I got a couple of questions:
Is it possible to allow randomers to join your team? I believe this kind of event should also try to allow clan less people to join on big organized battles. cRPG isn't all about the clans.
Following up to this: Is it a problem to have a player in your team without the associated clan-tag? I my clan we have a "testing period" where the recruits aren't allowed to wear the tag, but i would still like them to join the fight sometimes.
Any restrictions on spectators?
Also, to this: "§4a: The maps used will be snowy village and ruins."
These maps are not made for big battles, they are designed for a maximum of 64 players. I think we should use other maps if possible, there is not many opportunities for strategy on those maps IMO.
There will probably be more questions later on :)
Furthermore, I am willing to help you with being a Judge and Co-organizer if you need it.
I suggest field by the river as a good map to be honest.
Its better, but the problem is still the same as far as i can see. Its designed for a maximum of 64 players, and therefore might not be good for 120+ players.
Since there is caps on both cavalry and ranged, i'd be open for random plains/steppe.
When the map makers made the native maps they designed them for 64 players. That was the maximum allowed number of players at that time. Later on that restriction has been removed.I was meaning that you are giving too many credits to map makers, dude they are the same guys that left the ladder bug in port assault after a year and lots of patches... I doubt that they thought about making maps for 64 player or that they have tested those maps by themselves with more than 10 guys.
And by all means, do not take village or port assault. Those maps are terrible for big teams.
I was meaning that you are giving too many credits to map makers, dude they are the same guys that left the ladder bug in port assault after a year and lots of patches... I doubt that they thought about making maps for 64 player or that they have tested those maps by themselves with more than 10 guys.
And Village IS the native map to play in a huge battle, especially if with class restriction the defender can't spawn only ranged. Yes it turns battle into a siege like mode, but with ladders and 3 gates I think it would be awesome in a multiclan environment where commander can simply say "Fallen take gate, AB flank them and then proceed to the barn" and such
20 rounds for each match up seems a bit excessive, especially with the number of people playing. It might be hard to have people hang around for hours for that kind of setup. Why not best out of 5 for each matchup?
15 rounds on random plains. 3 map changes (as we cannot spawn change on random plains).15 rounds sound great to me :).
Should we designate attackers and defenders? I'm not sure it's necessary on random plains.
15 rounds is fine.but you also have a round where a team got advantage, because of the attacker/defender split
7:7 = tie (when it's 14) 8:8 = tie (when it's 16)
at 15 you can never have a tie and always have a definite winner.
15 rounds is fine.
7:7 = tie (when it's 14) 8:8 = tie (when it's 16)
at 15 you can never have a tie and always have a definite winner.
but you also have a round where a team got advantage, because of the attacker/defender split
but you also have a round where a team got advantage, because of the attacker/defender split
that is why i would not like the attacker/defenderif we are going to play on random maps, we need attacker/defender, otherwise it could end up in a frustrating match where one team gets better spawn AND flag spawning near it, which is kinda lame imo.
we should just keep it "vannila" each team dose what they want if they camp fucking tough luck
you either camp aswell or bum rush them or wait for flags dont whine just do the same as them.
Other question - lightly related - can you switch the active players and substitutes between rounds? So lets say Member A plays 5 rounds, then swaps with Member B?
§6: Battles will take place on either Fridays, Saturdays or Sundays.
I think we need more details before we can sign up with correct numbers or a good part of people who signed up will not show up.
So you suggest that we just go ahead and say a date and time for all matches allready?
I can definitely see the merit in that!
You think it is possible to have two teams fight at the same time? We have servers enough for that?
I would suggest something along the lines of:
Option 1:(click to show/hide)
Option 2:
The same as above but on saturdays
Option 3:(click to show/hide)
I don't know how to make a vote. Can someone help me?
Btw what about midgame "classchange" ? Like picking up a xbow or mounting a free horse concerning the class limit?
I'm quite a dastard with the GMT timing, as I've never participated in these clan-based battles before.. I'm guessing that if it's ~1:20 am on the west coast, it would be 7 GMT? What would 18 GMT be then?
