Jump to content


Skirmish 3


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
26 replies to this topic

Captain_Judo #21 Posted Jan 11 2013 - 20:54

    eSports Manager

  • Administrator
  • 10805 battles
  • 1,227
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    10-06-2011

View PostAbsoluteRoyal, on Jan 11 2013 - 20:44, said:

Now you say "we find it's best to keep the rules "as is" once posted". OK well I don't know what the rules are until you post them. So how could any player feedback possibly have any effect other than on future events?

It's absolutely effective! I'll be sure to steer clear of a similar set up in the future, based on the feedback provided. Again, I'm sorry Skirmish 3 is just short.  :Smile_sad:

In the past, when we've made changes, teams are equally upset for simply changing the rule-set. This shows me that we can't expect all teams to regularly check these, or the tournament pages, for updates. Lord_Farquad and I ultimately felt it's best to leave Skirmish 3 as is.

AbsoluteRoyal #22 Posted Jan 11 2013 - 21:39

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 21222 battles
  • 468
  • Member since:
    06-20-2011
Appreciate the reply Captain_Judo. Also my last statement was focused more towards the January Challenge, I really like Skirmishes 1-3 so far. Apologies for the confusion and posting in the wrong thread   :Smile_sceptic:

Edited by AbsoluteRoyal, Jan 11 2013 - 21:39.


Pendan #23 Posted Jan 11 2013 - 23:32

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 10175 battles
  • 143
  • [RAZE] RAZE
  • Member since:
    10-02-2010
I like that this skirmish is heavies only. I like skirmishes that have rules sets that just never happen in any other format like regular battles and TCs. I also think outside the most hard core teams you will see a variety of tanks in this skirmish because of the level. Hard to get to a specific tier 7 tank if don't have at least the tier 6 already. This is different than skirmish 2 when only at tier 3 everyone could have a luchs.

My suggest to avoid having teams all comprised so similar and the 80% domination of a single tank in skirmishes is to always add a rule for the max number of any one tank. 3 would be a good number for most 7 tank battles so that never have over half the team in same tank.

CptBlood #24 Posted Jan 17 2013 - 12:52

    Sergeant

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 26420 battles
  • 138
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011
Why did the winning teams get placed on the wrong sides?  SIMP should be on the top.

Edited by CptBlood, Jan 17 2013 - 12:52.


Captain_Judo #25 Posted Jan 17 2013 - 21:31

    eSports Manager

  • Administrator
  • 10805 battles
  • 1,227
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    10-06-2011
Hey CptBlood  :)  I'm not sure I follow- can you elaborate?

CptBlood #26 Posted Jan 18 2013 - 03:31

    Sergeant

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 26420 battles
  • 138
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

View PostCaptain_Judo, on Jan 17 2013 - 21:31, said:

Hey CptBlood  :)  I'm not sure I follow- can you elaborate?

Ah, in the Tournament Sheet things are correct.  I normally never look there.  But in the Battle Schedule the teams were placed in the wrong spots which has never happened before so I thought people were going to get the wrong opponents.  Never mind! *grin*

Captain_Judo #27 Posted Jan 23 2013 - 02:47

    eSports Manager

  • Administrator
  • 10805 battles
  • 1,227
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    10-06-2011
A belated congratulatory message. Nevertheless, Skirmish 3 is in the books!

Fulcrum Gaming3:2WAR & PEACE

That's two tournament wins in a row for Fulcrum Gaming. With the official launch of our ELO scoring system, Fulcrum Gaming propels themselves to the top with 1,223 points. And here are the minds behind the tactical headache that was Skirmish 3:

AbsoluteRoyal
CarbonWard
fmlrommel
Friction
Fzerox
hugomaximus
MATT_DAMON
nagatron
Relics
Sov13t

:Smile_honoring: