NW Completed NW International Linebattle Championships "ILC" [Canceld]

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Status
Not open for further replies.
Guys you have to understand with shooting in a charge, it is a pain in the a** when it comes to the referee and both the participants, because most of the time it's very subjective when it is comes to charging and at what range it is considered skirmishing etc. The rule "only shoot in line" isn't very hard, it's obvious when it is a line and when it is not.  Hekko you make a great point using maths trying to prove your point as objectively as possible, but try and look from the referee's/organiser's point of view (this is also for you Evanovic). I can already see the complaints coming in about shooting in charges and from where they start their charge etc etc.
Now I must ask you guys to please stop debating about shooting in charges, for it is not related to the ILC anymore as the decision about the rule is already made, and it will rest with that. If you really wish to convince the other party about it you can always start a seperate thread. :smile:

And I'm sorry if I come off rude but the thread IS called "ILC" not "Shooting in charges: what do you think?"

EDIT: Hekko made a seperate thread, sorry for not noticing earlier. Thanks for that Hekko.
http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,232843.0.html is the link if you're really into the discussion.
 
Yeah well done Hekko making a new thread xD

Offtopic:Eazy where have you been posting you became a regular so fast xD You wrote K on all threads xD ?
 
Thing is, with no shooting in the charge you will get alot of equally fuzzy things, arguably more fuzzu situations to consider. What if someone makes it into melee with the line, one guy steps out of line to face that threat while the others are still firing, is that shooting out of formation? If not you could on the same principle argue that: halting, facing right firing directly and charging is in formation despite everyone not being in the same stage of this manouvre since they are firing in the same imaginary line that was applicable if one guy was out of formation meeting the first melee threat while the rest are firing. Confuzzling, loophole-ish and generally harder to police.

offtopic: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,16200.msg387137.html#msg387137
 
Vorlen said:
We had an amusing situation yesterday actually. First LB i've played in a long time. One round we charged, and the enemy turned tail and ran.

How do you "fix" that. We couldn't shoot them, so we chased them around for a while and then gave up, reforming line, and subsequently having them reform line in a position that was advantageous for them.

Anyone who advocates firing on a charage destroys the linebattle needs to get down off of their high horse and realise that the tactics and atmosphere that they are proposing is something they themselves destroy anyway. What with hill camping, hiding behind hills with only faces showing, double skirmish lines, people wanting to fight with more than one line, etc etc. There is such an abundance of elements in this game that are exploity, to pick only one is silly. All these words, atmosphere, tactics, strategy, realism..... You have got to be kidding if you believe these things really exist. It's merely a different set of exploity gameplay that is used.

The most amusing part is people still pretend shooting is a "thing". Shooting is not a thing, you put your mouse in the vague area and click. There are no regiments that are good at shooting. There are regiments that get lucky at shooting. But as we all saw, the first guy who came along and said "I know how to shoot accurately gais" got flamed as an exploiter quicker than a latin american government embezzle's public money.

Charging an enemy without shooting, means he will sit there till the last second picking you off, i would say it's nearly impossible to charge a stationairy line without him getting at least one close range volley off at you. Charging with shooting means he is forced to break up and engage, lest his own line get peppered by fire.

As i said, i'm glad the organisers made a dicision, it's their tournament and they should stick with it and have the balls to do so. I don't want them to change it. This is more to say, Srsly gais.... srsly....
Click to expand...

use an aggressive arrowhead reform ?
 
From a refereeing perspective you're over-burdening yourselves now.

Firstly, I would argue that refereeing 'not firing in the charge' is a lot harder than refereeing 'firing in the charge'. With 'not firing in the charge' you're expecting ALL individual rankers to resist their impulsion and instict - that is to discharge their weapon if it is loaded, no matter what state of formation they are in. There's always going to be some few who forget that rule, and there's always going to be dubious situations when, for example, half the line is entering melee and the other half continues to fire out of ignorance or lack of awareness of that.

Why is it easier to referee 'firing in the charge'? Because you're refereeing the each regiment as a regiment and not individual rankers who step out of line. Regiments will always charge as a unit and judging their charging distance (it only takes 1 second of observation) is a lot more easy than spying out random inconspicuous rankers who discharge their bullets in charge (which is going to require a lot more scrupulousness). It's also a lot easier to punish rule-breaks: when a regiment charges from too far they're ALL accountable as a unit, because they all charged from the same point, but trying to judge whether a regiment should be punished for one or two people firing in the charge is much harder. 'Firing in the charge' is a lot more referee friendly.
 
