Think Tank for SOCOM 4

[Pillorian]

You are incorrect, Last. Every single staff member does not have skype. Your idea calls for UF to advocate using a system that has been frowned upon for as long as it's been around. A simple call or not, UF would be telling people(CR's) to use Skype, and that shouldn't happen. Either Skype is allowed or it's not, there shouldn't be a grey area.

 

I think you make a good point here. Being that this is something ANY gaming website wants to keep out of its leagues and clans makes something such as Skype difficult to utilize. However it is clear that we need some sort of communication prior to the start of these matches to cause less headache in the end and make the matches go more smoothly. We can only hope that Zipper will include a pregame lobby system like we have seen in the past in upcoming patches, but we should not hold our breath. At this point you have to have the mindset that it will never be there. Skype is an option, whether good or bad. But so was sending the opposing CR a list of the players playing in a PSN message. Apparently neither of those are attractive options according to the responses provided.

 

The bottom line is this. Everyone is going to have to adjust until (if we ever get it) Zippers installs pregame lobbies. Being a CR is no easy meat, they will likely bear even more responsibility during this but that is their job. Whether it is spelling out the names correctly or keeping their teams cool if there is an issue during the war, everyone is going to have to give up a little. In no way am I condoning the use of Skype or any other means of outside communication during a war. Not only is that cheating, people who use it are pathetic and don't belong here. However, it is clear that there needs to be some form of communication between CRs so both sides are happy and ready to play. Perhaps sharing phone #s is a more attractive option for this. Or having each team post a overall war thread with rosters of players playing (before war starts) then results and any conflicts that arose (after war completes). Or the UF flash chat that was used for war meetings during UFIC. There are many attractive options, and many more than any one person can think of. However, just discounting ideas provided based on small petty issues is not going to resolve this problem. We need the collective effort of everyone here to analyze each option provided and perhaps come up with creative methods, variation, or new ideas that will make everyone happy.

 

A think tank is for ideas, even if they are good or bad; not opinions. Let's try keeping this thread on this track, so we can get the most out it, from this post forward.

[Pillorian]

Does anyone have any idea how the cross-game chat system will work when Sony implements it?

 

Perhaps CRs could talk to each other before a war using that?

[BigMoneyNacku]

Small, petty issues? Nowhere did I see anything of that nature. You are correct in stating there are many different options. UF endorsing Skype is not one of them, and that is why I posted.

 

I do think a combination of Attitude's post and the UF chat room, could be a workable option.

[Bandit99]

How about we go back to old school and the way I always thought it should of stayed. Eligible players are the responsibility of their own team. Each team is responsible for checking their own roster. If they play with a players whose name is incorrect, they forfeit the war.

 

If an opposing team finds that their opponent has in fact used illegal players, they file a complaint and submit proof, end of story. I have never liked the fact they we have placed this burden on the opposing team to check my roster. A large majority of all issues involving wars starts before the war is even started. One team calls another team out on an illegal player. Then they go back and forth with, well he has played in other wars and no one said something and that kind of BS. That is no way to start a war, that is why I say we go back to old school.

 

Each team is responsible for bringing in legal players. Your inability to do so falls directly on your shoulders. We have in the past used a wide variety of competition rules to compare to ours or use as a guideline for ours. Why should this be any different. Play legal players falls on the team in which they play for. If at a later time a team has been shown to use illegal players, they are forced to vacate or forfeit those wins.

 

That would solve all the issues about rosters.

[BigMoneyNacku]

How about we go back to old school and the way I always thought it should of stayed. Eligible players are the responsibility of their own team. Each team is responsible for checking their own roster. If they play with a players whose name is incorrect, they forfeit the war.

 

If an opposing team finds that their opponent has in fact used illegal players, they file a complaint and submit proof, end of story. I have never liked the fact they we have placed this burden on the opposing team to check my roster. A large majority of all issues involving wars starts before the war is even started. One team calls another team out on an illegal player. Then they go back and forth with, well he has played in other wars and no one said something and that kind of BS. That is no way to start a war, that is why I say we go back to old school.

