[WWC18] Discussion Topic
- Thread starter WhiskeR
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
ban nessa and eduard ****ing immediately, stop this ****ing nonesense.
Nessa you're a ****ing snake for trying to act all noble and then go all sneaky like, absolute loser
Nessa you're a ****ing snake for trying to act all noble and then go all sneaky like, absolute loser
Maybe the admin team already know they're in different teams under different names but are making excuses to not ban them so if they are caught, they wont be punished. The admin team probably advised them to go under a different name and ID. If they wanted to ban them they would have already, clearly there's something going on behind the scenes.
You misunderstood. I contacted both players personally and informed that due to the current situation, they will not be able to participate in the tournament. You can call it as you like, but if they take part in the tournament under other nicks, they do it without our permission. If you have evidence for it, please introduce it.
And please, do not create theories that are a lie. If you try to accuse someone, submit any evidence.
And please, do not create theories that are a lie. If you try to accuse someone, submit any evidence.
easiest solution is to open up a bans and warnings topic like every tournament in the recent years had
Streaming BE vs Wonwokie tonight at 19:30 gmt!
Hope im allowed to by the admins.
Hope im allowed to by the admins.
If team A wins map 1 and draw map 2, then the third map in the fixture should be played. It should only come to overtime if team B manages to win map 3.
so it's possible to have a match play on for hours if the facs on the maps are unbalanced and you always roll 3-0?
Ye gotta say the literal interpretation of the rules is not what happened in the Wonwook BE match
If it's BO 3 then it isnt stalemate until 3 map are played.
In the match BE won the first map and the 2nd map was drawn.
By the rules as written they would need to play teh 3rd map to see whether the math was drawn. The possibilities remaining were either BE won teh 3rd map and therefore teh match, there was a draw on teh 3rd map so BE won the match or Wonwooks won the 3rd map and you went into the match draw condition (keep playing 3 rounds per side until someone won).
If you mean a map cannot end in stalemate you need to redraw the rules. But also - WHY would you have the rule this way? Playing extra time when teh match is drawn is one thing but doing it per map is very strange. Imagine if teh map and factions were such that teh fist map was somehow very equal, the first map could go onfor ages when teh later 2 maps coud have decided the match.
If it's BO 3 then it isnt stalemate until 3 map are played.
In the match BE won the first map and the 2nd map was drawn.
By the rules as written they would need to play teh 3rd map to see whether the math was drawn. The possibilities remaining were either BE won teh 3rd map and therefore teh match, there was a draw on teh 3rd map so BE won the match or Wonwooks won the 3rd map and you went into the match draw condition (keep playing 3 rounds per side until someone won).
If you mean a map cannot end in stalemate you need to redraw the rules. But also - WHY would you have the rule this way? Playing extra time when teh match is drawn is one thing but doing it per map is very strange. Imagine if teh map and factions were such that teh fist map was somehow very equal, the first map could go onfor ages when teh later 2 maps coud have decided the match.
So to caveat before giving my opinion, the other team tonight did play better and they deserved their win. I'm not arguing against the current result.
However I do think it's worth discussing the issue that with that match, the order of maps played and the rules that no map could be drawn, can very seriously affect the result. I think we can make a good argument that Wonwokie had a chance of winning the closed map, and anyone that plays Warband knows that the map style has a large impact on the result. By avoiding a map pick system and also enforcing that a map MUST be won, you've imbalanced every fixture because either a match up will have a closed map advantage or an open map advantage.
Another aspect is the impact faction imbalance has. It's a very real possibility that you will have imbalanced factions on some maps, with your current rules you could end up having relatively equal teams play several overtime sets. I'm imagining something like Nords vs Vaegirs on a very closed map like Sandi, that could easily be seen as a 5-0 then 3-0 to nords several times, broken only by some sort of fluke teamkill or similar. That is not very competitive and is similarly not very compelling for the viewer. CS has had a few maps that are very one-sided and these are roundly criticised.
However I do think it's worth discussing the issue that with that match, the order of maps played and the rules that no map could be drawn, can very seriously affect the result. I think we can make a good argument that Wonwokie had a chance of winning the closed map, and anyone that plays Warband knows that the map style has a large impact on the result. By avoiding a map pick system and also enforcing that a map MUST be won, you've imbalanced every fixture because either a match up will have a closed map advantage or an open map advantage.
Another aspect is the impact faction imbalance has. It's a very real possibility that you will have imbalanced factions on some maps, with your current rules you could end up having relatively equal teams play several overtime sets. I'm imagining something like Nords vs Vaegirs on a very closed map like Sandi, that could easily be seen as a 5-0 then 3-0 to nords several times, broken only by some sort of fluke teamkill or similar. That is not very competitive and is similarly not very compelling for the viewer. CS has had a few maps that are very one-sided and these are roundly criticised.
The matchrules weren't exactly clear before the match started, that certainly is a pity.
However I watched the match and I have to admit I really like these rules now they are actually clear.
Each map has to have a winner, in case you draw a map you get overtime on that map, yes it could go to double or tripple overtime but imo this makes it more exciting for the viewers.
It's exactly the same BO3 system as in cs:go and I like that, it's refreshing.
Previously alot of matches only lasted like what, 7 rounds? untill you had a winner, all the rounds after that were just pointless and not fun to watch anymore.
Also in the case of this match alot of people have the opinion it should have gone to a 3rd map.
But why? BE won the 1st map, then the 2nd map ends in a draw and goes to overtime.
If after the win and the draw the match would have gone to a 3rd map that would have been really unfair towards BE don't you think? Like Wonwokie had not even won a single map and would still get the chance to take the game anyways on the 3rd map or what? Very strange way of thinking I'd say. And in addition after Verloren it could have well been 1-1 then and you'd have to play a 4th map. Which as far as I know just is impossible in a BO3.
Nah really just keep these rules wwc18 admins, as a viewer they definitly are an improvement imo.
The veterans of this game just don't really like changes as I noticed
On the maps, yea I'm not sure if randomised maps are a good idea, that's something that could use an improvement as many people stated.
Perhaps a pick and ban system would be better?
However I watched the match and I have to admit I really like these rules now they are actually clear.
Each map has to have a winner, in case you draw a map you get overtime on that map, yes it could go to double or tripple overtime but imo this makes it more exciting for the viewers.
It's exactly the same BO3 system as in cs:go and I like that, it's refreshing.
Previously alot of matches only lasted like what, 7 rounds? untill you had a winner, all the rounds after that were just pointless and not fun to watch anymore.
Also in the case of this match alot of people have the opinion it should have gone to a 3rd map.
But why? BE won the 1st map, then the 2nd map ends in a draw and goes to overtime.
If after the win and the draw the match would have gone to a 3rd map that would have been really unfair towards BE don't you think? Like Wonwokie had not even won a single map and would still get the chance to take the game anyways on the 3rd map or what? Very strange way of thinking I'd say. And in addition after Verloren it could have well been 1-1 then and you'd have to play a 4th map. Which as far as I know just is impossible in a BO3.
Nah really just keep these rules wwc18 admins, as a viewer they definitly are an improvement imo.
The veterans of this game just don't really like changes as I noticed
On the maps, yea I'm not sure if randomised maps are a good idea, that's something that could use an improvement as many people stated.
Perhaps a pick and ban system would be better?
- Status
