ICW2 Suggestions

[Joseph]

I was extremely satisfied with the first ICW despite the problems we faced. But, now we can learn from them and this one will be twice the fun!
I completely agree with gdh, this would be a doable solution to alot of argument.

I don't recall there being much argument over "unfair sides"...could be wrong though. You get what you get, everyone gets defender advantage half the time, and I don't see the need to double the time commitment to add a marginal amount of fairness

[Phobos]

I was extremely satisfied with the first ICW despite the problems we faced. But, now we can learn from them and this one will be twice the fun!

I don't recall there being much argument over "unfair sides"...could be wrong though. You get what you get, everyone gets defender advantage half the time, and I don't see the need to double the time commitment to add a marginal amount of fairness

The question is whether double the time to play will actually be double the fun or not. I really wouldn't mind it for some of the funner planets (dantooine and mos for example). But for most of the large planets that means 4 battles instead of 2, and with multiple planet battles scheduled each day, they could take several hours to play through...

Also, I think the higher risk element of only getting to play as one side per map adds more strategical dynamic by forcing you to really think about the advantages that enemy defenders will have depending on which planet you choose to attack. Remove that, and you are making the maps more bland so there really is no advantage (or it is greatly reduced) to holding certain planets over others.

[«ΙΞ¢KØ»]

I dont remember who did this, but i personally enjoyed not using the jets in the war, made for a more interesting game i thought.

[SirPimped]

A dark/jet trooper's biggest advantage is the range they can cover for taking CPs. If the ICW2 was no capture, then it wouldn't be a problem. My suggestion is no capturing CPs.

[Shazam]

I don't recall there being much argument over "unfair sides"...could be wrong though. You get what you get, everyone gets defender advantage half the time, and I don't see the need to double the time commitment to add a marginal amount of fairness

There was a little fuss about "noobiness", nothing big.

The question is whether double the time to play will actually be double the fun or not. I really wouldn't mind it for some of the funner planets (dantooine and mos for example). But for most of the large planets that means 4 battles instead of 2, and with multiple planet battles scheduled each day, they could take several hours to play through...

Also, I think the higher risk element of only getting to play as one side per map adds more strategical dynamic by forcing you to really think about the advantages that enemy defenders will have depending on which planet you choose to attack. Remove that, and you are making the maps more bland so there really is no advantage (or it is greatly reduced) to holding certain planets over others.

Good point, I wasn't really putting time into consideration.

Maybe we could lower the reinforcement count to make up for that? Just an idea.

A dark/jet trooper's biggest advantage is the range they can cover for taking CPs. If the ICW2 was no capture, then it wouldn't be a problem. My suggestion is no capturing CPs.

I would personally like CPs to be captured. CPs allow alot of strategy, without them this would be a completely skill-based tournament. That isn't a problem for FC, but I'll be the first to admit that there needs to be some wiggle room to give other teams a fighting chance.

What if we just took away the flying capabilities for the jets or just lowered their flying distance?

[{PLA}gdh92]

The question is whether double the time to play will actually be double the fun or not. I really wouldn't mind it for some of the funner planets (dantooine and mos for example). But for most of the large planets that means 4 battles instead of 2, and with multiple planet battles scheduled each day, they could take several hours to play through...

Also, I think the higher risk element of only getting to play as one side per map adds more strategical dynamic by forcing you to really think about the advantages that enemy defenders will have depending on which planet you choose to attack. Remove that, and you are making the maps more bland so there really is no advantage (or it is greatly reduced) to holding certain planets over others.

That's a good point, maybe 'base' planets where people start off and there are two maps could have just one play through so that there's a defender advantage and it doesn't take so long. My main concern is where a clan starts with a map with a tank advantage then just picks that side evrytime and becomes almost invincible.
Also I think CPs are a must, as they add some strategy to the game rather than just spawning and shooting, the ability to save a game that you are losing by sneaking around and getting a CP behind the enemies backs is one of the main reasons I still play.

[Led]

the ability to save a game that you are losing by sneaking around and getting a CP behind the enemies backs is one of the main reasons I still play.

good luck with that!

[Phobos]

I think tanks can be just as unfair as jets it all depends on the maps and how they're used.

I wouldn't mind specials being allowed, but the Droideka would need at least a little buff to compensate.

[-=(212) Nixo=-]

Would there be mod maps involved? They are fun but reduce the number of people that play

[«ΙΞ¢KØ»]

My suggestion is no capturing CPs.

I really enjoyed the different cp wars, for the stratigies like Z said.
I just didnt like how much of an advantage jets gave, and how over used they were, instead of using ground strategies.

[Joseph]

Would there be mod maps involved? They are fun but reduce the number of people that play

Surely they don't reduce the number of players anymore than installing tunngle/GR does.

[-=(212) Nixo=-]

Nope they do not but we need all the players we can get so this wouldnt exactly help that

[Shazam]

Mod maps are a MUST. They spice the tournament up. I get tired of the old stock maps at times.

If we made a map pack and detailed instructions to install them, I'm sure it wouldn't effect the participant numbers.

[Oven]

Status update

Epifire will be returning as an admin
Agent Z has been made an admin (and consequently, cannot Rep YAK or Admin non-neutral battles)

Apparently there can only be 1 poll question per topic, so I will make a topic soon that has a "ballot" template where you can vote on certain potential changes to the ICW2.

For planning purposes:
The ICW2 will consist of 4 weeks, with battle announcements taking place during the week as usual. Battles will take place on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays; here is the list of weekends:

• Dec. 21-23
• Dec. 28-30
• Jan. 4-6
• Jan. 11-13

All of this and more will be more officially written up in an ICW2 Rules thread this weekend.

Phobos, your idea is very interesting.

Also, unless there's a huge outcry resulting from this post, I'm going to veto the play-each-map-twice idea.

Mod maps are a MUST. They spice the tournament up. I get tired of the old stock maps at times.

If we made a map pack and detailed instructions to install them, I'm sure it wouldn't effect the participant numbers.

Agreed. Also, I would like to change up the map rotation considerably this time around.

[Shazam]

Agent Z has been made an admin (and consequently, cannot Rep YAK or Admin non-neutral battles)

Just to clarify, I planned on participating in YAK despite being an admin. I will not be allowed to admin any battles involving YAK (or our ally/allies?) so that there is no possibility of bias towards one team. If anyone disagrees with this I will choose between the two roles, but I would like to do both if possible.

@Oven:  Would I be allowed to admin any battles involving YAK's allies? I can understand if I would not be allowed to, but that would limit the battles I could admin a lot.

-edit:  Are we allowing allies this go-around? Probably should've asked that first.