Napoleonic Wars League [Season 1-4]

[ThE-KiLLiaN]

45e 6-4 6te in 1st League.
Gg for this match DasBrot ! 

[DasBrot]

45e 6-4 6te in 1st League.
Gg for this match DasBrot ! 

Thank you too, very enjoyable and fun!

[Evanovic]

This is the moment 92nd got awarded a round for at 14:47:
 

 
Looking at the killfeed, 17e only get 1 kill after the melee begins. The teams more or less had equal numbers at this point and a majority of both lines are still alive. Any rational person would accept that this rule-infringement does not call for giving a round. 92nd lost 1 guy (1/30 of their team essentially) only 1 second after the melee commenced and they get awarded a free round for it?? What a joke.

[Kleist]

Why cant you just accept bevers/brots decision? See how no one except you is complaining about a match in wich your regiment wasnt even involved. If Posh was complaining i would kinda understand this, but not you..

[Alpharion]

Well..It may not be my place to say as I don't represent any of the regiments nor the NANWL itself, but If I had been refing a match such as this in the NANWL the most I would have done is slayed him and given a warning. To give a round up is simply preposterous. The absolute highest would have had to been a re-do of the round.

[Evanovic]

Why cant you just accept bevers/brots decision? See how no one except you is complaining about a match in wich your regiment wasnt even involved. If Posh was complaining i would kinda understand this, but not you..

Because if other regiments were as petty as 92nd to scrounge for rounds, and if the NWL organisers were as generous to other regiments as they were to 92nd we'd see a lot of score-changing every single match. I think everyone would accept that would not be a good thing though. This kind of stuff and worse happens to us (Nr.24) every match but we only appeal the things that actually affected the course of the round adversely.

[James]

I personally cannot agree more with Evan. Throughout the season there have been a lot more serious rule breaks than what had occurred during that match and yet nothing was done. 17e definetly did deserve to win that match and giving the 92nd that round was absolutely ridiculous.

[Kleist]

Why cant you just accept bevers/brots decision? See how no one except you is complaining about a match in wich your regiment wasnt even involved. If Posh was complaining i would kinda understand this, but not you..

Because if other regiments were as petty as 92nd to scrounge for rounds, and if the NWL organisers were as generous as they were to 92nd to other regiments we'd see a lot of score-changing every single match. This kind of stuff and worse happens to us every match but we only appeal the things that actually affected the course of the round adversely.

Thats what we also do, as i said before.

Well..It may not be my place to say as I don't represent any of the regiments nor the NANWL itself, but If I had been refing a match such as this in the NANWL the most I would have done is slayed him and given a warning. To give a round up is simply preposterous. The absolute highest would have had to been a re-do of the round.

 We asked posh to re-play the round but he didnt want to, Cameron posted it the page before..

[Eddie]

Well..It may not be my place to say as I don't represent any of the regiments nor the NANWL itself, but If I had been refing a match such as this in the NANWL the most I would have done is slayed him and given a warning. To give a round up is simply preposterous. The absolute highest would have had to been a re-do of the round.

+1
Absolutely ludicrous.

[PrideofNi]

4 shots only in the last round FiC. One killed. Want a video? Contact me.

And that's justification for awarding a whole round? You lost 1 player from a FiC, yet it was a 35 vs 35 LB pretty much. This is totally out of proportion, other regiments do not get awarded rounds for that sort of thing.

 When watching the match, I noticed you weren't there the whole time, but it was quite close. I would have thought it would be quite obvious that when a match is close, losing 1 (one of our better meleers) can completely change a melee fight (as well as the spreading out affect a FiC has / the confusion in TS) and the result. Many regiments have claimed this, and you never took issue with it which is why I find this outburst somewhat confusing. In addition the 92nd straight away asked for a replay of the round - not that we wanted to claim a round this way, but since it was refused, what choice did we have? Either way I fail to see why you are posting conversations from Posh, if he has/wants to make a point I am pretty sure he has an FSE account.

