Napoleonic Wars League [Season 1-4]

[Sharko]

Honestly why the fuck anyone would want too run this league is beyond me you cant win if they made the opposite decision then a different group of people would argue against it. They cant win either way.

[Kilidath]

If we are being strict on the rules

- No shooting while charging or out of formation

Only the regiment charging cannot shoot, there is nothing saying you cannot shoot while engaged in melee, or while received the charge.

As for all this rubbish about defending regiment firing while being charged has more effect then just casualties is rubbish, Why?

1. If you men are complaining about it, it more your own training and discipline that's at fault.

2. "We have to strafe". No offence but if you charging in  straight line at a enemy formation with loaded muskets you deserve to get shot.

3. not firing on a bunch of guys running at you to stab you is stupid.

4. If the guys firing are in line, they can fire.

However a referees decision should be final once its given, that's the point of taking one to an event, the same as if you don't take one and you then come here with a complaint its should be tough luck.

If you can't sort it during the event then tough, Referees decision should be final.

In other news 95th v 18th as the 18th disband so I believe this match doesn't count now, correct ?

[John Price]

I think this is how the rule should be.

- No shooting in charge or out of formation, If even one of a sides men is engaged in melee with the opposing regiment the line must hold fire and charge.

Wording it like that means that the newer regiments in the league wont do things such as trying to disengage the line from the melee to shoot, And to use an example in 18e vs 25th, Easy-e charged our line (Officer) but his line kept on firing, Of course that is stupid and is practically rambo'ing but theres nothing in the rules that says he cant do it. And if a regiment charges a line and that line keeps shooting and holds its ground, as soon as one person gets into melee, The NCO's of the shooting regiment should tell the colonel "Were in Melee" and the colonel should immediatly say "Hold Fire And Charge." If not its just poor communication between the regiment, and the round deserves to be re done etc.

[Gokiller]

Jum jum, those last 5 pages made my week again... 

[Kilidath]

- No shooting in charge or out of formation, If even one of a sides men is engaged in melee with the opposing regiment the line must hold fire and charge.

Its a good addition, if a little long winded for for me, but I can't think of a simplification.

[John Price]

Yes i agree, But it is the only real way to keep from these things happening on repeat and making sure people know what firing in charge is.

[Hadhod]

Every officer knows exactly that FiC applies even if 1 man is in melee. It has been like that for the past 2 seasons.

@Evan: You say a kill of 1 guy does not affect the outcome of the round? That is just plain bullshit. Of course it influences it. It is 1 man less on the field. We went from numerical advantage to equality, not even mentioning the confusion it cause on TS, as others have said before. If we follow your logic it would be okay to shoot at least 1 man every round while out of formation "because it doesn't affect the outcome". Logic much?

And there has been consistency. Only 2-3 rounds earlier 17e shot another two people while being engaged in melee (1 guy got killed in melee before those two kills IIRC). But because we won the round it was not taken into account. If the referees would be inconsistent we would have gotten that round too because it was a fucking blatant rulebreak (nearly 5 seconds after being in melee and still shot).

I am not saying 17e did it on purpose and as you can hear on their video Posh (I believe it is him) even says to stop firing, but if his men don't listen then they should be punished for it. Rules are rules, and have to be enforced.

[John Price]

Every officer knows exactly that FiC applies even if 1 man is in melee. It has been like that for the past 2 seasons.

@Evan: You say a kill of 1 guy does not affect the outcome of the round? That is just plain bullshit. Of course it influences it. It is 1 man less on the field. We went from numerical advantage to equality, not even mentioning the confusion it cause on TS, as others have said before. If we follow your logic it would be okay to shoot at least 1 man every round while out of formation "because it doesn't affect the outcome". Logic much?

And there has been consistency. Only 2-3 rounds earlier 17e shot another two people while being engaged in melee (1 guy got killed in melee before those two kills IIRC). But because we won the round it was not taken into account. If the referees would be inconsistent we would have gotten that round too because it was a fucking blatant rulebreak (nearly 5 seconds after being in melee and still shot).

I am not saying 17e did it on purpose and as you can hear on their video Posh (I believe it is him) even says to stop firing, but if his men don't listen then they should be punished for it. Rules are rules, and have to be enforced.

