How is Courtyard Conundrums a small ctf map? You can easily play 5v5 on that map.

That doesn't make it good.

While that can be argued, I agree that the poll description should be more neutral. Now it's almost as if its telling people to vote 4v4.

there small maps, w2 is pretty big but not playable on 5on5 :)

its HUGE indeed

which is also part of the reason why the map sucks :P

the map mostly sucks because it's just a patchwork of corridors
[it's obvious if you just look at the ground and not the room themselves ; and the only place which isn't a corridor is the ya ground near rl/haste, but you can't fight here cause you don't have the high ground : 3 stairs steps makes the rl/haste little rounded kind of corridor safer ; beside the bases (which are defenders delight anyway) there is nowhere to fight in this full of shit map, just lot of corridors to run and run and run and run and run and quit]

w2 is really not playable with 5v5.. 4v4 it is :)

they made me vote 4on4!!!

4v4 by a long shot. More individual skill involved as easier to follow matches. Not to mention not having to NEED that fifth player, should be more suitable for TDM teams as well if they ever considered playing some CTF.

The available maps are all 4v4 friendly, 5v5 it's chaos and less teamplay based. CTF should be teamplay based and 4v4 simply brings it out more than 5v5.

to make it simple :

4v4 = teamplay CTF

5v5 = TDM

so go 4v4.

All gametypes should be 4on4. Always should've been.

In the U.S. they've stuck to 4on4 for Q3 CTF, TDM and CA and it really helped.
Same clans could play TDM, CA or CTF with the exact same lineup, gameplay was less chaotic in both CTF and CA, and a lot of maps were way more playable this way.
It's also easier to mount a clan, a pickup, a quick scrim...

I've been saying it for ages, 4on4 all the way.

sorry, all your points are valid but we don't support having a clue here. :<

Especially not CB admins :)

8(

I tried so often already to get a 4v4 CTF community going in Europe.
the Q3CTF summercup 4v4's on ClanBase that I've organised were always a succes, every single time.....

but still many of the (mainly low end division) clans always demanded a 5v5 league again in the next seasons and with supervisors of cups usually being the ones from the lower div clans, they always kept the 5v5 format in any league and cup......

in Q3 a 4v4 would already have been better. less spam, less cessing and more teamplay and also more room for real individual skill instead of 5 men defenses etc.....

so boring.

we really need QL CTF to be 4v4 so it wont fall victim again to the funfdef tactics

"we really need QL CTF to be 4v4 so it wont fall victim again to the funfdef tactics"

We will adapt and make it vier def!

No, do it vier-ein-halb

Ok so why was this cup 5on5?

http://clanbase.ggl.com/news_league.php?lid=1697

Because of the admins and the stubborn osp ctf players.

Yes but Right said lower div clans wanted 5on5, that was EuroCup. Also both supervisors were players in high skilled clans :)

aka stubborn ospers.

I wanted 4v4.
cb cup bozos didnt.
people from the vote that was held did not want a 4v4 but a 5v5

JUST PLAY TDM! :D

voted 4v4 due to no "lol qlctf" option.

this^

Same shit here.

Basically this should be

Europe vs North America

thought so, too. but seems like it is eu+na vs stubborn ppl

no in europe we prefer play on 4v4 when the map are made for!

so pls all admin for everycup put this format for CTF 4v4 pwn

Well there's no reason to say people that don't vote 4v4 are stubborn or 'retarded'. It's an opinion and well the majority is picking 4v4, so it's pretty obvious what most people like 4v4 more than 5v5.

The current maps just favor 4v4 more than 5v5. ctf7, ctf8 (siberia), c2 and w2 are just based on the concept of 4v4. As soon as you enter a fifth on both sides, most maps become too crowded due to each team having more or less a '2nd mid player'. You'll have 8 people on mid instead of 6.

Overall you'll have an average of ~2 to 4 people battling it out in mid with a 4v4 format. With 5v5 this tends to be a solid 5 to 6. So you'll have 3v3 shooting at each other with mostly rails constantly. Where in 4v4 you'll tend to have more 1v1 and 2v2 situations, making it more vital to win those battles, because it will give you control for a while. In 5v5 teams can constantly rush a mid with players before everyone is killed, making it a DM7 TDM like game.

Just my view on why it should be 4v4 and not 5v5. Including the whole 4v4 for all modes is kinda handy as well for all teams.

rofl fucking noobs 4v4?

:)

Haven't ever played ctf, but as most ppl voted 4v4, I voted 4v4 too.

Whats next? Halo?

I prefer World of Warcraft.

i voted 5v5 because most voted 4v4

lol

4v4 = ctf with one chaser less!

Usualy i like when rules changes but c'mon...5v5 sux...4v4 ftw

4v4 - its just fun
5v5 - often ends in tdm and chaos.

Oh and besides RiGHT I see no real oldschool ctf player posting here.

That's because most old school people are tired of trying to win this discussion after 10 years and still 5v5 is being forced? Also, if you look at who voted what, you'll see almost every old school player voting 4v4, at least the ones that played a decent level...

If you want to play 4v4 go back to tdm please.

CTF is based on teamplay and you can't really believe that coordinating a team of 4 players is harder than a team of 5 players.

Ironworks might not be perfect for 5v5, but c2 and w2 are really no 4v4 maps at all and were played in 5v5 for almost 10 years now.

People just seem to think that aim is the one and only skill in quake, while playing CTF is so much more than just aim.

People just seem to forget more and more how to play ctf and think that with aim they are going to succeed, but think about players like ooze, who made brilliant flagruns .. would that have been the same with only 4 enemies?

