A read-only archive of discourse.darkjedibrotherhood.com as of Sunday May 01, 2022.

Tier 2 Gaming Platform Discussion - Retire Unplayed Games?


So I’m looking for some feedback from the members on this one. We have quite a few Tier 2 Games which really aren’t played much at all or in some cases ever. I’ve considered removing them from the Tier 2 List, and there a few different courses of action that could be taking, including not removing any of them. So read over the list below, reply and let me know what you prefer or propose a new idea entirely. Thanks for your feedback!

  1. Any Tier 2 Game which has no matches submitted in a 12 month period is removed.
  2. Any Tier 2 Game (except Star Wars Games) which has no matches submitted in a 12 month period is removed.
  3. All Tier 2 Games remain on the list forever (yay, Alien vs Predator 4 life!)

https://wiki.darkjedibrotherhood.com/view/Tier_2_Gaming_Platforms (so people can see the list)

I vote option 2.


I vote 2 … but I also think they should have replacements …


I vote 2 and agree with Ergregious.


Option 2.

I’d actually make all SW games permanent tier 1, given the nature of the club, but that view may be unpopular.


I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “replacements”. We add games periodically, generally after running a competition to see if there’s interest. The Gaming Platforms are by no means restricted based on number of games included.


This may finally be the time to get this question out…

If 2 members of the DB want to play a game, any game, against each other, why should CFs not be awardable, no matter what said game actually is?


Option 2.


Mark… probably because we see enough abuse and exploiting of the system as is. The more you open it up, the more people will abuse. That’s DB 101.


option 2 for me.


Shad nailed that one. Believe me, I’d love to open up DB Gaming more. Its something I’ve wanted to do, but keeping it all level and trying to figure out then prevent the potential exploits before they’re used would be ridiculous.

Even after you think you have a game locked down and relatively even, something pops up you hadn’t anticipated (refer to News Post on Diablo 3 I just made).


I would vote for option 2, however I would suggest a competition before the game is retired (say if it hits six months of no activity) to ensure that people haven’t just forgotten about it. I know some games I looked at playing on the T2 list I didn’t simply because I didn’t see anyone else playing them / submitting matches for them. I think a competition could spark some interest and possibly revitalize interest in those games. And if after the competition activity dies back out (or if the competition is a huge flop) then the games should be retired.


I would have gone with option two, but I like Rod’s idea. I vote for that one.

I’d add that another issue with allowing CFs for any ol’ game would likely be that you’d have to sit and figure out what the CF value should be for every game that people came along and submitted to the site, which would take a lot of time and could be really difficult in the case of games that cost money that those in charge don’t own and can’t afford to buy in order to determine their value.


Option 2. And agree that the idea of CFs for any/all game matches is not feasible because of balancing issues. Seeing and arguing during the last round of Pazaak CF changes points out exactly how difficult and contentious those rewards are to keep balanced.


Option 2, with the caveat that (perhaps) with enough requests competitions with specific CF outputs may be run for non-current platforms, similar to the mobile games comps, if there are enough people. Mass Effect 3 had something similar once upon a time, Star Conflict had it too. More game competitions for trials based on popularity would be awesome.


There were some suggestions to run a competition for the platform at the end of the 12 month period prior to removal, to see if there was any interest in it. I think we all know that almost any competition that is run will get submissions, which would create an endless loop of no Tier 2 games meeting this criteria. Hell, if I wasn’t running it I’d track down the game and pocket a 2nd level Crescent as one of the few participants.

Although there is merit in calling out that a Platform is about to be retired in case some folks want to sweep in to save it for nostalgia’s sake. So what I’m proposing is the following:

  • Any Tier 2 Game (except Star Wars Games) which has no matches submitted in a 12 month period may be removed after notification of this game’s “Near Retirement” status in a Fist Report and no earlier than one month after the Report is published.

If feedback is positive following the GJW we’ll look at starting this process for a few games. Expect only 1 or 2 platforms to go on the chopping block each month, not a spam of all at once.


Maybe adding a Trail tier… Something to give it a chance on it’s own to give it exposure. The thing is with how games are being produced I am wary on buying until it is our for a few months. Saying that if I get a benefit of Cf’s, I might just pick it up. Kinda like how I got D3 only real reason was the cf’s and the Pob’s.


I have starting a Tier 2 gaming comp … Matchmaking for Glory! https://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/competitions/9154

it’s already at Diamond level with a few days to go.

Also due to the interest I already created the next version Matchmaking for Glory! #2 https://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/competitions/9180

Join in and save older games we been playing a lot of BF2 to prepare for B3,

If the intrest remains high i’ll keep making weekly comps!