User login
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
28. March 2007 - 14:41
#21
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
wrote:I am sure that is not problem to any clan in this days have at least 4 members.
Oh, haha. Sorry, but it just isnt true. Many clans struggled recently to put out a four man squad, WASP being the biggest example i can think of.
Nah, i dont think there's really that much difference between 3v3 and 4v4, still, i'd hate the ranking being bound with more and more restricting rules. I think it isnt bad as is, and what should be done instead of it, is think of a good way to filter out not serious clans from it.
28. March 2007 - 15:15
#23
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
http://www.excessiveplus.net/clandb/id=549
1, 2...3. 3 active. ;]
The poll speaks for itself. 3vs3 remains and i agree with it. If there ARE more members, clans will use them. If there are not, don't restrict them from gaining rep.
28. March 2007 - 15:23
#24
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
wrote:http://www.excessiveplus.net/clandb/id=549
1, 2...3. 3 active. ;]
The poll speaks for itself. 3vs3 remains and i agree with it. If there ARE more members, clans will use them. If there are not, don't restrict them from gaining rep.
Good example 
SOUL have since foundation 3 members after Lime falling down and that's almost year or even more. They will probably remain with 3 anyway 
Why every clan MUST play ranked CW ? 
Anyway if we wanna be biggest and long lasting q3 mod which will be with this trends, we have to prepare on even more hyper growth... simple as that.
BTW where poll said that 3 vs 3 will remain, so far is 21:19 for 4 vs 4.
28. March 2007 - 15:29
#25
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
wrote:http://www.excessiveplus.net/clandb/id=5491, 2...3. 3 active. ;]
The poll speaks for itself. 3vs3 remains and i agree with it. If there ARE more members, clans will use them. If there are not, don't restrict them from gaining rep.
BTW where poll said that 3 vs 3 will remain, so far is 21:19 for 4 vs 4.
soul was just a random example, don't stick to it.
Every clan "MUST" play cw cause that's the only way to show activity as a clan since there is no forum for friendly games results. And most importantly, it's the only serious way to gain reputation and more than "3" join your clan.
Are you willing to take such serious decision which will affect hundreds based on 40 votes and an extremely weak difference of 2? I wouldn't.
28. March 2007 - 15:36
#26
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
wrote:Every clan "MUST" play cw cause that's the only way to show activity as a clan since there is no forum for friendly games results. And most importantly, it's the only serious way to gain reputation and more than "3" join your clan.
Are you willing to take such serious decision which will affect hundreds based on 40 votes and an extremely weak difference of 2? I wouldn't.
Playing on public servers with TAGs and showing good attitude and skill is best way to build reputation and seriousness.... that is the first step. Second is playing some FWs to measure strength with other clans. Third is make public image on forum, contribute community, and so on.... Last phase is playing ranking wars, when you are strong enough to play with at least 40% clans in ranking, so far you probably gain away more then 4 members... Anyway we can here make study, how build up strong clan... never then less clan is usually as his founder, that is my conclusion...
BTW, poll is open 15 days, and everybody is invited to vote, if only 50 vote for example it is good enough, nobody can be forced to vote...
Regards
28. March 2007 - 15:37
#27
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
3 vs 3 can also be strategical choice of a-clans, e.g. pickin dm3
with anothyer new rule that option is also cancelled, which I would regret...
again, I say keep Total Rank open for all setups and use Leagues with a-clans for rules
<drt_nihil> we about wolf and wolf is here
(@enha) damn you, people are dancing, instead of work
(@drt_foksie) she mutated
28. March 2007 - 15:47
#28
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
I disagree anyway. 7-8 years old game, small, non very "pro" mod and you want to restrict serious activity.
I saw no serious argument to bring 4vs4 as minimum. 3vs3 causes absolutely no problems. Sure more clan wars but i see nothing bad in that.
1) More get hyped up with the whole idea of fighting as a team.
2) Some learn about the forums and get tied up with the rest of the community.
3) More learn about punkbuster and pure.
These 3 serious arguments came to me in like half a minute. I bet there are far more but you get my point. I have only good things in my mind about 3vs3.
---
As i see, you are willing to take into account a tiny difference of a couple votes. If that's the case i have 2 solutions:
1) If you'll implement the idea anyway make it like that "A clan can play 3vs3 minimum only the first 8 clan wars"
2) Make a couple of more accounts and balance the result. I hope that AT LEAST you see that voting without posting means nothing. NOTHING. So far i think that "3vs3" wins for the guys that posted.
btw, "copy" some of tyr's arguments here.
--edit--
I re-read your posts
Quote:
This is not against new clans, it is for less clans but more quality in clans, then more quality in community. New clans which have only 3 members have to merge...
HAVE to merge? O.o Oh boy...
28. March 2007 - 16:34
#29
![mow Q [EN]](/files/screenname/8646b528fbbe1090dc61e0f29405d1b3.webp "mow Q [EN]"){kind=small}
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
To ur argument, FW for comparing strenght.
FWs are the shit, wasted time, played for nothing.
Sure, 2!S plays FWs from time to time, but as less as possible. If we do, we try to let play other players, and include trainresults etc. We play nothing serious on FWs, just testing stuff and players with different tactics.
So, power of clans is not comparable for us.
Anyway, FWs are the SHIT!
I will vote 3v3 should stay, before u argue with numbers. Same right for all.
Further with 4v4 it will become much harder to arrange cws, and i dont want to think about the ammount of WOs which will wast also my time.
This is all against 'easy going
Seems we start to lose the fun out of eyes.
28. March 2007 - 17:18
#30
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
SUGGESTION
New clans take some time to get forums here. They must first show that mean business. Soooo how about this:
"New clans post their clan wars but they won't be ranked. After they complete 5 clan wars and show that they mean business their wars will be ranked (along with the first 5 of course)"
----
I posted this cause i think that the real "problem" is that pointless clans come and go. Of course the number 5 is just my "clanless" opinion.
wrote:I think it isnt bad as is, and what should be done instead of it, is think of a good way to filter out not serious clans from it.
--edit--
I agree with the mow's "fun" thing. I posted this too in my previous post but I wanted to base it on strictly logical arguments so i deleted it. So, yes i agree, the "fun" above all. Where's the fun when forced to merge with other clans and/or lose cws cause most members have a real life.
Shout 12:11:15
: You spoil everyone's enjoyment in the Carnage server, I should have banned you long ago, anyways, play on bot only servers where you can't piss them off
: No Darkn355 was me, you have no idea how many players msg me to say you are pissing them off, I was in the server the other day and I seen for myself you pissing 3 players off and all 3 leaving the server because of you, this is been going on for a year,
: no FUBAR no the administrators don't like me
: Noob, and there is the reason you are banned, I really don't know if your 12 or not right in the head, you have been warned many times
: the 2 Spectators weird on elite carnage my house my banned Darkn355 on elite carnage my banned fuck you
: i have twitch embedded now https://www.tig...
: all servers lag !
: HI MY CHILDREN 
)
: Hi malombo
: HI FUBAR)
Who's online
There are currently 1 user and 32 guests online.
Difference is big, I post it all about in several posts.
Ranking already have bound 3 vs 3, only I suggest number change.
It is bad, and I suggest changes to make situation better and preserve hyper inflation trends. Otherwise why I will suggest any changes
: When I will have time I will show numbers... then will speak here in this tread with NUMBERS and facts why is better 4 vs 4. How and who will filtrate serious clans 
:
Regards
BBSQUAD CLAN
- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die...