Nah, random pairing shouldn't be a thing in a tournament of this size, or a regimental tournament in general. The point of these types of tournaments is to create proper competition among regiments. So it makes sense for the participating regiments to attempt to create a strong team within reasonable limits. In return, it makes very little sense to leave this process up to complete or partial randomness. All this will achieve is that it will "cripple" certain top regiments just "because they are good". Additionally, certain top teams will get lucky and get a decent lower tier reg and others will get unlucky and get a completely useless one. All this will do is make the tournament feel like a bit of a waste (or missed chance) to the top team that got unlucky. It will also make the tournament even more one sided for the teams that got lucky as there will be fewer proper teams to stop them. It would thus only make the tournament an even more one-sided affair for the teams that got lucky. This divide in skill between the unlucky and lucky teams would only become more apparent after the playoff stage and make the tournament less interesting. As a host it should be a priority to keep randomness and luck to a minimum in a tournament. (To the extent of what is achievable of course)Appreciate the indepth answer mate and I agree with a number of points here and I can see why you take issue. My main misgivings with the original approach is that this time around we won't likely achieve more than 2 groups, wheras last year we achieved 3. The only way in my mind to give newer or less competitive regiments a fighting chance was to get them involved in more competitive pairings. Although I must admit this may be rose-tinted from my perspective... as you say this is more likely to result in frustration as opposed to the supporting venture I envisioned when thinking this up initially. the point you've made about the large skill gap at the lower end is very valid and would create a situation in which comp regs would get lucky or unlucky pairings... this would ofc greatly depend on who actually applies, as there are plenty of what I would call 'mid tier' regiments which would be much less of a handicap to the big boys if we did take the randomized approach.
I think leaving team selection up to randomness also creates more problems than it fixes. And in this particular situation, I don't think it even fixes the problem you've laid out here in the first place. There will always be a massive divide between the level of top tier teams and lower tier teams within the group stage. Even if 15th 92nd 13e 45th were to pair up with a complete casual reg, they would likely dominate their group. (Assuming these regiments are all in different groups). They will still finish top of their group and dominate most matches there. However, when it would come to to the playoffs, random pairing would make the playoffs less competitive and of a lower overall skill level. Instead of having (for example) 8 top tier regiments with medium regiments affixed to them in playoffs, you'd have 8 top tier regiments with low tier regiments affixed to them in playoffs. Meaning the overall skill level of the playoffs will be lower.
The most important thing for this tournament is that the top competitive regiments do not group up (15th 92nd 13e 45thn 96y and 71st right now). This won't happen anyways as there is no desire or incentive among top regiments to team up like that. Slightly besides the point, but I think it would also be much more interesting if the last year's champions (15th & 77y) get the chance to defend their title. Additionally, non-random team selection would allow same language coalitions to form (for example a IVe and 13e team), which would be able to communicate better with one another and make the competition more interesting.
It's impossible to fairly randomise a tournament like this since there are such variances of skill within regiments, just have a rule once again in which "top" regiments cannot play with one another, and give the larger regiments such as 45thn/92nd the ability to play with two lines.No doubt it would involve some surprises and would be a serious shake up, just looking to guage what people want from the tournament. I am more than happy to go ahead with whichever option suits the majority of the attendance best.
Yeah it is difficult to get the more casually oriented regiments to sign up. I understand that they will not have any desire to sign up to a tournament where they don't have any chance and are just there to "fill the groups". But such a problem could also be fixed by having a lower tier bracket and an upper tier bracket in playoffs. Alternatively, you could disconnect the two tiers completely from the get-go and have a Division A and Division B, like RGL S7 had. Of course you would then run into the problem of having to decide which team belongs in which tier, but you would also run into that problem if you were to split the teams and randomize them as you proposed in your OP.Nah, random pairing shouldn't be a thing in a tournament of this size, or a regimental tournament in general. The point of these types of tournaments is to create proper competition among regiments. So it makes sense for the participating regiments to attempt to create a strong team within reasonable limits. In return, it makes very little sense to leave this process up to complete or partial randomness. All this will achieve is that it will "cripple" certain top regiments just "because they are good". Additionally, certain top teams will get lucky and get a decent lower tier reg and others will get unlucky and get a completely useless one. All this will do is make the tournament feel like a bit of a waste (or missed chance) to the top team that got unlucky. It will also make the tournament even more one sided for the teams that got lucky as there will be fewer proper teams to stop them. It would thus only make the tournament an even more one-sided affair for the teams that got lucky. This divide in skill between the unlucky and lucky teams would only become more apparent after the playoff stage and make the tournament less interesting. As a host it should be a priority to keep randomness and luck to a minimum in a tournament. (To the extent of what is achievable of course)Appreciate the indepth answer mate and I agree with a number of points here and I can see why you take issue. My main misgivings with the original approach is that this time around we won't likely achieve more than 2 groups, wheras last year we achieved 3. The only way in my mind to give newer or less competitive regiments a fighting chance was to get them involved in more competitive pairings. Although I must admit this may be rose-tinted from my perspective... as you say this is more likely to result in frustration as opposed to the supporting venture I envisioned when thinking this up initially. the point you've made about the large skill gap at the lower end is very valid and would create a situation in which comp regs would get lucky or unlucky pairings... this would ofc greatly depend on who actually applies, as there are plenty of what I would call 'mid tier' regiments which would be much less of a handicap to the big boys if we did take the randomized approach.
I think leaving team selection up to randomness also creates more problems than it fixes. And in this particular situation, I don't think it even fixes the problem you've laid out here in the first place. There will always be a massive divide between the level of top tier teams and lower tier teams within the group stage. Even if 15th 92nd 13e 45th were to pair up with a complete casual reg, they would likely dominate their group. (Assuming these regiments are all in different groups). They will still finish top of their group and dominate most matches there. However, when it would come to to the playoffs, random pairing would make the playoffs less competitive and of a lower overall skill level. Instead of having (for example) 8 top tier regiments with medium regiments affixed to them in playoffs, you'd have 8 top tier regiments with low tier regiments affixed to them in playoffs. Meaning the overall skill level of the playoffs will be lower.
The most important thing for this tournament is that the top competitive regiments do not group up (15th 92nd 13e 45thn 96y and 71st right now). This won't happen anyways as there is no desire or incentive among top regiments to team up like that. Slightly besides the point, but I think it would also be much more interesting if the last year's champions (15th & 77y) get the chance to defend their title. Additionally, non-random team selection would allow same language coalitions to form (for example a IVe and 13e team), which would be able to communicate better with one another and make the competition more interesting.
Re. the multiple companies I wouldn't rule out the 92nd or 45th bringing their centre line (how different is this really for the 45e, 2eGren we saw last year from IVe corps?) but these are the only regiments I can really see being able to pull off something like that. Keep the ideas/discussion going guys, if anything I'm more confused than ever as to the way forward as of rn!
Whilst I would very much be up for a rematch of 15thYR/77y vs 33/92nd, perhaps it would be more interesting/better to ask the regiments that participated last time to all find new partners?
@RikkertIf the requirement to be a top regiment is to draw in a 1v1 vs 45thn, we might have a lot of top regiments to rule out
The whole argument you brought makes perfect sense however I can't help but find your perspective of the whole 'stacked teams' extremely biased. Like yeah, I think any sensed people would agree with your ranking of the current possible top teams however, it's a bit rich somehow the 77y isn't listed in there but the 45thN is, whereas they just drew each other last week in EIC. Like your duo is fine but somehow any other possible top team is to be ruled out because it's 'too strong'?
I know you probably mean well and just want to avoid a stack that would stomp any opposition and obviously, we all know you and the 77y are a team of regiments that play together because they like each other, not because they care about the win. I would also like to have the returning champions come back to defend their title, seems ever fitting. But somehow, I just feel a bit uncomfortable that a potential team ranking including the 45thN as a top team, but not the 77y, had to come from you.
Generally speaking, I agree with the overall sentiment though. I don't like the idea of random pairing and would very much prefer that regiments like the 45thN/92nd get either the possibility to play with two lines of their owns (like Mask suggested) or form a coalition/duo with regiments they enjoy playing with (like the 92nd/33rd runner-up team of last edition). Rather than putting a load of restriction on the way people are allowed to form teams, why not just try to prevent what's obviously an attempt at abusing the tournament's format instead of limiting a 'potentially strong' but genuine coalition of two regiments that would enjoy playing together.
As an example, the 13e/96y teaming-up would make zero sense considering both regiments have little to nothing in common, that I have always clearly stated I dislike how 96y approach linebattle competition purely when it comes to tactics/gameplay, we don't have a strong group of players that like one another, etc...; but in another scenario, a team that's potentially (in average at least) as strong could be allowed on the principle that they just want to have a good time together. Rather than restricting for the sake of restricting, I would just prefer seeing Kincaid rely on the opinion of trustable and fair community members to decide on what's to be allowed & forbidden.
With that being said....@Presidente @USE4Life @Kieran, you guys looking for a partner by any chance? :-*
@RikkertYeah, I see what you mean. Although that was the only match in a while where we've seen 77y do that well. The result was a fair one, but the 45thN got unlucky with shooting in couple of rounds so it could have gone their way quite easily. I'm not saying the 5-5 was a fluke by any means, but I think it is harsh to instantly pretend like the 77y is already back at the same level as the 45th. It was quite clear that the 45thN was the better regiment in terms of melee ability by a major extent, which is what I mostly based my claim off.
The whole argument you brought makes perfect sense however I can't help but find your perspective of the whole 'stacked teams' extremely biased. Like yeah, I think any sensed people would agree with your ranking of the current possible top teams however, it's a bit rich somehow the 77y isn't listed in there but the 45thN is, whereas they just drew each other last week in EIC. Like your duo is fine but somehow any other possible top team is to be ruled out because it's 'too strong'?