Either way was an enjoyable 1v1, I hope there will be a rematch soon or even doing more larger lb's with 17e as opponents.

[James]

Spoiler

Why cant you just accept bevers/brots decision? See how no one except you is complaining about a match in wich your regiment wasnt even involved. If Posh was complaining i would kinda understand this, but not you..

Because if other regiments were as petty as 92nd to scrounge for rounds, and if the NWL organisers were as generous as they were to 92nd to other regiments we'd see a lot of score-changing every single match. This kind of stuff and worse happens to us every match but we only appeal the things that actually affected the course of the round adversely.

Thats what we also do, as i said before.

Well..It may not be my place to say as I don't represent any of the regiments nor the NANWL itself, but If I had been refing a match such as this in the NANWL the most I would have done is slayed him and given a warning. To give a round up is simply preposterous. The absolute highest would have had to been a re-do of the round.

 We asked posh to re-play the round but he didnt want to, Cameron posted it the page before..

[close]

You cannot expect both regiments to call 35 of their best players to play one single round.

[Evanovic]

You know what's interesting, Nr.24 appealed a FiC decision a while ago (was never followed up). We won a LB 9 - 1, but the enemy fired in the charge in a round that they won, killing a couple of our guys. When we spoke with DasBrot in TS, the MAX that he was willing to do was change the score to 9 - 0, NOT 10 - 0 for us (so just take a round away from then, not give one to us). So it is even more suprising, that in a weaker FiC case that we see here, where it's only 1 man dying, that he takes a whole round off 17e and gives it to 92nd. The double standards are pretty astonishing in this league. If the NWL organisers had applied the same reasoning to this match they would have changed the score to 17e 5 - 4 92nd, which means 17e would still get the 3 points that I think everyone knows they deservedly won.

[Kleist]

Why do you think they deservedly won? In my opinion every round was very balanced.

[PrideofNi]

You know what's interesting, Nr.24 appealed a FiC decision a while ago (was never followed up). We won a LB 9-1, but the enemy fired in the charge in a round that they won, killing a couple of our guys. When we spoke with DasBrot in TS, the MAX that he was willing to do was change the score to 9 - 0, NOT 10 - 0 for us (so just take a round away from then, not give one to us). So it is even more suprising, that in a weaker FiC case that we see here, where it's only 1 man dying, that he takes a whole round off 17e and gives it to 92nd. The double standards are pretty astonishing in this league. If the NWL organisers had applied the same reasoning to this match they would have changed the score to 17e 5 - 4 92nd, which means 17e would still get the 3 points that I think everyone knows they deservedly won.

I don't see how that's relevant since there have been more recent cases where FiC has changed the score to what we see here. What everyone knows is that there was a rule break and the ideal situation (which the 92nd tried to get) would be getting the round replayed. No reason to attack us (calling us petty etc) when all we are doing is following procedure - like many, many other regiments.

[DasBrot]

You know what's interesting, Nr.24 appealed a FiC decision a while ago (was never followed up). We won a LB 9 - 1, but the enemy fired in the charge in a round that they won, killing a couple of our guys. When we spoke with DasBrot in TS, the MAX that he was willing to do was change the score to 9 - 0, NOT 10 - 0 for us (so just take a round away from then, not give one to us). So it is even more suprising, that in a weaker FiC case that we see here, where it's only 1 man dying, that he takes a whole round off 17e and gives it to 92nd. The double standards are pretty astonishing in this league. If the NWL organisers had applied the same reasoning to this match they would have changed the score to 17e 5 - 4 92nd, which means 17e would still get the 3 points that I think everyone knows they deservedly won.

I remeber the complaints about the organizers who would just change rounds if the rulebreaks were significant. In the mean time, we are going away from this, and now people are complaining about it again. I sense the double standarts somewhere else.
-edit
You can be sure that we will handle future rulebreakings quite similar (except those against 6te and 3teFK since everyone will just shout around "administrators taking advantages of being administrators")