cRPG

cRPG => Archive => Nations Cup => Topic started by: IG_Saint on September 29, 2012, 05:53:52 pm

Title: rules discussion
Post by: IG_Saint on September 29, 2012, 05:53:52 pm
I've got some issues with the rules as they stand now, so I thought I'd open up a little discussion about them.

First up:

Quote
-Alts and Skip the funs ARE ALLOWED.   

As much as I personally would have probably prefered playing an alt, I really think this tournament should be restricted to main characters only. Main characters are the most known, the most iconic, the best representative of the player in cRPG.

Quote
-Throwing does not count as ranged.

This just seems like a very bad idea, giving a huge advantage to any country that can field a couple of high lvl infantry mains with a bit of throwing on the side. If the above rule about STF chars remains in place, it wouldn't surprise me either that a lot of countries would force people to just use STF infantry with a bit of throwing on the side. Being able to nail cav, archers or shieldless inf with a couple of throwing weapons before melee starts is a huge advantage.

Quote
-If a team has only 8 players, and all 8 players are infantry, they must play with only 5. Likewise if a team has 8 players and 8 of them are archers, they must only play with 3.

A lot of the smaller countries are probably going to have trouble fielding the perfect team of 5 inf, 3 cav and 3 ranged. Meaning that small countries would either have to play with less players, which just isn't fun or fair, or (depending of the alt/STF rule) have to force players to play builds they normally don't, or maybe even builds they simply don't like to play. I'd suggest just removing the maximum on infantry players, allowing countries to field 8 inf if they want or have to.

Lastly I would also add some kind of maximum armour rule, for instance that only 1 person is allowed armour above 20 weight. Just to avoid the nasty situation where a team consists entirely of tin cans. I've never played clan battles in cRPG, but from what I heard something like this was pretty much standard.

One more thing, not really to do with the rules, but the map selection seems to be rather native based. I personally would prefer to have some more cRPG maps, rather than the same old maps that we've all played in a thousand clan battles. Maybe 1 or 2 of the best villages, or some of the good user made maps.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Zotte on September 29, 2012, 06:14:32 pm
A team needs to be able to adapt to a certain situation, this means being able to swap character classes even if they do not have enough substitutes online to do this, this is why mains, alts and STF characters are all allowed.

Throwing is usually only effective in large quantities and is seen as a support weapon, maybe there should be some limits imposed on it but they should not be taking the range slots.

Your third point should be countered by the ability to use STF and alts as well.

Armour rule is a possiblity, though some more debate on that is needed.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Riddaren on September 29, 2012, 06:23:01 pm
Throwing should definately count as ranged.
Seems like there are no restrictions for crossbows either...

So, you can have this:

2 horse archers
3 archers
3 throwers (all using throwing lances)

:shock:
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: IG_Saint on September 29, 2012, 07:08:23 pm
Quote from: Zotte on September 29, 2012, 06:14:32 pm
A team needs to be able to adapt to a certain situation, this means being able to swap character classes even if they do not have enough substitutes online to do this, this is why mains, alts and STF characters are all allowed.

Your third point should be countered by the ability to use STF and alts as well.

I certainly see your point, my concern is that 1: people will be forced to play STF chars to meet team requirements or even worse to meet the team captain's perfect setup, which is quickly gonna sap their will to play and 2: that we'll end up with teams consisting of mostly STF chars rather than (the way it's supposed to be imo) mostly main chars with an occasional STF/alt.

That said, point 1 is really a worse case scenario and point 2 is mostly personal preference, so maybe I'm making too big a deal out of this.

Quote from: Zotte on September 29, 2012, 06:14:32 pm
Throwing is usually only effective in large quantities and is seen as a support weapon, maybe there should be some limits imposed on it but they should not be taking the range slots.

I disagree, throwing, even in small quantities, can be scarely effective when used properly or, more worryingly, when the gods of random number generators are on your side. And Riddaren's team setup is also just a very scary idea and brings to question the "ranged cav counts as cav" rule.

Quote from: Riddaren on September 29, 2012, 06:23:01 pm
Seems like there are no restrictions for crossbows either...

