Splash DamageBlogSneak Peek: Clans and Tournaments Update for Brink

Splash Damage Blog

Sneak Peek: Clans and Tournaments Update for Brink


We're close to releasing a comprehensive update for Brink, bringing full clan support, ladders and tournaments to all versions of the game. This update is currently in the final stages of testing and will be pushed out to the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and the PC version of Brink as soon as that is complete.

Since there's a whole bunch of new stuff headed your way, we thought we'd give you a sneak peek of the goodness that awaits you:

Clans & Tournaments Beta Site

The centerpiece of Brink's clan features will be the launch of the beta site for clans and tournaments at http://battle.brinkthegame.com, featuring several new sections and shiny new functionality.

Create a Clan

Brink Clan Profile
Click to enlarge

First and foremost, you'll now be able to create and manage your own Brink Clan right on the website. Once you've selected a name for your Clan and registered it, it'll get a dedicated profile page displaying its members as well as a breakdown of clan statistics like its current ranking, wins and losses, and upcoming Clan matches. From there, you'll also be able to invite others to join your squad, toggle your Clan's recruitment status, review applications of players applying for membership, and manage the privileges available to each of your Clan members.

Global Clan Ladder

Clan support is great, but we thought it'd be even better if you could challenge other clans and organize clan matches, too. For this purpose, we've got the Global Clan Ladder. It'll display all of the Clans in Brink arranged by their current ranking and make it easy to find other Clans at similar skill levels.

Brink Global Clan Ladder
Click to enlarge

From there, Clan leaders will be able to challenge other Clans to Clan Matches. Once a time for a match has been agreed, Brink will automatically create a match at the appropriate time and issue invites to all participating players. And if you happen to be playing Brink, you'll be reminded of any upcoming matches that you're scheduled to play.

Brink Clan Challenge
Click to enlarge

The outcome of the match will affect the ranking of both participating clans. The winning team will see its ranking increased, while the losing outfit will drop a few points.

All matches on the Global Clan Ladder will be 5 vs. 5 and utilize Brink's full map pool.

Brink Clan Challenge Accepted
Click to enlarge

Event Ladders

Brink Event Ladder
Click to enlarge

In addition to the Ladder, we'll also be able to run tournaments via the website, referred to as Event Ladders. These events will often have customized rule sets, such as smaller team sizes and very specific map pools. You'll be able to register your Clan for these right on the site and, much like regular Clan Matches, Brink will create game sessions for each match automatically and send invites to the players. Winning an Event Ladder is no small feat, and if you make it all the way to the end, you'll net a trophy to show off on your Clan's profile page.

No Brink Website Account Yet? Register Now!

To take advantage of all this cool new functionality once the update goes live, including creating clans and playing in tournaments, you'll first need to have an account on the Brink site. To do this, you will need your unique access code, which you can find within the main menu for Brink, under Online Stats. The code will link your player account to the site, which will feed information like your clan status and upcoming matches back into Brink. You'll also get access to all the other great features already available on the site right now, including detailed statistics for your characters, summaries of your most recent matches, and much more. In short, if you haven't made an account yet, now's most definitely the time!

Game Updates

Finally, we'll also be releasing game updates for all three versions of Brink alongside the Clans & Tournaments update. We'll have more information on what’s in these very soon, so keep checking back!