Read it back through again hadhod, you say this, of course us in league 1 and 2 should know that, but i gave you an example of even a regiment in league 2 doing it, If the rules arnt worded and explained like this, then how are people in the newer leagues suppose to know really? if they are a new regiment etc. they may find theirselves not in the know, Straying a little off topic from the 92nd vs 17e matter but honestly i want no part of it, i would rather go to the heart of the problem and improve it, That being the rules.

[Hadhod]

Every officer knows exactly that FiC applies even if 1 man is in melee. It has been like that for the past 2 seasons.

@Evan: You say a kill of 1 guy does not affect the outcome of the round? That is just plain bullshit. Of course it influences it. It is 1 man less on the field. We went from numerical advantage to equality, not even mentioning the confusion it cause on TS, as others have said before. If we follow your logic it would be okay to shoot at least 1 man every round while out of formation "because it doesn't affect the outcome". Logic much?

And there has been consistency. Only 2-3 rounds earlier 17e shot another two people while being engaged in melee (1 guy got killed in melee before those two kills IIRC). But because we won the round it was not taken into account. If the referees would be inconsistent we would have gotten that round too because it was a fucking blatant rulebreak (nearly 5 seconds after being in melee and still shot).

I am not saying 17e did it on purpose and as you can hear on their video Posh (I believe it is him) even says to stop firing, but if his men don't listen then they should be punished for it. Rules are rules, and have to be enforced.

Read it back through again hadhod, you say this, of course us in league 1 and 2 should know that, but i gave you an example of even a regiment in league 2 doing it, If the rules arnt worded and explained like this, then how are people in the newer leagues suppose to know really? if they are a new regiment etc. they may find theirselves not in the know, Straying a little off topic from the 92nd vs 17e matter but honestly i want no part of it, i would rather go to the heart of the problem and improve it, That being the rules.

Well I don't really care, if they change it or not, but I see your point. For newer regiments and their leaders it might be better to clarify it.

[Mannelig]

i think its funny:

everybody is argue about fic, which is more or less a mistake by a few.
but when there are    multiple gaps on a whole line for several shoots, which is clearly on purpose, noone cares.

[Kilidath]

i think its funny:

everybody is argue about fic, which is more or less a mistake by a few.
but when there are    multiple gaps on a whole line for several shoots, which is clearly on purpose, noone cares.

This has been discussed, I think its just as serious an issue as FiC but its been discussed before (around pages 250-260)

[Carolus.]

It's a given that rules need to be enforced consistently but that's a moot point completely in my opinion. Even if this was a consistently enforced rule (which it is not as Hekko has explained) the fact remains that any rational person would accept that the death of James MacDonald to a single fire in the charge, when both teams had 30 or so men on the field at the time, did not adversely affect the course of the round. Anyone who believes that 92nd would have won that round had they had James MacDonald still on the field is being dishonest. We saw 17e convincingly beat 92nd by a large margin in that melee, 92nd having 1/30th of their team still alive is extremely unlikely to have made a difference, any experienced NW player would accept this.

bs. As said earlier,  FiC has more negative effects than just the death of ppl getting shot. So the fact that only guy got shot is not the only thing the judges etc should base their decision on. But Im sure you know this.

i think its funny:

everybody is argue about fic, which is more or less a mistake by a few.
but when there are    multiple gaps on a whole line for several shoots, which is clearly on purpose, noone cares.

I agree. That was ridiculous. Forum rage/flaming to make organizers change decisions.

[William Jones]

So if a regiment fic but doesn't win a round is fine but if they win that round the other regiment bitches and complains. Surely if its means so much there should be a reset immediately. What a bunch of losers and hypocrites... Isn't a referee supposed to be present?

[Hadhod]

So if a regiment fic but doesn't win a round is fine but if they win that round the other regiment bitches and complains. Surely if its means so much there should be a reset immediately. What a bunch of losers and hypocrites... Isn't a referee supposed to be present?

No it's not allowed to FiC regardless if you win the round or not. Why should the regiment that got FiCed on complain about if after? They won the round even though the enemy broke a rule. I wouldn't have a problem with punishing that aswell, but I believe that would be kinda unfair towards the regiment that FiCed as it will essentially cost them 2 rounds because of 1 rulebreak.

[Caskie]

The thing is why don't they say something in-game instead of coming onto the forums and saying the other regiment broke a rule and this would stop the arguing as their was the whole melee conflict to ask for a reset but asked at the end where most players would leave the server as it was last round.