27 Replies Latest reply: Aug 25, 2013 7:12 AM by Zombie-Hell-Fire RSS

If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?

USarmyvet

I've seen a lot of threads talking about a zombie clan or elite group of players and all sorts of different criteria about who/how. Going back to BO1, I also considered alternatives to the matchmaking lobbies.

 

From all the different threads I've seen.....and all the different ideas, they all seem to fall apart at a point (number of people) that exceeds the ability of a small number of people being able to manage the quality of the group. Meaning....at some point, the group becomes no more reliable than random lobbies or it's too small a group to quickly find a game.

 

Since everyone knows the in game ranking system is easily gamed and actually promotes a goal counter to good team play, how would you "test" or validate a person as a quality team player?

 

As I've said before, the stats that are important to zombies are not in the game stats. For example, ability to hero out a round solo after 3 players die out might be a good stat....call it game saves. Another stat that might be important is quits. The best criteria would be one you probably couldn't condense to a stat.....such as game delays, team play, not talking, raging, etc.

 

Since the stats and ranks can be manipulated.....and assuming you were the one forming a group and looking for some other qualifying criteria, what would be your "test"?. How would you assemble a large (hundreds) group and be reasonably sure they are worthy without a huge time investment by a few?

 

(I'll be away most of the day....won't be able to respond till later)

  • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
    Blazinhydro

    Charge them.. Lol

     

    All donations go to charity, if your serious a few dollars or pounds wouldn't be missed, and while it wouldn't guarantee a skill level it would show great willing from the offset :)

     

    Silly idea probably. But I'd pay 5 pounds to a good cause, knowing I'd be part of a community who feels the same :D

    • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
      USarmyvet

      Blazinhydro wrote:

       

      Charge them.. Lol

       

      All donations go to charity, if your serious a few dollars or pounds wouldn't be missed, and while it wouldn't guarantee a skill level it would show great willing from the offset :)

       

      Silly idea probably. But I'd pay 5 pounds to a good cause, knowing I'd be part of a community who feels the same :D

       

      Didn't Activision try that?

       

      I don't think that solves the problem.....you want a pool of players that don't quit, are team oriented and not obnoxious...skill would be below those IMHO. Aholes have money too

  • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
    JD-ILLusiONS-JD

    Throw them into a 4 player match on nacht der untoten and see if they can work as a team

  • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
    whots_his_face

    Let anyone join.  Have a voting system whereby players are encouraged to sign in to the website and rate their team mates post match.

     

    It's far from perfect, but it avoids the possible and probable hierarchy that most alternatives would bring.  Maybe as Blazin suggests, charge a small £5 for charity donation just to screen out the idiots that would just want to troll with a 24hr live pass.

    • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
      USarmyvet

      whots_his_face wrote:

       

      Let anyone join.  Have a voting system whereby players are encouraged to sign in to the website and rate their team mates post match.

       

      It's far from perfect, but it avoids the possible and probable hierarchy that most alternatives would bring.  Maybe as Blazin suggests, charge a small £5 for charity donation just to screen out the idiots that would just want to troll with a 24hr live pass.

       

      That might be possible if there were "tiers"....otherwise it would morph into the same issues the match making lobbies have.

       

      What good is a "clan/group" if all you do is get the same frustrations lobby hunting offers?

       

      "Let anyone join" drives up the labor of keeping a well pruned group of good people.

      • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
        whots_his_face

        Not really.  You act like a ****, you're out, you lost you're fiver.  Surely everybody deserves a chance?  Isn't that the right thing to do? 

         

        I fail to see where the labour is in signing into a web site for 10 seconds post match.  It would only be labour intensive if there was a power structure created whereby select individuals did the judging (And yes - the difference is HUGE!)

