@Schwarzeis : TDM is also a possibility ofcourse , however the factor teamwork is not necessarily one of the key factors to win .

@Dysfunkshion and all others concerning class abuse : If they put so much effort in balancing a game , a team would be stupid to all go soldier or create a medic reviving train . The opposing team just uses the best "counter class" and voila , problem solved..I think

As for changing classes during a war or match : I'm pro . For example : you're having a team of let's say 5 and you have 2/3 players in your team that only play / focus on playing 1 specific class. Then you've got like 2 so called multiclassers , players capable of playing well in different classes. If one of the players has a bad day and wants to switch class because he's playing terribad , shouldn't you think it would be acceptable that 2 players can switch classes to help the team performance ?


Anyways , like I already mentioned 345678 times before , we first have to see how balanced the game really is :biggrin:

Let's make it simple: A team consisting of 5 people of one class shouldn't be able to win. Especially not operatives or engineers, since they can't hand out ammo, nor health. They might win on the defending side, but they would never complete all main objectives. All the other team has to do is focus one or two guys down (Medic, engi or soldier) to prevent them from completing the objective.

this topic seems a little premature. the game may not even support modding. there may not even be a server selection interface. certainly didn't look like one on the ps3 video's. not naysaying the concept but you may want to wait and see if it's even possible before worrying about rulesets

PC's will have server selection, and most likely, mod tools.

Gonna post a small update here (as for some reason I can't edit the OP because my internet is f'ing me over ) :

- There seems to be a lot of discussion about how the teams should be set up . I think we can all agree that we will have to put a maximum # on certain classes ,that's for sure.

- Something that crossed my mind aswell is a ready-up system for private servers (private matches on consoles , I assume ?) I think most of you who already played competition in one game or another have came across this system where you have to type ready or even just press a button to ready yourself .
I'm kind of hoping this feature will be included right from the start . If not , I think it won't be that hard to mod if and SDK of some sort is released ( I can get into contact with people who created this for ETpro and Wolfpro if needed )

- A specific question towards people who will be playing Brink on either ps3 or xbx360 : what are the major online competitions there ? Is it still MLG , game battles and consolegaming ? I lost track of the console competitions a while ago :$

let's start by putting a number on the amount of players in a team. How many reserve players you can have. How many maps that should be played. This all influences class setup.

good point.

Restricting people from switching their class midgame sounds very odd. It's the backbone of the objective-based core-gameplay of BRINK.

Also I think in competitive games it should be 5v5 or 6v6, so people have to focus on a maximum of two objectives/missions.

Alright since nobody has really made sense yet,

Class limitations should not be a problem in a 6v6 setting(max), with the amount of players needed to cap forward command posts(operative), Buff weapons(engi), Do obj(sold or eng or ops) there would be 3-4 remaining class options.
Even if they were to form a medic train with these 4 classes it would be negated by the good old (SD Classic) body gibbing, or tapping out a player waiting for revive. Not to mention 4 meds probably being a weak force to begin with, minimal attack buff decent health buff.
Allowing body-type switching mid-round would be essential and if not, only medium body type should be allowed. The reason being if one team decides to all go light and the other all goes med,heavy there would be a limit to their defense strategies based on the other teams "luck that they weren't all light too".

Allowing both teams the access to the exact same set of upgrades (to be decided when they are known).

Stopwatch AB BA over 2 maps should be best, depending on how many main objectives there are 1 point should be rewarded for each completed obj.

Need the hit indicator sounds from passed SD comp mods *dink dink dink*

Regarding the theory on an all operative class "[censored]", that's kind of laughable because if you've spent at least 20 minutes practicing you should have each player in a zone and communicating on a VOIP server, hence "disguises" are useless in comp and have been since ET.

