[NC2012] - Questions and Answers

Users who are viewing this thread

Mr.X said:
No, I'm saying the system of classifying maps as open or closed and then using them in the tournament based off some guys opinion is ****.
What part of "People agree to it" did you not understand? Start a petition about it or just leave the goddamn tournament. That "one guy" does change things when the majority express their opinion towards them. Whining on this thread will get you nothing.

This is not the "Hate America" card I'm playing. This is the "You accepted the ****ing rules when you joined the tournament, now stop whining about them and stop giving people reason to hate you." card.
 
Goker said:
Mr.X said:
No, I'm saying the system of classifying maps as open or closed and then using them in the tournament based off some guys opinion is ****.
What part of "People agree to it" did you not understand? Start a petition about it or just leave the goddamn tournament. That "one guy" does change things when the majority express their opinion towards them. Whining on this thread will get you nothing.

This is not the "Hate America" card I'm playing. This is the "You accepted the ****ing rules when you joined the tournament, now stop whining about them and stop giving people reason to hate you." card.
Who the **** are you to tell us what to do ? To me atleast your just an ignorant turk we are going to have to **** stomp. We had no previous competitive experience and didnt know these maps enough to judge them before the tournament. We played a match on it and feel its more of a closed map then open. We are expressing our opinions if you dont like them ignore them. We are part of this tournament and we have the right to contest rules and question them. I questioned it and so far iirc alex posted once but his post did not explaim how its a open map. My question still stands why and how is it a open map. ( this directed at event adminstrators )
 
Z3ro said:
Who the **** are you to tell us what to do ? To me at least your just an ignorant Turk we are going to have to **** stomp.
Nope, not gonna reply to personal insults. Thank you.

Z3ro said:
We had no previous competitive experience and didn't know these maps enough to judge them before the tournament.
Your own fault, isn't it?

Z3ro said:
We are expressing our opinions if you dont like them ignore them.
I don't care about you expressing your opinion on the map and I never stated an opinion on that. Mr.X was not talking about the map. He was talking about how the tournament is run. I'm pretty sure that is something you need to keep in mind before deciding to enter a tournament. Whining about the decision-making part of the tournament afterwards is bad attitude.

Read before you post.
 
Goker said:
Mr.X said:
No, I'm saying the system of classifying maps as open or closed and then using them in the tournament based off some guys opinion is ****.
What part of "People agree to it" did you not understand? Start a petition about it or just leave the goddamn tournament. That "one guy" does change things when the majority express their opinion towards them. Whining on this thread will get you nothing.

This is not the "Hate America" card I'm playing. This is the "You accepted the ******** rules when you joined the tournament, now stop whining about them and stop giving people reason to hate you." card.

Dude, this is the ******** question and answer thread. I'm questioning the rules and have yet to hear a good answer. It's only been "**** off America" every time I ask something. I know I accepted the rules. Its not like I broke a rule in a match and then was like "that rule is stupid so it doesn't matter". Whether or not the rule gets changed I'm going to play. I think I'm allowed to disagree with the rules. And the only people who've actually answered me with a reasoning for the rules (not, I'll add, the tournament organizer, who simply told me not to play) are basically collectively proving that whether or not a map is closed or open is based on opinion.

If we're going off opinion, I am of the opinion that Khergits are perfectly balanced in multiplayer and should be added to the faction pool. Discuss.


EDIT: Zero's post is stupid. We had enough time to get used to the map. Thats not the problem. Nor am I disputed our match with France. France won. End of story. GG.

Goker said:
Mr.X was not talking about the map. He was talking about how the tournament is run. I'm pretty sure that is something you need to keep in mind before deciding to enter a tournament.

Read before you post.

True, but as long as I'm allowed to dispute the way a tournament is run, I'll do so if I think I should. Yes, I joined the tournament, and yes I agreed to play by its rules, and yes, I have been playing by its rules and will continue to do so. I still think that a particular rule is bull**** and am questioning it in the question and answer thread. I fail to see why you think I'm in the wrong for simply questioning the ****ing rule.
 