         

        If say after your 5th game your score is visible, wouldn't this be reliable?  Where was the effort? Their score was merely awarded by all the people who had played those games with them.  Seems a beautiful thing to me

        • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
          USarmyvet

          whots_his_face wrote:

           

          Not really.  You act like a ****, you're out, you lost you're fiver.  Surely everybody deserves a chance?  Isn't that the right thing to do? 

           

          I fail to see where the labour is in signing into a web site for 10 seconds post match.  It would only be labour intensive if there was a power structure created whereby select individuals did the judging (And yes - the difference is HUGE!)

           

          If say after your 5th game your score is visible, wouldn't this be reliable?  Where was the effort? Their score was merely awarded by all the people who had played those games with them.  Seems a beautiful thing to me

           

          The labor would be keeping dheads from infiltrating the group and polluting it.....much like we see here every afternoon from 3-5 pm.

          • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
            whots_his_face

            Looks at time.. lol.  I can't help but think the admission price would prevent most, coupled with the fear of being banned and losing it.

             

            I see a site with a list of people who are online.  Next to their tag they have a score. Next to the probationary players(less than 5 games) is a relevant badge.  People have the opportunity to decide wether to give that player a chance, or play with a rated player.

             

            I think the abuse would be very small, and a price worth paying.

            • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
              USarmyvet

              whots_his_face wrote:

               

              I see a site with a list of people who are online.  Next to their tag they have a score. Next to the probationary players(less than 5 games) is a relevant badge.  People have the opportunity to decide wether to give that player a chance, or play with a rated player.

              The PHP code to acomplish this would be a lot more difficult than the description of it....and still does not address how you stop a player (or group) from boosting themselves to shotguns errr....I mean 5 star ratings.

               

               

              whots_his_face wrote:

               

              I think the abuse would be very small, and a price worth paying.

              As far as I know....I'm the only person that has spent real money and real time outside of xbox and forum discussions to address this. If it was doomed from birth to be a smaller internet version of the xbox "submit player review" + "shotgun/skulls".....it's not worth doing IMHO.

  • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
    SevenThug

    I can play a 10 round game with 3 other people and get a pretty good feeling of who's gonna do good. Granted, some people screw up early on (myself included).

     

    So you want to look at it in the context of their stats. But there's nothing like playing a game with people.

     

    Alternatively-watch their recent matches at 6x speed. This could take out a large amount of the time spent (slowing down to watch anything you find interesting). See how they play, how they react when a teammate goes down, what they do when things go unfavorably, can them get themselves out of a sticky situation by thinking outside the box...etc.

  • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
    Sabercrest

    Would be very time consuming for larger groups, but playing a game with them is pretty much the best way to go. If they do well then allow them into the 'group'. To be honest though, a group of "hundreds" wouldn't be very managable anyway, especially as you can't even have more than 100 on your friends list.

    • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
      USarmyvet

      Sabercrest wrote:

      To be honest though, a group of "hundreds" wouldn't be very managable anyway, especially as you can't even have more than 100 on your friends list.

      Thus the need for a work around....

       

      I agree with you on manageability....this is why I'm asking for suggestions. I think I have an interesting work around for that as well that would add some fun for people that are very active in the community.

  • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
    Psychobilly_X

    I'd throw them on Nacht der Untoten and see how good they can work as a team!

  • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
    shadowwalker831

    The criteria you have, while valid when wondering if someone has skills in zombies, is not always the most important criteria while selecting teammates. For example, I NEVER play with people based off of skill. You mentioned being able to clutch a round after everybody else dies off. I don't care if you are a two-bone who can't stay up for a whole round on your own, or a shotgun who never goes down, I would befriend both and play with both under certain situations. Obviously you wouldn't ask the two bone in on a high round game, but I would still love playing with them for fun and the challenge of having someone to look out for.

     

    Really there are two categories of games for me, high rounds and game for fun. There are different players I would take into each game and some that I would put in both, but the MAIN factor for me is just being able to get along with someone. If I can't have fun in a game with you, it really doesn't matter how good or bad you are. I'll just say that for the most part I like playing with people that I get to revive because it makes it more of a challenge for me and puts something on the line in the game.

