*DAMN R6 Forum

Just a shout/cry/plee for some information and clarification on the use of WZ in cbs.

As i understand it with lms the following applies (examples using 4v4 setup)
if one team eliminates their oppolents they win
if one team has more guys alive at the end of the game than their oppolents they win.
If both teams have the same number of guys alive then the game is declared a draw.

So with warzone...

If one team holds the base, uniterupted for 3 minutes they win the game.... or
and now the big im confused by:
if you don't take the WZ but have more remaining guys than your oppolents (who also fail to hold base) do you win?
Or do you have to eliminate the entire opposing team to win?

What are the specific rules for use of WZ? i always thought it was basically LMS but with the added element that if you could hold the base for 3mins you won!

Please enlighten. thankyou
I ;D

Just my opinion here, but I think all of the mods that we play clearly say what is what.  

?  In LMS, the goal is to eliminate all, if not more, of your opponents.  The team with the most players left alive is declared the winner, regardless of whether or not the other team was completely eliminated or not.  The only problem with LMS is camping, which was supposedly being taken care of with Warzone.

?  In Warzone, the goal is one of two objectives:  Control the Warzone for 3 minutes, or eliminate all opponents.  In the event that the game comes to an end by way of the game timer expiring, these two criteria are used to determine the winner.  Since the game timer only expires when the above criteria are not met, both teams are then informed that the game has resulted in a tie.

Does this make sense?  Of course it does.  LMS is not Warzone, and Warzone is not LMS.  Yes, both game types share the aspect of winning by completely eliminating your opponenets, but everything else differs.  Warzone is not the game type to use if you are trying to camp your way to victory.  Many clans try to do this by being one up on a team and then retreating, maybe covering the Warzone.  Again, we have camping, but that is why Warzone is the way it is.  Warzone was implemented into the Battle League as a means of offering clans a camp free game type.  This conclusion was decided upon the fact that Warzone can only be won by taking the Warzone, or eliminating the entire opposing team.  

Warzone is not a variance of LMS.  It never was and it never will be.  I would like to again point out that even the game itself declares a draw if the criteria of winning are not met.  In LMS, if you are up by one guy, the game will then declare a winner.  Therefore, Warzone is simply not a variance of LMS, but a completely different game that happens to share one aspect of another game type.  In Siege, you either take the base or eliminate the other team.  In Assassination, you either assassinate the general, or the general survives by way of his team completely eliminating the other team, or by the expiration of the game timer.  Each game type shares aspects, but are quite different.

I believe I have stated my point, which if you sift through the rambling was simply this: Warzone can only be won by controlling the Warzone for 3 minutes, or by eliminating the opposing team in its entirety.

.::|N| Noto

well,  

I think the reason why this was an issue for BFG is because we were under the impression that when one team is up in a cb and the time runs out.  Even though the other team that is down a man might have gotten the Warzone after the 3 min warning within the game the game should have gone to the team with more players.  To be honest the only reason I personally have an issue with this is because, first off, we had never experienced this situation before.  Second off, we were told originally that Warzone was only introduced to the cbing community to add an objective to the game.  Most of us, including Dr. No at first were under the impression that whatever team had more players in the end would be the victor of that game.   Plus since we knew that Warzone had glitches from before we were assuming that the tie, just because the losing team got the Warzone, was one of those errors that was not corrected within the game.  

I dont think that most clans have had that problem but when you play a serious camping map like Airbase (Warzone), that situation might happen that you cannot find the last guy in your efforts to take him out.  And if we would have known that you can tie the game simply by taking the base then we would have taken measures to take the base as well or prevent the capture of the base.  I am not trying to argue with the facts.  The facts are the game does say it is a tie when one team has 2 men left and the other only has one but has the base for under 3 min.   That is the case.  But nowhere in the BL rules does it say that this would happen, so there was no way for us to prepare for this scenario.  In the end both teams agreed to talk to an admin halfway thru the game and at first DR. No agreed that it was our win, then after your debating with him he retracted and said that it did count as a tie.  No matter, in the end we subsided with the tie.  The point I am trying to get at is the fact that since no one was presented with this scenario till now we had to make our best assumption based off of what the known rules were about the cb.  And that is why most of us in this case would agree that even though it said tie in the game, it was the team with the most men left within the game that should have won, and that is also why BFG is bringing up this issue here.