New_Player_FTW said:
Also I love the way that after PL-BRA match the drama is made by Americans - its strange that Brasilians can't speak up for themselves. And im not complaining about decision that organisators made because we don't really care. But the fault wasn't on our side and we waited for over 1! hour (and even additional time before changing spawns) for any server to come available and we even tried to look for one ourselves. We were not obliged to do so. and after that we are getting black-pred by americans who are not even slightly objective. "Poland abuse Brasil!" "Save Brasilians from villian poles" - thats just BS where the auther don't even pretend to be objective.

Really? Did you even read the thread? Before you hop your ignorant ass onto your high-horse again, you might want to exercise your grasp on the English language and try reading the thread you're referring to. On the first page, in the first few posts, it was made clear that nobody blamed Poland for the server issue. Here, I even have a quote.

Orion said:
Nobody here was blaming you or your team.

Funny, that's right after another Polish team member came into the thread and accused Americans of sticking their nose where it doesn't belong, just like you did here. Is this a shared feeling among the Polish team? Maybe I should start fostering resentment of other nations among my team members. It could make for some more interesting forum drama like this in the future.  :roll:

Back to the actual discussion, there's no rule which states all rules are final. We already know for a fact that they aren't, because they have been changed since they were originally posted. Don't believe me? Check the rule thread, there's a lengthy changelong. Most of those rule changes were brought about by community criticisms of the ruleset & subsequent suggestions for its revision. Why should this be any different when precedent shows community involvement is significant?
 
Z3ro said:
My question still stands why and how is it a open map. ( this directed at event adminstrators )

I'm going to assume you're still talking about reveran village.

But closed maps generally feature:
- Elevated positions
- Towers/Buildings you can enter
- Enclosed flag spawns (small spaces surrounded by walls/buildings)

The consequence of which are that cavalry effectiveness is limited somewhat; but don't get me wrong, a team with strong cav players can still make it work.

Reveran Village therefore has no elevated positions, No buildings or Towers you can enter and only 1 enclosed flap spawn. The majority of the map is open (2/3rds) and it doesn't have any other features I would expect of a closed map. Saying Reveran Village is a closed map because it has 1 alley that cavalry can't ride through is as ridiculous as saying ruins is closed because you can hide in the ruins / tower.


Mr.X said:
And the only people who've actually answered me with a reasoning for the rules (not, I'll add, the tournament organizer, who simply told me not to play) are basically collectively proving that whether or not a map is closed or open is based on opinion.

Opinion and general consensus > European teams have been playing the maps for a while with no complaints over the categorisation. You have to concede that you're in the minority here, it wasn't a decision that was made by the Alex, the maps have been played as categorised here for half a year now by over 30 teams.

If that's not good enough, what system do you propose that isn't based on opinion? (A vote is still opinion based).

Orion said:
Maybe I should start fostering resentment of other nations among my team members. It could make for some more interesting forum drama like this in the future.  :roll:

That's not necessary, your team are already responsible for most of the drama here anyway.  :roll:
 
crazyboy11 said:
Z3ro said:
My question still stands why and how is it a open map. ( this directed at event adminstrators )

I'm going to assume you're still talking about reveran village.

But closed maps generally feature:
- Elevated positions
- Towers/Buildings you can enter
- Enclosed flag spawns (small spaces surrounded by walls/buildings)

The consequence of which are that cavalry effectiveness is limited somewhat; but don't get me wrong, a team with strong cav players can still make it work.

Reveran Village therefore has no elevated positions, No buildings or Towers you can enter and only 1 enclosed flap spawn. The majority of the map is open (2/3rds) and it doesn't have any other features I would expect of a closed map. Saying Reveran Village is a closed map because it has 1 alley that cavalry can't ride through is as ridiculous as saying ruins is closed because you can hide in the ruins / tower.


Mr.X said:
And the only people who've actually answered me with a reasoning for the rules (not, I'll add, the tournament organizer, who simply told me not to play) are basically collectively proving that whether or not a map is closed or open is based on opinion.