I know you probably mean well and just want to avoid a stack that would stomp any opposition and obviously, we all know you and the 77y are a team of regiments that play together because they like each other, not because they care about the win. I would also like to have the returning champions come back to defend their title, seems ever fitting. But somehow, I just feel a bit uncomfortable that a potential team ranking including the 45thN as a top team, but not the 77y, had to come from you.
some of you need to come down from your ivory towersmight have to be a bit more specific there big dog
@RikkertYeah, I see what you mean. Although that was the only match in a while where we've seen 77y do that well. The result was a fair one, but the 45thN got unlucky with shooting in couple of rounds so it could have gone their way quite easily. I'm not saying the 5-5 was a fluke by any means, but I think it is harsh to instantly pretend like the 77y is already back at the same level as the 45th. It was quite clear that the 45thN was the better regiment in terms of melee ability by a major extent, which is what I mostly based my claim off.
The whole argument you brought makes perfect sense however I can't help but find your perspective of the whole 'stacked teams' extremely biased. Like yeah, I think any sensed people would agree with your ranking of the current possible top teams however, it's a bit rich somehow the 77y isn't listed in there but the 45thN is, whereas they just drew each other last week in EIC. Like your duo is fine but somehow any other possible top team is to be ruled out because it's 'too strong'?
I know you probably mean well and just want to avoid a stack that would stomp any opposition and obviously, we all know you and the 77y are a team of regiments that play together because they like each other, not because they care about the win. I would also like to have the returning champions come back to defend their title, seems ever fitting. But somehow, I just feel a bit uncomfortable that a potential team ranking including the 45thN as a top team, but not the 77y, had to come from you.
If anything, if 77y prove they are a top regiment again by making it far enough in the EIC to be considered a top regiment by the rules of this tournament, you won't hear me object to it if our coalition is not allowed.
dont use my words when you are not worthy of it@RikkertYeah, I see what you mean. Although that was the only match in a while where we've seen 77y do that well. The result was a fair one, but the 45thN got unlucky with shooting in couple of rounds so it could have gone their way quite easily. I'm not saying the 5-5 was a fluke by any means, but I think it is harsh to instantly pretend like the 77y is already back at the same level as the 45th. It was quite clear that the 45thN was the better regiment in terms of melee ability by a major extent, which is what I mostly based my claim off.
The whole argument you brought makes perfect sense however I can't help but find your perspective of the whole 'stacked teams' extremely biased. Like yeah, I think any sensed people would agree with your ranking of the current possible top teams however, it's a bit rich somehow the 77y isn't listed in there but the 45thN is, whereas they just drew each other last week in EIC. Like your duo is fine but somehow any other possible top team is to be ruled out because it's 'too strong'?
I know you probably mean well and just want to avoid a stack that would stomp any opposition and obviously, we all know you and the 77y are a team of regiments that play together because they like each other, not because they care about the win. I would also like to have the returning champions come back to defend their title, seems ever fitting. But somehow, I just feel a bit uncomfortable that a potential team ranking including the 45thN as a top team, but not the 77y, had to come from you.
If anything, if 77y prove they are a top regiment again by making it far enough in the EIC to be considered a top regiment by the rules of this tournament, you won't hear me object to it if our coalition is not allowed.This round lives rent free in my head(https://i.gyazo.com/26cfab120948fa225a43a20ba86de406.jpg)[close]
We were up 3^ before that volley and lost the round. Ultimately there was that unlucky round and melee that we really shouldn't have lost where we were up 1, but as the great vegetable once said, I say to you @Gaz 'you're not better than us'.
Get Proven
Long story short this is an extremely difficult tournament to balance correctly and I absolutely do not envy you KincaidI'll try my best ;D ;D Either way tbf aslong as its enjoyable for 90% of us thats the end goal!
I think its pretty clear that the randomized format is unpopular, which I am more than happy to walk away from and to stick with the tried and true that we ran with last season. As many have said a stacked team at this point is unlikely to happen in any case due to lack of association between the regs for which this could apply to anyway :)A double elimination format for this is very unnecessary honestly. I would just stick to single.
I suppose now we can move the discussion to something touched on briefly by a few responses; I would like to continue with an upper/lower bracket (or A & B league) so as to offer something for those teams which don't end up making the cut. I must admit I'm not that clued up on the whole double elimination format which EIC seems to have adopted this season - is this something which we'd like to see if we opted for play-offs? I've no doubt we could put together a good exciting league like RGL S7 aswell, it really is going to be quite subjective as to which is better. Might just put a poll on this thread once we've come up with some suitable options.Long story short this is an extremely difficult tournament to balance correctly and I absolutely do not envy you KincaidI'll try my best ;D ;D Either way tbf aslong as its enjoyable for 90% of us thats the end goal!
A double elimination format is always unnecessary honestly. I would just stick to single.
get rekt clashsome of you need to come down from your ivory towersmight have to be a bit more specific there big dog
get rekt clashsome of you need to come down from your ivory towersmight have to be a bit more specific there big dog
btw 77y is stronger than last year, you can clearly see it with all the people who recently joined, their performances and their attendance
MRGL 0 win german underdog looking for a big top regiment to carry us, hit me up xxBrothers of the XIII, assemble
Reforming 27th just for thisGood luck
Reforming 27th just for thisMake sure Whiteknight is in
Ffs TardetOn I VaKarM.net am there is literally an sick achievement called 'A good coffee and help some good news'. Needless to say that was the first I me unlocked pls. ;D
I'll come back and read this later its too early
The only vibes I get from those videos is a bunch of people who can't block charge at each other with very little thought behind it.
But on a more serious note, the meta of this game has simply evolved beyond what you see in those videos. I don't necessarily believe that the meta you're describing was better or more entertaining, it just seems like complete chaos and randomness to me. Neither do I believe that different or more interesting maps are going to change the meta in any meaningful way. A map being interesting or not does not change whether a weaker regiment can run from melee or not. Yes, retreating up a hill could potentially slow the regiment down, but that seems like such a specific scenario that I doubt the actual impact it would have on the meta. If regiments want to retreat from melee like that, they will simply make sure they're not positioned in a way where their only way of retreat is up a big hill. Tbh, I think it is perfectly understandable for a regiment with weaker melee to run away from the stronger regiment in a 2v2. It is really annoying to play against, but as long as you don't retreat like 2Lr did last time I have nothing against it. I think the map terrain was mostly fine in the last 2v2, although it wouldn't hurt to make the hills slightly more pronounced. You don't want super hilly maps because then the sides will just camp. You also don't want super flat maps with no cover, because then one of the two sides will stand in spawn and shoot. You want slight rolling hills everywhere or alternatively one big hill in the middle that both sides can reach around the same time, with some smaller hills for cover around it. I agree that the maps were definitely too big last time tho, this didn't help the problem of regiments running around the map, but Kincaid already said he was working on that.Edit: for anyone that didn't see the 2Lr shit last yearhttps://youtu.be/VgziN9QOUwc[close]
The only vibes I get from those videos is a bunch of people who can't block charge at each other with very little thought behind it.
But on a more serious note, the meta of this game has simply evolved beyond what you see in those videos. I don't necessarily believe that the meta you're describing was better or more entertaining, it just seems like complete chaos and randomness to me. Neither do I believe that different or more interesting maps are going to change the meta in any meaningful way. A map being interesting or not does not change whether a weaker regiment can run from melee or not. Yes, retreating up a hill could potentially slow the regiment down, but that seems like such a specific scenario that I doubt the actual impact it would have on the meta. If regiments want to retreat from melee like that, they will simply make sure they're not positioned in a way where their only way of retreat is up a big hill. Tbh, I think it is perfectly understandable for a regiment with weaker melee to run away from the stronger regiment in a 2v2. It is really annoying to play against, but as long as you don't retreat like 2Lr did last time I have nothing against it. I think the map terrain was mostly fine in the last 2v2, although it wouldn't hurt to make the hills slightly more pronounced. You don't want super hilly maps because then the sides will just camp. You also don't want super flat maps with no cover, because then one of the two sides will stand in spawn and shoot. You want slight rolling hills everywhere or alternatively one big hill in the middle that both sides can reach around the same time, with some smaller hills for cover around it. I agree that the maps were definitely too big last time tho, this didn't help the problem of regiments running around the map, but Kincaid already said he was working on that.
I think a 2 Div system might work better, but before you decide anything best just see how many sign ups this gets. That will intice more and more people to "get involved" (-_-).The first video was mostly there to show that you can have entertaining 2v2s on maps that have trees and slightly medium hills. I'd take that match over 80% of the 2v2s I have seen in the last two years and it's not even close. You obviously can't strictly compare it to nowadays linebattles as people are more skilled in the current community and we don't use FiC no more which contributes for a lot of the chaotic gameplay. Call me crazy for it all you want for preferring that though, I don't mind!
In fairness Tardet that first video you posted I have ofc seen before but its not a great example of the old times XD
I think a 2 Div system might work better, but before you decide anything best just see how many sign ups this gets. That will intice more and more people to "get involved" (-_-).
In fairness Tardet that first video you posted I have ofc seen before but its not a great example of the old times XD
You're like Trump...I think a 2 Div system might work better, but before you decide anything best just see how many sign ups this gets. That will intice more and more people to "get involved" (-_-).
In fairness Tardet that first video you posted I have ofc seen before but its not a great example of the old times XD
This is why am I most influential 2020
:'( why u gotta do me like thatThe only vibes I get from those videos is a bunch of people who can't block charge at each other with very little thought behind it.
