| NWBC The first suggestion is a reboot of an old league, NWBC (Napoleonic Wars Battle Championship). This league saw coalitions of regiments form together, to fight classic style NW Linebattles but with a more competitive atmosphere. I have some basic rules prepared to give you an idea of what this league might look like: Spoiler 1. Basic rules: #1.1 Minimum attendance to matches is 50 players. #1.2 Should attendance of both teams exceed this number then the maximum advantage any one team may have over the other is 5 players. #1.3 Line infantry, Lights/Rifles(max15) and Cavalry (max15) classes must be involved. The addition of artillery(max10) permitted but must be approved by both teams prior to the match. #1.4 Regardless of the maximum numbers given for each class (see class rules), teams must be comprised of 50% Line infantry at all times. #1.5 Matches will consist of 4 rounds on a single map (custom or random) with a side swap. #1.6 If either team is considered to be camping, displaying no attempt to gain or give gound then a warning may be issued once (per round). Should the warning be ignored that team may be forced to forfeit that round. #1.7 An 'All Charge' may be called if over 10mins of the round has elapsed or if both teams are to be considered camping. When called all units charge and resolve the round as soon as possible. [close] | NW Campaign The second suggestion is a Campaign which I proved concept for this time last year, with a successful outcome (even if the teams turned out to be a little imbalanced activity wise). See below links for more details but it's essentially a commander battle campaign, fought over a virtual map in fse which uses different denominations of units for different troop types, using a higher player to bot ratio than you usually have in commander battle servers, primarily to encourage cooperation within the units: Here is the thread with the rules for this (hosted back in July last year): https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/index.php?topic=38799.0 Outcome summary of the last campaign can be found on the post here: https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/index.php?topic=38798.30 |
Thanks all, you may well be right with the NWBC being the better option - at the very least it's a lot less work. I did thankfully make a successful campaign this time last year though Tardet :) look at the 2nd link and there's a summary at the bottom! If there's sufficient interest for that maybe that'll be a project for another time :D
If anyone has concerns to raise re. rules feel free to raise them.
Thanks all, you may well be right with the NWBC being the better option - at the very least it's a lot less work. I did thankfully make a successful campaign this time last year though Tardet :) look at the 2nd link and there's a summary at the bottom! If there's sufficient interest for that maybe that'll be a project for another time :D
If anyone has concerns to raise re. rules feel free to raise them.
Should take the time to read properly myself, thought it was the rules of one of these successful events hosted some years back. I might have come across that thread once or twice but never took the time to look deep into it, will do now thanks! :)
Would another linebattle tourney really work? like it seems most people aren't interested in getting shot anymore and its all about groupfighting. I think that commander battle tourney sounds like a bit of fun however :)
when i was Col of 18th we were having ideas with 2v2 Linebattles..... its literally as basic as it sounds, 2 regiments vs another 2.... each team has many ways they can go about it, e.g. stick together, pretend to be 1 massive line, or 1 line distract while the other flank.... any similar concept to those would interest me. either way gl with whichever u choose kinky!
Edit: so NWBC pretty much is what im saying, but with however many regiments u choose per side.
when i was Col of 18th we were having ideas with 2v2 Linebattles..... its literally as basic as it sounds, 2 regiments vs another 2.... each team has many ways they can go about it, e.g. stick together, pretend to be 1 massive line, or 1 line distract while the other flank.... any similar concept to those would interest me. either way gl with whichever u choose kinky!
Edit: so NWBC pretty much is what im saying, but with however many regiments u choose per side.
Thanks bae x
Essentially this is what i'm proposing (as in it's on a comparatively small scale) but with the addition of the cav and lights to spice things up and let bigger regs use their additional companies. No FiC rules and 50v50 will allow for a decent proportion of melee to shooting I reckon with less lag than your typical LB.
sounds good, not sure how the no FiC rule will go down, depends on your target audience as more competitive regiments will want a FiC rule whereas i imagine casual dont???? not surewhen i was Col of 18th we were having ideas with 2v2 Linebattles..... its literally as basic as it sounds, 2 regiments vs another 2.... each team has many ways they can go about it, e.g. stick together, pretend to be 1 massive line, or 1 line distract while the other flank.... any similar concept to those would interest me. either way gl with whichever u choose kinky!