I'm guessing you mean: "-IMPORTANT – per each match, max. of 5 infantry, max. of 3 cavalry, and max. of 3 archers."
I assume that's just a typo and that the bold archers should really be ranged.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Corsair831 on September 30, 2012, 12:29:17 am
Everyone can use STF's. Therefore people who are scared of certain builds can adapt. The xbows are archers for rule purposes. I will clarify this tommorow.

As for throwing, to be half effective you need at least 4 pt and 2 wm dedicated to throwing ... A big loss .. easily countered by practice shields. Also, a thrower is never as effective as an archer as a ranged unit, if throwing counted as ranged the same as archers there'd be no throwing ..

The maps may be revised but not many of them are great for comp play, we'll have a look :)

As for the ranged counts as cav, to take a low damage HA you must sacrifice a 1 lance kill heavily armoured and effective on foot cataphract. I think this is fair. Maybe we should have a max 1 rqnged cav rule but i think theyre weak tbh.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Gnjus on September 30, 2012, 08:33:58 am
I can understand the cav/ranged restrictions but why am I not allowed to field a full-melee 8-men team with no riders and/or shooters ?  Is there a problem with teams fully consisting of persons who are of straight sexual orientation ?
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Corsair831 on September 30, 2012, 12:23:48 pm
Quote from: Gnjus on September 30, 2012, 08:33:58 am
I can understand the cav/ranged restrictions but why am I not allowed to field a full-melee 8-men team with no riders and/or shooters ?  Is there a problem with teams fully consisting of persons who are of straight sexual orientation ?

i've played a LOT of clan matches on this game, and when teams are full melee they are A - fail, and B - the matches are EXTREMELY boring, with very little tactics apart from "charge".

also i clarified the rules, it now says archers/crossbowmen, and teams are now allowed a maximum of 1 ranged cav.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Haboe on September 30, 2012, 12:32:48 pm
All ranged should be under the same category.
Its should be up to the team to make a choice between trowing archer or crossbow.


Quote from: IG_Saint on September 29, 2012, 05:53:52 pm

As much as I personally would have probably prefered playing an alt, I really think this tournament should be restricted to main characters only. Main characters are the most known, the most iconic, the best representative of the player in cRPG.

Its not about representing the player, its about forming a team that represents a country.
Also i think its not true at all that the main represents the player best, there is a reason ppl have alts, and why they respec/ retire to change class. A lot of players don't represent a single class.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: SirCymro_Crusader on September 30, 2012, 02:01:08 pm
What are the specific armour/weapon restrictions?
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Corsair831 on September 30, 2012, 06:49:15 pm
Quote from: SirCymro_Crusader on September 30, 2012, 02:01:08 pm
What are the specific armour/weapon restrictions?

1 mauler, 1 HA/HX per team, 1 horse of over destrier value per team
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Gnjus on September 30, 2012, 06:56:29 pm
Quote from: Corsair831 on September 30, 2012, 06:49:15 pm
1 mauler per team

Great Maul or all mauls/mallets/long mauls ?
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: SirCymro_Crusader on October 01, 2012, 01:50:33 pm
Quote from: Corsair831 on September 30, 2012, 06:49:15 pm
1 mauler, 1 HA/HX per team, 1 horse of over destrier value per team

Oh so were gonna have one team with all plate  :rolleyes: (with a few plate cav, and plate archers)
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Tuetensuppe on October 01, 2012, 05:09:22 pm
i suggest, that the captains of all teams meet up on a ts and discuss all rules...
because do it in a official forum > you will never get a decission > you will only earn different views :)

so just anounce a meeting by pm early enough and if a captain cant take part he should send a substitute for it...


greetings


Tueten
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Corsair831 on October 01, 2012, 05:55:35 pm
Quote from: Tuetensuppe on October 01, 2012, 05:09:22 pm
i suggest, that the captains of all teams meet up on a ts and discuss all rules...
because do it in a official forum > you will never get a decission > you will only earn different views :)

so just anounce a meeting by pm early enough and if a captain cant take part he should send a substitute for it...


greetings


Tueten

don't worry, no discussion, i'm a dictator

armour rule i forgot to say, no armour above 20 weight - this stuff's all in the rules if you look guys ..

therefore no plate crutching fun ;(
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Gnjus on October 01, 2012, 06:22:37 pm
Quote from: Corsair831 on October 01, 2012, 05:55:35 pm
don't worry, no discussion, i'm a dictator

armour rule i forgot to say, no armour above 20 weight - this stuff's all in the rules if you look guys ..

therefore no plate crutching fun ;(

Quite a lot of restrictions for a mod that was supposed to be all about "freedom".

