Native Completed North American Native League [NANL]

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
RoBo_CoP said:
Didn't ask!? You're joking right?

Check that thread out, Marnid, myself, and many others begged for our own board.

Though I wasn't involved in running the tournament, I'm quite sure Marnid had asked for one and the response being: there isn't enough players to warrant it's own board.
Yeah because begging in the tournament's thread is the place to ask... you think I read all the posts there or consider any conversation that goes on as any sort of actual request?

If I was asked (perhaps I vaguely remember something), then there were probably 6-8 teams in the tournament at that point in time and absolutely no guarantee of any sort of regular play that would warrant a sub-forum. SNL asked, I told them to come back when they had 12 or so teams, they ended up with (I think) 16, which went down to 13 after drops. On top of that, they had a schedule which meant every team was playing a match every week.

Accusing me of any sort of bias against the NA community whatsoever is so unbelievably ridiculous.
 
Where did I say you had a bias against NA? Though maybe you could read this:

RoBo_CoP said:
Though I wasn't involved in running the tournament, I'm quite sure Marnid....

If you'd like to clear anything up about it, he would be the one to talk to. He can give you any specific details that I can not, though all I'm here for is this:


I'm asking for is the oppotunity to aquire our own board in the event we have enough support to earn it.
 
RoBo_CoP said:
Where did I say you had a bias against NA? Though maybe you could read this:
RoBo_CoP said:
How about you wait n see how many teams sign up, and give us our own board this time around.  :roll:
I think your pronoun usage says it all.

I won't tolerate the accusation, whether implicit or explicit. It's not true and I won't let it go unchallenged.

RoBo_CoP said:
I'm asking for is the oppotunity to aquire our own board in the event we have enough support to earn it.
I'm saying that opportunity is and has always been there.
 
Good, glad that's cleared up.

Captain Lust said:
I won't tolerate the accusation, whether implicit or explicit. It's not true and I won't let it go unchallenged.

Captain Lust said:
If I was asked (perhaps I vaguely remember something), then there were probably 6-8 teams in the tournament at that point in time and absolutely no guarantee of any sort of regular play that would warrant a sub-forum. SNL asked, I told them to come back when they had 12 or so teams, they ended up with (I think) 16, which went down to 13 after drops. On top of that, they had a schedule which meant every team was playing a match every week.

All you had to say was that in the first place.
 
RoBo_CoP said:
All you had to saw was that in the first place.
So in this situation, you think I should be expected to remember every single detail of my every interaction with every tournament and make no error. Simultaneously, you believe you are within your rights to make uninformed casual attacks at my impartiality and I should somehow preemptively guess what you're referring to and explain why you're misinformed before you say anything? That's how I should prevent my reputation from being tarnished by your attitude?

Don't you think that's a slight double standard?

I won't give you an inch on this I'm afraid. Until you make a post that doesn't contain a snide remark, I will continue to batter you with logic and justice.
 
I mentioned NASTe in my first post, you could have taken that as a clue.

If you wanted details you could have:

Captain Lust said:
put your pride to one side.

Edit: Even though I'd love to continue to spam a thread that's not mine, I'm on steam babes.
 
Zaffa said:
Top 8 clans? Are there even 8 competitive clans in the NA scene?

Additionally, why limit it to clans instead of teams (as every other tourney has been)?

Ah, I meant teams, my bad. I don't know why I put clans. Thanks Zaffa.

Errr, where do you see the top 8 clans? I only see the top 8 teams.

Captain Lust said:
I want to pick up on a few points in yur ruleset. My comments will be written in red.

Members
  • Members may be apart of any team regardless of their allegiance to any clan or other organization.
  • Members may only be a member of one team.
  • Members must show good sportsmanship before, during, and after matches.

Take care over your definition of "teams" and "clans". Make it clear which each term means to users. While it seems to be reasonably clear and consistent in the rules, the name of the tournament contains the word "clan" even though by your definition, you're running a "team" league and not necessarily a "clan" league.