Just when I thought you would like it out of all people as it sums up your gameplay to perfection.
I didn't play 1v1s back in 2013, so I can't really judge from anything other than the video's that I've seen. And, yeah I personally hate passive players or passive play in general and I personally really don't like it either when people run away from me. I hate that kinda shit with a passion because it doesn't feel like you're being out-skilled as an individual, just "out-patienced".But on a more serious note, the meta of this game has simply evolved beyond what you see in those videos. I don't necessarily believe that the meta you're describing was better or more entertaining, it just seems like complete chaos and randomness to me. Neither do I believe that different or more interesting maps are going to change the meta in any meaningful way. A map being interesting or not does not change whether a weaker regiment can run from melee or not. Yes, retreating up a hill could potentially slow the regiment down, but that seems like such a specific scenario that I doubt the actual impact it would have on the meta. If regiments want to retreat from melee like that, they will simply make sure they're not positioned in a way where their only way of retreat is up a big hill. Tbh, I think it is perfectly understandable for a regiment with weaker melee to run away from the stronger regiment in a 2v2. It is really annoying to play against, but as long as you don't retreat like 2Lr did last time I have nothing against it. I think the map terrain was mostly fine in the last 2v2, although it wouldn't hurt to make the hills slightly more pronounced. You don't want super hilly maps because then the sides will just camp. You also don't want super flat maps with no cover, because then one of the two sides will stand in spawn and shoot. You want slight rolling hills everywhere or alternatively one big hill in the middle that both sides can reach around the same time, with some smaller hills for cover around it. I agree that the maps were definitely too big last time tho, this didn't help the problem of regiments running around the map, but Kincaid already said he was working on that.I am not denying the meta has evolved but you must be some sort of masochist adept of a dark cult if you actually enjoy the current meta of 1v1/2v2 linebattles more than what you played in 2012/2013. For instance, nobody would argue the game's way more skilled than it used to be in 2012/2014 but thinking what we have now is actually more entertaining - in the literal sense of the word - really surprise me coming from you. I don't argue that it was better as it's purely subjective but as someone who actually played both for years, there is no denying that the way to play linebattles back in the day was more enjoyable. Not more skilled, definitely not more tactical but more enjoyable without a doubt. An indisputable majority of the OG players that came back to the game (leaders especially) will tell you they despise the way the meta evolved and again, it's not necessarily a bias as they will also agree on other indisputable, better aspect of the current competitive community.
:'( why u gotta do me like thatThe only vibes I get from those videos is a bunch of people who can't block charge at each other with very little thought behind it.
Just when I thought you would like it out of all people as it sums up your gameplay to perfection.I didn't play 1v1s back in 2013, so I can't really judge from anything other than the video's that I've seen. And, yeah I personally hate passive players or passive play in general and I personally really don't like it either when people run away from me. I hate that kinda shit with a passion because it doesn't feel like you're being out-skilled as an individual, just "out-patienced".But on a more serious note, the meta of this game has simply evolved beyond what you see in those videos. I don't necessarily believe that the meta you're describing was better or more entertaining, it just seems like complete chaos and randomness to me. Neither do I believe that different or more interesting maps are going to change the meta in any meaningful way. A map being interesting or not does not change whether a weaker regiment can run from melee or not. Yes, retreating up a hill could potentially slow the regiment down, but that seems like such a specific scenario that I doubt the actual impact it would have on the meta. If regiments want to retreat from melee like that, they will simply make sure they're not positioned in a way where their only way of retreat is up a big hill. Tbh, I think it is perfectly understandable for a regiment with weaker melee to run away from the stronger regiment in a 2v2. It is really annoying to play against, but as long as you don't retreat like 2Lr did last time I have nothing against it. I think the map terrain was mostly fine in the last 2v2, although it wouldn't hurt to make the hills slightly more pronounced. You don't want super hilly maps because then the sides will just camp. You also don't want super flat maps with no cover, because then one of the two sides will stand in spawn and shoot. You want slight rolling hills everywhere or alternatively one big hill in the middle that both sides can reach around the same time, with some smaller hills for cover around it. I agree that the maps were definitely too big last time tho, this didn't help the problem of regiments running around the map, but Kincaid already said he was working on that.I am not denying the meta has evolved but you must be some sort of masochist adept of a dark cult if you actually enjoy the current meta of 1v1/2v2 linebattles more than what you played in 2012/2013. For instance, nobody would argue the game's way more skilled than it used to be in 2012/2014 but thinking what we have now is actually more entertaining - in the literal sense of the word - really surprise me coming from you. I don't argue that it was better as it's purely subjective but as someone who actually played both for years, there is no denying that the way to play linebattles back in the day was more enjoyable. Not more skilled, definitely not more tactical but more enjoyable without a doubt. An indisputable majority of the OG players that came back to the game (leaders especially) will tell you they despise the way the meta evolved and again, it's not necessarily a bias as they will also agree on other indisputable, better aspect of the current competitive community.
But, as a regimental CO , a good part of my personal enjoyment in 1v1s comes from when my regiment wins because it has a coherent line and is disciplined in melee. It is entertaining to me if we win melee fights because people listen to commands and fight properly. For example, if we call for middle to push into a flank and it works, I definitely get a great deal of personal enjoyment from it. I know 1v1 melee isn't the "glorious" all out charge melee as it might have once been. But you have to understand that this regiment is a project that I've invested a lot of time in over the last three years (yes very sad), so when it goes right I get a great deal of personal enjoyment from it. In the RGL final, where 92nd was essentially sitting back and waiting for us to make mistakes, we obviously weren't happy with the manner in which we were losing. Every round was super drawn out and often resulted in two lines spinning in circles and a lot of running around chasing stragglers. We weren't having fun, until we adapted and started doing the same. Mels said something after one of the rounds which stuck with me: "This isn't melee, but I'm actually quite enjoying it". The melee itself is maybe less enjoyable as it is less "glorious" to simply push one flank and up/down everyone that fails to escape whilst the other flank falls back. But that is simply how regimental melee is won and I enjoy it when my regiment does it right.
I understand some older regimental leaders weren't happy with the meta last time they played. (I suppose you're talking about 14e and 84e in the last season) They obviously didn't like it as they weren't used to it, I assume those regiments were expecting the same type of melee as in those videos from 2012. But they also didn't like it because they weren't able or willing to adapt to it, and lost because of it. I can understand that 84e and 14e didn't care enough about the game and weren't around for long enough at the time to want to or to be able to adapt to the meta. They simply didn't care about winning the tournament and didn't have the time to adapt, so from their point of view the matches against us might have been really horrible. But from my point of view, the matches against them were very enjoyable.
Not gonna reply to the rest as we seem to agree on that. I should've read ur first post better.
@Rikkert:-*
Tbh melee and the way you described isn't the problem. Unless you push it to the extreme as 96y did it for a while, it never bothered me as what you described is essentially a mix of tactics and skill and that's why we still play this game. The 14e & 84e may have not enjoyed that aspect either but it's never something they expressed to me. It's really only the approach to maps (that comes from regimental 1v1s) and the gameplay of running aways for a good part of the match that pretty much all the OG I have talked with found repulsive and certainly didn't motivate them to stay longer than they had to.
The analogy you found with the RGL match vs 92nd is however well-chosen and helps me understand your point of view even better. Don't have much to argue in that regards, what you said is spot on even though I personally find it a bit disappointing as I am someone who plays 1st) to have fun then close 2nd) to win. Obviously, the two are very much linked together but I have always won by playing in a manner that I found to enjoy and I don't know how I would react if I was put in the situation you were. Would have probably done the exact same tbh but I know it would have hurt my motivation to play on a long-term basis.
Anyhow, another paragraph duet to come down to something we already knew, we mostly agree with each other in the big picture, just small details we see differently.
:'( why u gotta do me like thatThe only vibes I get from those videos is a bunch of people who can't block charge at each other with very little thought behind it.
Just when I thought you would like it out of all people as it sums up your gameplay to perfection.I didn't play 1v1s back in 2013, so I can't really judge from anything other than the video's that I've seen. And, yeah I personally hate passive players or passive play in general and I personally really don't like it either when people run away from me. I hate that kinda shit with a passion because it doesn't feel like you're being out-skilled as an individual, just "out-patienced".But on a more serious note, the meta of this game has simply evolved beyond what you see in those videos. I don't necessarily believe that the meta you're describing was better or more entertaining, it just seems like complete chaos and randomness to me. Neither do I believe that different or more interesting maps are going to change the meta in any meaningful way. A map being interesting or not does not change whether a weaker regiment can run from melee or not. Yes, retreating up a hill could potentially slow the regiment down, but that seems like such a specific scenario that I doubt the actual impact it would have on the meta. If regiments want to retreat from melee like that, they will simply make sure they're not positioned in a way where their only way of retreat is up a big hill. Tbh, I think it is perfectly understandable for a regiment with weaker melee to run away from the stronger regiment in a 2v2. It is really annoying to play against, but as long as you don't retreat like 2Lr did last time I have nothing against it. I think the map terrain was mostly fine in the last 2v2, although it wouldn't hurt to make the hills slightly more pronounced. You don't want super hilly maps because then the sides will just camp. You also don't want super flat maps with no cover, because then one of the two sides will stand in spawn and shoot. You want slight rolling hills everywhere or alternatively one big hill in the middle that both sides can reach around the same time, with some smaller hills for cover around it. I agree that the maps were definitely too big last time tho, this didn't help the problem of regiments running around the map, but Kincaid already said he was working on that.I am not denying the meta has evolved but you must be some sort of masochist adept of a dark cult if you actually enjoy the current meta of 1v1/2v2 linebattles more than what you played in 2012/2013. For instance, nobody would argue the game's way more skilled than it used to be in 2012/2014 but thinking what we have now is actually more entertaining - in the literal sense of the word - really surprise me coming from you. I don't argue that it was better as it's purely subjective but as someone who actually played both for years, there is no denying that the way to play linebattles back in the day was more enjoyable. Not more skilled, definitely not more tactical but more enjoyable without a doubt. An indisputable majority of the OG players that came back to the game (leaders especially) will tell you they despise the way the meta evolved and again, it's not necessarily a bias as they will also agree on other indisputable, better aspect of the current competitive community.
