EU vs NA

[Kabookie]

Let's have a free for all, instead of trying to limit to the elite few.
I sometimes am able to play on EU servers, where my ping is like 145, and it does as well or better than the erratic ping of NA servers (35 to 745 ping).

[_GTX_]

This sounds epic, and rly could be awesome to do. But collecting 60 of the best from both places...... Just that is extremly hard. And im worried that the ping will do a too big difference so this will just be: Na wins on na, eu wins on eu.

But if someone is up for organizing this from na and eu, then it could be sweet.

[Thovex]

Could it be a suggestion that the cRPG community builds an island in the middle of NA and EU and we host our own servers there?

So Kinngrimm doesn't have his unfair advantage anymo- eh so we have equal pings. 

[Dalhi]

I doubt that it will ever happen, but it's just my guess.
Apart from that, I played few times on NA servers, in strageus, cRPG battles or even back in Native. It's not fun at all, and I have no idea why would anyone be interested in playing with 150 ping it's just waste of time... besides:

EU wins, it's a default win.

The only thing that might be interesting and may bring some fun is a topic where you'd pick whose 60 players 

[Arrowblood]

everyone over gen 30 

[Mithus]

I play on both servers EU and NA, and watch people playing a lot as spec, if would be possibly to have a neutral ground with people with the same ping, I would bet my cRPG money on NA side.  EU has more numbers of good players, but if we had the top 10 of each side, I would bet money on NA side.

[Thucydides]

you guys need to relax on the E-peen

[Remy]

Everyone sucks, true story.

[Torben]

I would really like to see this.  not because of us-eu,  but because i enjoy huge scale battles,  especially with highly skilled players.

if only we could keep the hate out of it,  but i think it would induce too much flaming : /

specially cause EU kicks US ass anytime, anywhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fba8PTx0fVE

[_GTX_]

I play on both servers EU and NA, and watch people playing a lot as spec, if would be possibly to have a neutral ground with people with the same ping, I would bet my cRPG money on NA side.  EU has more numbers of good players, but if we had the top 10 of each side, I would bet money on NA side.

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Siiem]

This thread, so full of shit.

[Tennenoth]

I'm all for this, I think it would be good. It doesn't just come down to "player skill" as opposed to "teamplay skill" as well, this would also be an issue if you think about it but it doesn't matter all that much if this is relaxed and "for the fun of it".

Picking the players wouldn't be a massive problem because you'd need more than 60 people anyway to cover for the disappearance of some people, life throws stuff at you and you can't always play. On top of that each side should elect a "central board" who would make final decisions on who to put in, a panel of more or less neutral and trusted players, i'm sure that there are a few names from both sides that could be added to do this.

Sounds like it could be good fun it organised correctly.

[Teeth]

And im worried that the ping will do a too big difference so this will just be: Na wins on na, eu wins on eu.

Do three rounds on the NA server, then switch to EU and do three rounds. If either teams gets a majority of the victories they win. Casualties should be counted after every round so that if both teams win their three rounds the team that suffered the least casualties in total wins.

That should be a fair solution and not at all hard to carry out.

For the selection of the players, it won't be the absolute top 60, cause you will never get them all together at the same time. Just pick a date, let people sign up. Put a council together for each team that picks the best out of the sign ups. Join ts, play and let EU celebrate their victory. It's really not all that hard.

My only concern is the timezone difference, one team is going to get majorly fucked over because they have less players available due to shitty time. Thats why I suggest putting the battle on the NA server on EU primetime, and putting the EU battle on NA primetime. So that the better selection of players goes to the team with shitty ping. Alternatively you could also find a time thats equally shit for both teams and do the matches back to back.

[_GTX_]

Do three rounds on the NA server, then switch to EU and do three rounds. If either teams gets a majority of the victories they win. Casualties should be counted after every round so that if both teams win their three rounds the team that suffered the least casualties in total wins.

That should be a fair solution and not at all hard to carry out.

For the selection of the players, it won't be the absolute top 60, cause you will never get them all together at the same time. Just pick a date, let people sign up. Put a council together for each team that picks the best out of the sign ups. Join ts, play and let EU celebrate their victory. It's really not all that hard.

My only concern is the timezone difference, one team is going to get majorly fucked over because they have less players available due to shitty time. Thats why I suggest putting the battle on the NA server on EU primetime, and putting the EU battle on NA primetime. So that the better selection of players goes to the team with shitty ping. Alternatively you could also find a time thats equally shit for both teams and do the matches back to back.

Exactly, the one organizing this is gonna get quite a hard time. Which is what i said first. But anyway, if someone is up for it. And yeah this is some good rules regarding the way to calculate winner.

[Chasey]

but but if everybodys good there'll be no peasants for me to kill to raise my kd nooooooooo