Presenting a fun and fast paced new INF league!!

[keihaswarrior]

Two leagues? Two tournaments? Two ladders? Two sets of forums and rules etc.? umm... bleh?

How about we just stick to 3 vs 3 or change it to 4 vs 4. Everyone who doesn't like what we pick can just keep their complaints to themselves...

 

[(SDS)benmcl]

KW is correct 3 vs 3 or 4 vs 4. Any other way is going to cause you problems. You are not going to please everyone anyways.

 

[UN17]

Will there be a free agent list for Mercenaries? So if you're missing one player, you can hire a merc to fill in the slot?

 

[{GD}Shmoo]

UN that is what I am hoping my thread at the DTASAL forum (listed above) will be. A place for people to list themselves as available. This is until I finish the DTASAL web site, which hopefully I will have a list of players available instead of this thread.

 

[Vega-don]

why you ***-**** always have to discuss everything , every rule... lets just go on a DTAS server, play the match, basta!!!!!
you want the league to start in july?

 

[Crowze]

Am I the only one who thinks that a team made of 3 of the 5 league organisers is a bit beyond the pale?

 

[O_DoGG]

I'm not formally opposed to anything, I just prefer standard dtas, but even if 3 vs 3 is chosen, I'll try and play it. Having two leagues running at the same time sounds perilous.

 

[geogob]

Am I the only one who thinks that a team made of 3 of the 5 league organisers is a bit beyond the pale?

I don't care really... I'm in this to have fun and so do the DTASAL organisers. I thrust them to be honnest and fair.

 

[NTKB]

What are you trying to imply Crowze?

Ok so lets hold a vote. Ill post a poll now.

 

[=D.C.L.I=Snipez]

vtd 4v4, don't care really but prefer 2 extra chances a little more. Btw, does anyone know the server we'll play on and where (which state, country?).

 

[yurch]

What are you trying to imply Crowze?

It's quite simple, really, in the very likely event of a dispute, having an all-moderator team involved isn't likely to fit with people's notions of 'impartiality'. Doesn't matter if they think they can be fair or not, you can only go with appearence.
A better solution, but not a perfect one, is to only use the non-playing moderators in an event where this occurs.

 

[Lasersailor184]

Definately Snipez. I've played you in INF when you had 56k and even then you kicked ass.

 

[NTKB]

A better solution, but not a perfect one, is to only use the non-playing moderators in an event where this occurs.

We will do that, or just give the right to the other team to show we are trying to be honest and impartial.

 

[Crowze]

That works for me. Don't take these things personally NT etc., I just try and think of everything.

Next question: With a team size of 3... what if one player can't make it? Do you mean the required players for a match is 3v3, but a team can be any size (up to 5 would make sense, since 6 could make a new team)?

Also, what kind of format will this league be? Like the ILCR (can't think of what's it's called, it's too early in the morning), ladder etc.?

 

[NTKB]

ok we are working on making this a 4 vs 4 now since it appears thats what an overwhelming majority want. If thats what you guys want then thats what you will get. As for the extra players to fill in, this is still being decided by rules lawyers stay tuned.

No offense taken crowze, its ok. The Scoring system will be different from the ILCR. I have a general idea of how I wish to do it, which I will present to the mod team soon so they can finalize it if they like it.

 

[Keganator]

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WITH 3v3!!!!!!!!!!!! 3v3 would be much more interesting...forget the majority, do what would be COOL! Remember, infiltration didn't get to be the nifty game it is by appeasing to the majority

 

[yurch]

They had to please somebody.

 

[Crowze]

The number of Os you put on the end of GO won't affect my vote in the slightest. Would you care to explain why 3v3 is any more interesting than 4v4?

 

[ant75]

hmmm... because the less the merrier ?

 

[Keganator]

3v3 is the smallest number of people that you can have a decent game of DTAS. The old DTAS restricted games to 3v3 for that very reason. Because of the relative size of Infiltration maps, if you want to have *any* chance at being stealthy, you want to minimize the possible number of contacts in each game. Thus, 3 on a side would satisfy this condition. So, instead of combat being a slugfest between two sides, it would become more of a stealthy search and destroy/hide and capture fight. Limiting to three people also makes it difficult to completely seal off any one area; there will be gaps that a quiet, careful team could sneak through. It makes the skill of deciding where to defend of the players even more important. It also means that you can't have half the team defending, and half the team scouting - you'll have to have everyone stick together if you want backup. Sure, you could let one of three go out scouting, but what happens if they need backup? They won't have any, unless you have one person guarding the flag...

Anyway, that's my opinion.