gaming leagues. So with that in mind, I'd discourage multi-teaming. If you want to really grow the concept of identity among teams, make people identify themselves as A team.

Seems a bit long to get a simple message across... Hopefully you guys get where I'm coming from.

I don't completely disagree with your sentiments but the ideas which really seem to have had the effect are requiring names and uniforms not mandating that if you play in my league you cannot play in that other league, I have known many soccer players who play indoor/outdoor/summer soccer for different teams this doesn't diminish their commitment to any of the teams.

I would be against having multiple teams within the same league and also some ways to discourage changes within the team but not prevent changes since sometimes a player has to drop. The point seems somewhat moot though since Cory appears to be favouring one size.

keldrin
08-21-2013, 03:15 AM
Teams being separate from guilds is a good thing. Being in a guild shouldn't be a requirement for competitive play.
Plus, it would make the top guilds very competitive to get into. This increases your chances of being able to get into a decent team.

RobHaven
08-21-2013, 05:21 AM
I don't completely disagree with your sentiments but the ideas which really seem to have had the effect are requiring names and uniforms not mandating that if you play in my league you cannot play in that other league, I have known many soccer players who play indoor/outdoor/summer soccer for different teams this doesn't diminish their commitment to any of the teams.

You're absolutely right. Before I got sick, I would play on 4 to 6 teams at a time year round. There wasn't a team I didn't identify with or play my hardest for.

I guess I'm not really sure what it is I take issue with, then. So until I think of a better way to discover and articulate my issues, it'll have to stand at "I don't like it because I don't like it."

zadies
08-21-2013, 07:40 AM
Making it possible to form a team outside of your guild is well and good but everyone here is making an assumption that the top tier guilds aren't going to make it a self imposed rule of if your not representing our guild you should find teammates elsewhere. Sure you can pug raids in wow but the top ranked world firsts are done all one guild.

Malicus
08-21-2013, 01:28 PM
Making it possible to form a team outside of your guild is well and good but everyone here is making an assumption that the top tier guilds aren't going to make it a self imposed rule of if your not representing our guild you should find teammates elsewhere. Sure you can pug raids in wow but the top ranked world firsts are done all one guild.

Not quite sure what you mean since you are saying if you form a team outside the guild then you should look for members outside the guild which is what you already did. i will assume you mean that you would not be welcome in the guild, but I honestly foresee your team being more important than your guild in many ways and forcing guild membership can only have a detrimental effect on the perceived strength of your team and possibly alienate guild members so I do not really see it playing out in the negative way you suggest.

Certainly many guilded people will prefer to form teams within their guilds but I do not see it being imposed. Also I would liken this more to arena than raiding and most of the Arena players I knew in wow were quite happy to take the best partners they could find not the best partners they could find in guild.

Poolboy
08-21-2013, 02:10 PM
Definitely need a seperation, limiting your pool of members to players in your guild is terrible idea. As a more competitive player in other games, I have played in many teams with friends without and even with players from different servers etc to find teammates with playstyles similar or even differing. As a nee comer to TCG I can imagine deck personalization can greatly affect how you play with or against others. Playing this way not only helps expand you as a player but in many cases heled build friendships and new guildies anyways

zadies
08-21-2013, 06:31 PM
Not saying it isn't a good idea but allowing it doesn't mean it won't be enforced some other way so don't be surprised. Opening it up is well and good but that doesn't mean ppl won't make it an issue.

funktion
08-21-2013, 06:52 PM
Not saying it isn't a good idea but allowing it doesn't mean it won't be enforced some other way so don't be surprised. Opening it up is well and good but that doesn't mean ppl won't make it an issue.

People have potential to get their feeling hurt over just about anything... personally I'm not concerned at all about the situation you mentioned.