But, as a regimental CO , a good part of my personal enjoyment in 1v1s comes from when my regiment wins because it has a coherent line and is disciplined in melee. It is entertaining to me if we win melee fights because people listen to commands and fight properly. For example, if we call for middle to push into a flank and it works, I definitely get a great deal of personal enjoyment from it. I know 1v1 melee isn't the "glorious" all out charge melee as it might have once been. But you have to understand that this regiment is a project that I've invested a lot of time in over the last three years (yes very sad), so when it goes right I get a great deal of personal enjoyment from it. In the RGL final, where 92nd was essentially sitting back and waiting for us to make mistakes, we obviously weren't happy with the manner in which we were losing. Every round was super drawn out and often resulted in two lines spinning in circles and a lot of running around chasing stragglers. We weren't having fun, until we adapted and started doing the same. Mels said something after one of the rounds which stuck with me: "This isn't melee, but I'm actually quite enjoying it". The melee itself is maybe less enjoyable as it is less "glorious" to simply push one flank and up/down everyone that fails to escape whilst the other flank falls back. But that is simply how regimental melee is won and I enjoy it when my regiment does it right.
I understand some older regimental leaders weren't happy with the meta last time they played. (I suppose you're talking about 14e and 84e in the last season) They obviously didn't like it as they weren't used to it, I assume those regiments were expecting the same type of melee as in those videos from 2012. But they also didn't like it because they weren't able or willing to adapt to it, and lost because of it. I can understand that 84e and 14e didn't care enough about the game and weren't around for long enough at the time to want to or to be able to adapt to the meta. They simply didn't care about winning the tournament and didn't have the time to adapt, so from their point of view the matches against us might have been really horrible. But from my point of view, the matches against them were very enjoyable.
Not gonna reply to the rest as we seem to agree on that. I should've read ur first post better.
Why not just do randomised seedings based on signups; have 4 divisions, and then randomise the first seed with the last seed, second seed with third seed.Reread the first 2 pages.
So you'd always have the 'worst' teams with the best teams and the upper middle with the lower middle. I dont think having extra brackets solve the issue. Since it's a '2v2', the whole point would be to have two separate regiments, working together to win, having one regiment split into two sorta defeats the purpose of a 2v2, that would just make it a 1v2 with the 1 being a longer split line.
If regiments hate each other after pairing then A. You signed up knowing you could have the possibility of that pairing, B. Solve the dispute by changing them with a similar seed team by liasing with one of the other top seeds to exchange. Or make an algorithm that doesnt match teams up who have issues.
That would make the tournament somewhat randomised and fun.
Why not just do randomised seedings based on signups; have 4 divisions, and then randomise the first seed with the last seed, second seed with third seed.Reread the first 2 pages.
So you'd always have the 'worst' teams with the best teams and the upper middle with the lower middle. I dont think having extra brackets solve the issue. Since it's a '2v2', the whole point would be to have two separate regiments, working together to win, having one regiment split into two sorta defeats the purpose of a 2v2, that would just make it a 1v2 with the 1 being a longer split line.
If regiments hate each other after pairing then A. You signed up knowing you could have the possibility of that pairing, B. Solve the dispute by changing them with a similar seed team by liasing with one of the other top seeds to exchange. Or make an algorithm that doesnt match teams up who have issues.
That would make the tournament somewhat randomised and fun.
Kind Regards trot888
Fietta man, just stop, you really really really really just don't seem to understand how regiments work. (as also evidenced by your posts on the 13e thread yday as well) I've never seen someone miss the mark so badly about this game, whilst claiming that everyone else is in the wrong from a moral highground.Why not just do randomised seedings based on signups; have 4 divisions, and then randomise the first seed with the last seed, second seed with third seed.Reread the first 2 pages.
So you'd always have the 'worst' teams with the best teams and the upper middle with the lower middle. I dont think having extra brackets solve the issue. Since it's a '2v2', the whole point would be to have two separate regiments, working together to win, having one regiment split into two sorta defeats the purpose of a 2v2, that would just make it a 1v2 with the 1 being a longer split line.
If regiments hate each other after pairing then A. You signed up knowing you could have the possibility of that pairing, B. Solve the dispute by changing them with a similar seed team by liasing with one of the other top seeds to exchange. Or make an algorithm that doesnt match teams up who have issues.
That would make the tournament somewhat randomised and fun.
Kind Regards trot888
Yup I did and all I see is people advocating playing with their own regiment and pairings due to elitism.
Worst comes worse, if people complain about the minute difference between the seedings, you can make a full seeding where the top seed of division A matches with the bottom of division D unless there's a dispute.
The 45thN Centre Company is called the dogshit for a reason. Stacked with a bunch of casual, highping, no microphone, minisiege recruits.
They are mostly dogshit at melee and a bunch have problems to follow commands on english.
Nr13 beats them in a groupfight for example. (no front)
The 45thN Centre Company is called the dogshit for a reason. Stacked with a bunch of casual, highping, no microphone, minisiege recruits.
They are mostly dogshit at melee and a bunch have problems to follow commands on english.
Nr13 beats them in a groupfight for example. (no front)
Beeing forced to play with a regiment I don't like/match in a competitive tournament is contra productive for the fun and success of the event.
If the chemistry is cancer and they turn out to be dogshit in the first match, I surely don't wanna play other cancerous matches with them.
It's like voluntarily spending time with someone you don't like and causes you to loose, no one enjoys that.
Edit: for anyone that didn't see the 2Lr shit last yearhttps://youtu.be/VgziN9QOUwc[close]
Well that leaves us no other choice but to play with the 13e I guessThe 45thN Centre Company is called the dogshit for a reason. Stacked with a bunch of casual, highping, no microphone, minisiege recruits.
They are mostly dogshit at melee and a bunch have problems to follow commands on english.
Nr13 beats them in a groupfight for example. (no front)
thats actually a full front
In German we call this "Hetzjagd" ;DEdit: for anyone that didn't see the 2Lr shit last yearhttps://youtu.be/VgziN9QOUwc[close]
Everyone talking about 2Lr running away from 15th but no one sees Nr13 taking the 77y down in melee with barely any losses... :'(EXCELLENT
We noticed, but its not hard to take down the 77y, especially when its lead by the one of the worst EU leaders :/Gi is back in the 77y?
The 45thN Centre Company is called the dogshit for a reason. Stacked with a bunch of casual, highping, no microphone, minisiege recruits.my voice speak in English this is so cute
They are mostly dogshit at melee and a bunch have problems to follow commands on english.
Nr13 beats them in a groupfight for example. (no front)
Nonetheless I still love all of them and would like to play with them in a 2v2 line tournament.
Beeing forced to play with a regiment I don't like/match in a competitive tournament is contra productive for the fun and success of the event.
If the chemistry is cancer and they turn out to be dogshit in the first match, I surely don't wanna play other cancerous matches with them.
It's like voluntarily spending time with someone you don't like and causes you to loose, no one enjoys that.
You can do this randomized thing for a one time thing like an 2v2 lb or even a groupfight tournament, but surely not for a league/tournament that takes several dates.
Even the draft league was based on picks of captains and wasn't completely random.
NWWC Teams are more or less based on if you are good enough compared to your other fellow countryman.
The argument than one matchup would easily dominate the tournament otherwise is not true. There are couple of top teams that can challenge each others properly, I would even say its more even at the top than it was back in the NWL days.
Its 2v2 lb where you can do a lot of damage with smart leadership, teamwork in melee and good shooting. Its not groupfight where the bigger stack almost automatically gonna win.
We noticed, but its not hard to take down the 77y, especially when its lead by the one of the worst EU leaders :/Gi is back in the 77y?
SpoilerHey Belgium/France you cant play at the EC because you too strong.
Really don't understand why 92nd/55th wouldnt be allowed. If you too weak get good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeLyTexWlGsunironically trying to get your stacked team by pulling the "we are shit in 1v1s" card. Especially after Sunday, the 55th can be counted as a "top" regiment (ie contending for titles), you have the roster for it and now you have the tournament win to back it up. This tournament in the past has been geared towards avoiding "stacked" coalitions and Kincaid has stated that he wishes to continue this rule, so either accept his decision or don't play.
By that logic 15thYR and 77y should never been allowed to play in the first place as 15thYR was the number one regiment since 1 or 2 years already and 77y with Gaz leading it stopped many good regiments in many tournaments from ever winning a title by simply knocking them out of the tournament (for example 55th was beaten by the 77y in the loserbrackets of the EIC) + the fact that 77y has also a very track record.
(https://gyazo.com/af7aaffd454b39d1b672e34d3f2ea1dc.img)
Nobody complained about that team being made because in all honestly I like a good fucking fight, something to be excited about to fight in the near future/final stages of the tournament.
So why the fuck wouldnt you allow an equal team to that of the 15thYR/77y and 71st/96y.
It has always been that in a tournament that you are going to have some favorites to take the title but that shouldnt mean that just because a decent competitive team is formed that they get refused to play in this tournament.
That also includes using the excuse of ''well 55th won the RGT guess that means you are a top dog regiment all round with not a single flaw'' that simply doenst uphold, who knows it might be an one time thing.
