its not about eye candy helms deep is utter **** and there are way too many variables to look at say it does get rated and im mordor you know what im going to camp and theres nothing u can do to stop me its fair game THIS IS THE REALITY
Also there are various 2v2 maps which are siege's of cities like Minas Tirith 4p or Helm's Deep Siege. There is ofc 2v2 without siege which is Wilderland (based on 3rd Age battles taken place in area called Rhovanion).
LOL I can't even begin to describe how unbalanced and utter **** these maps are that you claim should be rated
As usual the conversation turns into a **** measuring competition. Stop trying to one up each other, and focus on the issue brought up.
Do we as a community(the lotr community) even want lotr rated? If its an unresounding yes, then surely we could tweek or create new maps to meet the specific criteria that rating a new map requires.
Introduce elements of anti-camp, penalties for evil if they choose to camp as a way to win the game, vice versa for goodies, if at any stage of a game evil is clearly unable to sustain its momentum or attain victory, then the goodies should go on the offensive, failure to do so would result in some form of penalty.
As usual the conversation turns into a **** measuring competition. Stop trying to one up each other, and focus on the issue brought up.
Do we as a community(the lotr community) even want lotr rated? If its an unresounding yes, then surely we could tweek or create new maps to meet the specific criteria that rating a new map requires.
Introduce elements of anti-camp, penalties for evil if they choose to camp as a way to win the game, vice versa for goodies, if at any stage of a game evil is clearly unable to sustain its momentum or attain victory, then the goodies should go on the offensive, failure to do so would result in some form of penalty.
This is where I disagree. Rating should be a means to an end. You are asking the wrong question. You shouldn't be asking "Does the LotR community want LotR to be rated - and if yes, how can we accommodate this" - rather you should be asking "What does the LotR community want" and if "more players" is the answer only then should we consider rating LotR is a way of achieving this. Nhoobish got it spot on.
I made the conscious decision to not name names, it doesn't matter who said what, or who to. We need to put this in-fighting to rest before it tears the community apart.
Locked I agree with some points you made, yes a prudent question is "do we want more players" I think however this question is pointless to ask, ofc we want more players.
If we want to make LotR rated and have the respective moderation staff consider doing this for us, we need to be willing to adjust the maps to fit the criteria.
Sadly however until we create maps with a certain degree of balance, implementing things to prevent the larger civs camping to win the game, to ensure a fast paced flow of gameplay that we as "pro's" thrive on, we need to introduce maps that can be played by anyone or this will never happen.
Sure, why not? If most of the regulars want it rated then why deny it? We'll need to make sure it's balanced enough, which may generate a few strong modifications.
Maegz the fact the "new" map will be Diplo excludes it from being rated, for the sole reason of rigging unbalanced teams to farm points.
It's likely to balance the current maps for rating it would take some extreme measures (in most cases) I personally think it would be better to design new map(s) specifically to fit into the pre-defined ratings criteria.
Also there are various 2v2 maps which are siege's of cities like Minas Tirith 4p or Helm's Deep Siege. There is ofc 2v2 without siege which is Wilderland (based on 3rd Age battles taken place in area called Rhovanion).
LOL I can't even begin to describe how unbalanced and utter **** these maps are that you claim should be rated
Do we as a community(the lotr community) even want lotr rated? If its an unresounding yes, then surely we could tweek or create new maps to meet the specific criteria that rating a new map requires.
Introduce elements of anti-camp, penalties for evil if they choose to camp as a way to win the game, vice versa for goodies, if at any stage of a game evil is clearly unable to sustain its momentum or attain victory, then the goodies should go on the offensive, failure to do so would result in some form of penalty.
Do we as a community(the lotr community) even want lotr rated? If its an unresounding yes, then surely we could tweek or create new maps to meet the specific criteria that rating a new map requires.
Introduce elements of anti-camp, penalties for evil if they choose to camp as a way to win the game, vice versa for goodies, if at any stage of a game evil is clearly unable to sustain its momentum or attain victory, then the goodies should go on the offensive, failure to do so would result in some form of penalty.
This is where I disagree. Rating should be a means to an end. You are asking the wrong question. You shouldn't be asking "Does the LotR community want LotR to be rated - and if yes, how can we accommodate this" - rather you should be asking "What does the LotR community want" and if "more players" is the answer only then should we consider rating LotR is a way of achieving this. Nhoobish got it spot on.
Locked I agree with some points you made, yes a prudent question is "do we want more players" I think however this question is pointless to ask, ofc we want more players.
If we want to make LotR rated and have the respective moderation staff consider doing this for us, we need to be willing to adjust the maps to fit the criteria.
Sadly however until we create maps with a certain degree of balance, implementing things to prevent the larger civs camping to win the game, to ensure a fast paced flow of gameplay that we as "pro's" thrive on, we need to introduce maps that can be played by anyone or this will never happen.
No its the best ever. For the same reasons.
Alllllllllll lotr maps are already balanced noooo problemo
It's likely to balance the current maps for rating it would take some extreme measures (in most cases) I personally think it would be better to design new map(s) specifically to fit into the pre-defined ratings criteria.