 

Each team is responsible for bringing in legal players. Your inability to do so falls directly on your shoulders. We have in the past used a wide variety of competition rules to compare to ours or use as a guideline for ours. Why should this be any different. Play legal players falls on the team in which they play for. If at a later time a team has been shown to use illegal players, they are forced to vacate or forfeit those wins.

 

That would solve all the issues about rosters.

 

Best suggestion I've heard yet.

[IRISH BULL]

How about we go back to old school and the way I always thought it should of stayed. Eligible players are the responsibility of their own team. Each team is responsible for checking their own roster. If they play with a players whose name is incorrect, they forfeit the war.

 

If an opposing team finds that their opponent has in fact used illegal players, they file a complaint and submit proof, end of story. I have never liked the fact they we have placed this burden on the opposing team to check my roster. A large majority of all issues involving wars starts before the war is even started. One team calls another team out on an illegal player. Then they go back and forth with, well he has played in other wars and no one said something and that kind of BS. That is no way to start a war, that is why I say we go back to old school.

 

Each team is responsible for bringing in legal players. Your inability to do so falls directly on your shoulders. We have in the past used a wide variety of competition rules to compare to ours or use as a guideline for ours. Why should this be any different. Play legal players falls on the team in which they play for. If at a later time a team has been shown to use illegal players, they are forced to vacate or forfeit those wins.

 

That would solve all the issues about rosters.

 

Yea, I like that also. But it contradicts Rule #3, section D:

 

D: All clans are to check out EACH OTHERS rosters before the start of the war. If you notice someone incorrect on the roster of the opponent, you will tell them immediately in the lobby, so that the offending clan has the opportunity to bring in a legal player WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT FOR THE START OF THE WAR, or play the man down in the war. IF both clans green up without having to call on any ineligibility issues, all players are considered LEGIT and, even if there is a case of ineligibility found DURING the war, it is too late, and the war goes on AS IS. This will effectively eliminate any practices of "allowing" a clan to green up knowing they already have an ineligible player on their team in order to get a free win.

 

 

So now if a clan is found after the fact to have an illegal player, no matter the outcome, they forfeit the war. There really is not any time to "allow" a clan to green up. The burden is on them now.

[Bandit99]

Yes at this time it does, however if this is the way we go, that rule would be amended.

[Bandit99]

The new rule would read something like this.

 

D: Each and every team is solely responsible for the gunners they bring into battle. All gunners must be on your roster and their names must match the submitted name on your roster exactly. This includes all symbols, letters, numbers as well as Capitalizations. Please note this is different than recent tourneys as we have not required the capitalizations to be exact, however going forward we are. Bandit99 and bandit99 will not be seen as a match as the "B and b are different".

 

In the event your team brings in a player whose name is not "EXACT" in every way, and your opponent submits proof that this occurred, your team will forfeit that war. There is no debating this. This rule is simple and spelled out and has no "GRAY AREAS". Names must match exactly in every sense of the word "EXACT", including upper and lowercase letter usage. There shall be no ill will spoken to your opponent for filing a complaint over an illegal player as it is your teams responsibility to submit a legal roster, no one else's.

 

Any team who violates this rules and shows ill will toward their opponent for calling them on this rule, will be subject to penalties. Do not project your anger for your teams shortcomings upon your opponent.

 

If you feel an opponent has used a player whose name is different on their roster, you may only file a complaint if you have clear and concise photographic or video evidence. Do not make a claim without that evidence in hand and attached to your complaint.

[Guest Attitude]

The new rule would read something like this.

 

D: Each and every team is solely responsible for the gunners they bring into battle. All gunners must be on your roster and their names must match the submitted name on your roster exactly. This includes all symbols, letters, numbers as well as Capitalizations. Please note this is different than recent tourneys as we have not required the capitalizations to be exact, however going forward we are. Bandit99 and bandit99 will not be seen as a match as the "B and b are different".