42 Comments

Looks good, but I have the feeling it's value will largely be determined by gameplay update.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 15:54
Interesting. Guess this'll show how active things are. Can't help wishing this was in the game from the begining though before the PC community collapsed.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 15:58
All matches on the Global Clan Ladder will be 5 vs. 5 and utilize Brink's full map pool.
Badman, only half brinks maps are comp suitable. But i guess most importantly we shall have to see if the changes improve brink to a level where players return in such numbers as to benefit the new changes (i.e. someone to play in the tourneys), otherwise it wont matter either way.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 16:10
I'll forego commenting on the use of this patch, but I'd like to say that I'm really glad you guys managed to fit a ladder into the whole thing. I hope it'll be useful for any future games.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 16:28
but I'd like to say that I'm really glad you guys managed to fit a ladder into the whole thing. I hope it'll be useful for any future games.
This. Such features need to be easily ported to future titles at launch.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 16:35
This looks really good. I hope it will be in your next game from the beginning.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 17:16
Looks bloody class to be honest, if only you released the game around now...
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 17:17
This looks Sick Mr. Badman.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 17:21
I know it's useless to ask, but: IS THIS [U]FINALLY[/U] THE UPDATE THAT BRINGS OFFLINE LAN SUPPORT LIKE YOU PROMISED [U]SIX EFFING MONTHS AGO[/U]??!?!?
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 17:31
Badman, only half brinks maps are comp suitable.
You can pick which map you want to play when issuing a clan challenge, so you can easily avoid maps you dislike.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 18:00
You can pick which map you want to play when issuing a clan challenge, so you can easily avoid maps you dislike.
Ah well thats something, also it wasnt so much me disliking them it was more that some maps are very heavily weighted in one direction due to exploitable corners or close spawns etc, that makes it un-usable in competition as teams will full hold each other on the same bits.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 18:04
So when is the Clan part official. I signed in to Xbox live and there was a patch, but when can we go to the website? Edit: I actually re-read the post and the clan part is not officially launched. I jumped the gun I guess, hence the sneak peak part, lol.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 18:13
Yes, that. Those.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 18:21
Looks nice
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 18:27
will it be possible to join more than one clan/group? for those of us that play with different clusters of people?
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 19:12
will it be possible to join more than one clan/group? for those of us that play with different clusters of people?
I would like to know this as well. I hope there will be an easy way to be part of multiple clans and join as needed to play.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 19:20
Yes it looks nice :)
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 20:20
Badman, only half brinks maps are comp suitable.
Play your teams equally on both attacking and defending on those supposedly unsuitable maps and you'll have a reasonable measure of their suitability (here's a hint -- 100%).
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 21:37
Should it not be obvious to you RT1, Apoc is quite a highly skilled player who's involved in the comp scene. As are many others who have played this game competitively. The vast majority say the same thing he is. :)
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 21:52
And (for what it's worth) I'm a highly skilled player not involved in the "comp" scene. I'm not disagreeing that there are some maps that aren't optimized for competition play (Security Tower anyone?) but I'm suggesting that any advantage by one team can easily be overcome by switching sides. They do it in professional tennis, baseball, basketball and volleyball -- all competitive sports -- so why not Brink? In fact, I'll go on to say that you won't have an accurate measurement of a team's capability if you don't switch sides and play an equal number of games on either side.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 21:59
Full holds aren't fun when it's full hold after full hold after full hold. Try watching your favourite sport and always seeing the game being a draw. Forever. Fun, no? :)
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 22:04
Yeah... It look like very nice!
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 22:04
Try watching your favourite sport and always seeing the game being a draw. Forever. Fun, no?
Those are the consequences of pitting two teams together bearing humans who reside in the top 0.01 percentile of humanity in terms of skill. There will be far more close call matches than not. When that happens, you have to fashion another means of measuring skill by tossing in a variable to test consistency. For sports teams, how well they do at home versus all the variables of road travel, foreign facilities, etc. Those are things that enter into the equation as well. Sport is a test of mental toughness as well as conditioning, etc. To compare, I happen to be one of the world's best Wipeout Pure/Pulse/HD players (PSN ID: Flashback_Jack). At the very top of the ladder there are players that are often so close in terms of track laptimes, that you'd have to add another decimal place on the clock -- even two -- to separate them. That's just the way it is. At that point you have to add variety to test not just one's ability, because that's a given, but consistency as well. And it's consistency that wins contests. Mix 'er up by switching sides; you sort of have to. It's about the closest thing to a scientific measurement of a team's ability as it gets.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 22:15
And (for what it's worth) I'm a highly skilled player not involved in the "comp" scene. I'm not disagreeing that there are some maps that aren't optimized for competition play (Security Tower anyone?) but I'm suggesting that any advantage by one team can easily be overcome by switching sides. They do it in professional tennis, baseball, basketball and volleyball -- all competitive sports -- so why not Brink? In fact, I'll go on to say that you won't have an accurate measurement of a team's capability if you don't switch sides and play an equal number of games on either side.