For regiments like the 15thYR and the 92nd you can make a case that those are your consistent threats to the titles of any tournament on a regimental base as they have been going tow to tow for sometime now.
I see plenty of good regiments and coalitions in this tournament with each their strong and weak points but nothing completely out of balance to the point where you can say well this tournament is a default win for this coalition and yes this prediction of mine also includes the 92nd and 55th team.
Excluding our team would result in just removing a nice competitive challenge to look and work forward to.
I think I have said enough on this matter on behalf of the 92nd&55th coalition, Kincaid can render his decision as he likes with the newly given arguments and we will await his responds.[close]
The 77y beating 55th argument is pretty pointless, the 55th has a much better roster then the 77y, just horrendous leadership in comparison. Need I also remind you that the IVe 45e beat the 77y in EIC (ie the reason the 77y were in the loser bracket in the first place), are you also going to argue that the 15th shouldn't be allowed to play with the IVe as a result?
The reality is, your team is made up of the best linebattle regiment currently, 92nd (based from EIC) and currently the strongest 10v10 gf regiment (55th) which has a fairly impressive number of skilled members, enough to fill out the ranks of their line in a 2v2 match. It is absolutely undeniable that your team would be by far the strongest regarding skill of members, with your only downside being the fact that rayleigh can't lead. I don't have a problem if you guys are allowed to team up, but if you are allowed to team, I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to team with the 45thn for example. (this is not something I would desire as it would go against the spirit of the tournament)Teams are judged on their roster as a whole, the reality is the 55th have a large portion of top tier players in nw currently, and this showed on the weekend during rgt, you can't show an example of you losing a 1v1 with a dog roster and then proceed to argue why this shows you aren't very good. I'm fairly certain if you guys replayed that 1v1 with all of the players you had on Sunday, you would absolutely smash 77y.Spoilerunironically trying to get your stacked team by pulling the "we are shit in 1v1s" card. Especially after Sunday, the 55th can be counted as a "top" regiment (ie contending for titles), you have the roster for it and now you have the tournament win to back it up. This tournament in the past has been geared towards avoiding "stacked" coalitions and Kincaid has stated that he wishes to continue this rule, so either accept his decision or don't play.
Ignoring that the 55th lost to the 77y a couple of months ago benefits you how? Makes you look disingenuous, especially when the roster used there is almost identical to our current active roster.
I mean look:Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/ya8fzTj.jpg)[close]
There are 2 players I can see that aren’t currently active in the 55th on that side. The leadership is the same, and there are ~5 additions that would probably play in the 2v2. It’s basically the same lineup, and for you to pretend the 55th is on par with the 15th and 92nd in 1v1s is comical, frankly. Using a 10v10 groupfighting win as apparently representing the 55th’s ability in a larger line battle format is illogical, as is calling a team consisting of the 92nd and 55th stacked for this tournament.[close]
After Pieter his post I don't need to use many words to say that we in the 55th feel the same way. Well so be it I guess. GG to the 15thYR and 77y for the ez win and see you next time.
We'll most likely just drop out of this tournament since we aren't wanted anyways. For once a tournament not hosted by Price and it still ends up for the 55th as if he would have hosted it.
So far for having some epic battles in a format I really wanted to try out with our friends in the 92nd and try to beat the reigning kings. Seems like next year We'll have to try and lose RGT to be able to play :).
After Pieter his post I don't need to use many words to say that we in the 55th feel the same way. Well so be it I guess. GG to the 15thYR and 77y for the ez win and see you next time.
We'll most likely just drop out of this tournament since we aren't wanted anyways. For once a tournament not hosted by Price and it still ends up for the 55th as if he would have hosted it.
So far for having some epic battles in a format I really wanted to try out with our friends in the 92nd and try to beat the reigning kings. Seems like next year We'll have to try and lose RGT to be able to play :).
pussy
Seeing this is a discussion thread of some sort dont mind me doing my last say in this as I find it pretty disrespectful to simply shut the door, not giving anyone a chance to express their last opinion on the whole matter.you're right, 77y are the best regiment of all time, with the best leader of all time, were they in a coalition with anyone else they would absolutely crush this tournament. The 77y CRUSHING the 55th 7-3 and CRUSHING the 45thn 5-5 is proof of their elite status. And also, due to the IVe45e beating the 77y, I think we should also be recognising them as a elite tier regiment.SpoilerHey Belgium/France you cant play at the EC because you too strong.
Really don't understand why 92nd/55th wouldnt be allowed. If you too weak get good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeLyTexWlGsunironically trying to get your stacked team by pulling the "we are shit in 1v1s" card. Especially after Sunday, the 55th can be counted as a "top" regiment (ie contending for titles), you have the roster for it and now you have the tournament win to back it up. This tournament in the past has been geared towards avoiding "stacked" coalitions and Kincaid has stated that he wishes to continue this rule, so either accept his decision or don't play.
By that logic 15thYR and 77y should never been allowed to play in the first place as 15thYR was the number one regiment since 1 or 2 years already and 77y with Gaz leading it stopped many good regiments in many tournaments from ever winning a title by simply knocking them out of the tournament (for example 55th was beaten by the 77y in the loserbrackets of the EIC) + the fact that 77y has also a very track record.
(https://gyazo.com/af7aaffd454b39d1b672e34d3f2ea1dc.img)
Nobody complained about that team being made because in all honestly I like a good fucking fight, something to be excited about to fight in the near future/final stages of the tournament.
So why the fuck wouldnt you allow an equal team to that of the 15thYR/77y and 71st/96y.
It has always been that in a tournament that you are going to have some favorites to take the title but that shouldnt mean that just because a decent competitive team is formed that they get refused to play in this tournament.
That also includes using the excuse of ''well 55th won the RGT guess that means you are a top dog regiment all round with not a single flaw'' that simply doenst uphold, who knows it might be an one time thing.
For regiments like the 15thYR and the 92nd you can make a case that those are your consistent threats to the titles of any tournament on a regimental base as they have been going tow to tow for sometime now.
I see plenty of good regiments and coalitions in this tournament with each their strong and weak points but nothing completely out of balance to the point where you can say well this tournament is a default win for this coalition and yes this prediction of mine also includes the 92nd and 55th team.
Excluding our team would result in just removing a nice competitive challenge to look and work forward to.
I think I have said enough on this matter on behalf of the 92nd&55th coalition, Kincaid can render his decision as he likes with the newly given arguments and we will await his responds.[close]
The 77y beating 55th argument is pretty pointless, the 55th has a much better roster then the 77y, just horrendous leadership in comparison. Need I also remind you that the IVe 45e beat the 77y in EIC (ie the reason the 77y were in the loser bracket in the first place), are you also going to argue that the 15th shouldn't be allowed to play with the IVe as a result?
The reality is, your team is made up of the best linebattle regiment currently, 92nd (based from EIC) and currently the strongest 10v10 gf regiment (55th) which has a fairly impressive number of skilled members, enough to fill out the ranks of their line in a 2v2 match. It is absolutely undeniable that your team would be by far the strongest regarding skill of members, with your only downside being the fact that rayleigh can't lead. I don't have a problem if you guys are allowed to team up, but if you are allowed to team, I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to team with the 45thn for example. (this is not something I would desire as it would go against the spirit of the tournament)Teams are judged on their roster as a whole, the reality is the 55th have a large portion of top tier players in nw currently, and this showed on the weekend during rgt, you can't show an example of you losing a 1v1 with a dog roster and then proceed to argue why this shows you aren't very good. I'm fairly certain if you guys replayed that 1v1 with all of the players you had on Sunday, you would absolutely smash 77y.Spoilerunironically trying to get your stacked team by pulling the "we are shit in 1v1s" card. Especially after Sunday, the 55th can be counted as a "top" regiment (ie contending for titles), you have the roster for it and now you have the tournament win to back it up. This tournament in the past has been geared towards avoiding "stacked" coalitions and Kincaid has stated that he wishes to continue this rule, so either accept his decision or don't play.
Ignoring that the 55th lost to the 77y a couple of months ago benefits you how? Makes you look disingenuous, especially when the roster used there is almost identical to our current active roster.
I mean look:Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/ya8fzTj.jpg)[close]
There are 2 players I can see that aren’t currently active in the 55th on that side. The leadership is the same, and there are ~5 additions that would probably play in the 2v2. It’s basically the same lineup, and for you to pretend the 55th is on par with the 15th and 92nd in 1v1s is comical, frankly. Using a 10v10 groupfighting win as apparently representing the 55th’s ability in a larger line battle format is illogical, as is calling a team consisting of the 92nd and 55th stacked for this tournament.[close]
So the way you see it is:
55th strong line up but weak leadership vs 77y with a average to good line up with arguably one of the best NW leaders.
How isnt that fair? If you cant get your regiment into melee and get out shot by someone like Gaz or any other leader that understand how to lead then you will still lose as seen in the EIC.
Funny how theoretically you also mention that you would rather go with the 45thN over 77y when Gaz also stopped Maskman in his tracks by getting a 5-5 draw, proving that a good melee stack couldnt overcome the better leader.
But seems like Kincaid rendered his decision as poor as it is in my opinion, clearly this tournament is the NW 2v2 2nd place tournament.
With a clear winner 15thYR&77y so congrats to them and best of luck to all other teams to fight for that sweet 2nd place or 3rd place.
I might be a bit harsh on this but its just outrageous that a 2v2 tournament is being compared to the likes of a RGT 10v10 melee only and that Kincaid suggests that me and Rayleigh should bring a midtier regiment and still expect that to be the challenges for the current champs.
