7th said from the start of the tournament they wont be playing 4v4s in here... and its in the rules that you cant force 4v4s.. only if both teams agree to play it.
A lot of gg's were seen yesterday. Well played by all. Congrats to 7th That Europe match was prolly the funniest Euro I've seen. The 2v2 CBA match was a long one, but it was a great battle. The Final Germs match was funny and entertaining as well. Many things happened in the final game that were not expected (full archers & Tarkan rush to be specific lol). All three of these matches I recommend watching. I had fun casting with Dave as usual. Thanks to all for watching
When we are playing and if people are going to force me to do 4v4 then I will go ballistic. Fair warning. 4v4 is optional, read the rules.
was quoted by efkan and seeing as no 7th disagree'd I thought you were all on the same page and wouldnt play 4v4s so I didnt even bother trying to ask during this set... but easy to say now after the end result worked in your favor you would be totally fine with 4v4s played.. (lol)
Which of those maps would be worse for us if 4 7th played? Phurris is a better Vets player than any other Eot that could have played.
If you want we can do rematches on those 4 maps in 4v4 setting?
"When we are playing and if people are going to force me to do 4v4 then I will go ballistic. Fair warning. 4v4 is optional, read the rules."
Nowhere in there did he say we wouldn't play 4v4, he just said he wouldn't be forced to play 4v4 after Drew suggested it should be forced.
I would put us in 4v4s over your team of 3 + whoever you want to use regardless.. its a rare day that Eot will be outplayed in tgs like we were yesterday.
If a clan has 4 players online then they have to 4v4. If they only have 3 then the other clan has to play 3v3.
There are already enough barriers without adding the logistics of having 4 players online at the same time
Quoted by dave too.. Drew never mentioned forcing people to play only 4v4s... but at the least it should of been split with both.
Even if this result was completely different id say the same thing today regardless... and I guess its a good thing that no one wanted to go with your idea of 1v1 and 2v2 sets being worth 2 pts instead of 1.. or you'd be in a totally different mindset today
Why are you on this forum... go back to your rm bf forums naab
i did not like it at all, makes me happy i left CS forever
In the Eot 7th set the only 3 games that I thought were any good was the 2v2 Gwarz/2v2 CBA & 3v3 Vetz.. everything else was pretty one sided.
CBA:
http://www.voobly.com/match/view/12480204
Europe:
http://www.voobly.com/match/view/12479646
Germs:
http://www.voobly.com/match/view/12481013
was quoted by efkan and seeing as no 7th disagree'd I thought you were all on the same page and wouldnt play 4v4s so I didnt even bother trying to ask during this set... but easy to say now after the end result worked in your favor you would be totally fine with 4v4s played.. (lol)
If you want we can do rematches on those 4 maps in 4v4 setting?
"When we are playing and if people are going to force me to do 4v4 then I will go ballistic. Fair warning. 4v4 is optional, read the rules."
Nowhere in there did he say we wouldn't play 4v4, he just said he wouldn't be forced to play 4v4 after Drew suggested it should be forced.
If a clan has 4 players online then they have to 4v4. If they only have 3 then the other clan has to play 3v3.
There are already enough barriers without adding the logistics of having 4 players online at the same time
Quoted by dave too.. Drew never mentioned forcing people to play only 4v4s... but at the least it should of been split with both.
Even if this result was completely different id say the same thing today regardless... and I guess its a good thing that no one wanted to go with your idea of 1v1 and 2v2 sets being worth 2 pts instead of 1.. or you'd be in a totally different mindset today