 

In the event your team brings in a player whose name is not "EXACT" in every way, and your opponent submits proof that this occurred, your team will forfeit that war. There is no debating this. This rule is simple and spelled out and has no "GRAY AREAS". Names must match exactly in every sense of the word "EXACT", including upper and lowercase letter usage. There shall be no ill will spoken to your opponent for filing a complaint over an illegal player as it is your teams responsibility to submit a legal roster, no one else's.

 

Any team who violates this rules and shows ill will toward their opponent for calling them on this rule, will be subject to penalties. Do not project your anger for your teams shortcomings upon your opponent.

 

If you feel an opponent has used a player whose name is different on their roster, you may only file a complaint if you have clear and concise photographic or video evidence. Do not make a claim without that evidence in hand and attached to your complaint.

Perfect. That even takes the 20 second lobby timeframe out of the equation. You can snap a picture or video whenever it's noticed in game. Play the game out if you wish, then submit.

 

Now if thats settled what shall we do if we can't get our players on the same side in time? Keep re-starting the match until we get it right?

[Bandit99]

Just to clarify, what I posted above is just a suggestion. All of us here are currently just running ideas about this back and forth. Any changes to the rules or how to handle this and other situations will come from the Tournament Admins.

[Pillorian]

I agree that is the responsibility of the clan to play players (with exact PSNs) on their roster. Honestly, I never had any issues with ineligible players on the opposing team. Bandit's idea is a good one and will work flawlessly. Either play players on your roster with exact spelling/case/special characters/etc, or you forfeit.

 

So what we need for the pregame lobby is which clan will take which side. Do we want to allow clans to choose which side they play on, or should that be predetermined? EX: Home is Insurgents, Away is Spec Ops. If clans will be choosing, we will need some way for reps to indicate which side they will be taking so the respective CRs can forward it to their players.

 

PSN message? PSN chat? UF flash chat? IM? What is the easiest and most efficient? What other options are there?

[Guest Attitude]

Just to clarify, what I posted above is just a suggestion. All of us here are currently just running ideas about this back and forth. Any changes to the rules or how to handle this and other situations will come from the Tournament Admins.

Understood completly, I was just saying how it is a well written solution.

[Guest Attitude]

Well, IMO, knowing prior to the match will give everyone just that little extra time to get on the proper sides before the room launches on it's own. Also, knowing a side in advance really won't do any harm if we choose to let the game auto pick our map for us. You can know your selected side a month in advance, but if you don't know which map your playing then knowing your side won't matter.

[Pillorian]

Wait so are we using the in-game ladder for matches or custom rooms?

[Pillorian]

If I recall, in the in-game ladder whoever sends out the challenge will always be SEALs. Whoever accepts a challenge will be Insurgents.

 

I never was in one, but in custom matches you can switch sides, right?

[Peebrain]

The new rule would read something like this.

 

D: Each and every team is solely responsible for the gunners they bring into battle. All gunners must be on your roster and their names must match the submitted name on your roster exactly. This includes all symbols, letters, numbers as well as Capitalizations. Please note this is different than recent tourneys as we have not required the capitalizations to be exact, however going forward we are. Bandit99 and bandit99 will not be seen as a match as the "B and b are different".

 

In the event your team brings in a player whose name is not "EXACT" in every way, and your opponent submits proof that this occurred, your team will forfeit that war. There is no debating this. This rule is simple and spelled out and has no "GRAY AREAS". Names must match exactly in every sense of the word "EXACT", including upper and lowercase letter usage. There shall be no ill will spoken to your opponent for filing a complaint over an illegal player as it is your teams responsibility to submit a legal roster, no one else's.

 

Any team who violates this rules and shows ill will toward their opponent for calling them on this rule, will be subject to penalties. Do not project your anger for your teams shortcomings upon your opponent.

 

If you feel an opponent has used a player whose name is different on their roster, you may only file a complaint if you have clear and concise photographic or video evidence. Do not make a claim without that evidence in hand and attached to your complaint.

 

 

I agree that each player should be the responsibility of their own clan. What I don't like about this is that it will be hard to prove and require an outside instrument whether it be a camera or camcorder. Not everyone is going to have one handy, and I feel that trying to remember the way everyone spells their names and stuff will take away from the match. Plus, almost every clan that has been caught with an illegal player in the past puts up a fuss and with socom it will be harder to prove.

