Author Topic: rules discussion  (Read 4644 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline IG_Saint

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 196
  • Infamy: 20
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: IG
rules discussion
« on: September 29, 2012, 05:53:52 pm »
0
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.

Offline Zotte

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 87
  • Infamy: 12
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Basileia ton Romaion
  • Game nicks: Zotte, Craftybadger
  • IRC nick: Zotte
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2012, 06:14:32 pm »
0
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.

Offline Riddaren

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 601
  • Infamy: 298
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Burg Krems
  • Game nicks: Riddaren, Matthaus
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2012, 06:23:01 pm »
0
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:
« Last Edit: September 29, 2012, 06:30:52 pm by Riddaren »

Offline IG_Saint

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 196
  • Infamy: 20
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: IG
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2012, 07:08:23 pm »
0
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.

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.

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.

Offline Corsair831

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1168
  • Infamy: 616
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2012, 12:29:17 am »
0
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.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2012, 12:32:31 pm by Corsair831 »
I 10/10'd cRPG on moddb.com!

Do your bit for our community and write a 10/10 review for cRPG on http://www.moddb.com/mods/crpg !

Offline Gnjus

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1831
  • Infamy: 397
  • cRPG Player Sir White Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Siktir git, pislik okçu.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Turklings
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2012, 08:33:58 am »
0
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 ?
Do you honestly think you have any sort of moral authority, Reyiz? Go genocide some more armenians and deny it ever happened, please, and stay in the middle east.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Corsair831

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1168
  • Infamy: 616
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2012, 12:23:48 pm »
0
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.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2012, 12:30:21 pm by Corsair831 »
I 10/10'd cRPG on moddb.com!

Do your bit for our community and write a 10/10 review for cRPG on http://www.moddb.com/mods/crpg !

Offline Haboe

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1090
  • Infamy: 331
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Born with a shield on my back. Difficult birth.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Mercenaries
  • Game nicks: Merc_Haboe
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2012, 12:32:48 pm »
0
All ranged should be under the same category.
Its should be up to the team to make a choice between trowing archer or crossbow.



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.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline SirCymro_Crusader

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1095
  • Infamy: 134
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2012, 02:01:08 pm »
0
What are the specific armour/weapon restrictions?

Offline Corsair831

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1168
  • Infamy: 616
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2012, 06:49:15 pm »
0
What are the specific armour/weapon restrictions?

1 mauler, 1 HA/HX per team, 1 horse of over destrier value per team
I 10/10'd cRPG on moddb.com!

Do your bit for our community and write a 10/10 review for cRPG on http://www.moddb.com/mods/crpg !

Offline Gnjus

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1831
  • Infamy: 397
  • cRPG Player Sir White Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Siktir git, pislik okçu.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Turklings
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2012, 06:56:29 pm »
0
1 mauler per team

Great Maul or all mauls/mallets/long mauls ?
Do you honestly think you have any sort of moral authority, Reyiz? Go genocide some more armenians and deny it ever happened, please, and stay in the middle east.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline SirCymro_Crusader

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1095
  • Infamy: 134
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2012, 01:50:33 pm »
0
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)

Offline Tuetensuppe

  • Event Manager
  • *
  • Renown: 1057
  • Infamy: 88
  • cRPG Player Sir White Knight A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Mercenaries
  • Game nicks: Merc_Tuetensuppe Tojtensoup_throwing_spoons Merc_cry_me_a_soup
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #12 on: October 01, 2012, 05:09:22 pm »
0
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
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Quote from: Gnjus
yes thats the problem, no more nice clans, everyone acts like theyre the real thing but all are just greedy backstabbing arrogant sons of bitches

Offline Corsair831

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1168
  • Infamy: 616
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #13 on: October 01, 2012, 05:55:35 pm »
0
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 ;(
I 10/10'd cRPG on moddb.com!

Do your bit for our community and write a 10/10 review for cRPG on http://www.moddb.com/mods/crpg !

Offline Gnjus

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1831
  • Infamy: 397
  • cRPG Player Sir White Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Siktir git, pislik okçu.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Turklings
Re: rules discussion
« Reply #14 on: October 01, 2012, 06:22:37 pm »
0
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)

Do you honestly think you have any sort of moral authority, Reyiz? Go genocide some more armenians and deny it ever happened, please, and stay in the middle east.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login