As stated on the tittle of the thread, it is a suggestion. Means us as players who will participate can input their ideas so we can make this happen. Made 3 rounds but it is not likely they will be used. Too many games and I personally wouldn't want a poor soul having to run a tournament this long lol, rather look at the civs and chose from them which would be better for what round. Would like it to be a Bo3 though. Finals can be dropped down to Bo3 or kept Bo5, up to the people. I hope a 2v2 would be okay, if not guess we can do 3v3 but matches will be longer. Rules also need to be made since there can be NO camping whatsoever in this map, or archer civs will gain a huge advantage over infantry or any other civ.
sounds awesome but id say bo1 till semi's at least, i mean you are right about having a selection of civs, the issue comes with the fact it will take ages if bo3 till finals
sounds awesome but id say bo1 till semi's at least, i mean you are right about having a selection of civs, the issue comes with the fact it will take ages if bo3 till finals
Just have bo3 with 8 player set civ 2v2v2v2 games have have the winners advance.
yep 2v2 is better in 3 rounds..
if we go 2v2v2v2 then 6 plyrs will team up for the strongest one,,, which is simply ....
so i suggest make it 2v2 or better ffa of 3 rounds nd top 3 plyrs will go to next round
yep 2v2 is better in 3 rounds..
if we go 2v2v2v2 then 6 plyrs will team up for the strongest one,,, which is simply ....
so i suggest make it 2v2 or better ffa of 3 rounds nd top 3 plyrs will go to next round
As long as you don't get greedy you will win in RCB if you have the lead and if no one feeds significantly.
If you have a set layout with civs and players it'll streamline the tournament more too.
Maybe it'd be best to do bo4 with 2v2v2v2, that way each team could be each civ pair once.
If you're going to have a tournament why have it just 2v2? Hardly anyone plays RCB with just 4 people and 2v2... More people will join too if it's 2v2v2v2 which is something everyone plays.
As long as you don't get greedy you will win in RCB if you have the lead and if no one feeds significantly.
If you have a set layout with civs and players it'll streamline the tournament more too.
Maybe it'd be best to do bo4 with 2v2v2v2, that way each team could be each civ pair once.
If you're going to have a tournament why have it just 2v2? Hardly anyone plays RCB with just 4 people and 2v2... More people will join too if it's 2v2v2v2 which is something everyone plays.
yes lets do a bo4 2v2v2v2 with the chances of crashing being high and letting the tournament drag out for days
Map: RCB Gold 2011v4
Player 1, Player 2 vs Player 3, Player 4
Civilizations:
Round 1: Bo3
Celts/Mayans
Japanese/Saracen
Persian/Teutons
Round 2: Bo3
Japanese/Mongols
Turks/Vikings
Celts/Britons
Round 3: Bo3
Celts/Mongols
Mayans/Huns
Byzantines/Franks
Finals: Bo5
Japanese/Mongols
Aztecs/Japanese
Celts/Mongols
Turks/Goths
Spanish/Britons
As stated on the tittle of the thread, it is a suggestion. Means us as players who will participate can input their ideas so we can make this happen. Made 3 rounds but it is not likely they will be used. Too many games and I personally wouldn't want a poor soul having to run a tournament this long lol, rather look at the civs and chose from them which would be better for what round. Would like it to be a Bo3 though. Finals can be dropped down to Bo3 or kept Bo5, up to the people. I hope a 2v2 would be okay, if not guess we can do 3v3 but matches will be longer.
P1 - Aztecs
P2 - Mayans
P3 - Saracens
P4 - Chinese
P5 - Celts
P6 - Mongols
P7 - Japs
P8 - Koreans
P1 - Aztecs
P2 - Mayans
P3 - Saracens
P4 - Chinese
P5 - Celts
P6 - Mongols
P7 - Japs
P8 - Koreans
too unskilled and un balanced no? lol
you could argue 2v2v2v2 each team same civ and play by points so 2 teams go through.....
Just have bo3 with 8 player set civ 2v2v2v2 games have have the winners advance.
you could argue 2v2v2v2 each team same civ and play by points so 2 teams go through.....
Unbalanced lol. Not really.
if we go 2v2v2v2 then 6 plyrs will team up for the strongest one,,, which is simply ....
so i suggest make it 2v2 or better ffa of 3 rounds nd top 3 plyrs will go to next round
if we go 2v2v2v2 then 6 plyrs will team up for the strongest one,,, which is simply ....
so i suggest make it 2v2 or better ffa of 3 rounds nd top 3 plyrs will go to next round
As long as you don't get greedy you will win in RCB if you have the lead and if no one feeds significantly.
If you have a set layout with civs and players it'll streamline the tournament more too.
Maybe it'd be best to do bo4 with 2v2v2v2, that way each team could be each civ pair once.
If you're going to have a tournament why have it just 2v2? Hardly anyone plays RCB with just 4 people and 2v2... More people will join too if it's 2v2v2v2 which is something everyone plays.
If you have a set layout with civs and players it'll streamline the tournament more too.
Maybe it'd be best to do bo4 with 2v2v2v2, that way each team could be each civ pair once.
If you're going to have a tournament why have it just 2v2? Hardly anyone plays RCB with just 4 people and 2v2... More people will join too if it's 2v2v2v2 which is something everyone plays.
yes lets do a bo4 2v2v2v2 with the chances of crashing being high and letting the tournament drag out for days