     

     

    My big things that will get you kicked off my friendslist(I don't test people but do hold my friends to a standard):

     

    -Raging out of a game over something stupid or for no reason. Everybody has bad days so I can understand if you go into a game and get a bunch of downs early and lose motivation to play and want to quit. Most people are not secure in their rank like I am so I understand their hesitance to take so many downs in a game and I would rather them quit out if they are stressing and not having fun. Blaming it on the game, other people, raging, and quitting without warning, however, is unacceptable.

     

    -Trolling. It is fun sometimes but when done maliciously or with no provocation it will get you more raging than laughing. I do like to have troll games and mess with friends but this should always be agreed upon as far as I'm concerned, unless someone deserves it(we've all been in these games). I would never troll someone who didn't deserve or ask for it.

     

    -Glitching. Number one thing to get you kicked off faster than anything. I do ALL of my stuff legit, so for someone to put in less work and dedication CHEATING to attain even half the prestige it is a kick in the face to anybody who did it legitimately. This is half the reason why public lobbies are so screwed because there are glitchers EVERYWHERE.

     

    -Talking crap. I barely ever have to deal with this because most of the people I meet on here or end up getting added are really cool people, but you'll see it all the time if you go in public lobbies. There's no point in playing with someone who is obviously just there to get attention and nothing more.

     

    -Doing completely stupid things. I know this counteracts what I said about playing with lower level players, but those players have to at least be willing to listen, learn, and understand how to play the game in a more mindful manner. Buried would be a good map to give examples on because people will do some of the most retarded stuff on there. Hitting the box out of spawn for fire sales. Opening EVERY DOOR for no reason. Drawing chalk in a stupid place on a serious game or acting like a baby over it. Starting the ghost round without warning people(although this is a fun way to troll friends!). Building a useless buildable in a prime spot(MotD shield on the catwalk or dock is another PERFECT example of this). Stealing weapons/items. Turning traps on people. Setting traps up in a stupid way. Spamming the box for a WW and then not helping the team when they need your help(person with the paralyzer isn't moving when a revive is needed even though they can fly faster to people). None of these things are really enough to make me hate or not play with a person right off rip, but usually these are the characteristics of a greedy, incompetent, or ignorant player and violating a couple of these in a game will tip me off as to what kind of player you really are. Not that the game can't be played out and enjoyed even, but not the kind of person you would want on your friendslist.

     

    -Running into other peoples areas/Kill stealing : This one is kind of a sensitive subject as in the heat of a game it can be easy to accidentally do, but can also cause a lot of grief for other players. Kill stealing is usually only an issue in public lobbies as most people seem to respect eachothers space and understand that there are different training/camping areas for different people, however nothing will get on my nerves faster than running in my area with M&S and shooting all my zombies out from under me. Or running a train into my area so you can hit the box. With communication, moving around the map and being mindful of other players is easy and can be done so efficiently that you can fit ALL players into one area and have them feeding off one ammo source(even running trains) so there is no excuse for someone to just mindlessly run in an area that isn't there's for ammo or something. Yet again, I expect it from public lobbies, so I won't rage and I'll just fight them back turning it into an essential grief match, but if you are on my friends list I will probably just say something about it.

     

     

    All in all, I can be pretty low key when it comes to the people I play with, but these are some of the factors that weigh heavily in my mind when I rate someone as a teammate, and consider playing with them in the future. Hope this helps somewhat...lol

  • Re: If you were forming a group of good players (clan?) How would you test?
    Bloody_Bup

    1. know what they are doing are learn fast

    2. able too handle there own ( being in places alone without going down)

    3. can have pretty good convo

     

    my gtag: BLOODY BUP

     

    my cooliest homie i play with is from this fourm

    Gtag: ElectriicZoo real cool guy