[BigMoneyNacku]

Everyone has a cell phone, PB. It should be easy to get a snap of the players in the room. You are correct in alot of clans making a fuss in the past. I don't think we will ever get past that. Most of the time, the CR or leader is mad they made a mistake, and instead of owning up to it, they lash out at whomever they can. I don't think this new version of Socom will change that, but maybe if the new rule is adopted, it will eliminate the grey area we've had to deal with in the past.

[Peebrain]

People do have cell phones but not everyone has a good camera on their phone, or they can't get to their phone at that moment, or their phone will be dead, etc... The list goes on. If that becomes the rule I'll have to deal with it, but I'm just not comfortable having to use something outside of the PS to verify this. I know that the fussing will never stop, but with this way the match will have already been played and completed before the infraction could even be brought up which will cause more fuss and steam roll... I could just be playing devil's advocate, but someones gotta do it.

 

 

Completely unrelated note... Am I tagged to have the Endurance add on my posts cuz it's on every one of mine.

Edited May 3, 2011 by Peebrain

[Pillorian]

Photographic evidence of incorrect rosters or cheating/glitching has been an acceptable standard for as long as competitive gaming has been around. It would be great if everyone had the ability to record video. It is always a good idea to have someone with that capability in your clan. The theater mode in Black Ops was a great feature for competitive gaming. It is too bad S4 and other games don't have that feature. My motto is be prepared for anything, have your cameras and video recorders on at all times.

[shane]

Completely unrelated note... Am I tagged to have the Endurance add on my posts cuz it's on every one of mine.

 

 

Yess...... Noooo

 

lol actually it will be on teh first and last posts... so when you reply it will show up on your post until someone else replies.

[Peebrain]

Yess...... Noooo

 

lol actually it will be on teh first and last posts... so when you reply it will show up on your post until someone else replies.

 

Haha ya I can see that now. I think I was suffering from momentary retardation that day.

 

(To save those jokers some time I'll do it for you.)

 

But Pee, I don't think that retardation is momentary. hahahaha... ok movin on.

 

Photographic evidence of incorrect rosters or cheating/glitching has been an acceptable standard for as long as competitive gaming has been around. It would be great if everyone had the ability to record video. It is always a good idea to have someone with that capability in your clan. The theater mode in Black Ops was a great feature for competitive gaming. It is too bad S4 and other games don't have that feature. My motto is be prepared for anything, have your cameras and video recorders on at all times.

 

It is great evidence of foul play, the only problem is that UF has that rule about once a match has started everyone is legal. This is a good rule because 9/10 times it will be a true accident and the clan isn't being shaddy. Some clans have the ability to win being down a player and it would be unfair if it was an accident and they lost outright as opposed to playing a player down. However it will be impossible to make a rule until we see the changes zipper has made so I guess we just need to wait and see. Hopefully the changes are good, so we don't need to change the rules.

[Rockman35]

Will we ever get back on Socom 4???? PSN down over 2 weeks!!! WTF SONY!!!!

[Guest Attitude]

I guess this thread served it's point. We were all aware that there were major issues prohibiting our clan to clan wars (not to mention just getting in a room with your buddies). We couldn't come up with workable solutions needed to fix Zippers lack of community support that was provided in this game. Hence, Endurance has now been delayed indefinatly until the fixes come. If they come.

 

Come on Zipper, I'm still rooting for you to show me why Slant Six is not or should not be producing a better SOCOM game then you. Give us the community support we want.....and need!

[bloodbath09]

I am actually quite disappointed in Zippers lack of support since the games release. Its been almost a month and there hasn't been any indication when the next patch is coming. The one that is suppose to include a effing PARTY SYSTEM, and hopefully many other fixes this game needs.

 

gahhh!

 

Also when the heck are we going to get the SOCOM Pro perks. Jesus!

Edited May 20, 2011 by bloodbath09

[Peebrain]

Well blood, you can ask Jesus tomorrow at 6ish in the pm.