To add on this: Each of these Deutschritter teams will field a minimum of 8 players.
BEAST - Bannerlord Early Access Skirmish Tournament
BEAST is the first Bannerlord Skirmish tournament in Europe.
Share this group
Quick Overview
[BEAST#3] Suggestions
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
Well we can literally create second and third team just for voting? I think as Relexan said, clans should able to vote one time only. Show me any clan who voted differently than their first team. Every clan is trying to get what their first team wants. All of the teams of one clan can vote system = easily cheating what you wanna get and forcing others to play that way.
For example 3 X clans which has only one team wants 2 class limit restriction only, 3 Y clans wants no class limit. Each of the Y clans have 3 different team. So, when you count votes it is : 3 votes for Class Limit and 9 votes for no class limit but in reality votes was equal from the beginning. New beast system: Outnumber other's votes with simple trick, force other's what do you want to play by just gathering more people under teams.
For example 3 X clans which has only one team wants 2 class limit restriction only, 3 Y clans wants no class limit. Each of the Y clans have 3 different team. So, when you count votes it is : 3 votes for Class Limit and 9 votes for no class limit but in reality votes was equal from the beginning. New beast system: Outnumber other's votes with simple trick, force other's what do you want to play by just gathering more people under teams.
Last edited:
KW and DR teams voted differently, and I highly doubt people would create another team just so they can get an extra vote in the pool of ca. 30 clans. Furthermore seeing as though the vast majority is voting for the limit of two I don’t see why you guys are winding yourselves up so much about this
I am not giving specific clan examples. If this system goes on, 10 clan can outnumber 29 clan by votes this seems wrong to me that's all.
Aprikosenmann
Knight
But the 10 clans with 3 teams each represent like 240 active players while the 29 clans represent 232 active players. Seems reasonable no?
Why should DR 2 not be allowed to vote but if they make a new clan with the same team they can?
Hmm, let me explain that from my point of perspective. I want to start with i am not giving any specific clan example. If the results of voting were separated division to division your point of view would work. Because it wouldn't effect the overall results.
For example, in Div A class limits got accepted but in Div B it got rejected. So, second/third teams can decide their own division's fate. But because of the voting effects all divisions, second/third teams will support their clan's main team's request 99% of the time.
Ofcourse second/third team members are free individuals and they have free will to choose but second/third teams are always learning from the main team. They are copying the best possible strategies from their main team and trying to adapt these strategies. First team's captain is teaching second/third captains how to apply best strategy in various class setups and maps.
This is so far the positive manner from first team to second/third teams. Negative manner is first team can force or manipulate their second/third teams as what the first team wants. Because depending the voting results, it can change the first team's position on the ranking list.
Why Second/Third teams voting is unfair:
1. Second/Third teams are copying their first team's tactic and will vote same with the first team.
2.Second/Third teams might get manipulated or oppressed by their first team in order to change their votes.
3.Second/Third teams might do not care the tournament as much as their first teams so they will vote in their first team's favour.
4.First teams might be frustrated because they cannot counter in-game strategies so they might create new tournament rule suggestions with the help of their second/third team's votes.
So basically, if any second or third team leave their clan, create a new one which has no bounds with previous one so they don't get influenced by any other clan, they can vote freely for sure.
Important note: Even we have some special examples that some of the teams voted differently than their first team, it doesn't mean all second/third teams are going to do that. With this system goes on future, first teams will just triple their votes in order to get what they want.
Most of the second/third teams are playing for fun and leaving the competitive side of the tournament to their first team. We have democracy in Beast which is great but more friends = more second/third/fourth teams = more votes in order to get advantage for your clan. Which is highly against competitive side of the game and cheating.
For example, in Div A class limits got accepted but in Div B it got rejected. So, second/third teams can decide their own division's fate. But because of the voting effects all divisions, second/third teams will support their clan's main team's request 99% of the time.
Ofcourse second/third team members are free individuals and they have free will to choose but second/third teams are always learning from the main team. They are copying the best possible strategies from their main team and trying to adapt these strategies. First team's captain is teaching second/third captains how to apply best strategy in various class setups and maps.
This is so far the positive manner from first team to second/third teams. Negative manner is first team can force or manipulate their second/third teams as what the first team wants. Because depending the voting results, it can change the first team's position on the ranking list.
Why Second/Third teams voting is unfair:
1. Second/Third teams are copying their first team's tactic and will vote same with the first team.
2.Second/Third teams might get manipulated or oppressed by their first team in order to change their votes.
3.Second/Third teams might do not care the tournament as much as their first teams so they will vote in their first team's favour.
4.First teams might be frustrated because they cannot counter in-game strategies so they might create new tournament rule suggestions with the help of their second/third team's votes.
So basically, if any second or third team leave their clan, create a new one which has no bounds with previous one so they don't get influenced by any other clan, they can vote freely for sure.
Important note: Even we have some special examples that some of the teams voted differently than their first team, it doesn't mean all second/third teams are going to do that. With this system goes on future, first teams will just triple their votes in order to get what they want.
