BEAST - Bannerlord Early Access Skirmish Tournament

[BaronDeMoroz]

I have a question about the rules. I need an explanation.

Spoiler: Rules:

§ 5 Team Rosters
(1) Every team has to provide the tournament administration with a roster consisting of six to 12 players and their respective Steam IDs before being accepted into the tournament.
(2) Should a player not be on a roster and play for a team, then, if eligible to play for that team, that player will be treated as a member of that team and will be added to their roster.

§ 7 Transfers
(1) Any player who has not yet played in a match may join a team at any time during the group stage.
(5) No roster changes are allowed during the Knockout Stage.

Spoiler: Questions:

1. I have a full declared roster of 12 people. Can I, based on these clauses of the rules, expose unapproved players (I have a large spare bench), without prior approval? (All players are members of my clan, and give a guarantee that will not play in other teams). Or I need to approve the replacement in advance?

2. What should I do after an undeclared player plays a tournament match? Should I clean the declared roster to 12 people approved by the regulations?

3. If the substitute player has already played for the team in the group stage tournament. Can I delete him from the approved list of 12 people before the knockout stage?

Spoiler: Explanations:

We have a lot of people in the clan. But we do not want to put more than one team in the tournament.
How free can I change the composition of a team in a tournament without violating the rules and regulations?

 

[Aeronwen]

Hi any player who is on your roster but has not yet played in a tournament match can be removed from the team. If you have space them any player who has not played for any other team can be added to your roster. However players who have played at all in a tournament match cannot be removed and players who have played for another team in a tournament match cannot be added.

if your question is 'how can i have more than 12 players actually playing for the team' than the answer is that you cannott within this ruleset.

Mostly the rules are the result of problems caused in previous (Warband) tournaments. The roster limit though does have an impact on clans that want to play together/ teams with a larger but less available group of players and hopefully will not be a feature of future tournaments. (although some people do think it helps to inspire more teams to sign up).

 

[BaronDeMoroz]

Can I put an unregistered player in a match. (He satisfies all the necessary requirements). And only then, in fact, delete from the roster of unplayed player and add already played?

 

[Namakan]

Seeing rule 12 being violated quite a bit, why is it even a thing? You have steam links for everyone anyways.
If its to stop people from pretending to be someone else, putting an extra few letters infront of their name won't stop them.

It's just an extra annoyance for those who don't have tags on their steam names usually.

 

[TheBard]

Seeing rule 12 being violated quite a bit, why is it even a thing? You have steam links for everyone anyways.
If its to stop people from pretending to be someone else, putting an extra few letters infront of their name won't stop them.

It's just an extra annoyance for those who don't have tags on their steam names usually.

The rule will stand.

There is a reasoning for this and it's quite obvious for me. We have insufficient options to administer this tournament and by weakening administration by letting everyone play under name and tag they like this will be even more difficult. Also this rule is in place to reject offensive names if deemed so by administration staff and prevent the name as a tool to annoy others.

 

[Namakan]

I don't agree with your reasoning.

First off, I do agree that names ingame should directly relate to the ones on the roster - calling yourself AAAAAAA while that's not the name on the roster is probably not a good move. Toxic names would also already be filtered out here as you wouldn't allow them for rosters.

Second off, I'm assuming you have this rule to prevent people from playing in others stead by changing their accountname/pictures - adding an extra few letters to the start of that new name won't stop them. It is just an extra annoyance for those of us who don't usually have their tags on their profile - we now have to add them for each match.

Lastly, there is a way to check which steam accounts played in a given match as all game clients automatically save the steamIDs of all players in a match locally. I can help you figure out where that is and how to use it, if you wish.

tl;dr: I don't think this rule will accomplish what you wish it to do. It will only annoy the people that have nothing to hide and those that do will still not be caught by it - they could be though, using other, more definitive ways.

 

[TheBard]

I do not want to drop §12 for the reasons mentioned above, also to filter out offensive names and so on.

 

[Aeronwen]

Can I put an unregistered player in a match. (He satisfies all the necessary requirements). And only then, in fact, delete from the roster of unplayed player and add already played?

