Poll: Do you think maximum playernumber in teamgames should be lower?

Polls do not seem to have a date attached, so by date from this thread we will in 125 years be able to tell when the poll took place :)

Also the poll is anonymous but if you want others to know what you clicked, you can write it here.

KNORKER YOU HONK!!
Poll 101: #1 Do not add OR options to a poll.

Where are the 7v7, 8v8, 9v9, 10v10, 11v11 options?

quote: a limit larger than 6v6 would have none of the (hopefully positive) effects of smaller teamsizes.

That's wrong. 8v8 has better FPS and less clusterfuck than a 12v12 (current max I think).

I want a max somewhere around 8v8 to 10v9 (split at 20), because 6v6 is not enough for a room split - splitting into 3v3 or 3v4 means rooms die too fast. 4v4s and above seem pretty stable.

Oh I almost forgot that: "higher" can mean "higher than current" or "higher than 6v6".
Poll so bad! KNORKERER!

Poll was up for 5 days, stopped displaying it now.
Final result was:

29% of clickers wanted to limit gamesize in same way, 71% did not.

My interpretation:
Maybe the poll was really as badly worded as Skasi wrote, but joking aside I doubt that.


To be honest I am superdisappointed.
The devs I could already not understand since years, because on one hand they careully tweak the game in so many aspects. And then on the other hand when it comes to something as fundamental as "How many players are in a game", they just seem not to care.

But poll is of course mostly for players.
One opinion often read in forum was "But every once in a while 12v12 is fun!"
I hoped more players would be able to turn down those "once in a while" games.
Maybe some players honestly enjoy these games, but seeing the constant complaints about bad balance, lag, kicking, trolling I somewhat doubt it.
There was the hope that even if some players enjoy such games, they would see what it ultimately does to zK.

Do not talk about how smaller games can be played by pm'ing players and waiting in lobby, I know these things.
That only really works for 'veteran' players, if you ever want to see zK grow it is no solution.

Real growth, not "Hooray the teams have grown from 11v11 to 12v12" or "Horray, zK clusterfucks are larger than BA clusterfucks."
Or "Hooray, some guys who play spring since 5 years are playing a few 1v1 matches."
To me it is not understandable how people can see these things as sucess.
zK could be so much more, but not if one is content with having reached some medicore plateau.
It seems like admitting defeat.
The clusterfucks have won, all hail.

quote: You asked players two questions: 2) Should the game be split sooner?

No, the poll never asked that.
Split was never mentioned in poll.
The poll only asked if players want a lower maximum playernumber in teagames, how this was to be archived was not mentioned.

quote: Obviously most players say "no!" - they want to decide for themselves. This way they can play 3v3 or 10v10 whenever they want.

I already commentated on players wanting to play large games on "whenever they want."

quote: Why are you disappointed?

Because it seems players desperately cling onto the """"freedom""""" of, as you call it, "playing 10v10 whenever they want", without regard what this does to zK.
I hoped players would be willing to give up their short-term-fun of the large teamgames, for the greater good of the game so to speak.

Well if players read it like that then that would be fail.
Though that requires reading things into a single-line questions, that are not there...
Would be interessting to know if more players understood it like that.

Tbh I thought that maximum player number meant the number at which the room splits. I still voted to have a max of 6v6 but still it's possible to read this as "when does the room split?"

Maybe in future polls the question should always be a link to a thread, where the question is explained in more detail than one line allows.
But really I did not expect that memories of room splitting fails are so deep in minds ;)

quote: ZK can offer and actually handle big games,

Define "handle:"
Performance wise it can certainly NOT handle such games.
See various complaint or hardware survey threads for proof.
Imo it is not normal or desirable that basically every large game has players dropping out.
("all players must buy better hardware" is not a solution, have to work with what is there)

Gameplay wise zK can NOT handle such games.
The gameplay totally degrades:
Most of the carefully thought out and balanced stuff just goes out of the window.
Maybe it needs to degrade even more, until it is more widely seen as problem.

Community wise zK can NOT handle such games.
All players are in one game has so large skill differences that it constantly causes rage/trolling.
More imporantly it makes growth impossible:
Like this all the talk about PR, steam greenlight is worth nothing.
All the trailers, videos, commentated games, etc become useless.

I do not feel like this needs more detailed explainations, there was so many threads over the years.
If someone disagrees, fine with me. If many disagree then no use to think of solutions because appearently the situation is not seen as problem.

quote: straight up banning them (and everything close to them, if you limit at 6v6) will take away from the game.

Sometimes taking away something is nessecary, to make room for other things.
I partly understand the attraction of large games, too.
But with all their negative sides, why would one not happily trade them for more games at the same time, less lag, better gameplay, more new players, better balance,...
If SO many players feel clusterfucks are SO important to zK, then how is that not disappointing?

STOP BLAMING POPULARITY OF SUBGAME A FOR LACK OF POPULARITY OF SUBGAME B. Improve the attractiveness of B if you want more people to like it. Or improve its visibility of it to nubs. Don't try to ruin other people's fun just so you can have yours.

Edit - Ok perhaps this is a bit strongly worded but I feel this argument has gone ignored again and again.

Well how about limiting to 6vs6 (7vs6, split at 7vs7), and and changing ''small room'' to ''large room'' with no limits just for a week? We'll see whitch one would be played more often.

BTW there is an old poll, which says:


OFFTOP

quote: attracts all the raging trolls to one place

TheSponge , you fail again.
Since when troll = rager? Stop considering it as one.