(click to show/hide)

Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Riddaren on October 08, 2012, 11:12:29 pm
Quote from: Gnjus on October 01, 2012, 06:22:37 pm
Quite a lot of restrictions for a mod that was supposed to be all about "freedom".

(click to show/hide)

Well, to be honest, I see no need for any restrictions at all to be honest.
But let's save that for another tournament.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Gnjus on October 15, 2012, 05:00:43 pm
Any sign of the starting date for this tourney ?
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: bagge on October 16, 2012, 06:07:18 pm
When we have enough teams organized i guess
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Corsair831 on October 16, 2012, 06:25:29 pm
literally just waiting for teams to get organised, hopefully we can start with maybe 12 or so teams, if we have to start with less it'll be a very short tourny :) ...

so far teams i know that are organised for certain is sweden, the ones im pretty sure would be ready to go in a couple of weeks are the uk, turkey, finland & croatia.

There are about 3 or 4 other teams that are slowly coming together, but overall that still only makes under 10 teams.

It'd be great if people could encourage others in their clans or their friends etc to sign up for their national teams :).
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Gnjus on October 16, 2012, 07:45:46 pm
There used to be a time when people would literally sell their anus for a chance to participate in a cRPG event, the lack of interest for something like this really speaks volumes.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Elmuri on October 16, 2012, 07:58:03 pm
What's wrong with big countries Germany, Poland and Russia? One would think they find 8 interested players out of hundred(s)
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Corsair831 on October 17, 2012, 02:25:48 pm
i don't know, i asked some of the prominent polskis if they wanted to command the polish team, they said no, so it's just up to someone to step up. As for germany i don't know what's going on there they seem to have 1 interested player, and russia has a few ... i would've thought with DRZ and Grey russia and poland would have been able to field 2 / 3 teams EACH, not half a team between them ..
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Osiris on October 17, 2012, 03:06:20 pm
There is a reason for that Gnjus and that is STRAT. People spend tons of time on strat and dont really have the will to organise or play in anything else.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: RamsesXXIIX on October 17, 2012, 04:30:06 pm
Quote from: Osiris on October 17, 2012, 03:06:20 pm
There is a reason for that Gnjus and that is STRAT. People spend tons of time on strat and dont really have the will to organise or play in anything else.

This. Strat comes before NC for everyone.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Gnjus on October 17, 2012, 05:40:33 pm
Quote from: RamsesXXIIX on October 17, 2012, 04:30:06 pm
This. Strat comes before NC for everyone.

I'm as a drunk as drunk could be but i don't think that It's the case........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jujqyVez2jw
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Oberyn on October 18, 2012, 11:39:39 am
France team was up and running 100% when the first try at nation's cup happened. After it disentegrated miserably with nothing but a few training matches played people seem to just be sitting back and watching if this is going to go all the way or suffer the same fate. Then there's the new version of Strat as others have pointed out.
p.s: I have not been in contact with any of the team leaders, I may be totally wrong but that's my impression of it.
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Riddaren on October 24, 2012, 08:14:48 pm
"-Armour rules - No armour above 20 weight"

What does this mean exactly?

Is it the total weight of all clothing combined (head, body, hand, legs) or is it the maximum weight of a single item?
Title: Re: rules discussion
Post by: Corsair831 on October 24, 2012, 09:52:07 pm
Quote from: Riddaren on October 24, 2012, 08:14:48 pm
"-Armour rules - No armour above 20 weight"

What does this mean exactly?

Is it the total weight of all clothing combined (head, body, hand, legs) or is it the maximum weight of a single item?

a single item, i'll clarify it