I do not understand you
As long as you have fewer than 12 players you can add any player who has not yet played in a match for another team.
It is against the rules to remove from the roster players who have played in a match for your team.
It is against the rules to add a player who has played in a match for another team.

The reason we dont allow player who have already played for another team to switch teams is that in older warband tournamnents the final stages were often played by the best players from all the teams in the tournament and had little resemblance to the team that went through the group stage - which caused a lot of argument amongst players.

 

[BaronDeMoroz]

I just clarify the rules. That would not make mistakes.

 

[Waljaaa]

So what's the next step? Aren't all the group stage matches suposed to be played by now?

 

[Aeronwen]

So what's the next step? Aren't all the group stage matches suposed to be played by now?

they are supposed to be but unfortunately not everyone did. we had to decide between going ahead this weekend with some teams not knowing who they were playing until tomorrow night or delaying by a week.

 

[FineApple]

I would like that tournament administration discuss the issue of OP insta kill mechanic the kick pilla throw which i notice is becoming more frequent. I would from participants point of view would like to see the practice officialy not allowed, maybe penalised. discuss people

 

[TheBard]

I would like that tournament administration discuss the issue of OP insta kill mechanic the kick pilla throw which i notice is becoming more frequent. I would from participants point of view would like to see the practice officialy not allowed, maybe penalised. discuss people

This is interesting to hear. The tournament staff decided to ban the use of longbows and/or bows+shields on horses as it is a deliberate bug. But this is another category and if the tournament staff would hypothetically ban it there might be a lot of pushback.

 

[Namakan]

It's an OP mechanic that, judging by the posts of TW devs, is not intended and will be removed with the next patch.
Matches could be decided by whether or not the patch has come out by the time they are played. I'd be very much in favor of banning it, but I'm having a hard time imaging how you would actually enforce this.

 

[TheBard]

It's an OP mechanic that, judging by the posts of TW devs, is not intended and will be removed with the next patch.
Matches could be decided by whether or not the patch has come out by the time they are played. I'd be very much in favor of banning it, but I'm having a hard time imaging how you would actually enforce this.

I agree it's OP but this is actually the dev's job to fix their game and not mine.
And as you pointed out it's nearly impossible to administer.

 

[Mabons]

Question regarding a very rare situation with the veto rule: say one team wanted to veto a match up(khuzait vs sturgia on Xauna for example) and then they queue up again and it’s the exact same match up they just vetoed, would this still be played out and just consider it unlucky or would this 2nd time also be vetoed automatically?

 

[Aeronwen]

Question regarding a very rare situation with the veto rule: say one team wanted to veto a match up(khuzait vs sturgia on Xauna for example) and then they queue up again and it’s the exact same match up they just vetoed, would this still be played out and just consider it unlucky or would this 2nd time also be vetoed automatically?

I am surprised the rule could be read in anyway that supposes a particular faction match up is vetoed for the match. Perhaps you can explain where you see a reading of teh sort you describe.

(4) For each match, each team may use one, and only one, veto and force a restart on any map during the warmup phase.
(5) On using a veto teams must type the equivalent of 'we are using our veto to reset the map' in game chat and a screenshot of that chat must be posted with the match result screens.

 

[TheBard]

In this case: tough luck.

 

[Mabons]

In this case: tough luck.

@Aeronwen I wasn’t implying that it vetoed a match up for the entire Bo5, just say if a team was extremely unlucky and vetoed a match up just for the next game they queue to be the exact same. @TheBard has answered though

 

[Aeronwen]

@Aeronwen I wasn’t implying that it vetoed a match up for the entire Bo5, just say if a team was extremely unlucky and vetoed a match up just for the next game they queue to be the exact same. @TheBard has answered though

I think we already had a match where the teams played the same factions 3 times in a row lets hope we get the tools to choose maps and factiions or at least play again with swapped factions soon.

I really wanted to know though how the rules could be read as expressing anything other than it was a one-time veto. if it isn't clear I guess we should change the wording but I can't read any other way than expressing that there is one veto for one map and not an ongoing veto on faction matchups.