BEAST - Bannerlord Early Access Skirmish Tournament

[Mabons]

This whole discussion will be pointless once we have more than 5 maps anyways, then there will be more choice.

 

[Namakan]

This whole discussion will be pointless once we have more than 5 maps anyways, then there will be more choice.

cool, think any of us will still be alive when that is the case?

 

[Firunien]

What do you think about a 4 week summer break?

 

[IceNoVa]

A week or two more would certainly be helpful. The summer gap is a widespread phenomenon and I'd encourage every other team to speak out on this so the admins can make a decision accordingly.

A new patch would also be great, but of course there's no telling when that will come around.

 

[♛AXDER]

What do you think about a 4 week summer break?

I'd love to get even more, but yes imo 4 weeks are minimal break amount for current state of the game, if nothing changes.

 

[Gotha]

I would suggest a vote until sunday like that troop limit vote.

 

[Einarcf]

Some part of me kinda wants to wait for 1.6.(1)

 

[MIKA]

Some part of me kinda wants to wait for 1.6.(1)

agreed

 

[TheBard]

Some part of me kinda wants to wait for 1.6.(1)

Do you want to play on christmas then?

Like this is legitimate concern of mine: Waiting for 1.6.1 might take a considerable amount of time.

 

[Llaakkee]

There's very little point in delaying for a specific patch as we don't have any idea when that will be. We will discuss when to start BEAST#6 within the admin team, but would be good to hear any further opinions on timescales etc.

 

[DeathBG]

Let's just make the new sign up thread and start on the 15th of August easy.

 

[TheBard]

Sign Ups are open.

 

[Namakan]

Do you want to play on christmas then?

Like this is legitimate concern of mine: Waiting for 1.6.1 might take a considerable amount of time.

I'm sure our community manager @Callum or maybe @AVRC can shed some light on if we're talking weeks or months?

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

Some part of me kinda wants to wait for 1.6.(1)

Yeah, it would be great to get an even vague indication from TW when it's coming. My instinct is it's worth waiting a couple of weeks on the signup deadline.

 

[Aeronwen]

I mean, when the rule was written (I'm recalling from memories a year ago, correct me if I am wrong @Aeronwen ) it just was designed like this to not create confusion. Nobody cared about the rule up to now and I'd like to call out RM for ****posting in saying this rule was created DM biased.

On the other hand Outskirts could be considered an open map with Omor and Trading Post standing company to that. Echerion and Xauna can be considered closed maps on the other hand so by removing one of the open maps and reserve it for the tie breaker, you can just go and ban Xauna or Echerion to force an open map if you want to play an open map. If you go however and pick Xauna and the other side picks Echerion then this is on you, since it's impossible both open maps get banned unless both teams ban one of them.

Since the tie breaker was never used so far (and I don't expect use of it in the future) the admins could go and appoint Omor as tie breaker to bring back Outskirts into the rotation.

well I believe the devs will look into the idea of a symmetrical tie breaker map but its obvously not a priority. TO was chosen as the most symmetrical map after a lot of discussions and its convenient to have it this way but tbh its not important - we can just as easily have the 5th map not banned or picked as the tie breaker. Since we changed the win condition to most rounds if the sets are 2-2 its unlikely to go to a tb map anyway.

I think it is a good discussion to have. I really don't care one way or the other, it has no impact on the admins and as far as I can see no impact on the fairness of a match.

But ye complaining that a rule that has been in place and not questioned for the majority of the life of the tourney is somehow biased is just silly.

Jumping to 'the admins are biased because I just decided I don't like x rule' just damages the complainer's credibility.

 

[Rangah]

Would be best to delay BEAST until the combat changes are introduced. SGM won't be taking part in the next BEAST if it's not going to be on the new combat patch.

 

[Firunien]

I totally agree that waiting for the patch cant be an option because it can by anytime between next week and next year. We are also a bit fatigued by the current throwing meta.

I suggested 4 weeks as compromise because we also would have liked a even longer break, but i can understand admins dont want to put it in hold too long.
Only speaking for my squad we have many guys goin on vacation during August, so for us starting after August would be perfect, but we don't expect it.
Thats just an information for @Llaakkee because you asked, i hope the admin team will come to a good decision for everyone.
Would be great to have the input from other teams as well.

 

[TheBard]

I know that many of the top teams who abuse the throwing meta to the max are sick of it. I however want to stress that the tournament is composed of not only Division A, but also B, C, D and E and there might be a sizable portion of them wanting to continue the tournament business. We don't know that yet because so far nobody of them spoke up - I'd like to make sure they're not overheard in this regard, so in case you read this, Captains of B, C, D, E teams, please speak up.

 

[Aprikosenmann]

Wait for 1.6.1 and you guys have a nice 6 months break

 

[Popowiczka]

Hi! Whats the reason behind starting it just one after another? Cant we take a bit of a break between BEASTs like 3-4 weeks or so?