1 User(s) are reading this topic (in the past 30 minutes)
0 members, 1 guests
0 members, 1 guests
What's popular right now:








AoKTS updates (78 users)

CBA PathBlood 1.8.2 (45 users)

Word Association (29 users)

1.6 reward campaing (28 users)

2v2 Cops n' Robbers Tournament! ... (25 users)

TIW 2020 Map votes (24 users)

New CBA Hero now supports HD / D... (19 users)
Most active threads in past week:








Strange bug (6 posts)

THis record just pauses and im u... (5 posts)

Unable to spec 1.6 game data games (4 posts)

a problem in download (4 posts)

Nobody can play 1.6 anymore. (4 posts)

1.6 out of sync without player d... (4 posts)

Elite skins for 1.6 (3 posts)
I was thinking we could cut it off at the king event and maybe make it easier to play in tournaments.
Also remove the onager level for good since its not really meant to be played 1v1
I would do it for fun definitely.
I like the 30 second thing though... after the winner gets to to platform
the enemy has 30 seconds to still get there to get his 2 points. (Winner gets 3 gold i belive)
Unless you want to completely edit the map and make it so winner only gets 1 gold per victory
taking out a few events would balance it. The onager event, the VDML event, the huskarl event being just a few that really have no place in a 1v1.
Also the luck variant is so important to keep in this type of map.
VDML should stay and Huskral also I think *although I would not be against removing the end maze*.
Onager could be removed but I would just remove the trees and make it about attacking each other as opposed to attacking certain points of the obstacle.
Also the luck variant is so important to keep in this type of map.
VDML should stay and Huskral also I think *although I would not be against removing the end maze*.
Onager could be removed but I would just remove the trees and make it about attacking each other as opposed to attacking certain points of the obstacle.
What if you are playing someone like Tra? Think about playing TTF in hard lag.
Obviously if the lag is not consistent this does not apply... but unless someone is intentionally lagging the lag should remain consistent.
Obviously if the lag is not consistent this does not apply... but unless someone is intentionally lagging the lag should remain consistent.
I played in intense lag back in the zone but we are talking random timings In regular lag it is just a matter of timing how long it takes for your unit to react to a command. For example in general for the cav archer one I just click when the rubble places a third and it works 99% of the time in lag.
This is different >.>
Obviously if the lag is not consistent this does not apply... but unless someone is intentionally lagging the lag should remain consistent.
I played in intense lag back in the zone but we are talking random timings In regular lag it is just a matter of timing how long it takes for your unit to react to a command. For example in general for the cav archer one I just click when the rubble places a third and it works 99% of the time in lag.
This is different >.>
I just don't see the need to mess with it. If Dave and I were playing a 1v1 it would be over in approx 30 minutes.
Throw in random laggy player and the duration would be based on adjusting to the lag.. which should not effect the game that much.
Assume two random players get together and 1 lags. Im sure the game could take along time. How does editing the map change this? Taking out 3 events that are based mostly on good timing and luck will not effect the duration that much. Most of the time spent stuck on obstacles will be on obstacles like the sheep one or the woad transport boat which happen to be two of the most important and remembered obstacles on the map.