Rule #8 of BL rules state:

8.   A win is when a team either kills the entire other team or is the team with the most people left alive.
A tie is when both teams have the same number of players left alive at the end of the game.
A loss is when a team either is entirely killed or has less players alive than the other team.

Nowhere on the BL rules ver 1.8 does it ever say that Warzone rules apply specifically to Warzone.  It only states specifically rule #8 about how wins and ties occur.  So if the tie was to be allowed within the BL rules then it should, by all rights be posted in the BL rules, which it is not.  That is our main issue with this taking of the Warzone in less then ample time being considered a tie even though the WZ game says so.  Again, either 1. WZ wasnt tested enough for these problems, 2. The BL rules were not specific on what rules apply to gameplay. or 3. The rules stand and it should be the win of the team that had more guys left on the board.  Anyway, that is just my opinion.

+MOD+Saberian

Hmmm. Mauti id love to hear your take on this if your about.

hey,

all in all Noto is right i think, cept that my opinion is that u can win also when u have more people when time is up and no team got the warzone yet.

just take that what the game says: when it says "Victory!" u won, when it says Draw then it?s a draw and when it says that u lost then u lost... that?s very simple isn?t it?  :)

[one] Civic.xo

Civic seems misinformed. The warzone mod works under the asumption that if the game is not concluded BEFORE 10 minutes it is automatically a draw.

Hey Val,

How the warzone mod is now, unless the entire team is wiped out, it does say draw at the end of the 10 minutes no matter how many people are left alive.  If one team has 4, and the other has 1, it'll say draw.  So Civic has it right actually.

I think we are all saying the same thing.

I said that if the warzone is not conquered or one team is not eliminated, than the game is automatically a draw. A Clan has has to complete 1 of the 2 objections BEFORE 10 minutes for a win. I don't see a problem with this at all. It is extremely rare to see a draw in warzone in the first place.  

Like val said:


and i've never seen it happen.

Honestly, I feel the resolution and explaination for all this is simple.

The game says that it is a draw, and we sure do not question it when an LMS result is a draw.  Warzone is a game-type in its own right, so its game results are as valid as any others'.  It just seems odd to some because warzoone isnt rewarding half-sucess with a win like LMS.

Also, warzone was added to the league as an option to reduce camping.  It totally fails at this if a team can sit and get the more-men-still-alive win as we have in LMS.  Take the zone, or kill everyone.  ;)

It makes sense how the game is, but I was just going by what the rules said.  that's all.  If you look at the rules, they are somewhat different to how WZ really is.  It's obvious that not many people have gone thru every scenario that has happened within the WZ game but then again, how are we supposed to know what to expect if there is no guideline to follow from the beginning.  That was our main issue about the problem.  I am not objecting in any way to how it's to be played, but if there is a specific way that WZ is gonna be played then it's only fair that we know as clans how WZ works.  This way we can prevent these issues within the future.

+MOD+Saberian

We still do not have a clear statement from a BL Admin as to what the ruling is.  Can the Admins please make a ruling?

?  A win in Warzone is accomplished by eliminating all opposing forces or controlling the warzone for 3 uninterrupted minutes.  If neither of these objectives is met, the game will result in a tie, regardless of the number of players left alive on either team.

[size=14]OR[/size]

?  A win in Warzone is accomplished by eliminating all opposing forces or controlling the warzone for 3 uninterrupted minutes.  If neither of these objectives is met, the team with the most players left alive is declared the winner.

I think you can pretty much copy and paste my words for whatever the ruling will be.  Both statements above clearly explain what is a win, and what is not.  Either way, can someone please make a clear ruling?  CB's are still going on, and there are only 24 days left in the season.  I'm sure this situation will present itself again.

.::|N| Noto

haha at Noto's "or"

WZ is not LMS. Same rules should not apply. The mod is made as such that you can only win in two ways. This prevents camping. Remember that!

In LMS it is pretty common that the leading clan camps. This sucks. WZ allows a clan with fewer players alive to have a shot at winning.

A win in Warzone is accomplished by eliminating all opposing forces or controlling the warzone for 3 uninterrupted minutes.  If neither of these objectives is met, the game will result in a tie, regardless of the number of players left alive on either team.


This is how it is and how it should be. Thanks noto.

Yes, i do believe that Noto has a serious point.  One of these awnsers should be puit into the BL so people can stop assuming what the rules are really on that point.  it dosent take much time for  some admin to put this into the BL rules.  and since the rules were originally made to be specific, this should also be listed in there.  Especially since WZ has possibly a different guideline to follow.  So if someone can plz put this in the rules like Noto said and pick one of the choices, we can all move on with our lives on this issue.  Thanks.