Teams
  • Each team must represent at least one official NA clan, International (including NA) clan, or a reasonable organization.
  • Team names must be appropriate, reasonable, and relative to the team and the League. If not, an Administrator will contact the Captain to see about a name change.
  • There may be multiple teams representing one clan.
  • Teams must have at least 8 members but may not exceed 14 members.
  • Each team must designate a Captain to handle all issues with the tournament for their team and a Co-Captain to do the Captain's job when he is not available.

*If any changes need to be made by a team after the start of the league, they need to contact the Head Administrator about the change and wait 24 hours before the changes take effect.

What makes a clan official? That should be defined if it's part of your ruleset.

Does "International (including NA) clan" mean an international clan that has NA players? If so, how many do they need? Would the NA players need to play in matches?

"reasonable organization" comes across as a particularly vague term. The impression I get is that you will review the suitability of applicant teams on a case by case basis. If that is correct, then it would be better to simply make that clear in the rules instead of using undefined vague terms.

"Team names must be appropriate, reasonable, and relative to the team and the League." Again, without any clarification this rule is massively open to interpretation. Think about what you want to achieve and/or prevent with the rule and reword it to make that clear to potential teams.

"There may be multiple teams representing one clan." If your other rules are well constructed, there should be no need for this rule. The ability to submit multiple teams from one clan should be implied by the lack of a rule that says otherwise. This might fit better as a key point that you direct teams towards, rather than as a rule in itself.

It's always a bad idea to have the minimum team size any larger than the minimum requirement for matches. If a team has 6 active players that they can bring to every match, there is no need to restrict them by forcing them to add an extra two.

Be careful about the team changes. A fixed system prevents luck of the draw having an admin online or not to add a new player before a match. I would say make it always 24 hours or add some sort of fixed time where additions will become valid.


Free Agent List
  • The Free Agent list will be a list of players who do not belong to a team, but wish to be apart of the tournament through emergency substitutions.
  • If a team cannot field a desired amount of players, they can use a Free Agent to play for them in that match. This is called an emergency substitution.
  • A team may only use one Free Agent for emergency substitutions per match.
  • If a Free Agent is used for emergency substitutions by one team in more than two matches, that team could face penalties.
  • Teams must post when a Free Agent is used.

This isn't to my tastes at all. In 6vs6 one player can be very influential. I think there's also no way to regulate whether or not a team is able to field players. It's a very easy thing to lie about and a very hard thing to verify.

You ought to consider what you want to achieve with the tournament and how accurate the final standings will be if potentially very strong Free Agents are loaning out their services at whim.


Round Robin Stage
The Round Robin Stage will use the Round Robin system of tournaments. Each week a team will face a designated opponent. This will last until each team has challenged each other team. The maps and factions will be designed randomly by the Head Administrator and will be referred to as the "Weekly Fixture".

  • Rankings in this stage will be determined by round wins.
  • There will be two maps each match. Each map will have two sets of four rounds. The first set will have Top Team play as Faction 1 and Bottom Team play as Faction 2. The second set will have Top Team play as Faction 2 and Bottom Team play as Faction 1.
  • Teams are recommended to field at least 6 players. If need be, teams may field 5, but continuation of this for more than two matches will result in penalties. Both teams must match players.
  • The team with the most round wins after the second map is completed wins the match.
  • Tied rounds will be replayed.
  • In the event of a tied match, the teams will not compete any further. Their scores will be calculated as is.
  • In the event of a tied ranking (which will alter the choosing of the top 8 for the Single Elimination stage), the team with the highest number of match wins will be chosen first.

"This will last until each team has challenged each other team. " Don't use "challenged". It implies teams are picking their opponents. Just say "played against", "faced" or something.

There are a number of reasons why sorting the teams by overall Round Wins is a terrible idea. I would strongly advise to base the rankings primarily off of points earned for match wins and draws. If you are not convinced, I can go into a lot more detail about this.

"Teams are recommended to field at least 6 players. If need be, teams may field 5, but continuation of this for more than two matches will result in penalties. Both teams must match players." What happens if a player drops from one team? Does the other player need to drop one? What about if teams play 3 rounds from 3 different matches 5vs5? Are they punished more than a team which plays two entire matches 5v5? Since they played 5v5 in 3 separate matches.