Technically anything is fair if you enable the same conditions for both sides, but that is not the issue. Competitive maps are meant to be consistent and encourage the map to be played at it's fullest. Full-holds will happen whenever there is a drastic skill gap between teams, but when you see two teams of equal skill hold up in the same spot with a lot of ease, it's usually a design fault. The bad Brink maps tend to never make it past the 1st objective and tend to be very bias, which leads to incredibly boring matches and discourages motivation towards participation, and then you have to use really lame tie breaker rules on top of that. People would like the offensive/defensive design to be equal throughout a match, instead of both teams playing a heavily favored side in separate rounds. What your saying is a very simplistic method of overlooking the actual issue at hand.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 22:15
The bad Brink maps tend to never make it past the 1st objective and tend to be very bias, which leads to incredibly boring matches and discourages motivation towards participation, and then you have to use really lame tie breaker rules on top of that.
So be it. Assume another means of measuring who wins then -- total XP? You can't use emotional factors or some nebulous half-fact like map design to drive your decision making process. It should and must be objective.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 22:29
Those are the consequences of pitting two teams together bearing humans who reside in the top 0.01 percentile of humanity in terms of skill. There will be far more close call matches than not. When that happens, you have to fashion another means of measuring skill by tossing in a variable to test consistency. For sports teams, how well they do at home versus all the variables of road travel, foreign facilities, etc. Those are things that enter into the equation as well. Sport is a test of mental toughness as well as conditioning, etc. To compare, I happen to be one of the world's best Wipeout Pure/Pulse/HD players (PSN ID: Flashback_Jack). At the very top of the ladder there are players that are often so close in terms of track laptimes, that you'd have to add another decimal place on the clock -- even two -- to separate them. That's just the way it is. At that point you have to add variety to test not just one's ability, because that's a given, but consistency as well. And it's consistency that wins contests. Mix 'er up by switching sides; you sort of have to. It's about the closest thing to a scientific measurement of a team's ability as it gets.
A good comp map is one where times are set. Matches may be close, but it should usually be a team managing to beat the other team's time by 10 seconds rather than a full hold. Full holds would be fun if they were hard to do. I personally love it in American football when you have a game between great teams where no are touchdowns scored (Like the Alabama LSU game this year). But if it happened all the time, then it wouldn't be cool. That said, I think Container City and Security Tower get a bad rep. With good teams, the first and only possible hold spot on CC is the courier objective. In the first few weeks we thought the bot objectives were hard, but they are the easiest objectives in the game now, thanks to 1) people learning the right way to do them, and 2) Some tweaks from SD. The first gate objective is problematic with uneven teams. But with even teams, the offense would have to have a horrible start to get held. (Which has certainly happened to me before. And the same thing can happen on Resort..which is why it is so important to practice the hell out of that first push.) As for Sec Tower, the courier objective is a possible hold spot. With even teams, the escort objective is doable as long as 1) the courier objective was completed quickly enough that there is enough time, and 2) the team knows how to do it (suicidal medics with lazarus moving the escort a few feett at a time and using the cover at that tricky gate section.) Even without enough time, the escort objective is good since you can win on progress. However, Sec Tower is probably not quite as good as CC because the courier objective comes earlier and can be a hold. These maps were not played because of initial impressions and technical issues. I truly believe that if the competitive community had stayed with Brink, that the general opinion torwards those maps would have changed. I wouldn't say that Refuel or Shipyard are good competitive maps....but things can change over time. I have a lot of ideas of how to consistently win the difficult parts of those maps, but not much opportunity to test them anymore. I personally never thought Terminal or Reactor were very good for competition because of the hack objectives came first. I like Resort until the hack objective.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 22:45
So be it. Assume another means of measuring who wins then -- total XP? You can't use emotional factors or some nebulous half-fact like map design to drive your decision making process. It should and must be objective.
Uh lol. Just read tangos post for more detail. Xp would be hilariously bad, but usually it's determined by objective completion %. It is not a half-fact that map design influences outcomes... the horrible spawn times played a big part in most of the problems, but some of the map layouts are horrendously biased towards the defense. So biased in fact that it plays a huge role in perpetuating endless ties where there should be none. I don't expect you to understand, but perhaps you will experience it sometime.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 22:51
The way i see it in my head...which may not make sense to anyone else but ill try and explain it. If team skill level is measure on a scale of 1 - 5. Good objectives will be the ones where if there is a difference in skill of say 1 or smaller either way then the superior team will get the objective. So a team whose skill level is 3 will get the objective against a team at skill level 2. Etc etc etc. Problem with brink, is alot of the objectives are very defensive based, where a difference of 2 or 3 is required to overcome an objective. So only if the defending team was say a 2 and the attacking were 4's would the objective be lost. Problem with that is, a matching of two teams of say 3 and 4 skill level will result in a full hold either way on that objective. Because its required for the attackers to be considerably better in order to take it. Thats as simplified as it gets. But i feel it sorta explains what i mean. Objectives should be even, its ok giving defenders a shorter distance to travel, but then dont give them superior positioning and cover and then give the attackers really poor attack roots with bottlenecks. Too many disadvantages for attackers means you wont get anywhere regardless of skill. So yea, a very large number of competitive players and clans have looked at all the maps and ruled out the ones with extreamly bad balance issues. I dont see why we should ignore the opinions of hundreds of experienced people.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 23:04
