*DAMN R6 Forum

We just finished a GhR Seige Ladder cb and it really bugged me that our team got Offense for all 5 games.  It would bother me whether we won or lost the cb to have to always be Offense or always Defense.  (Being Defense every game would favor campers, tho, in my opinion.  I would like a rule addendum calling for alternating Offense and Defense.  What are averyone's opinions on the matter?

Humbly,

BTs_ST u RM ???

That is the reason why you guys didnt approve the cb??? That is pretty sad.

Negative!!!!!

I can't confirm cb's--this is my opinion I said!!!

We are not protesting the cb brother Valdar of the Hill People!!!

I am saddened and somewhat offended by such an accusation (especially from a buddy) but I'll get over it!!! ??? ;D

Ya it's random Sturm...you run the risk, everyone does.  So i'm going to push this through right before i go to bed unless i hear a good point on why this battle should not be posted.

You guys have played siege battles before. You know that it is all luck of the draw whether you are on offense or defense. You didnt bring up this issue when you won. The first time you guys did lose, it becomes something for the admins to decide. Accept the bloody loss. It aint the end of the world.

Now about the issue itself.... We can discuss that.

I accepted the damn loss!!!!

This was my first Seige cb.

I am only expressing my opinion about what I feel is a flawed protocol.

Or am I not allowed to have an opinion and ask other ladder members theirs?

(And no smart talk from Splinter lol ;))

NO!!!

NO OPINIONS ALLOWED!!!!

NOW QUIET YOU!

;)

I think what val is referring to, is one of the BTs waradmins put the match on hold.

Roger That Flies!

I appreciate this type of compromise between consenting adults, lol.  Thanks you big gay coreboy you!

Flies, that could potentially take all night though.  Yes, both teams could agree to it before the CB, but it still creates other problems.  There are some maps that are better to be on offense, or on defense.  And people have different ideas over which is better sometimes.  So it's just one more thing for people to bitch about.

I love playing siege, but it just doesn't lend itself to CB's as well (which is why I like warzone better for CB's).

If you really want to make it fair, you'd have to play shorthanded.  For example:

team A is CB'ing team B.  
team A plays one player short the first 4 games (defense).
team B picks the first two maps, team A the second two.
after the fourth game, team A gains a player, team B loses one.
team A picks the first two maps, team B the second two.

ties are handled in the same method, you get the idea.

The reason I see it this way is Siege was meant to be shorthanded on defense.

Just my opinion on it.