Opinion and general consensus > European teams have been playing the maps for a while with no complaints over the categorisation. You have to concede that you're in the minority here, it wasn't a decision that was made by the Alex, the maps have been played as categorised here for half a year now by over 30 teams.

If that's not good enough, what system do you propose that isn't based on opinion? (A vote is still opinion based).

Orion said:
Maybe I should start fostering resentment of other nations among my team members. It could make for some more interesting forum drama like this in the future.  :roll:

That's not necessary, your team are already responsible for most of the drama here anyway.  :roll:
Thank you, finally a actual answer. I can see where your coming from, I can agree with what you said that classifies a closed mal except the Motf spawns because theirs way more to a match then waiting for motf. I didnt mean to start any drama was just looking for some clarification, the ignorance among some of your fellow europeans started the drama.
 
crazyboy11 said:
Orion said:
Maybe I should start fostering resentment of other nations among my team members. It could make for some more interesting forum drama like this in the future.  :roll:

That's not necessary, your team are already responsible for most of the drama here anyway.  :roll:

Should I apologize because my team is questioning a system they think is flawed with the goal of improving it for everyone's benefit? Heaven ****in' forbid somebody having a contrary viewpoint to what the esteemed European overlords of Warband have decided! :roll: Welcome to the world, you aren't alone.
 
Seriously everyone should watch their attitude. No point in discussing with crappy attitudes.

Adding a mixed category could be a good idea and reveran village matches that category quite well.
 
Orion said:
crazyboy11 said:
Orion said:
Maybe I should start fostering resentment of other nations among my team members. It could make for some more interesting forum drama like this in the future.  :roll:

That's not necessary, your team are already responsible for most of the drama here anyway.  :roll:

Should I apologize because my team is questioning a system they think is flawed with the goal of improving it for everyone's benefit? Heaven ****in' forbid somebody having a contrary viewpoint to what the esteemed European overlords of Warband have decided! :roll: Welcome to the world, you aren't alone.

Overlord, I like it.  :lol:

But you kinda missed my point, I wasn't saying it's bad to question the system or try to improve it, just that your team is already capable of causing drama without additional fostering.
 
"Off topic" Questions:grin:id Poland and Brazil play repeated match?
Also,since Yugoslavia has finished last in our group(3) we will play match against the last in group 4 for the final spot in playoffs.Is that Brazil?
If so,does the winner take playoff place of Portugal,and what is the deadline for this match?
 
Erminas said:
"Off topic" Questions:grin:id Poland and Brazil play repeated match?

Not yet. They still have the following two weeks (Phase Five, and Play-offs) to complete it however.

Erminas said:
Also,since Yugoslavia has finished last in our group(3) we will play match against the last in group 4 for the final spot in playoffs.Is that Brazil?
If so,does the winner take playoff place of Portugal,and what is the deadline for this match?

Since Brazil and Poland haven't played their match yet, there is no definite last in Group 4. After Phase Five, there will be a Play-offs round in which you'll play.

The winner will take the place of Portugal, and it'll be week's deadline like other matches.
 
crazyboy11 said:
If that's not good enough, what system do you propose that isn't based on opinion? (A vote is still opinion based).

Well the idea of the categories was to ensure that one team didn't get to play everything on their turf, right? So let team's pick their own maps and factions. People will pick their own turf or be screwed for not doing it.
 
Mr.X said:
Well the idea of the categories was to ensure that one team didn't get to play everything on their turf, right? So let team's pick their own maps and factions. People will pick their own turf or be screwed for not doing it.

That would be a great regression and not feasible in my opinion. It would take us back 2 years.
 
Mr.X said:
Well the idea of the categories was to ensure that one team didn't get to play everything on their turf, right? So let team's pick their own maps and factions. People will pick their own turf or be screwed for not doing it.

A very bad idea, this will encourage teams to pick the same map over and over, as that team might be doing well on that specific map and will prefer to play on it every single time.
 
Back
Top Bottom