User login
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
29. March 2007 - 20:19
#51
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
voted for 3vs3 becouse some clans dont have more members so they wont be able to play cws if u put 4vs4 minimum.
And if someone wants to play 4vs4 he can make a deal so i dont got the sense of this rule.
29. March 2007 - 22:45
#52
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
wrote:voted for 3vs3 becouse some clans dont have more members so they wont be able to play cws if u put 4vs4 minimum.
And if someone wants to play 4vs4 he can make a deal so i dont got the sense of this rule.
I agre on 100%% it's don't have snes. If all deal form me is no problemos 
Histroy :
PLUS = FOX Clan >> GSE Clan >> BBS Clan >> KTM Clan >> BURN* Clan >> BBSquad Clan >> MR Clan >> VENDETTA Clan >> OUT of gaming 
RAIL = DUNNO Clan >> OF Clan >> PW Clan >> OUT of gaming
30. March 2007 - 7:46
#54
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
Solid arguments rena. I am convinced.
In the current 3vs3, which is like that years now, how many clan wars ended on 2vs2? 2% or them? Less? Whoa, that's a serious problem.
All i see is a guy say "I am right". Bring logical arguments on the table and not an uncertain prediction that there will be "more quality in community"
30. March 2007 - 7:59
#55
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
Main reason against 4 vs 4 is because most of clans have 3 best players, and #4 is questionable. Despite of 10 members. So, clans are against 4 vs 4 minimum, because they will be weaker. I know that some top clans have trouble with #5 member, they have top 4 with no problem, but #5 is weak part.... So, mainly why some clans are against it is selfishness. Anyway Taratos interesting is that you are clan less on long term and you are so active on this tread, are you have in mind making clan ?
30. March 2007 - 8:06
#56
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
Yes, this is the "main" reason but there are many more maybe "less" important. I posted a few of them on my previous posts.
There is no reason to restrict 3vs3. If XXX clan wants to play 4vs4 minimum they can set a rule in their challenge thread "4vs4 minimum. Period.". Then they will be free to play against the "50%" of the community that wants 4vs4 as minimum. No reason to force the other half to merge, recruit or die.
The idea to split clans and set different minimum isn't bad. However, clans have ups and downs as we all know. If XXX clan goes through a dry period, 4vs4 could actually kill it. Why make it so complicated? It works fine as it is.
Make a clan?! I am active enough but I suppose that the right path should be to join a clan "first". 
30. March 2007 - 8:11
#57
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
Please try to wrote in couple lines why I suggest rule change from 3 vs 3 to 4 vs 4. Why ? Because I wanna see do you understand why I do that.
Best regards
30. March 2007 - 8:14
#58
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
wrote:
its how i see it.
clan who have only 3 members dint passed the start line yet, they still can play frendly wars and increse they tactic and gameplay skills.
ranking should be bit more serious than a founding clan in one day, second day play 3 cw, and third day clan breakapart.
30. March 2007 - 8:31
#59
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
You think that you didn't write what you wanted clearly and ask that? Or do i look like a guy that doesn't read the forums?
If you notice when i try to build my arguments in 1) 2) 3) to be crystal clear about what i mean.
Anyway, here's what you say:
Quote:
1) "As you can see how much new clans arise in last couple of months. Drawback is that we now have inflation in numbers of played CWs."
Not a bad thing as i said a few posts above.
Quote:
2) "CWs become even more interesting."
Some of the most interesting games i've had were 3vs3. You mix quantity with quality.
Quote:
3) "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...
You want clans to:
a) Die
Merge
c) Recruit
d) Not get created
I am against such restrictions. You can find all my arguments above.
Quote:
4) "Ehum, I am guy which watch all what happening and I now intervene to preserve hyper inflation of new clans and to much ranked CWs, also to much death clans..."
I can see nothing bad in that. Random clans can be filtered. I made one suggestion a few posts above.
I don't see any more arguments.
----
About hq's post: Your problem is clans that die quickly. There is a way to filter such clans and not force 4vs4. Not rank their first clan wars.
--EDIT--
Just a piece of my mind:
4vs4 will only serve strong clans. Smaller clans will die sooner or later and strong members from these clans will join the top strong clans. Typical case of "Make the rich, richer".
30. March 2007 - 8:41
#60
![mow Q [EN]](/files/screenname/8646b528fbbe1090dc61e0f29405d1b3.webp "mow Q [EN]"){kind=small}
Are you for minimum 4 vs 4 players for ranked CW ?
Someone who dont want to respond on others posts, shouldn't discuss. (rena)
Rena, you exaggerate immoderately with your Posts and u put the responses of others in to something rediculous. (lets play 1v1).
My questions are:
- why it is better to have less CWs
- where would be the higher quality "exactly"
- is it also because it becomes too much work for you to make the ranking "alone"?
- what happens if the 4th person is loosing connection while war or even other reasons, for example mum says "clean ur room", kid "no", mum "NOW!", and wush, away ...
I have few more questions, but they are secondary.
- My arguments are:
- it will become harder to arrange wars for 4v4
- i will need more time to arrange wars for 4v4
- if the 4th lose his connection, the war was wasted time!?
- the chance to have 3 players for a war for new/small clans is higher than to have 4
- It is much easier to arrange a war with minimum 3v3, everybody has less worries
- Not wasting time = more gaming instead of discussin
Personally i like other ideas in this thread more. My personall favourite is
- After a fix ammount of wars a new clan will be "appear" in ranking, while the opponent will be ranked at once.
For u as it-pro (rena), that should be no problem.
@HQ u can remove ur avatar
Shout 23:26:53
: We are saddened to report that a recent fire has significantly impacted our beloved pizzeria. Thankfully, there were no injuries, but the damage means we will be temporarily closed as we embark on the journey to rebuild. For over a century, from Lou Santi
: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit. Voluptate cupiditate voluptatum ducimus modi repellendus repudiandae vero beatae explicabo placeat odio praesentium reprehenderit optio dolor, magnam ea suscipit neque libero. Veritatis, nisi? In i
: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit. Voluptate cupiditate voluptatum ducimus modi repellendus repudiandae vero beatae explicabo placeat odio praesentium reprehenderit optio dolor, magnam ea suscipit neque libero. Veritatis, nisi? In i
: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit. Voluptate cupiditate voluptatum ducimus modi repellendus repudiandae vero beatae explicabo placeat odio praesentium reprehenderit optio dolor, magnam ea suscipit neque libero. Veritatis, nisi? In i
: my new profile facebook name and photo my home and other informations https://www.fac... this is JIVA
: Steff, traitor. That’s a valid message
: Enter a valid Message
: Me, lol
: hello!
: I hope you had a good reason to be absent. Get well soon, my friend.
Who's online
There are currently 1 user and 6 guests online.
Let me see, why we then change rule and make 2 vs 2 as minimum, I don't see any problem with that, because clans can agree 5 vs5, or 4 vs 4, and if they haven't enough members they can play 3 vs 3, so if someone have bad connection then they can finish 2 vs 2, why not, that happened, I was witness of that. Or can be started as 2 vs 2, then in case of connection problems CW can finished as 1 vs 1
Maybe 1 vs 1 as minimum ? :roll: Then we will have 500 clans 
And in case that one have bad connection then one clan - man can win by WO 
BBSQUAD CLAN
- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die...