When both 15thYR and 77y are one of the most battle hardened regiments in our community, but I guess the ''experienced individuals'' that Kincaid consulted didnt think about this or felt that it would only be fair to be at such a disadvantage.
Because lets be real that is what it is you will always be at an disadvantage either you are lucky enough to challenge the 15thYR in the open and maybe manage to beat them if you are good enough for example something that the 92nd could potentially do, but then your ally as shown during the last tournament where we teamed up with the 33rd and performed both to the best of our abilities at that point couldnt hold up against the 77y or when the 92nd went after the 77y couldnt hold off the 15thYR. (same situation occured with 92nd not being able to fight the 15thYR in the open for several rounds)
Which just really shows the scenario where you always will be at if you dont have something of an equal team compared to that of the current champs (Yes this might suck for some teams seeing an on paper stronger team but we already have that with the likes of 15thYR&77y), both 15thYR and 77y are capable of bringing that near impossible clutch at almost any time.
It being through the sheer melee skill that the 15thYR has making even a 2 to 1 advantage over them neglectable if you are not among the top of regiments, or it being through the exceptional leadership that Gaz brings to the table forcing regiments to make stupid plays and punish them over and over again as if they literally are new to leading a regiment lmao.
Anyways as for the 92nd will have our staff meeting and take everything in consideration, forming possibly a new team or something.
But our strong favor goes out to our friends in the 55th and to maintain our coalition.
Seeing this is a discussion thread of some sort dont mind me doing my last say in this as I find it pretty disrespectful to simply shut the door, not giving anyone a chance to express their last opinion on the whole matter.you're right, 77y are the best regiment of all time, with the best leader of all time, were they in a coalition with anyone else they would absolutely crush this tournament. The 77y CRUSHING the 55th 7-3 and CRUSHING the 45thn 5-5 is proof of their elite status. And also, due to the IVe45e beating the 77y, I think we should also be recognising them as a elite tier regiment.SpoilerHey Belgium/France you cant play at the EC because you too strong.
Really don't understand why 92nd/55th wouldnt be allowed. If you too weak get good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeLyTexWlGsunironically trying to get your stacked team by pulling the "we are shit in 1v1s" card. Especially after Sunday, the 55th can be counted as a "top" regiment (ie contending for titles), you have the roster for it and now you have the tournament win to back it up. This tournament in the past has been geared towards avoiding "stacked" coalitions and Kincaid has stated that he wishes to continue this rule, so either accept his decision or don't play.
By that logic 15thYR and 77y should never been allowed to play in the first place as 15thYR was the number one regiment since 1 or 2 years already and 77y with Gaz leading it stopped many good regiments in many tournaments from ever winning a title by simply knocking them out of the tournament (for example 55th was beaten by the 77y in the loserbrackets of the EIC) + the fact that 77y has also a very track record.
(https://gyazo.com/af7aaffd454b39d1b672e34d3f2ea1dc.img)
Nobody complained about that team being made because in all honestly I like a good fucking fight, something to be excited about to fight in the near future/final stages of the tournament.
So why the fuck wouldnt you allow an equal team to that of the 15thYR/77y and 71st/96y.
It has always been that in a tournament that you are going to have some favorites to take the title but that shouldnt mean that just because a decent competitive team is formed that they get refused to play in this tournament.
That also includes using the excuse of ''well 55th won the RGT guess that means you are a top dog regiment all round with not a single flaw'' that simply doenst uphold, who knows it might be an one time thing.
For regiments like the 15thYR and the 92nd you can make a case that those are your consistent threats to the titles of any tournament on a regimental base as they have been going tow to tow for sometime now.
I see plenty of good regiments and coalitions in this tournament with each their strong and weak points but nothing completely out of balance to the point where you can say well this tournament is a default win for this coalition and yes this prediction of mine also includes the 92nd and 55th team.
Excluding our team would result in just removing a nice competitive challenge to look and work forward to.
I think I have said enough on this matter on behalf of the 92nd&55th coalition, Kincaid can render his decision as he likes with the newly given arguments and we will await his responds.[close]
The 77y beating 55th argument is pretty pointless, the 55th has a much better roster then the 77y, just horrendous leadership in comparison. Need I also remind you that the IVe 45e beat the 77y in EIC (ie the reason the 77y were in the loser bracket in the first place), are you also going to argue that the 15th shouldn't be allowed to play with the IVe as a result?
The reality is, your team is made up of the best linebattle regiment currently, 92nd (based from EIC) and currently the strongest 10v10 gf regiment (55th) which has a fairly impressive number of skilled members, enough to fill out the ranks of their line in a 2v2 match. It is absolutely undeniable that your team would be by far the strongest regarding skill of members, with your only downside being the fact that rayleigh can't lead. I don't have a problem if you guys are allowed to team up, but if you are allowed to team, I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to team with the 45thn for example. (this is not something I would desire as it would go against the spirit of the tournament)Teams are judged on their roster as a whole, the reality is the 55th have a large portion of top tier players in nw currently, and this showed on the weekend during rgt, you can't show an example of you losing a 1v1 with a dog roster and then proceed to argue why this shows you aren't very good. I'm fairly certain if you guys replayed that 1v1 with all of the players you had on Sunday, you would absolutely smash 77y.Spoilerunironically trying to get your stacked team by pulling the "we are shit in 1v1s" card. Especially after Sunday, the 55th can be counted as a "top" regiment (ie contending for titles), you have the roster for it and now you have the tournament win to back it up. This tournament in the past has been geared towards avoiding "stacked" coalitions and Kincaid has stated that he wishes to continue this rule, so either accept his decision or don't play.
Ignoring that the 55th lost to the 77y a couple of months ago benefits you how? Makes you look disingenuous, especially when the roster used there is almost identical to our current active roster.
I mean look:Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/ya8fzTj.jpg)[close]
There are 2 players I can see that aren%u2019t currently active in the 55th on that side. The leadership is the same, and there are ~5 additions that would probably play in the 2v2. It%u2019s basically the same lineup, and for you to pretend the 55th is on par with the 15th and 92nd in 1v1s is comical, frankly. Using a 10v10 groupfighting win as apparently representing the 55th%u2019s ability in a larger line battle format is illogical, as is calling a team consisting of the 92nd and 55th stacked for this tournament.[close]
So the way you see it is:
55th strong line up but weak leadership vs 77y with a average to good line up with arguably one of the best NW leaders.
How isnt that fair? If you cant get your regiment into melee and get out shot by someone like Gaz or any other leader that understand how to lead then you will still lose as seen in the EIC.
Funny how theoretically you also mention that you would rather go with the 45thN over 77y when Gaz also stopped Maskman in his tracks by getting a 5-5 draw, proving that a good melee stack couldnt overcome the better leader.
But seems like Kincaid rendered his decision as poor as it is in my opinion, clearly this tournament is the NW 2v2 2nd place tournament.
With a clear winner 15thYR&77y so congrats to them and best of luck to all other teams to fight for that sweet 2nd place or 3rd place.
I might be a bit harsh on this but its just outrageous that a 2v2 tournament is being compared to the likes of a RGT 10v10 melee only and that Kincaid suggests that me and Rayleigh should bring a midtier regiment and still expect that to be the challenges for the current champs.
When both 15thYR and 77y are one of the most battle hardened regiments in our community, but I guess the ''experienced individuals'' that Kincaid consulted didnt think about this or felt that it would only be fair to be at such a disadvantage.
Because lets be real that is what it is you will always be at an disadvantage either you are lucky enough to challenge the 15thYR in the open and maybe manage to beat them if you are good enough for example something that the 92nd could potentially do, but then your ally as shown during the last tournament where we teamed up with the 33rd and performed both to the best of our abilities at that point couldnt hold up against the 77y or when the 92nd went after the 77y couldnt hold off the 15thYR. (same situation occured with 92nd not being able to fight the 15thYR in the open for several rounds)
Which just really shows the scenario where you always will be at if you dont have something of an equal team compared to that of the current champs (Yes this might suck for some teams seeing an on paper stronger team but we already have that with the likes of 15thYR&77y), both 15thYR and 77y are capable of bringing that near impossible clutch at almost any time.
It being through the sheer melee skill that the 15thYR has making even a 2 to 1 advantage over them neglectable if you are not among the top of regiments, or it being through the exceptional leadership that Gaz brings to the table forcing regiments to make stupid plays and punish them over and over again as if they literally are new to leading a regiment lmao.
Anyways as for the 92nd will have our staff meeting and take everything in consideration, forming possibly a new team or something.
But our strong favor goes out to our friends in the 55th and to maintain our coalition.
PRAISE BE TO GAZ, NAPOLEONS SUCCESSOR
Damn the CAPS salt xDfirst time u saying smth clever dog
The defending champion is beeing challenged, where is the problem?
I guess the last tournament losses really hurt your confidence Gi.
If they win this time who cares, next time you can stack with someone else. (Would spice things up)
As I said let 92nd/55th play! I'll donate into the prize pool
If 55th/92nd will not participate anymore in this tournament, I won't either out of solidarity.
I sent him to dogschool now he listens betterDamn the CAPS salt xDfirst time u saying smth clever dog
The defending champion is beeing challenged, where is the problem?
I guess the last tournament losses really hurt your confidence Gi.
If they win this time who cares, next time you can stack with someone else. (Would spice things up)
As I said let 92nd/55th play! I'll donate into the prize pool
If 55th/92nd will not participate anymore in this tournament, I won't either out of solidarity.
I sent him to dogschool now he listens betterDamn the CAPS salt xDfirst time u saying smth clever dog
The defending champion is beeing challenged, where is the problem?
I guess the last tournament losses really hurt your confidence Gi.