That would make the whole thing infinitely more competitive, and probably cut signups in half. Pretty counterproductive, really, given the nature of the project.Alright, then don't have a pot for the victors, cut the fee to like 5-10K per person and only use it for referees. I volunteered as a ref with no expectation of anything like this, then I found out that we're still short a number of referees. I have enough gold and wouldn't take any offered to me for this so I'm not trying to get rich off of anyone(I already have more gold than I know what to do with).
@Tydeus' Idea20K per person with a maximum of 400 people involved is only 800K gold. That's really minor when you look at the fact that each team would have 100 players. 8K gold per player as a reward is nothing to get competitive about. Regardless, as stated above, you could simply just use the entrance fee to help get more refs. We're talking about having volunteers spectate for multiple hours, that's not exactly exciting and I can see how people wouldn't want to do it(then again, I am so who knows).
the prize of winning this will be a whole lot of respect, worth more than any coin.
besides, rule number one makes your idea inpossible:
§1: The purpose of this tournament is for different clans to work together and have fun doing so. The point is, that here is the chance to work together with your enemies and against your friends.
fun and teamwork, not gold
suggest you have a dancing club, max capacity= 300 peepsWell when I came up with the idea I wasn't thinking about a reward for winners, just a way to maybe get one or two more refs. The idea crossed my mind about a reward and I didn't give it much thought, just threw it in with the rest. There is still a week before the start of the tourney, maybe enough time to grab more refs without the need of any sort of payment.
your club gets full, and all of a sudden, you demand all those people inside to give them money.
1. not everyone will like that, it's not about the amount of gold, its just, suddenly having to pay
2. if you'd ask me: administrational nightare
3. if you only get 8K gold, whats the point then. You could earn it in 30 mins playing. If you then say it's not for the money, then why ask and give it?
but, you have a point on the refs, they might wanna recieve some money, maybe a small fee per clan, there won't be hundreds of refs to pay. but of course, when is a sum high enough to make people wanna do the referring for the money, which is imo a bad reason.
I stay with my statement, respect is the prize, as well for the winners, as for all the participants, and especially for the refs and of course the organizers
Kudos to all of you out there!!!
will it be open for some randomers to fil the gaps ?
-Yeah Roosters are nice.No need for official Rostersand they won't be public. Its only so the teams have prepared themselves to obey the rules.
I will suggest they be send to neutral judges in order to document they can participate with a team within the rules.
- The map will be Random Plains. We have yet to decide if we want attacker/defender status.
- Yes, I have some what problems with servers. The server must be manipulated for 160 persons. I know Odin has said yes, and will talk more with him after my exam tomorrow. On the other hand I have asked Espu/Vargas if it was possible to borrow official servers. I yet lack an answer there. Suggestions and ideas are very welcome.
At the Fallen Servers, I want to mention that EVERY SINGLE DANISH USER will have >150 ping.
That means a lot of us can't play for the record.
The server is actually quite weird.
I'm starting to have 50-60 ping as a Dane, so i'm not sure about the theory.
Anyway, I hope we'll get EU_3 instead.
If that's the case then it will be no problem.
Before, Fallen explained me a problem with packages and reasons why Danish people got loads of ping (Reason why we completely fucked up one of the fallen tournaments where all people was danish :) )
well we do know from strategus that eu3 can handle the pressure icecold 8-)Oh yeah! 8-)
This thread is for questions, discussions and what not.
We still need referees NOT participating. Any NA's up for it?
Please respond to this post:
Sign-up and rules in the other thread:
http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,8241.msg122473.html#msg122473
Its RuConquista not Ruconquiste
We have still not decided if anyone team should be assigned the role of offense and the other defense and the switch? Or just let the game play out?
There will be 15 rounds with three map changes, all maps are random plains. Battles cannot last more than 1 hour and 30 minutes. (we need the room on the servers).
I like the sound of just letting it play out. It's open plains, so hopefully there shouldn't really be anywhere to camp for one team. Should mean both teams attack properly.
But perhaps if it's obvious that one team has a definite terrain advantage, switch the sides half way through.