Something that's going to give you more headache than either of those above rules is the '3 minutes camping max' rule. Dare I say it's going to lead to a lot of quarrelling and complaining both during the LBs and later on the forums because: a) it's too precise for refereeing, b) it's easily exploitable, regiments can move back and forth every 3 minutes and they're still 'camping' on the same hilltop, and c) because it's too attention-consuming when referees have other stuff to judge too. Don't set this up to fail, be very careful in your rule choices.

EDITED: Had to rephrase some things to make my point clearer.
 
MaHuD said:
Vorlen said:
We had an amusing situation yesterday actually. First LB i've played in a long time. One round we charged, and the enemy turned tail and ran.

How do you "fix" that. We couldn't shoot them, so we chased them around for a while and then gave up, reforming line, and subsequently having them reform line in a position that was advantageous for them.

Anyone who advocates firing on a charage destroys the linebattle needs to get down off of their high horse and realise that the tactics and atmosphere that they are proposing is something they themselves destroy anyway. What with hill camping, hiding behind hills with only faces showing, double skirmish lines, people wanting to fight with more than one line, etc etc. There is such an abundance of elements in this game that are exploity, to pick only one is silly. All these words, atmosphere, tactics, strategy, realism..... You have got to be kidding if you believe these things really exist. It's merely a different set of exploity gameplay that is used.

The most amusing part is people still pretend shooting is a "thing". Shooting is not a thing, you put your mouse in the vague area and click. There are no regiments that are good at shooting. There are regiments that get lucky at shooting. But as we all saw, the first guy who came along and said "I know how to shoot accurately gais" got flamed as an exploiter quicker than a latin american government embezzle's public money.

Charging an enemy without shooting, means he will sit there till the last second picking you off, i would say it's nearly impossible to charge a stationairy line without him getting at least one close range volley off at you. Charging with shooting means he is forced to break up and engage, lest his own line get peppered by fire.

As i said, i'm glad the organisers made a dicision, it's their tournament and they should stick with it and have the balls to do so. I don't want them to change it. This is more to say, Srsly gais.... srsly....
Click to expand...

use an aggressive arrowhead reform ?
Click to expand...

Not sure how an agressive reform(which is essentially what forming a line again would be anyway) would help, or the arrowhead component of it. The fact still remains that the enemy is moving away from you whilst strafing, dodging, and increasing distance in a manner that is unregulated and virtually impossible to regulate. The point is that it's completely possible for an enemy who doesn't want to engage in melee to avoid it by simply running away from it.

A charging regiment takes the risk, a charging regiment also undeniably takes casualties putting themselves into a charging position. Then the other regiment turns tail and flee's in a skirmishing formation. The regiment that charged can then reform a line which will not be instant(especially considering you spread out to reduce your casualties from a point blank volley) in which case the enemy most likely gets the better of the situation and both lines eventually go back to static shooting.

Rules to not fire on a charge are being enforced, but no rules as to what is acceptable formations for all other play are not. This seems very silly to me. 90% of regiments will break and scatter with no semblance of unity.

TLDR: It would be completely possible for a regiment to stop another regiment getting into melee should they choose to do so, whilst punishing any regiment that tries each round.
 
And actually, if the regiment that runs away doesn't change to melee mode, then they will actually run away faster than the charging regiment will come at them......
 
Tripple post* xD

Added rules for formations and regimental tags.

I hope everyone will enjoy this upcoming event.

EDIT: If there's any formations i have'nt included that you want to see then please contact me on steam and i will se what i can do (or any other suggestions regarding rules or the tournament in general). Steam name: Furrnox
 
Regiment name: 48e regiment de ligne
Tag: IIIe_48e_*rank*_*Name*
Contact person: here
Server: IIIe_Offical_server
Region: Europe/ North American
 
Regiment name: 50th Queens Own Regiment of Foot
Tag: 50th_Line/Arty_rank_name
Contact person:Hi_Im_Stefan
Server:not yet
Region: Mainly EU
 
Regiment name - 2e Régiment de Grenadiers de la Garde
Tag - IVe_2e
Contact person - IVe_2e_SLt_Stéphane (steam : stefdu93150)
Server - yes (at least 3 servers)
Region - EU
 
Just popping in to wish you all luck, and try and wrangle some merchandice royalties (thats my guy in the banner).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Krisee
EU Native Other Open The Grand European Duo Tournament - Community Funded prizepool! (fundraiser on kickstarter) - Triple elimination!1!
Replies
7
Views
328
Krisee
Krisee
Rigo
EU Native Duel In-progress European Duel Tournament Edition VI (87 players)
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
5K
The Holy
The Holy
Resolved I am from Korea. I'm having trouble with the admin password not working for the Napoleon Wars server.
Replies
3
Views
80
Shiroin
Shiroin
Back
Top Bottom