If they win this time who cares, next time you can stack with someone else. (Would spice things up)
As I said let 92nd/55th play! I'll donate into the prize pool
If 55th/92nd will not participate anymore in this tournament, I won't either out of solidarity.
Time to make myself unpopular in the 92nd and time to hurt some egos.
Kincaid is actually right on 2 out of 3 points.
1. It is correct to deny 92nd and 55th. The 92nd is unarguably the 2nd best regiment over the last 1,5 years and we are likely the only regiment to have a real shot at beating the 15thYR in any format and with Pieter, we have a leader that minimum matches Gi. And the 55th is an incredible melee stack, the only thing that divides that stack from being the best current regiment is longevity and decent leadership. But even atm the 55th could just yolo charge the 77y and would still make it a 1vs1 between the 92nd and 15thYR.
2. It is correct to allow the 15thYR and 77y teaming up. We don't need to talk about the 15thYR, they are the best regiment and shouldn't team up with another top regiment. But the 77y is no top regiment. In EIC they showed they got some decent wins but in the end, also got heavily clapped when it came to top opponents in a knock-out situation. The regiments consist of 3,4 competitive players, none of them would make it to the Top 15 of the 15thYR, 92nd, or 55th. And yes Gaz is a decent leader (although in my opinion far behind Gi and Pieter in their respective 2021 form) but that is no good argument as he is still in a regiment that is far behind. And you cant forbid a team cause you think they may win. Yes, they are probably the favorites if you would forbid 92nd/55th and 96y/71st but they are the favorites following the rules and doing a good job.
3. But where Kincaid is wrong is allowing the 96y and 71st coalition. The 96y is easily the regiment with the biggest skill difference between GFs and 1vs1, in favor of 1vs1. And it is accurate to name Desant alongside Pieter and Gi, in front of Gaz, when it comes to leading ability. And even the 96y gfing atm looks pretty strong to me. In RGT they were a way harder opponent for the 92nd than the 45thN was. And all of you would consider 45thN a top-tier regiment. And the 71st just made 4th place in RGT so after Kincaid's calculation they should be forbidden with other top regimens. Not even wanna start with the fact 71st is obviously the most annoying regiment to fight in a 1vs1 situation.
As you can easily tell by my comments I am heavily in favor of not allowing stacks. We already have enough stacked shit in the gf teams and regimental scene. No need to ruin the last bit of fun with another unnecessary stacking.
So what happens with the 92nd now? Either we find a cool opponent and can enjoy a clam 2v2 tournament or we don't find a partner and do not participate. Different to the vast majority of the community I believe it is nothing bad to not participate in one of the various spammed tournaments. Although I would feel bad for Kincaid as he in my opinion is the only regimental host that cares to make his tournaments of good quality. But I am sure Chriseh and Marxeil will host a MEIC or MRGL at the end of the year where all of you can stack hard again and live in inner relief.
Again what an academic and intellectual post from our Community Representatives to negotiate and provide freedom and happiness on the FSE/in the community.(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/480418748784705547/857288230130024498/emYSv_wt.jpg)SpoilerTime to make myself unpopular in the 92nd and time to hurt some egos.
Kincaid is actually right on 2 out of 3 points.
1. It is correct to deny 92nd and 55th. The 92nd is unarguably the 2nd best regiment over the last 1,5 years and we are likely the only regiment to have a real shot at beating the 15thYR in any format and with Pieter, we have a leader that minimum matches Gi. And the 55th is an incredible melee stack, the only thing that divides that stack from being the best current regiment is longevity and decent leadership. But even atm the 55th could just yolo charge the 77y and would still make it a 1vs1 between the 92nd and 15thYR.
2. It is correct to allow the 15thYR and 77y teaming up. We don't need to talk about the 15thYR, they are the best regiment and shouldn't team up with another top regiment. But the 77y is no top regiment. In EIC they showed they got some decent wins but in the end, also got heavily clapped when it came to top opponents in a knock-out situation. The regiments consist of 3,4 competitive players, none of them would make it to the Top 15 of the 15thYR, 92nd, or 55th. And yes Gaz is a decent leader (although in my opinion far behind Gi and Pieter in their respective 2021 form) but that is no good argument as he is still in a regiment that is far behind. And you cant forbid a team cause you think they may win. Yes, they are probably the favorites if you would forbid 92nd/55th and 96y/71st but they are the favorites following the rules and doing a good job.
3. But where Kincaid is wrong is allowing the 96y and 71st coalition. The 96y is easily the regiment with the biggest skill difference between GFs and 1vs1, in favor of 1vs1. And it is accurate to name Desant alongside Pieter and Gi, in front of Gaz, when it comes to leading ability. And even the 96y gfing atm looks pretty strong to me. In RGT they were a way harder opponent for the 92nd than the 45thN was. And all of you would consider 45thN a top-tier regiment. And the 71st just made 4th place in RGT so after Kincaid's calculation they should be forbidden with other top regimens. Not even wanna start with the fact 71st is obviously the most annoying regiment to fight in a 1vs1 situation.
As you can easily tell by my comments I am heavily in favor of not allowing stacks. We already have enough stacked shit in the gf teams and regimental scene. No need to ruin the last bit of fun with another unnecessary stacking.
So what happens with the 92nd now? Either we find a cool opponent and can enjoy a clam 2v2 tournament or we don't find a partner and do not participate. Different to the vast majority of the community I believe it is nothing bad to not participate in one of the various spammed tournaments. Although I would feel bad for Kincaid as he in my opinion is the only regimental host that cares to make his tournaments of good quality. But I am sure Chriseh and Marxeil will host a MEIC or MRGL at the end of the year where all of you can stack hard again and live in inner relief.[close]
Also if you're against nw "elitism" or "gatekeeping" this is it in practice. There's no need for this sign up to get rejected.
Kincaid mad because we said no to Immortal Highlanders ;)
I won't take part in this discussion, because I don't care frankly. But as the host and one of the most respectable people in this shitty- ass community, you should respect Kincaid his decision or at least have the decency to argue in a constructive way. This comment is just shit and not worthy of a community representative tbh.Again what an academic and intellectual post from our Community Representatives to negotiate and provide freedom and happiness on the FSE/in the community.(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/480418748784705547/857288230130024498/emYSv_wt.jpg)SpoilerTime to make myself unpopular in the 92nd and time to hurt some egos.
Kincaid is actually right on 2 out of 3 points.
1. It is correct to deny 92nd and 55th. The 92nd is unarguably the 2nd best regiment over the last 1,5 years and we are likely the only regiment to have a real shot at beating the 15thYR in any format and with Pieter, we have a leader that minimum matches Gi. And the 55th is an incredible melee stack, the only thing that divides that stack from being the best current regiment is longevity and decent leadership. But even atm the 55th could just yolo charge the 77y and would still make it a 1vs1 between the 92nd and 15thYR.
2. It is correct to allow the 15thYR and 77y teaming up. We don't need to talk about the 15thYR, they are the best regiment and shouldn't team up with another top regiment. But the 77y is no top regiment. In EIC they showed they got some decent wins but in the end, also got heavily clapped when it came to top opponents in a knock-out situation. The regiments consist of 3,4 competitive players, none of them would make it to the Top 15 of the 15thYR, 92nd, or 55th. And yes Gaz is a decent leader (although in my opinion far behind Gi and Pieter in their respective 2021 form) but that is no good argument as he is still in a regiment that is far behind. And you cant forbid a team cause you think they may win. Yes, they are probably the favorites if you would forbid 92nd/55th and 96y/71st but they are the favorites following the rules and doing a good job.
3. But where Kincaid is wrong is allowing the 96y and 71st coalition. The 96y is easily the regiment with the biggest skill difference between GFs and 1vs1, in favor of 1vs1. And it is accurate to name Desant alongside Pieter and Gi, in front of Gaz, when it comes to leading ability. And even the 96y gfing atm looks pretty strong to me. In RGT they were a way harder opponent for the 92nd than the 45thN was. And all of you would consider 45thN a top-tier regiment. And the 71st just made 4th place in RGT so after Kincaid's calculation they should be forbidden with other top regimens. Not even wanna start with the fact 71st is obviously the most annoying regiment to fight in a 1vs1 situation.
As you can easily tell by my comments I am heavily in favor of not allowing stacks. We already have enough stacked shit in the gf teams and regimental scene. No need to ruin the last bit of fun with another unnecessary stacking.
So what happens with the 92nd now? Either we find a cool opponent and can enjoy a clam 2v2 tournament or we don't find a partner and do not participate. Different to the vast majority of the community I believe it is nothing bad to not participate in one of the various spammed tournaments. Although I would feel bad for Kincaid as he in my opinion is the only regimental host that cares to make his tournaments of good quality. But I am sure Chriseh and Marxeil will host a MEIC or MRGL at the end of the year where all of you can stack hard again and live in inner relief.[close]
Also if you're against nw "elitism" or "gatekeeping" this is it in practice. There's no need for this sign up to get rejected.
Kincaid mad because we said no to Immortal Highlanders ;)
I won't take part in this discussion, because I don't care frankly. But as the host and one of the most respectable people in this shitty- ass community, you should respect Kincaid his decision or at least have the decency to argue in a constructive way. This comment is just shit and not worthy of a community representative tbh.Again what an academic and intellectual post from our Community Representatives to negotiate and provide freedom and happiness on the FSE/in the community.(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/480418748784705547/857288230130024498/emYSv_wt.jpg)SpoilerTime to make myself unpopular in the 92nd and time to hurt some egos.
Kincaid is actually right on 2 out of 3 points.