Edit: so NWBC pretty much is what im saying, but with however many regiments u choose per side.
Thanks bae x
Essentially this is what i'm proposing (as in it's on a comparatively small scale) but with the addition of the cav and lights to spice things up and let bigger regs use their additional companies. No FiC rules and 50v50 will allow for a decent proportion of melee to shooting I reckon with less lag than your typical LB.
People think casual regiments that pride themselves on hating competitions and competitive regs will be the driving force in a competition? Idk.
Seems like a cool idea just not too sure how many regiments can pull 50+ people as most struggle to get 15 for EIC.
People think casual regiments that pride themselves on hating competitions and competitive regs will be the driving force in a competition? Idk.
Seems like a cool idea just not too sure how many regiments can pull 50+ people as most struggle to get 15 for EIC.
Pretty sure not every casual regiment have the same approach as the 19th. Also, the minimum attendance of 50 is for the coalition entirely, not one regiment.
I see what you're saying, for a regiment like 33rd that can bring 70 to an event on a good day Vs 5 regiments of 10-15 people it obvious who would win.People think casual regiments that pride themselves on hating competitions and competitive regs will be the driving force in a competition? Idk.
Seems like a cool idea just not too sure how many regiments can pull 50+ people as most struggle to get 15 for EIC.
Pretty sure not every casual regiment have the same approach as the 19th. Also, the minimum attendance of 50 is for the coalition entirely, not one regiment.
But from experience coalitions are far more likely to get absolutely smacked by one big regiment and id say most the casual regiments don’t like competitions that’s why they are casual and that’s how they advertise themselves to their members
all random no? so we can prevent stuff like coalitions like 33rd et cetera.Good idea but what about if one reg aren’t anywhere near as good, the regs don’t work together and why would we have a regiment with multiple companies if we can’t work together in an event basically tailored for a regiment with many companies
for example 33rd Line with 92nd Lights with 40th cav and HRE arty
I don't think splitting up regiments into their companies is a good thing to do. I think you guys underestimate the danger coming from coalitions formed from elite regiments in their specific classes. Just imagine a coalition from 15thYR, 17e, 8eHuss and whoever is good at skirms and arty (don't know lots about the competitive scene in NW apart from Line Infantry)
I'm not sure if 33rd (or any other large regiment) would be able to defeat such a high-skill coalition.
Also I agree (think it was mentioned earlier in this discussion), that you shouldn't punish large regiments that were able to build themselves up to such a size by splitting them into their companies. There's a lot of organization to be done to keep a large regiment like that going and I respect every regiment that is able to do so.
Other than that I can only say, that 2ndHess would love to participate in NWBC. We hope it doesn't interfere with 59th NWCL though. Would be lovely if Kincaid and King_Kaide (pun intended) would communicate about that one ^^
I don't think splitting up regiments into their companies is a good thing to do. I think you guys underestimate the danger coming from coalitions formed from elite regiments in their specific classes. Just imagine a coalition from 15thYR, 17e, 8eHuss and whoever is good at skirms and arty (don't know lots about the competitive scene in NW apart from Line Infantry)of course u would see it that way as you are also a big regiment with several companies. What we meant was, it has to be balanced well and it being fair will come down to who signs up.
I'm not sure if 33rd (or any other large regiment) would be able to defeat such a high-skill coalition.
Also I agree (think it was mentioned earlier in this discussion), that you shouldn't punish large regiments that were able to build themselves up to such a size by splitting them into their companies. There's a lot of organization to be done to keep a large regiment like that going and I respect every regiment that is able to do so.
Other than that I can only say, that 2ndHess would love to participate in NWBC. We hope it doesn't interfere with 59th NWCL though. Would be lovely if Kincaid and King_Kaide (pun intended) would communicate about that one ^^