Most of the second/third teams are playing for fun and leaving the competitive side of the tournament to their first team. We have democracy in Beast which is great but more friends = more second/third/fourth teams = more votes in order to get advantage for your clan. Which is highly against competitive side of the game and cheating.
Last edited:
There you go.
I'll go through these one by one.
1) Partially correct, but there's no guarantee for that. While some teams may share tactics and debate them inside the entirety of their clan, most teams will handle their stuff on their own. Atleast that's how we do it.
2) If the "first team of my clan" went ahead to "oppress" me and my squad into agreement, I'd very much reconsider the friendly environment of the clan. The most valid approach would be a general vote in the clan and then going with a decision by team or unison.
3) I'm not sure whether this is some weird middleground between "team A opressing team B" and "Team B just signed up for another vote". Every team that signs up must be expected to play the entirety of the tournament.
4) This does not work out at all. since any suggestion will need to be backed my a majority. Even if your clan were to field an entire division, it would still not work that way.
The premise for each team having a vote is very simple: A team signs up and participates in the entirety of the tournament, hence they get to have a say in restriction votes such as class limits.
In short: Tournament decisions are affecting all teams and all teams should have a word about that. Restricting teams from voting, because they have 1 or 2 sister teams in the tournament should not change that, since the premise for each team having a vote hasn't changed.
@Jufasto I want to adress both points you make, but I will start with Deutschritter as example to how teams will work differently.
To address the issue of manipulation and answer from DR perspective (since we send three teams) - DR 2 plays differently and employs different tactics than DR 1 because they have different players. While all our teams will cooperate within the layer of the parent clan Deutschritter, the teams are more or less autonomous. So it might be the case for some clans that the first team oppresses the rest, but this certainly is not the case for Keyboard Warriors or Deutschritter.
To adress the other thing with the voting mode: In BEAST#1 I decided to opt for one vote per clan and in BEAST#2 it was used the same. BEAST#4 now employs this different method. I'd like to add that both voting modes have different advantages and disadvantages but I'd like to take the side of Apri in this that if you just hand out one vote per team you 1) disenfranchise the other teams which have arguably their own right to vote 2) you don't stop them from voting, they could just play under a different name as own team while still being part of Deutschritter, Keyboard Warriors or Defender of Faith, tags don't matter as much as allegiance in the end 3) if just one vote per parent-clan is given out you actually cement the rule of the few and top teams which is unfair either if you want to achieve broad democratic legitimization for a decision, which is the case for this vote.
To add one last thing: I cast in the votes for Deutschritter as mere messenger since it is more easy that way. I also just get one vote in internal voting and I just have one voice in internal discussions.
To address the issue of manipulation and answer from DR perspective (since we send three teams) - DR 2 plays differently and employs different tactics than DR 1 because they have different players. While all our teams will cooperate within the layer of the parent clan Deutschritter, the teams are more or less autonomous. So it might be the case for some clans that the first team oppresses the rest, but this certainly is not the case for Keyboard Warriors or Deutschritter.
To adress the other thing with the voting mode: In BEAST#1 I decided to opt for one vote per clan and in BEAST#2 it was used the same. BEAST#4 now employs this different method. I'd like to add that both voting modes have different advantages and disadvantages but I'd like to take the side of Apri in this that if you just hand out one vote per team you 1) disenfranchise the other teams which have arguably their own right to vote 2) you don't stop them from voting, they could just play under a different name as own team while still being part of Deutschritter, Keyboard Warriors or Defender of Faith, tags don't matter as much as allegiance in the end 3) if just one vote per parent-clan is given out you actually cement the rule of the few and top teams which is unfair either if you want to achieve broad democratic legitimization for a decision, which is the case for this vote.
To add one last thing: I cast in the votes for Deutschritter as mere messenger since it is more easy that way. I also just get one vote in internal voting and I just have one voice in internal discussions.
Can we have §2.2 amended as to mention that using any sort of glitch is prohibited and will be punished (however that punsihment may end up looking, admins discretion I guess)?
just in case something like the cav glitch pops up again...
just in case something like the cav glitch pops up again...
There remains a question of what is a glitch and whether it is an enforceable rule. Map glitches are pretty black and white.
DeathBG
Squire
I would suggest to make medals for the top team of each division(A,B,C,D) to award the teams who performed the best with something.For example, back in the days when I played Warband:Napoleonic Wars a tournament called NWL(Napoleonic Wars League) had medals for the top team of each division.And obviously that's a lot of work for Piconi but he can make 1 medal for the top team having it's name in it(Rather than making a medal for each participant).In my opinion this would motivate the teams to reach the top spot of their division and have something nice as a reward for it.
Teams in divs lower than A have the chance of promotion as a reward for reaching teh top of their div.
You are right, yes. I would still like the official stance to be that no glitches are allowed - even if only few cases are ever punished.
Players are free to ask admins for their opinion (or to not use it all) if they find something they consider a possible glitch. Admins can then make a decision if it's deemed a glitch or not - if even they are not sure, I guess asking the devs for their opinion would work.
Players should always ask the admins if in doubt whether somethign is a glitch.
It is one of those cases where there will be unintended consequences either way. We will have another look at it all and see if there is a better form of words.
Leave your suggestions in a new topic:
- Status
