Napoleonic Wars League [Season 1-4]

[Kleist]

I miss the old times where lb's are hosted to have some fun and not to be competitive.. 

Competitive is fun!

yea sometimes But not all the time, especially when it comes to rules likes this etc.   

[Hekko]

If you want to win, beat the enemy on the map he chose. Nothing to do with some map picking skills. There was not a single match where 6te or our opponent switched maps until they were so maxed out to fit their/our playing style. You sure can keep posting, but as stated earlier - this rule will not be changed a second time. I really don't get why map choosing is such a big deal to you, since it is not a big deal.

You are completely and utterly wrong about it having nothing to do with map-picking skills. Just because you have not come across douchebaggery does not mean that it has not happened and won't continue to happen. Svensson and I routinely pass up on maps that we think are "too fair" in the NWL games we have had.

You say it's not a problem. And in quite a few games I am guessing it won't be a problem because one side is getting what is called wtfpwned in technical terms (or both sides are so bad that they are unaware of the implications). But when teams are more equal in skill on a higher level this stuff matters, A LOT.

I miss the old times where lb's are hosted to have some fun and not to be competitive.. 

Competitive is fun!

yea sometimes But not all the time, especially when it comes to rules likes this etc.   

This is an explicitly competitive event, so saying that competitive is not worth striving for is a bit of moot point in this context. Albeit I agree with you in a general context.

[DasBrot]

You are completely and utterly wrong about it having nothing to do with map-picking skills. Just because you have not come across douchebaggery does not mean that it has not happened and won't continue to happen. Svensson and I routinely pass up on maps that we think are "too fair" in the NWL games we have had.

You say it's not a problem. And in quite a few games I am guessing it won't be a problem because one side is getting what is called wtfpwned in technical terms (or both sides are so bad that they are unaware of the implications). But when teams are more equal in skill on a higher level this stuff matters, A LOT.

Its not about map picking skills, period. If you're right, most of the games would end in a tie, because of the maps everyone can choose for his 5 rounds, and thus winning each of this because its his own chosen map. But this didn't happen. YOU are utterly wrong. So would the Nr24 now just accept the rule and wait for the next season to happen? You are only speculating about what-ever-could-be-and-happen. You're the team with the least matches since you joined as one of the last teams. So calm down and lets see what happens.

[MrSt3fan]

I don't see why a map is such a big deal. Pick a map both leaders agree on (if one doesn't then you just swap it) and after 5 rounds decide whether you want a new map or just swap sides. If both leaders agree to a map it is their own fault if the map is bad for them.

[Carolus.]

I don't see why a map is such a big deal. Pick a map both leaders agree on (if one doesn't then you just swap it) and after 5 rounds decide whether you want a new map or just swap sides. If both leaders agree to a map it is their own fault if the map is bad for them.

Agreed, BOTH leaders should agree before playing a map

[Bever]

I don't see why a map is such a big deal. Pick a map both leaders agree on (if one doesn't then you just swap it) and after 5 rounds decide whether you want a new map or just swap sides. If both leaders agree to a map it is their own fault if the map is bad for them.

That's the usual procedure in my opinion. Would be nice if everyone will go like this.

[Hekko]

I don't see why a map is such a big deal. Pick a map both leaders agree on (if one doesn't then you just swap it) and after 5 rounds decide whether you want a new map or just swap sides. If both leaders agree to a map it is their own fault if the map is bad for them.

That's the usual procedure in my opinion. Would be nice if everyone will go like this.

As I have said countless times, with competitive people (this is a competitive league after all?) this will not happen.  In a normal LB sure a consensus approach is more common.

[Bever]

Sign Ups open in 2 hours!

[alpkerem]

wow how exciting

/sarcasm

[DasBrot]

wow how exciting

/sarcasm

so excite
wow
such sign up


just for you my dear

[alpkerem]

didnt we already ;P

i jst got doge'd lel, thx brotski^^

[The Nutty Pig]

So people who where in last year dont have the sign up again?  I dont understand!

[Evanovic]

Its not about map picking skills, period. If you're right, most of the games would end in a tie, because of the maps everyone can choose for his 5 rounds, and thus winning each of this because its his own chosen map. But this didn't happen. YOU are utterly wrong. So would the Nr24 now just accept the rule and wait for the next season to happen? You are only speculating about what-ever-could-be-and-happen. You're the team with the least matches since you joined as one of the last teams. So calm down and lets see what happens.

Is it really going to take a regiment to pick a Mt Kilimanjaro spawn-camp to show you why the rule is so flawed?
 
Noone's saying that a chosen map will guarantee a win, but it will affect the result and it could be used by some teams more than others to gain points in an unsportsmanlike fashion (grief maps, caming maps etc). Do you really want teams to have this option? You are just planting a timebomb really. This season will be a lot closer considering the 91st has retired and better regiments are signing up, thus points differences could mean a lot more.
 
I heard that the second season begins next year, that's more than enough time to make a cool, official and balanced tournament map, right? It would be nice if you could actually tell us why randomly generated maps are better for this sort of tournament than a well designed, fit-for-purpose tournament map as well, what's the logic behind it?

[MrSt3fan]

I don't see why a map is such a big deal. Pick a map both leaders agree on (if one doesn't then you just swap it) and after 5 rounds decide whether you want a new map or just swap sides. If both leaders agree to a map it is their own fault if the map is bad for them.

That's the usual procedure in my opinion. Would be nice if everyone will go like this.

As I have said countless times, with competitive people (this is a competitive league after all?) this will not happen.  In a normal LB sure a consensus approach is more common.

Why wouldn't this happen in a competitive scene? competitive doesn't mean that people aren't being good sportsmen anymore. Basically what you are saying is that in a competitive seen both leaders will never agree? Or do I understand this wrong?

[Bever]

Regiments which played in the last season don't have to sign up again.
And please stop the discussion about the map rule now. -.-