Ladder, Tournaments, and Clans

BlueWaldo · December 5, 2002, 19:47

I brought this up before in these forums. I thought I might get a better response now that the game is out.

I am thinking of launching a new multiplayer ladder, tournaments, and clans site similar to GameLeague. After looking into it I have discovered the only way I can really do this so that the site doesn't lose money is to charge for membership. The system would work were you can join and play for a while on the ladder and do basic things, but to get to the meat of the system you would have to buy membership (I have been thinging something like $10 per year). What I need to now is: would any of you join. Please give me your feedback.

Thanks

FNBrown · December 5, 2002, 20:19

I don't necessarily think leagues are stupid, I just don't have the time or inclination to competitively participate in them.

statusperfect · December 6, 2002, 05:52

No way I'm going to pay!!!

I'm quite sure that there will be free leagues around, these leagues will attract more players and therefore be more fun than pay-leagues.

Boracks · December 6, 2002, 10:43

The advantage of a pay-for-membership league is that you are less likely to get cheaters/hackers and people who drop out at the earliest notion they might not win.

The disadvantage, of course, is that you have to pay.

Questions that arise are what type of multiplayer (turn type?, PBEM OK?) and are you ready to police disputes?

Since there was no option for "I'd be interested if I knew more", I haven't voted yet.

BlueWaldo · December 7, 2002, 02:23

It would be very similar to GameLeague. We would suport all game types, but when you report game you can choose what type of game you played so people will know when they look at the results. We will do the best we can policing results. People will have to relize that in some situation it is impossible to tell/prove if someone has cheated.

Like Boracks said pay leagues do have a lot of benifits. They can offer a lot better serivce, have better member, and other things. $10 a year really isn't muchfor a member to pay, but it can go a long way it keeping the league alive and running well.

WarningU2 · December 8, 2002, 01:22

I started http://www.myleague.com/civ3ptw/ but few have joined. It's free btw.

There is also another league at www.the-battlefield.com with about as many members.

I thought more people would join the civ3ptw league I started to find worthwhile game players but that's not the case so far.

I'd still consider paying a yearly fee if the caliber of players was better and a good competition developed among regulars. I miss the old civleague for MPG edition. I've noticed that the gamespy chat deteriorates into name calling many times.

BlueWaldo · December 9, 2002, 00:17

I'm thinking that there will need to be at least 50 people in the league to make it worth while. I wonder if I can get markg to post something in the news so more people will come here and give us their opinions, and we can see if there is enough intrest.

WarningU2 · December 9, 2002, 00:27

Hey I convinced 5 people to join up today but I'm feeling like a used car salesman .

Chuckles · December 9, 2002, 01:38

HAHA.

I think 10/year would be fine. My play is spikey so a monthly fee would not be cool.

BlueWaldo · December 9, 2002, 02:21

I know it kinda seams silly, but it is a lot of work if no one is going to join the league.

Nubclear · December 9, 2002, 03:17

Pay for a league? Definately not. For any game. That would (no offense) simply be stupid considering the amount of free leagues that will probably be avaible.

BlueWaldo · December 10, 2002, 16:25

Well, as it was said above, a pay league could provide a much better service.

Franses · December 10, 2002, 18:46

A pay league means some of the (nice to play) players will not be there (see above). Although it sounds like a good idea at first I have the feeling that we should not divide the few people that are playing MP over different leagues. It is hard enough to find people as it is. I have been searching for someone to play for several days now and did not yet succeed outside gamespy.

Zero · December 11, 2002, 01:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Boracks
The advantage of a pay-for-membership league is that you are less likely to get cheaters/hackers and people who drop out at the earliest notion they might not win.

The disadvantage, of course, is that you have to pay.

Questions that arise are what type of multiplayer (turn type?, PBEM OK?) and are you ready to police disputes?

Since there was no option for "I'd be interested if I knew more", I haven't voted yet.

no way, pay for membership needs some kind of a prize to attract players to actually pay for league. That would attract MORE cheaters.

We should hold a free league/ competitions. Apolytonians are generally good people (i think). Most demogamers have good etiquette. It might be fun to settle once and for all just who is the greatest Civ player in this site.

BlueWaldo · December 11, 2002, 17:19

The way I see it, no one is in a league now. So, this wouldn't divide. If you think the league wouldn't have cheaters then you must not have been here for Civ2. I agree, we need to hold a tournament. But not just one for Apolyton. One for all civers.