CTF is based on teamplay and you can't really believe that coordinating a team of 4 players is harder than a team of 5 players.

Yes it is. Reason? Simple: 5v5 gives a team an extra player to relieve some duties from others, making it easier to navigate through the maps forming more solid positions, instead of dynamic gameplay. As countless of matches have shown that extra player is usually used for a solid mid position or att/mid. Basically makes it easier for the defenders and is in no way 'better coördinated'. 4v4 is in this case pretty much more about coördinating, especially in the attacks and securing the right area's at the right time (= more dynamic teamplay).

Ironworks might not be perfect for 5v5, but c2 and w2 are really no 4v4 maps at all and were played in 5v5 for almost 10 years now.

Alright they were played 5v5, 10 years ago. 5v5 was the European standard for CTF and worked out pretty well I guess when aim was lower, connections were shittier and not one guy railed 60+ percent and 35+ LG.

Now overall the skill of the average player is higher in any FPS due to hardware changing and better connections.

c2 and w2 are good 4v4 maps actually. w2 in Q3 Summercups was fucking funny. As was c2. Only someone that hasn't been playing ctf2 in the last few years would say it's not a 4v4 map. It's really well made for 4v4 teamplay and ask ANY experienced CTF player that played at high level. CTF2 5v5 in Quake 3 was LOL in the last years due to 10 people having the ability to shoot 50 percent rail.

People just seem to think that aim is the one and only skill in quake, while playing CTF is so much more than just aim.

Since when is aim related to the amount of players playing in a CTF game? My opinion is that 4v4 is more aimbased yes, because the battle situations are more important to win to have a certain area for some time. A persons aim is the same in a 5v5 game as in a 4v4 game. But as I mentioned, 10 people with good aim in a high level ctf game on c2? haha hf ;D

People just seem to forget more and more how to play ctf and think that with aim they are going to succeed, but think about players like ooze, who made brilliant flagruns .. would that have been the same with only 4 enemies?

OoZe shined in the later years. Where he combined nice aim and his flagrunning skills together. It was fun to watch and brought the game to a higher level. I don't know if you checked out the Quakecon tournaments with the 4v4 format. They were way more tense and the individuals really made a difference. As a spectator it's really fun to notice those individuals more and it was more watchable what people were doing, instead of a zergfest on mid.

Perfectly fine if you prefer 5v5, but coming with partially untrue arguments that contradict themselves already in the same sentence is kinda pointless.

I'm playing 'high level CTF' in Q3 since 2004 and will continue in Quake Live and from experience in the CB cups and any other leagues, 4v4 was more entertaining for both players and spectators. Mainly because of the technology evolvements in the past years that brought the skill up of players and made 10 players on a map really crowded, due to high aim.

amen to that bld

I agreee, good and valid points. Thanks.

Wow I really don't have enough spare time to reply to all your 'arguments' and it's not that important to me either, but you really put some effort into that.

All i can say is that personally I just like 5v5 more and I don't agree that all your arguments really speak pro 4v4! But if people prefer a CTF that is easier to control, less chaotic, slower and more about 1on1 aiming, than I'm fine with that and will probably play less CTF and more TDM.

Only 5v5 gives ME the real CTF feeling and it's also more fun to be on TS with 4 other people instead of only 3.

Just my 2 cents

Wow I really don't have enough spare time to reply to all your 'arguments' and it's not that important to me either, but you really put some effort into that.

All i can say is that personally I just like 5v5 more and I don't agree that all your arguments really speak pro 4v4!

So basically, you care enough to tell him that you have an argument, but you don't care enough to actually try to say it. You're a terrible troll.

I said I respect his effort, but don't think that all his arguments are valid or correct, but I don't have the time to write such an in depth analysis and I don't care enough about this 4v4 or 5v5 question either.

I really don't see the reason why you as a third person have to attack me now ..

But you had enough time to visit ESR and reply to comments between 16:00 and 18:40 BST...

Impressively bad excuse. Allow me to be the first to welcome you to the internet.

Neither 4vs4 nor 5vs5 are anything like TDM.

nice! agreed! plussed!

5on5 is tdm and chase, 4on4 is more exciting for the players and the spectators. and c2 and w2 are 10 times better with 4on4 then with 5on5. Why do you think that all those maps are so low scoring in 5on5? its basically almost impossible to cap with 5on5 even if you got great tactics and teamplay.

imo 4v4 = ffa just rush base till you get through no tactics involved really

right, have you ever played 4v4 ctf then? doubt it if you hear you talk like this

Next stop -> 3v3 duels

I am more a fan of 1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1 tdm myself.

sounds like ffa, aka 12 sec weaponrespawn tdm


=/

4fort/8fort oldschool TF ftw

voted 4v4 because the poll description told me so and i wont bother making my mind up on my own

Personally, I like the single-flag format the best. Think about it... one flag, middle-of-the-map, cap in your opponents base. Everyone plays offense and defense. There is a single-focal point, no switching back and forth between flag carriers. It would be sort of like the quake version of soccer. At the very least, it would be easy to test.

Be scientific... trial and error that fucking shit.

1 flag sucks

pfff 4v4 is american bullshit cos they never had enough player, 5v5 = true ctf

I don't think the number of players will make any difference, 4vs4 all deff or 5vs5 all deff doesn't make a difference :P

I feel like 5v5 is better for ctf but tdm need to be 4v4, need bigger maps if it should be played 5v5.
Its harder to attack if you play 4v4ctf i think.

5vs5