I still feel Security Tower and Container City should be the competitive maps.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 23:05
I still feel Security Tower and Container City should be the competitive maps.
#1 ST is too long. #2 both maps have been played by actual competitive teams and it was rare to see anything progress past the first objectives. So why do you think they are competitively applicable? Pub? Instinct? There needs to be some reasoning/evidence behind a statement for it to make sense. Edit in the details in your post please.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 23:44
I still feel Security Tower and Container City should be the competitive maps.
CC is better than ST, but stilll not great. ST is just horrific.
Posted on 15 November, 2011 - 23:49
CC is better than ST, but stilll not great. ST is just horrific.
Terminal is horrific. CC and ST would play better than that one. Large maps = more room, and more definitive progress. That's what I think.
Posted on 16 November, 2011 - 00:29
I've posted this idea before, but its very simple: Stopwatch mode should by default have an offensive bias to ensure that times are set and full holds are a rarity. It would be so easy to do, just make it so when the map switches to stopwatch, certain objectives become easier to complete (ie: the time it takes to hack an obj is halved, or defense gets 5 seconds added to their spawn timer ever X minutes) and all the problems are solved for EVERY map. Asymmetrical maps require stopwatch mode for competition, and competition requires times to be set so every game isn't full hold after full hold. It's a no-brainer.
Posted on 16 November, 2011 - 04:49
I've posted this idea before, but its very simple: Stopwatch mode should by default have an offensive bias to ensure that times are set and full holds are a rarity. It would be so easy to do, just make it so when the map switches to stopwatch, certain objectives become easier to complete (ie: the time it takes to hack an obj is halved, or defense gets 5 seconds added to their spawn timer ever X minutes) and all the problems are solved for EVERY map. Asymmetrical maps require stopwatch mode for competition, and competition requires times to be set so every game isn't full hold after full hold. It's a no-brainer.
That is an interesting idea :) although it wouldn't fix map balance ( obviously ) it would make stopwatch a much more competitive mode :cool:
Posted on 16 November, 2011 - 06:52
Dynamic spawn timers were present in ETQW I think, but to be perfectly honest the overall style of map design in Brink takes a lot away. It's been discussed at length before, but if your familiar with other game titles in SD games, the objectives were always more accessible and the implementation of forward spawns motivated the entire map to be used. In Brink the best method is to turn the 2 main one-person enterances into crossfire death traps. A smart offense would never leave the typical high-ground/bottle necks of the objective room to utilize the other 75% of the map because there's absolutely no reason to. A huge reason why I've been all for bringing back the forward spawn....
Posted on 16 November, 2011 - 07:38
Im a little concerned... If we dont get huge waves of gamers ( ps3 ) after this update, will we be able to issue challenges for 2v2s or 3v3s? 5v5 is ideal, but I haven't seen #s like that for a long time :( ( its even rare for a 5v5 in the pubs )
Posted on 16 November, 2011 - 15:28
Ok so what happened to the Clan stuff?!?! Also been playing for the past 4/5 days in online servers with other people notice the stat site is not recording anything whatsoever, Clan progress etc will be useless if you can't figure why the stats still don't record at all.:rolleyes:
Posted on 25 November, 2011 - 16:04
We're expecting it to complete Bethesda's final testing pass soon (Thanksgiving ate into that a bit over in the US, among other things). We're also aware of the stats site issue and that's getting addressed.
Posted on 28 November, 2011 - 12:11
We're expecting it to complete Bethesda's final testing pass soon (Thanksgiving ate into that a bit over in the US, among other things). We're also aware of the stats site issue and that's getting addressed.
Thank you sir, for the reply. :)
Posted on 28 November, 2011 - 18:47
We're expecting it to complete Bethesda's final testing pass soon (Thanksgiving ate into that a bit over in the US, among other things). We're also aware of the stats site issue and that's getting addressed.
thats strange there are tests for brink before release? is this something new or did you realy test brink and thought it was good to go on release day? i mean you release a beta game and lost 95% of the players already if not more and now you tell something about a testing process? i hope you will have a testing process for your next game BEFORE release so your next game dos not fail like brink did i would love to play the game but there is noone to play it with anymore.
Posted on 29 November, 2011 - 15:08
thats strange there are tests for brink before release? is this something new or did you realy test brink and thought it was good to go on release day? i mean you release a beta game and lost 95% of the players already if not more and now you tell something about a testing process? i hope you will have a testing process for your next game BEFORE release so your next game dos not fail like brink did i would love to play the game but there is noone to play it with anymore.
Oh yeah. This sort of aggressive questioning is sure to illicit a response. And if you're actually trying to get a response then try to use acceptable grammar, punctuation and spelling. Of course you look like such a tough guy, standing up to the man and all that. :rolleyes:
Posted on 29 November, 2011 - 16:11
Thought it was more rhetorical if anything. Not that I'm standing up for the man who is standing up to the man.
Posted on 29 November, 2011 - 18:09
Not that I'm standing up for the man who is standing up to the man.
Lols. Yeah.. i just think the whole passive aggressive QQ sounds super-immature. If you want to complain then do so. The butt-hurt avoidance QQ is stupid. I mean I don't think the testing before release was anywhere near adequate. There are a bunch of bugs a simple check would have turned up so either they didn't leave time for bugfixing or they didn't leave time for QA. But I'm willing to say that straight up. I don't know. There was just something about the tone of that post that set me off.
Posted on 30 November, 2011 - 09:46