Also what if one team has 5 strong players and 1 weak player but they know their opponent has 6 strong players and they decide to pretend the weak player can't attend, forcing the match to be played 5vs5. Surely that's an unfair advantage that can be gained by abusing the rules and I don't see any way which it could be regulated.

You should explain what happens if teams are equal on round wins and match wins. Every situation should be accounted for right down to the point where you'd use a random roll. Otherwise, if that situation occurs, the team which ends up losing out would (and has every right to) feel hard done by.


Single Elimination Stage
The top 8 ranked teams of the Round Robin Stage will advance onto the Single Elimination Stage. The Single Elimination Stage will use the Single Elimination system of tournaments. Each week a team will face a designated opponent. If a team is defeated, they are eliminated from competing. The maps and factions will be designed randomly by the Head Administrator and will be referred to as the "Weekly Fixture". In addition, there will be a third map and factions randomly selected to be the "Weekly Tie Fixture". The team to win all of their matches will be named the champion of the League.

  • Advances in this stage will be determined by match wins.
  • There will be two maps each match. Each map will have two sets of four rounds. The first set will have Top Team play as Faction 1 and Bottom Team play as Faction 2. The second set will have Top Team play as Faction 2 and Bottom Team play as Faction 1.
  • Teams are required to field at least 6 players. Both teams must match players.
  • The team with the most round wins after the second map is completed wins the match.
  • Tied rounds will be replayed.
  • In the event of a tied match, the teams will compete on the map and faction of the Weekly Tie Fixture. This map will be played as if it was any normal map.
  • In the event of a tie on the Weekly Tie Fixture. Consider yourself unlucky and reschedule.

This applies to the Round Robin rules as well but what happens if both teams have 8 players but one team wants to play 6vs6 and the other team wants to play 8vs8? I assume they would have to play 6vs6 but this should be made clear in the rules. Something stating that no team can force the match to be played higher than 6vs6 while allowing the possibility if both teams consent would achieve what I assume you're after.

What happens in a reschedule? Do teams play the same maps and factions they played before? Certain teams may not consider themselves unlucky in that scenario... they could have important players missing and be much more confident they'd do better on another date.


Match Disputes
If there is a match dispute by either participating team during any match, the judges will review it privately with the team captains. If no solution comes of this, the judges will decide whether to redo that match under Administration Supervision or to leave the match alone the way it is.

Seems vague, although that's probably best for rules like these. My one concern would be if a team has a dispute but no judge is available. Can they simply delay the match inevitably until a judge can be contacted? What about gold earned in that round? At what point do teams stop playing if there's a dispute? What if a dispute could have been resolved if the teams (or of of the teams) had read the rules properly? Will they be penalised for their ignorance?

Servers
Servers should be picked with the best interest of both teams in mind. The server location should be as fair as possible for both teams. If severe lag is experience during a match, the teams may relocate to another server after the current set is completed.

Required Server Settings:
  • Game Mode: Battle
  • Combat Speed: Fastest
  • Block Direction: Manual
  • Auto-Balance Limit: Off
  • Disallow Ranged Weapons: Off
  • Friendly Fire: On
  • Melee Friendly Fire: On
  • Damage to Friend: 100%
  • Damage to Self: 0%
  • Gold: 100%
  • Combat Bonus: 100%
  • Round Bonus: 100%
  • Respawn Time: 8 Seconds
  • Max Round Time: 360 Seconds
  • Map Time: 120 Minutes

*Spectator mode is up to the Captains. If one Captain requests it a certain way that is more restrictive than the previous setting, the server must be put on that setting.
**Server settings should not be altered in a way to make the match unfair.

the teams may relocate to another server after the current set is completed. This leaves open the possbility of up to 4 rounds being played under potentially devastating conditions. I'd consider a different approach.

Also consider using the new WNL mod with updated Battle rules (4 minute rounds, flags spawn at ~2 minutes every time). This makes rounds faster with less waiting around. It also makes streams more entertaining to watch.