+MOD+Saberian

ISNT THERE ANY ADMIN READING THESE POSTS ANY MORE OR WE JUST CHATTING OUR FINGERS OFF FOR THE HELL OF IT

I THINK A RULING IS IN ORDER

DONT YOU

Um... Flies... what are you talking about?  In Warzone, if you do not completely eliminate the other team, or if you do not "take" the warzone, it results in a tie, regardless of the number of guys left alive.  If you do not accomplish these two above stated objectives, the game itself declares a draw.  It is declared a draw because the two objectives were not completed successfully.  please do not try to make Warzone, LMS.  They are different.  If they weren't, we would still have camping in Warzone.  Read above for my two explanations.  It is not clearly written in the rules either.  those rules were from last season and were in reference to LMS.  Other than the rules of setting up warzone, there are no rules that actually regualte this game type whatsoever.  I still think this issue needs to be addressed, and resolved by Admins.  

.::|N| Noto

Obviously there is a question here that needs a ruling by the Battle League Admins.  It's not that anyone is right or wrong, it's just that as written, there is confusion.

So, to echo Noto, can we please have a ruling by the Battle League, so we don't have any problems in a CB.

Thanks!

hey,

WZ was introduced to reduce camping. cuz of that i think that Noto?s first idea is the right one we should use. in a LMS game you can simply camp it out when u have more people left alive, WZ was made to prevent this.

i?d like to hear another BL admin to this issue, but i?m pretty sure that this is the right solution.

[one] Civic.xo

What confusion? Maybe its just me, but the default rules would be the rules of the game type.

A win in Warzone is accomplished by eliminating all opposing forces or controlling the warzone for 3 uninterrupted minutes.? If neither of these objectives is met, the game will result in a tie, regardless of the number of players left alive on either team

So it isnt so much a rule clarification that people want, but a rule CHANGE.

LOL. Heavens above, all i wanted was some clarification for Mauti or one of the guys who actually wrote these rules. Surely by the number of posts that have been written following my quiery there is a certain level of confusion as to how things stand regarding WZ.


btw. at the time that my confusion arose we were playing WZ on Airbase. 2v1 with less than 3minutes left. Now all the 1 man had to do (if the rules were not as i suspected) is sit tight and camp it out, the chances of the 2 guys on the other team of finding him are extreamly extreamly remote. - ie camping issues (which apparently WZ removes) are back in play

LOL don't be so melodramtic BFG. Too many people start crying wolf whenever a tiny change happens. If a draw is so horrible to you, then you need to win more of the games beforehand. We all know that the draw is best for the team already winning. Above all, remember that this situation is so damn rare and the worse that happens to you is a DRAW.

lol, BFG i dont think any rule change is needed here. LMS/Warzone/Seige are all different styles of play with different ways of play. LMS isnt warzone just as much as seige isnt LMS. I think Noto's first Reply explains this very well.

Instead of having a separate Siege CB, could Siege be added to the regular GR Team CB just like WZ and LMS are now?

Thanks VooDoo, now everyone has the answer from the BL =D.

BFG.GEN, yes, that game could have ended in a draw, but that also means that the team with 2 failed to take the base in the first 7 minutes (since only 3 were left).  And like someone said before, I haven't heard of a warzone draw yet (yours would be the first if it happened).

If neither team goes for the base, then it's their own fault that it ended in the draw.  Sounds like both teams camped, not just one.

Well, as for me accepting the issue isnt a problem.  What I have a problem with is why was this not written up in the rules?   I do understand that people need to experience an issue firsthand before it can be specified, but I do believe that this particular issue deserves at least some attention as to being put into the BL rules for future reference.  I believe that BFG was just flustered because we didnt know how it worked and were not aware of what action to take before hand because the rules, again, were not specified.  I believe thruout this whole query Noto and myself have calmly resolved any issue that we might have had within or game.  I think the issue for both of us is the fact that it has not been put into the BL rules.  
     I can also understand that WZ would be something quite hard to understand because even in testing the game u cant really test it with nothing to lose.  That is probably why this issue never ocurred before.  In either event, it was a big map, and i am sure we both camped a little.  But camping issues again, are not the issue.  If WZ is gonna be continued to be used then the rules of how it works should also be specified within the BL rules so people can understand exactly what the objectives are for gameplay.  
     Again, this is in no way a start for a flame war.  I am just expressing the concern that it seems all parties have about the BL rules at this point with WZ.  so if we could at least get some type of reply letting us know weather the specified rules for WZ are gonna be included then that would be most appreciated.  thanks.