1. It is correct to deny 92nd and 55th. The 92nd is unarguably the 2nd best regiment over the last 1,5 years and we are likely the only regiment to have a real shot at beating the 15thYR in any format and with Pieter, we have a leader that minimum matches Gi. And the 55th is an incredible melee stack, the only thing that divides that stack from being the best current regiment is longevity and decent leadership. But even atm the 55th could just yolo charge the 77y and would still make it a 1vs1 between the 92nd and 15thYR.
2. It is correct to allow the 15thYR and 77y teaming up. We don't need to talk about the 15thYR, they are the best regiment and shouldn't team up with another top regiment. But the 77y is no top regiment. In EIC they showed they got some decent wins but in the end, also got heavily clapped when it came to top opponents in a knock-out situation. The regiments consist of 3,4 competitive players, none of them would make it to the Top 15 of the 15thYR, 92nd, or 55th. And yes Gaz is a decent leader (although in my opinion far behind Gi and Pieter in their respective 2021 form) but that is no good argument as he is still in a regiment that is far behind. And you cant forbid a team cause you think they may win. Yes, they are probably the favorites if you would forbid 92nd/55th and 96y/71st but they are the favorites following the rules and doing a good job.
3. But where Kincaid is wrong is allowing the 96y and 71st coalition. The 96y is easily the regiment with the biggest skill difference between GFs and 1vs1, in favor of 1vs1. And it is accurate to name Desant alongside Pieter and Gi, in front of Gaz, when it comes to leading ability. And even the 96y gfing atm looks pretty strong to me. In RGT they were a way harder opponent for the 92nd than the 45thN was. And all of you would consider 45thN a top-tier regiment. And the 71st just made 4th place in RGT so after Kincaid's calculation they should be forbidden with other top regimens. Not even wanna start with the fact 71st is obviously the most annoying regiment to fight in a 1vs1 situation.
As you can easily tell by my comments I am heavily in favor of not allowing stacks. We already have enough stacked shit in the gf teams and regimental scene. No need to ruin the last bit of fun with another unnecessary stacking.
So what happens with the 92nd now? Either we find a cool opponent and can enjoy a clam 2v2 tournament or we don't find a partner and do not participate. Different to the vast majority of the community I believe it is nothing bad to not participate in one of the various spammed tournaments. Although I would feel bad for Kincaid as he in my opinion is the only regimental host that cares to make his tournaments of good quality. But I am sure Chriseh and Marxeil will host a MEIC or MRGL at the end of the year where all of you can stack hard again and live in inner relief.[close]
Also if you're against nw "elitism" or "gatekeeping" this is it in practice. There's no need for this sign up to get rejected.
Kincaid mad because we said no to Immortal Highlanders ;)
No worries boys, 13e and 18e+7th has this win. So no need to fight over this. 15thYR and 77y are nothing compared to us!
I won't take part in this discussion, because I don't care frankly. But as the host and one of the most respectable people in this shitty- ass community, you should respect Kincaid his decision or at least have the decency to argue in a constructive way. This comment is just shit and not worthy of a community representative tbh.Again what an academic and intellectual post from our Community Representatives to negotiate and provide freedom and happiness on the FSE/in the community.(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/480418748784705547/857288230130024498/emYSv_wt.jpg)SpoilerTime to make myself unpopular in the 92nd and time to hurt some egos.
Kincaid is actually right on 2 out of 3 points.
1. It is correct to deny 92nd and 55th. The 92nd is unarguably the 2nd best regiment over the last 1,5 years and we are likely the only regiment to have a real shot at beating the 15thYR in any format and with Pieter, we have a leader that minimum matches Gi. And the 55th is an incredible melee stack, the only thing that divides that stack from being the best current regiment is longevity and decent leadership. But even atm the 55th could just yolo charge the 77y and would still make it a 1vs1 between the 92nd and 15thYR.
2. It is correct to allow the 15thYR and 77y teaming up. We don't need to talk about the 15thYR, they are the best regiment and shouldn't team up with another top regiment. But the 77y is no top regiment. In EIC they showed they got some decent wins but in the end, also got heavily clapped when it came to top opponents in a knock-out situation. The regiments consist of 3,4 competitive players, none of them would make it to the Top 15 of the 15thYR, 92nd, or 55th. And yes Gaz is a decent leader (although in my opinion far behind Gi and Pieter in their respective 2021 form) but that is no good argument as he is still in a regiment that is far behind. And you cant forbid a team cause you think they may win. Yes, they are probably the favorites if you would forbid 92nd/55th and 96y/71st but they are the favorites following the rules and doing a good job.
3. But where Kincaid is wrong is allowing the 96y and 71st coalition. The 96y is easily the regiment with the biggest skill difference between GFs and 1vs1, in favor of 1vs1. And it is accurate to name Desant alongside Pieter and Gi, in front of Gaz, when it comes to leading ability. And even the 96y gfing atm looks pretty strong to me. In RGT they were a way harder opponent for the 92nd than the 45thN was. And all of you would consider 45thN a top-tier regiment. And the 71st just made 4th place in RGT so after Kincaid's calculation they should be forbidden with other top regimens. Not even wanna start with the fact 71st is obviously the most annoying regiment to fight in a 1vs1 situation.
As you can easily tell by my comments I am heavily in favor of not allowing stacks. We already have enough stacked shit in the gf teams and regimental scene. No need to ruin the last bit of fun with another unnecessary stacking.
So what happens with the 92nd now? Either we find a cool opponent and can enjoy a clam 2v2 tournament or we don't find a partner and do not participate. Different to the vast majority of the community I believe it is nothing bad to not participate in one of the various spammed tournaments. Although I would feel bad for Kincaid as he in my opinion is the only regimental host that cares to make his tournaments of good quality. But I am sure Chriseh and Marxeil will host a MEIC or MRGL at the end of the year where all of you can stack hard again and live in inner relief.[close]
Also if you're against nw "elitism" or "gatekeeping" this is it in practice. There's no need for this sign up to get rejected.
Kincaid mad because we said no to Immortal Highlanders ;)
92nd EIC WINNERS can easy 1v2 ANY coalitiontwo 92nd lines looks like stacked shit deny it rn
cya on battlefield dogs
92nd EIC WINNERS can easy 1v2 ANY coalitiontwo 92nd lines looks like stacked shit deny it rn
cya on battlefield dogs
Not rlly possible atm92nd EIC WINNERS can easy 1v2 ANY coalitiontwo 92nd lines looks like stacked shit deny it rn
cya on battlefield dogs
Yes form 2 lines with your center so we can play 92nd vs 45thN.
Its hardly any flame, but funny enough all the options mentioned like oh just team up with 45e is sadly not possible due to the summer vacation, Nr13 not possible due to the summer vacation, the only option that is still left is 19th and you have two regiments now without a team both being 92nd and 55th.
Either way we all know that whoever is going to team with the 19th will easily fill up the power vacuum that we have right now and challenge straight away the 15thYR&77y resulting in a dashing victory for the 19th and friends… ;D
Should have complained about 77y and friends in the first season but unlike some people in this community I like to see a fair challenge and don’t mind the some what more favorable teams which you always will have during any tournament.
If you really wanted to have a rule against stacked teams then you should have followed Boboy his idea.
Best with worst regiment
Second best with second worst
Etc.
we did the exact same what you guys did.Its hardly any flame, but funny enough all the options mentioned like oh just team up with 45e is sadly not possible due to the summer vacation, Nr13 not possible due to the summer vacation, the only option that is still left is 19th and you have two regiments now without a team both being 92nd and 55th.
Either way we all know that whoever is going to team with the 19th will easily fill up the power vacuum that we have right now and challenge straight away the 15thYR&77y resulting in a dashing victory for the 19th and friends… ;D
Should have complained about 77y and friends in the first season but unlike some people in this community I like to see a fair challenge and don’t mind the some what more favorable teams which you always will have during any tournament.
If you really wanted to have a rule against stacked teams then you should have followed Boboy his idea.
Best with worst regiment
Second best with second worst
Etc.
To clarify there was a discussion on this thread about that seeding process but all leaders thought it'd be better and easier if regiments picked their coalition partners and ran them through Kincaid before actually posting their team application. 77y and Friends and Iron Crusaders did this and thus our teams were accepted right off the bat. Also if we work with the seeding and then randomised format, teams such as 45thN Grens and 92nd Centre become actual possibilities and I am afraid the Pieter/Maskman combo would be too OP even if I know next to nothing about leading and the capabilities of regiments performing well in a linebattle type of event :P
Its hardly any flame, but funny enough all the options mentioned like oh just team up with 45e is sadly not possible due to the summer vacation, Nr13 not possible due to the summer vacation, the only option that is still left is 19th and you have two regiments now without a team both being 92nd and 55th.
Either way we all know that whoever is going to team with the 19th will easily fill up the power vacuum that we have right now and challenge straight away the 15thYR&77y resulting in a dashing victory for the 19th and friends… ;D
Should have complained about 77y and friends in the first season but unlike some people in this community I like to see a fair challenge and don’t mind the some what more favorable teams which you always will have during any tournament.
If you really wanted to have a rule against stacked teams then you should have followed Boboy his idea.
Best with worst regiment
Second best with second worst
Etc.
To clarify there was a discussion on this thread about that seeding process but all leaders thought it'd be better and easier if regiments picked their coalition partners and ran them through Kincaid before actually posting their team application. 77y and Friends and Iron Crusaders did this and thus our teams were accepted right off the bat. Also if we work with the seeding and then randomised format, teams such as 45thN Grens and 92nd Centre become actual possibilities and I am afraid the Pieter/Maskman combo would be too OP even if I know next to nothing about leading and the capabilities of regiments performing well in a linebattle type of event :P
boboy is still a little retarded dog tho