not accepting a sub?

[Psyks]

I Think that all subs should be aceppted. Its pointless not to except. ?Even if u dont and we need to start over the sub is someone better usualy. So you would stand even less a chance from the begining. I mean I thought people would say ok 1 loss whatever but some clans say f*** no and get themselves out of a jam. Whats your opinion?

[Brain]

You havent made a sufficent argument to support a rule change. Besides, it is the opposing clans decision.  If you dont want to let them sub, dont let them. If they won't let you sub, oh well, deal with it and move on.

[Typhy]

Okay, I know what you're refering to, actually, theres a little more to it, here is what I think on that: I think that if a player comes into a cb, and then has to go part way through, that's his problem, he shouldn't have cbed if he was going to have to leave, I do think that subbing in at the half is fair, but after a few games, I don't think so. Perhaps put a little more thought into it and repost it, you didn't make much of a case in your post.

[theN00b]

I am for subs if one of your players must go. Playing games is not a priority, over things are.

[Typhy]

I am all in favor of subs at the change of serves, however, not during a set of games

[Brain]

Well, I agree that there are thing that are more important than RS. But, I also agree with typhy, so here is my solution:
play down one man 'till the change of servers, then pick up the sub at the switch.

sound fair?

[Typhy]

Yes, infact that is what usually happens, while not a written rule, that's what is mostly done. I had to take XaF 1v3 in the 4 out of the last 5 game. That was one of the times that I played my best, I managed to win 3 out of the 4. I guess that I just play really well under preasure.

[Bondo]

No one should accept a CB if they can't play 5 measly games, sorry but I stand by the rule limiting it to halftime (a natural time to switch especially to get people with best ping and such) and crashing (not controllable).  I don't think the rule needs to be extended further, Matt had too leave but it was still his choice and his team wasn't able to get the CB finished because of it.  Now AK wasn't necessarily doing the most sporting thing by not accepting a sub, but they had the rules behind them.  As dirty as what they did is, I feel no sorrow for U who wasn't properly prepared for a CB.  Anyway, I don't really want a fight so I think this thread should be locked...it has gone as far as it needs to.

[AK_Rap1d]

Excuse me?  How about THEIR UNSPORTSMANSHIP !!  Yeah, there's a point where frustration took over and I was plain and simply fed up. ?With the IP joining in the middle of a match by a 3rd teamate(NightHawk), to the going when we weren't green up, to the mid game warps (Was Matt apple tabbing out when he got killed?) and the immaturity level brought into the CB, I was over even talking to those damn kids. ?We'll CB them on a clear and cool mind and not one all heated up. ?It'll give them time to review the rules and talk about their n00b15m

[†FiRE Infection]

Rapid are you sure this didn't have something to do with the fact that you were losing 6-0 at the time and then someone came in and you were losing 7-0? ?I'm sure you would be very angry if I didn't accept one of your subs in a cb that you were winning. ?Wouldn't you. ?You would have accepted the sub if you were winning by that much and don't say you wouldn't. ?Why wouldn't you play psyks in a 2v1. ?Because you didn't want it to count.

[Bondo]

Infection...at best the score was 4-0, but due to NH ip joining during a game one of those games didn't count so had it been continued it would have only been 3-0 with AK host left.  It wasn't a true dire situation so that isn't a strong reason.  Anyway, if you aren't going to lock this, at least move it to BL where it is on topic (and I can lock it ).

[Typhy]

Hey, Rapid, hows about we let me handle this? Okay? There is a little more to this than just Matt leaving, had Matt had to leave, and simply told us that, we almost for sure would have acepted it, the problem here was that in the game that he left during he said "Screw this, I'm out of here". He's gotta be able to keep his cool during a battle. He left by saying that, and we asumed that he left because he was mad at us. Already the battle was messed up, and we had no intentions of finishing it without Matt there.

[†FiRE Infection]

Psyks is wrong...sorry...that moron. ?I think Bondo wants to lock this.

No red asses in my domain...and yes I'm locking the thread-Bondo.

[.vooDoo.]

You havent made a sufficent argument to support a rule change. Besides, it is the opposing clans decision. ?If you dont want to let them sub, dont let them. If they won't let you sub, oh well, deal with it and move on.

That about sums it up, at host change sub are allowed unless allowed by opposing team. Its a very simple rule. This thread is now locked, and has been resolved.

I don't know about anyone else but your bit wasn't too clear Voodoo.

The rule as it stands and will stay.  Subing is allowed at host change and upon crash, regardless of the other team accepting.  Subbing in any other situation must be agreed to by opposing clan.