Violations and Cheating
Violations of the rules above are punishable by the Administrators of the tournament. The list of cheats below are also punishable by the Administrators. Punishment will be decided and enforced after the Administrators have a meeting with the party(ies) involved.

Cheats:
  • Altering files for an advantage.
  • Exploiting glitches on maps.
  • Using spectator to share information.
  • Espionage of any type.
  • Anything deemed as cheating by the Administrators unanimously.

Playable Maps and Factions
Factions:
  • Kingdom of Swadia
  • Kingdom of Nords
  • Kingdom of Vaegirss
  • Kingdom of Rhodoks
  • Sarranid Sultanate

Maps:
  • Ruins
  • Village
  • Ruined Fort
  • Field by the River
  • Snowy Village
  • Nord Town
  • Port Assault
  • Desert Town
  • Dijon
  • Frosty Battle
  • Reveran Village
  • Sand'di'boush
  • Snowy Hamlet
  • Vendetta

"Altering files for an advantage." What about a custom crosshair? What about a round timer that changes colour when the round is nearly over? Are these punishable offences? Also how do you plan to enforce this?

"Exploiting glitches on maps." You can't have a rule like this if you're not going make any attempt to define what counts as a glitch on any of the maps. It's not fair to assume everyone is a mind reader or has good knowledge of whatever consensus or precedent has been set in the past. Just remove the rule and spend some time removing what you consider to be glitches from the maps. It's easy enough.

"Using spectator to share information." Again, how do you plan to enforce this in any realistic sense?

"Espionage of any type." Vague... what do you mean by this and what does it cover that the other rules don't?

You guys play Dijon? Why?


Administrators
Administrators may not allow a team to break any of the rules above. In addition, they may not allow a team receive an unfair advantage over another using any means. If an administrator is a part of a team, and that team is involved in a dispute, that administrator may not rule on that dispute.

Head Administrator: William
taleworlds.gif
Nord Champion 
steam.gif
William

Administrator List:

What happens if the admins need to decide on a matter of cheating? Does the unanimity need to come from admins involved in the situation or not?

Would also be nice if you gave some assurances to streamers to guarantee that they can stream matches. It's only good promotion for your tournament.

I'll look through these when I have time :3
 
I looked through them, and they all seem very valid points. I think Erminas also brought up many of those points in his review post in our own forums, and I'm also in support of(for example) the new WNL battle rules, removing Dijon for something more balanced (Erminas suggested "Verloren"), and more.

 
Ruined Fort
Desert Town
Snowy Hamlet
Dijon
These maps are considered pretty bad for competitive, and have already been removed from EU competitive scene like years ago.

Village
Port Assault
Snowy Village
These we're removed from EU competitive scene recently.

Fort of Honour
Verloren
Shariz Village
Mountain Fortress
Dry Valley
Added to EU competitive scene recently

More info: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,271209.0.html

You might also want to check out ComP and at least my native map edits to the maps which got removed from WNL recently, which might fix some issues they had before.
 
Im confused on what you designate to be a team?

You state that teams must represent one of 8 clans


but then earlier you state that they can be teams with no allegiance to clans.
 
In most team-based tournaments, it seems like clan members form up their own teams anyway, with maybe a team or 2 having more diverse players. It would be interesting to have a more diverse tournament. This means maybe one of the rules can be that for each team, no more than 2 players from the same clan can be in the same team. This would make the tourney more challenging and probably more interesting as teams have to really know how to work together to win.

Just an idea :smile:
 
sotamursu123 said:
Village
Port Assault
Snowy Village
These we're removed from EU competitive scene recently.
And yet all three were played in NC matches 1-2 months ago.    :roll:



Hey, I got an idea guys.  How about everybody not hosting a tournament but has comments about it PM the actual tournament host if you have a serious suggestion instead of turning this into the same fricken arguments littering every other tournament thread. 

Seriously people....