No FPS in history will disallow you to switch class mid game.... especially one that prides itself on class switching without even a respawn, just a command center.

~~~To be comtinued

Support for competitive clan play is a must if a game wants to survive in the multiplayer world anymore.

If Brink doesn't have competitive gameplay based around clans, it will fail.

Well, seeing that most of the sales for FPS games are contributed to people who just want to play the game, and the competitive scene, usually makes up no more than around 10% of a games community, I see little truth in this.

I'm speaking about "legitimate" comp scene - like those who join leagues and such. A bunch of friends making up their own clan to be cool or just so they can play together, is quite different.

Well, yes and no. Games with a well established competitive scene attract attention which gets them more sales. Counterstrike was a competitive game long before any casual players knew anything about it.

CS was also a free mod, that had no support from publishers or retailers.

Medic trains were really powerful, true, but we don't know how the game will play out. How EXACTLY do revives work? How powerful are turrets? Does a heavy really tank that much more and does a light move that much faster?
A few things i can see for sure though are a ban on :
Grenade Launchers
Engineer Mines
Minigun
I can also see a limit on Engineer if turrets are very strong, a limit on Heavys to eliminate the possibility of a heavy+autoshotty medic train, a limit on shotguns themselves or a ban if they are very strong.
Teamwise i can't see no more than 6 people. If it was 8, comms would be hard and you can have 4 engineers with turrets lock down areas with 2 medics/assaults to defend for defense.
In 6v6 gameplay (ideal), i can see a one engineer limit as two turrets placed strategically can probably lock down a map. They were said to be strong, but limited on range, in which multiple (placed properly) can fix the range part. The usefulness of the operative is yet to be determined (it's probably little for competitive play; it seems to be a pub class) unless they are needed for an objective.
Also, to whoever said you can't switch classes, in w:et AND tf2 you were able to for comp. play. I don't see why you shouldn't here, especially if for example you need an assault to blow up an area for an objective, so you might switch out the operative to play assault.

This ^^

No reason to limit classes in a competition. If a competing team is unsuccessful due to their team build it's their fault.

You get killed, Medic tosses you a syringe, you choose when and if to use it. Upon choosing to revive yourself, you need to wait a couple seconds while the syringe "charges" up, and then you are revived. At least that is how it works in the vids.


And this ladies and gentlemen, is why I do not play comp anymore - because I like to have when I play games. The comp scene has the tendency to take perfectly fine games, and strip them down to the bare bones.

Oh, and putting a ban on GL's and miniguns, pretty much cripples the Heavy body type, or at least removes a good portion of his "perks."

No items, Fox only, Final Destination!

Saying that they are going to ban certain things in competition before you have played is basically going into the game assuming that SD can't balence the game properly. The only reason to ban something is if it is not balenced. If grenades can be balenced, other explosives can be.

Your rules outlaw 40% of the heavy weapons, you think that's a good idea? give heavies a choice of 3 guns as their main weapon? Two of them are MGs with similar uses the last is a shotgun.

Well if you had to choose between his rules or (provided MLG kids find Brink and like it which is unlikely) the ridiculous MLG rules that MLG kids will make?

I would prefer playing games without Artificial rules made by people who don't like something or other in the game. If a game has an unbalanced weapon I usually avoid it like the plague, but I can understand when people use them, and its just part of the game. Especially when it comes to a whole weapon type such as grenade launchers, dodging them will just be part of the experience.

Usually the weapons that people complain about are ones that "Don't take any skill". But as far as i have seen, such weapons are never as good as a harder gun used with skill. If your whole criteria for choosing weapons is whichever one takes the most skill, you should be using nothing but a pistol, it would take a hell of a lot of skill to win with one of those.

+1
Whenever I play BlOps with my friends they always complain about me using the 74, saying it's a [censored] gun and isn't "MLG".
Unless you have to pay for said "OP" weapon, I see no problem.

Only 1 restriction I think will happen, and that is 1 Heavy weapon per team with un/limited heavy bodytypes on 1 team or 1 Heavy bodytype per team.
Ah right, turrets will be restricted to 1 per team as well I bet.

Scoring system would be 2 points for map win, 1 for draw with the possible scores of 4-0, 2-2. If 3 maps are played 3-3, 4-2.

Edit: Red dots (enemies) on radar is likely to be removed too.

I could see a restriction on heavies being proposed, but why so low? 2 in 5v5 or more would be fine, 3 in 8v8 wouldn't be out of the ordinary. Once you have a team that's 50% or more heavies, i could see people complaining, especially when its a clan strategy, but having only 1 is once again trampling all over the balance SD has worked so hard on already.

Restrictions are put into place to fix balance issues that the devs have overlooked. Since they aren't even done yet, and you haven't played the game yet, you don't know if there are any problems.

The less restrictions the better. No one here has played the game yet so don't assume that turrets, miniguns, and other things in the game will be banned.

Your forgetting that competitive play consists of extreme coordnation. Mass GL spam and minigun spam will turn this game into an area denial fest and it just wont be fun, look what happens in bf2/bf2142 pubs in certain areas when you have supports just spam nading [censored]..its not fun.
Comp play bans this stuff so more raw skill is involved without the cheesy stuff that are in pubs, because in pubs that stuff can fly because of a lack of coordination.

Regardless, what we say doesn't matter at all. It's pure speculation. Once the game comes out and you see solid players begin to play, the obvious stuff that will be banned, will be banned.

Forgot to mention that I spoke from a 5v5 point of view, in a 6v6 I would see it restricted to 2 heavy per team.
Think mines would also be restricted to like 3 per team for 5v5 and 6 for 6v6.

As for Heavies, they are likely (little hard to say without having played the game) to be extremely powerful on defense and skilled teams would lock objectives down without a problem if they are allowed to have as many as they want to.