+MOD+Saberian

I discovered a very important thing lately! Let me give you an example from the real world:

GhRa vs X1
2 vs 2 on team ladder
Map: Training, LMS

What happens is simple. I kill one of the X1s and then accidentaly blow myself up. There is now one guy in X1 and one in GhRa. These two open fire and both die. BOTH teams eradicated, GhR says we win!

Why: Since I killed myself, X1 only got 1 kill. Since both teams were eradicated GhRa got awarded the win due to the fact that we had TWO kills. We decided to replay the round since the rules kinda say this should be a draw? Anyhow, there are no hard feelings about the Cb but I want to know what really should happen in that situation?

Civic said GhRa deserved the win. Do all admins agree?

This situation was taken care of in Seaon 3 I believe.  I'm not going to bother looking for the post, but Civic is incorrect in his statement, which said it was a win due to the team kill.  

The ruling back at the end of Season 3 was that a team kill (TK) was actually a defensive advantage.  In a 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, etc., a team could simply start off my killing themselves, whether purposely or accidently, and having an advantage due to the fact that Ghost Recon still regards the game 0-0 since neither team had eliminated even a single enemy.  If you are in a 4v4 and someone TK's, it becomes a 4v3.  The team with 3 only has to kill one man to win (if time expires), but the other team has to kill one as well.  It's a lot easier, as we all know, to kill at least guy out of 4 than it is out of 3, hence the defensive advantage.  

Basically, what I'm trying to say, the final ruling was that a TK counts against the team who TK's because they are one man down.  General Game Rules : Rule 8 states that "...A tie is when both teams have the same number of players left alive at the end of the game...".  I know this does not state that a tie is also when both teams have been completely eliminated, but when no one is left alive, I think you can figure out the outcome of that one.

I hope that clears things up for you Acri.  It wouldn't make sense if you killed yourself, and won because of it, not matter what the game said.  And again, I disagree with Civic on this one.

.::|N| Noto

To clear that situation up Buc, this scenario was actuall between .::|N| & +MOD+.  I believe this is how things went.  3v3 WZ on Airbase.  It was then 3v2 with +MOD+ leading, but then we evened things up.  We figured we should run out around 4 minutes remaining to try to get the Warzone.  We tried, and then got nailed just short of the smoke, without taking the Warzone.  It was then a 2v1 with +MOD+ on top again.  At this point, there were less then 3 minutes remaining.  Us .::|N| guys decided our last guy should just sit it out.  The reason why:  He couldn't take the Warzone since there were less than 3 minutes remaining.  In order to win, he would have had to eliminate the last 2 +MOD+ players in less than 3 minutes on a map that is quite big for a 2v1.  It was better to take a draw in this case, because if our guys attempted to go for the win, he would have most likely been shot before he even saw the first guy.  This is of course understandable.

In regards to never seeing a tie in Warzone, how has anyone never seen this before???  Go into a public room where you have Warzone with 4 respawns, and around 20 people playing.  You never take the Warzone because there are so many people, and it's sometimes difficult to completely eliminate the other team since there's always that one guy hiding in the bank or what not.  These games always end up in draws.  Now granted, it usually does not happen in a clan battle, but please do not insinuate that this is some sort of anomaly and that the planets must have been aligned in order for it to ensue.  Draws happen in Warzone, and it usually happens because you can't do anything about the Warzone in the last 3 mintues if it changes hands or was never taken, and it's sometimes difficult to find just one guy on large maps.  You end up running around in circles.

I would still like to see one of my statements added into the BL Rules though.  I clearly made two statements in an earlier post in this thread, and I think it would just clear this whole issue up.  Since Warzone is only addressed as a game type, with no specific rules, the rule change I ask for should have already been done, but since it has not, I still ask that it is done as soon as possible.

How many Admins do we have anyway?

.::|N| Noto

hey,

i rechecked this issue and i have to agree with Noto. he?s right about that GhRa vs X1 problem... thank you for blaming me!  >:( ;)

[one] Civic.xo

To answer your question noto, there is Elandrion, Mauti, me, Infection, Hazard, Dr. No and now civic.

I think this issue is now resolved, pm me if you would like it reopened.