/rantbutserious
 
Mad Dawg said:
sotamursu123 said:
Village
Port Assault
Snowy Village
These we're removed from EU competitive scene recently.
And yet all three were played in NC matches 1-2 months ago.    :roll:



Hey, I got an idea guys.  How about everybody not hosting a tournament but has comments about it PM the actual tournament host if you have a serious suggestion instead of turning this into the same fricken arguments littering every other tournament thread. 

Seriously people....

/rantbutserious

You and your crazy schemes.
 
Courtney said:
In most team-based tournaments, it seems like clan members form up their own teams anyway, with maybe a team or 2 having more diverse players. It would be interesting to have a more diverse tournament. This means maybe one of the rules can be that for each team, no more than 2 players from the same clan can be in the same team. This would make the tourney more challenging and probably more interesting as teams have to really know how to work together to win.

Just an idea :smile:
Funny how it is always the inactive clans with low skill players that offer these suggestions. No reason to split people up, especially when they had the organization and committment to play together on a daily basis.

Note that I do agree with suggestions to remove ruined fort and village from the roster. Attempts to remove desert town however are just silly, considering that it is fairly balanced and not really any campier than many of the other maps on rotation.

I would also suggest that Liberty and Snoop's Exile (the later already being featured in the current na 5aside), be added to the map roster.
 
Mad Dawg said:
sotamursu123 said:
Village
Port Assault
Snowy Village
These we're removed from EU competitive scene recently.
And yet all three were played in NC matches 1-2 months ago.    :roll:



Hey, I got an idea guys.  How about everybody not hosting a tournament but has comments about it PM the actual tournament host if you have a serious suggestion instead of turning this into the same fricken arguments littering every other tournament thread. 

Seriously people....

/rantbutserious

I'm starting to think you just copy/paste Mad Dawg, I think I see this point in every tournament thread! :grin:

That said, good luck with the tourny William/NordChampion. Another battle tourny sounds fun, so I hope it works out.
 
Ah, thanks again, Zaffa, for reminding me of the elitist that you've soooo desperately tried to be but usually just end up getting ignored :roll:. What exactly does "inactive clans with low skill players" have anything to do with presenting an idea that's a little out of the ordinary? It was an idea...an opinion...take it or leave it.   

Zaffa said:
Funny how it is always the inactive clans with low skill players that offer these suggestions. No reason to split people up, especially when they had the organization and committment to play together on a daily basis.

Anyway, good luck with the tournament. Hope all the quirks get worked out  :mrgreen:
 
Ok, I like the feedback, there is lots of it and I'm excited. I'll answer each concern to the best of my abilities.

sotamursu123 said:
Ruined Fort
Desert Town
Snowy Hamlet
Dijon
These maps are considered pretty bad for competitive, and have already been removed from EU competitive scene like years ago.

Village
Port Assault
Snowy Village
These we're removed from EU competitive scene recently.

Fort of Honour
Verloren
Shariz Village
Mountain Fortress
Dry Valley
Added to EU competitive scene recently

More info: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,271209.0.html

You might also want to check out ComP and at least my native map edits to the maps which got removed from WNL recently, which might fix some issues they had before.

The maps are not final. I put down the basic Native/ENL maps that were used in BIT. I haven't decided on maps yet, and I'm going to work on that later. Thanks for the links and info.

Duke88 said:
Im confused on what you designate to be a team?

You state that teams must represent one of 8 clans


but then earlier you state that they can be teams with no allegiance to clans.

Ok, a lot of people seemed confused on this and it is understand. To clarify, I said clan or reasonable organization. The organization can be anything from a NC Team to a team of Free Agents to a group of casual players. So you don't have to be alleged to clans at all. But if a team has Balions, TMWs, and a Non-Clansman in it, then I want both clans and the other member to receive recognition of their accomplishments.

The reason why I want this may seem weird, but I want to keep accurate and extensive records. When I give out the prizes, I'm going to specify the specific people involved in their "trophies". I will also record this down for the history of this League. I want to get everyone involved due credit. Do you think I should clarify that more in the rules?


Thanks for your good lucks and criticism. If I didn't reply to you specifically like the ones above, hopefully my answers were close enough to your issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom