Jump to content


looking to form or join team


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

Plainfields #1 Posted Oct 30 2015 - 02:39

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 15124 battles
  • 186
  • [-_-] -_-
  • Member since:
    10-22-2010
Looking for a group that plays ranked team battles well... 

GhostWrime #2 Posted Oct 30 2015 - 04:14

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2973 battles
  • 68
  • [-UFD-] -UFD-
  • Member since:
    07-30-2015
stats would help and oh by the way gl hf.

Guest_stormcrowe_* #3 Posted Oct 30 2015 - 05:05

  • Guest

heads up also more then likely once 10.0 hits team battles will change to the new league format of 7/68 also

 

Don't count on this

~Trevzor


Edited by stormcrowe, Nov 01 2015 - 04:44.


_Jdawgg #4 Posted Nov 01 2015 - 02:25

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 10386 battles
  • 407
  • [LOAD] LOAD
  • Member since:
    01-11-2013

I am sorry to the original poster, but I am posting here because of what Trevzor added onto the last post in this thread.

 

Wasn't team battles brought up as a way for those who actively participate in WGLNA to be able to practice without scrimmaging another team? That is something I always figured that mode was brought around for. With the format for WGLNA changing to 7/68 Tier 10 vehicles, why shouldn't the ranked TB ladder, once the current season is over, change to being tier 10s as well? Not to mention the normal ranked TB's but unranked as well. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to keep the team battles the way they are now, in the 7/42 tier 8 format. 



Blaze_terror #5 Posted Nov 01 2015 - 04:46

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14180 battles
  • 1,159
  • [N0RAD] N0RAD
  • Member since:
    05-17-2013
why not follow league format in ranked battles  .  WG  :facepalm:

Edited by blazeterror1, Nov 01 2015 - 06:46.


Guest__Stinky_Pinky__* #6 Posted Nov 01 2015 - 15:21

  • Guest

View Poststormcrowe, on Oct 29 2015 - 23:05, said:

heads up also more then likely once 10.0 hits team battles will change to the new league format of 7/68 also

 

Don't count on this

~Trevzor

 

War-gaming logic, best logic 

TheLoveHitman #7 Posted Nov 03 2015 - 00:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12342 battles
  • 800
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    06-04-2012
They are thinking of accessibility of team battles to all players. I think unranked should stay 7/54, but ranked go to 7/68. That way all the players who don't have tier 10's can still play, but the teams that have formed can get practice, or they could go to unranked and play tier 8's still.

The_Bezaleel #8 Posted Nov 03 2015 - 16:54

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22757 battles
  • 762
  • [LA] LA
  • Member since:
    01-23-2013

View PostTheLoveHitman, on Nov 02 2015 - 15:56, said:

They are thinking of accessibility of team battles to all players. I think unranked should stay 7/54, but ranked go to 7/68. That way all the players who don't have tier 10's can still play, but the teams that have formed can get practice, or they could go to unranked and play tier 8's still.

 

Or just introduce the new format alongside the old one, like Tank Company and Strongholds, where you can choose the tier you play at. TBs are quite active now, at least much more than when I started playing them many of the players who play them also have multiple Xs like myself, I don't think having low amounts of players in them would be an issue now if WG kept both.

TeaBaggery #9 Posted Jan 24 2016 - 00:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 25900 battles
  • 46
  • [-EVIL] -EVIL
  • Member since:
    08-17-2012
Bump

TheLoveHitman #10 Posted Jan 26 2016 - 04:23

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12342 battles
  • 800
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    06-04-2012
Why the bump? thread is pretty irrelevant

The_Bezaleel #11 Posted Jan 27 2016 - 17:02

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22757 battles
  • 762
  • [LA] LA
  • Member since:
    01-23-2013

View PostTheLoveHitman, on Jan 25 2016 - 19:23, said:

Why the bump? thread is pretty irrelevant

 

Probably wants the 7/68 format.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users