Team17 Experimental Cup

1 kamikaze would be a needed addition to the scheme.

Yeah. kami would be good !

Sticked to 16 players. Those who were excluded haven't played T17 in tus/trl or had the lowest rating.

GL HF

Group stage deadline is Sunday 2015-10-25 (2 weeks).

Group 4: host, sponsor, mafioso

This is unfair, I was looking forward to participate.

i'm famous

Quote from: Senator on October 08, 2015, 01:12 PM

Quote from: HHC on October 08, 2015, 11:34 AM
With so many handguns/bats/crap weaps in it's hardly possible to do any serious harm before SD. And with the low TUS scores on SD weaps.. it's likely you end up with many drawn games. 
I can see this only working with more time on the clock tbh.

That's what I said about Chicken23's scheme

Quote from: Senator on February 16, 2015, 01:45 PM
I guess there is a reason for the current crate probabilities. In your scheme probability for powerful non-SD weapons is lower so it's more difficult to kill the opponent with non-SD weapons. That means games will be more often SD weapon battles than before, or?

Wasn't water rise also slower when all weapons had the same probability? You had then more time to kill the opponent with non-SD weapons than in TUS scheme.

I think the greater number of shitty weapons doesn't affect that much after all. But we'll see about that

How many early kills do u see with the TUS "boom boom" scheme anyway? A worm gets attacked once by a big bomb and then it's moved to a cover. No TUS game ends before SD and usually u have at least 3 worms left heading to SD.

I disagree and believe the scheme to be the best edit so far after the global acceptance that old t17 channel and FB schemes (of all equal chances with couple of edits) creates too many sd weapons.

This goes back to original t17 schemes but with some slight changes to the sd weapons. You still get plenty of powerful weapons to make damage to a worm for more than 60+, but you also have to learn to deal with the cr8 of getting the shitty weapons.

tus t17 is the worst t17 scheme in the history of wa.

So in other words, I am not deemed worthy to participate in this cup because I have no official rating?  Because I when I first signed up for this cup I failed to see a minimum requirement to partake. Besides I was way before 16 too.

I'm just a player of this community along with those who got removed, that only wanted to play. Where is the equality in all of this, Senator? Why couldn't the rest play? Because we lacked points and status?

The groups that are paired are obviously paired by clans and it feels very bias.

Quote from: Kradie on October 11, 2015, 08:06 PM
So in other words, I am not deemed worthy to participate in this cup because I have no official rating?  Because I when I first signed up for this cup I failed to see a minimum requirement to partake. Besides I was way before 16 too.

I'm just a player of this community along with those who got removed, that only wanted to play. Where is the equality in all of this, Senator? Why couldn't the rest play? Because we lacked points and status?

The groups that are paired are obviously paired by clans and it feels very bias.

I wanted 4 players groups (16 players) and we got 19 players so I had to cut off some players. This is "experimental cup" so I wanted players who have a lot of experience of T17 to participate, that's why it was appropriate to choose players based on T17 experience/rating. This is just one cup among others.. you have chance to participate in many upcoming cups

If the groups were paired by clans, then Sbaffo, Free and Chelsea should be in the same group, right? Afaik I clicked pair by totally random

Quote from: Senator on October 11, 2015, 08:52 PM

Quote from: Kradie on October 11, 2015, 08:06 PM
So in other words, I am not deemed worthy to participate in this cup because I have no official rating?  Because I when I first signed up for this cup I failed to see a minimum requirement to partake. Besides I was way before 16 too.

I'm just a player of this community along with those who got removed, that only wanted to play. Where is the equality in all of this, Senator? Why couldn't the rest play? Because we lacked points and status?

The groups that are paired are obviously paired by clans and it feels very bias.

I wanted 4 players groups (16 players) and we got 19 players so I had to cut off some players. This is "experimental cup" so I wanted players who have a lot of experience of T17 to participate, that's why it was appropriate to choose players based on T17 experience/rating. This is just one cup among others.. you have chance to participate in many upcoming cups

If the groups were paired by clans, then Sbaffo, Free and Chelsea should be in the same group, right? Afaik I clicked pair by totally random

So I am not ''experienced'' because I am not ranked on tus? While I don't have my ranks documented here, I am experienced with Team17, and that is why I decided to sign up for this cup.

You say that this is ''Experimental cup'' and only ''experienced'' players may partake, why would a price be involved in an experiment?  Besides, look how you promote your cup ''T17 cup with a new scheme and $30 prize''

You could have left your desired cup details in the cup.  Instead of leading people on.
Or have it closed and then browse for players with ''Experience'' and invite them.

Senator, you could just have set the cup to auto-close at 16... It is not fair to pick and choose who plays in a public cup.

Really lame, dude.

Hey everyone in My group.. I can only play CUP games  07:00-12:00 GMT weeksdays &  00:00-13:00 GMT on weekends...

Please send me a time thats good for you within these hours and I will be there...

Does it mean i am experienced? Huehuehue

@Kradie

I had no idea how experienced u are. Tus stats are pretty much the only source out there and u hadn't any stats. That indicates u haven't played the tus scheme version much.

A prize is involved because obviously not many would be interested in pure scheme testing. At the same time I wanted a high level competition, which wouldn't be possible without a prize.

I thought about closed signups and at first I had "players will be chosen based on T17 ratings" written in the cup details. But then I realized we might not get enough players that way

@spleen17

Imo it's totally fine to have signups open for some days and then choose players based on objective measures (rating/played games). It would be stupid to just give the spots to those who surf on TUS sites several times per day. This arrangement indeed was fair because it gave everyone a chance, not just for the most active members. I could have selected players by random instead but obviously I didn't want to exclude the best t17 players.

del

Quote from: Senator on October 12, 2015, 07:55 AM

Imo it's totally fine to have signups open for some days and then choose players based on objective measures (rating/played games). It would be stupid to just give the spots to those who surf on TUS sites several times per day. This arrangement indeed was fair because it gave everyone a chance, not just for the most active members. I could have selected players by random instead but obviously I didn't want to exclude the best t17 players.

You didn;t have to exclude anyone, you could have just waited for 1 more and started with 20. You would still have got the feedback you wanted on the scheme.

It just seems like elitism. You are one of those who is always moaning about the drop in activity... how do you expect new players to start playing if they just get discarded from cups and such? It's a shame to see imo.