Such a shame
Thanks for the cup, sir!

Basically, yes Clanners are an agreement between 2 clans and the agreement should not change halfway through

Komo, I again suggest you stop using examples to make your point

Whether you have a problem with CF or not, it certainly LOOKS like you are. People would probably be less off-topic if you didn't use an example and just posted the general problem. Now it just turns into another CF thread, which is such a waste, because you do have a point to make that doesn't involve CF specifically.

It looks like you missed my question at the end, so I'll just repeat it
What exactly are you proposing is to be done about this?

Sorry.

No, I think you should agree on schemes before the games start.
If you're starting the first game while the second game isn't picked yet, then if the first game is your pick, I think you're agreeing they get to pick their scheme after the first game.

But for the reasons pointed out by avirex, I think both schemes should be agreed on before the games are actually played.

Quote from: avirex on September 11, 2010, 10:38 AM
what i said is, if i pick a scheme that the other guy was GOING to pick... he then has the upper hand to pick his next strongest/favorite scheme... which could be my least strongest/favorite scheme...

What I said is the consequence of what you said here If the other guy was going to pick roper and you were going to pick roper, what's wrong with playing 2 ropers?

Quote from: avirex on September 11, 2010, 10:38 AM
and chicken, trying to enforce the rule of "if they change pick i wont play second game" sound even lamer then my idea of a rule tbh sorry

Perhaps, but if clan A and clan B have an agreement on playing a roper and a RR beforehand (roper being clan A's pick) and clan B suddenly wants to change their pick after losing the roper, that means clan B is not holding themselves to their agreement. I think that's lame in itself.
If clan B all of a sudden wants to play BnG, I don't think clan A should be forced to play it, though of course, they shouldn't be prohibited to play it either.

But that's just my two cents for what it's worth.

First off a little side note: if you don't have anything against CF and don't want others to think you do, perhaps you should stop using them as examples, Komo I think it's a known issue in the league, so you didn't have to give any example, we know what you're talking about.

But what exactly are you proposing is to be done about this?

Don't put words into my mouth and don't try to read between the lines, because there's nothing there to read.
I think I posted quite clearly.

imo, you should agree on your picks before the first game starts and not change during/after the first game. But that's just saying what other posters here are saying already too
I don't think we need any rules about who has to say their first pick.
If you can't get to an agreement about what scheme to pick, then perhaps you shouldn't play at all?

I don't see anything in the rules about which schemes you need to pick, so I don't see why you couldn't play 2 ropers or 2 elites oslt (except in the playoffs, of course) and I don't exactly know what you're trying to say with your example, avirex.
You mean elite is an advantage for them over timetrial? Why don't you pick timetrial then if you care that much about having the advantage?

Quote from: avirex on September 10, 2010, 07:55 PM
most of you think that because the scheme is "old" that its right... so nothing will ever change...

I just love the irony in that statement As well as your previous post!

You know I asked you guys to arrange the games at least 10 times now, right?

We'll see what wormiverse does.

That's not how rating works, crash!

Quote from: Chicken23 on September 09, 2010, 05:40 PMbut the way we have made elite so 'chess' like as HHC says has taken some fun out of it.

I resent that! Chess can be awesome if you're playing all or nothing

Why do I have to kick people out of cups before I get responses?
Seriously, it takes 1 minute to let me know what's going on...

Your last post was from July. I posted about deadlines about 3 weeks ago (in August) and sent you a PM, warning you to arrange the games.
You haven't posted since.
A few days before the deadline, I sent you a PM and in that PM, I linked you to this thread.

Quote from: DarkOne on August 30, 2010, 06:51 PM
Decisions for the group as they stand now:
Group 2: You guys are all active! And yet, you're not getting the games done... I don't think I can let any of you to the next round if you don't play or arrange games.

If you still manage to find one of your remaining opponents to play and win, I'll ask MI to turn back the decision.
You'll have to do it quickly, though. If Kayz and Joschi have played before you have, I'm not going to ask him to do it anymore.
It's in your hands!

To answer your second question: see the quote above.

Quote from: DarkOne on August 30, 2010, 06:51 PM
Decisions for the group as they stand now:
Group 1: OREL has been kicked out of all cups (and he already voluntarily left this one), because he was slowing down lots of cups without ever arranging a game. Haksch is also terribly inaccessible. As it stands, Kayz and Phanton will go to the knockouts.

Well, as I already told Tade and fenrys, I don't mind if you guys play and these decisions need to be reverted.
I just want this cup to finish. If you guys can play eachother quickly, that would be great chuvash has been waiting for 2 months.

The same applies to Tenori and Free, *if* they hurry it up.

Quote from: ShyGuy on September 08, 2010, 09:20 PM
Also, I see Mad Cows as more crate luck... why should someone be able to launch 3 sheep-caliber weapons in one turn just because that player picked up a random crate?

This tells me you never played with that scheme. Otherwise you would've known the cows have less power.