Scenario CWs

Here's my suggestion: let's have scenario CWs. But only on 2 teams scenarios, of course. Scenarios are fun, good for learning how to be teamplay guy, so why to not allow them in CW room?

Basically, two coalitions can agree in advance what side they will pick, but when game starts the guy who got 1st pick also decides who will get what team. After that, players from one coalition will be able to pick only one team.

Kirjoittanut opi, 28.02.2016 at 03:40

Go back to RP. Thanks in advance.

Kirjoittanut opi, 28.02.2016 at 03:40

I agree with this turk

Only on certain scenarios, though.

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

Mods would have to pick fair and balanced maps for it to work.

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

Tell me at least one balanced part of default map. Yes, none.

There are scenarios like WW1 and Endsieg (even though Endsieg is shitty) that have perfect imbalance, making players find the best way to counter a country that may be stronger than theirs.

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

There are plenty of balanced scenarios. Hell, even WW1 is balanced, even if it's autistic.

Kirjoittanut Guest, 28.02.2016 at 03:45

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

Tell me at least one balanced part of default map. Yes, none.

There are scenarios like WW1 and Endsieg (even though Endsieg is shitty) that have perfect imbalance, making players find the best way to counter a country that may be stronger than theirs.

3v3 well balanced till u have so many possibility what to do, for example at ww1 best CP against best Entente, entente win, so if you look at point best vs best it will be always unbalanced

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:48

Kirjoittanut Guest, 28.02.2016 at 03:45

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

Tell me at least one balanced part of default map. Yes, none.

There are scenarios like WW1 and Endsieg (even though Endsieg is shitty) that have perfect imbalance, making players find the best way to counter a country that may be stronger than theirs.

3v3 well balanced till u have so many possibility what to do, for example at ww1 best CP against best Entente, entente win, so if you look at point best vs best it will be always unbalanced

"at ww1 best CP against best Entente, entete win" Lolno. If anything it's the other way around.

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:48

Kirjoittanut Guest, 28.02.2016 at 03:45

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

Tell me at least one balanced part of default map. Yes, none.

There are scenarios like WW1 and Endsieg (even though Endsieg is shitty) that have perfect imbalance, making players find the best way to counter a country that may be stronger than theirs.

3v3 well balanced till u have so many possibility what to do, for example at ww1 best CP against best Entente, entente win, so if you look at point best vs best it will be always unbalanced

Nope, CP always wins by SP so if they hold long enough they will win no matter how pr0 Entente is.

Ok ok ok, im not such ww1 fag, but mostly when i play for entente we are winning

Ik balanced scenario! King of the hill!

Sounds great

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

ww2

Kirjoittanut Tirpitz406, 28.02.2016 at 05:19

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

ww2

lol gl with getting 20 online players

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 05:21

Kirjoittanut Tirpitz406, 28.02.2016 at 05:19

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

ww2

lol gl with getting 20 online players

well, there were two 10v10 cws before and ww2 cw's would give some scenario players a chance who suck at eu+

King of the hill CWs lets get it going!

I dont see why are people resilient towards scenario CWs, if you dont want to play them..............dont, simple as that.

After all you all have been bitching how CWs are dying out so here is a chance to fix that.

Start playing CWs on other maps... then talk about scenarios.

What about RP CWs

Kirjoittanut Kraigg, 28.02.2016 at 06:38

What about RP CWs

A secret perversion every competitive player has.

Kirjoittanut Kraigg, 28.02.2016 at 06:38

What about RP CWs

If we had them, opi would be his coalition's secret weapon.

And for others who talk trash about scenario CWs:
1. Put some arguments first and whine after.
2. Scenarios are mostly teamplay games, not like RP.
3. Just as there are people who want default map CWs and not others, there are people who want other maps and scenarios and not default map instead. It's all about player's preferrence and unless you don't have really strong arguments, don't insult the other part of community.

Kirjoittanut Guest, 28.02.2016 at 03:45

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:43

Tell me atleast one balanced scenario

Tell me at least one balanced part of default map. Yes, none.

Oh no! njab you've just summon the "Europe is the most balanced map on atWar" guy!

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:48

3v3 well balanced

CW we get Turk-Ukr, or UKR-UK-Germ combo.

balanced huh?

Anyway, trying to control whenever a scenario is balanced or not is as useless as checking it for custom maps. We're able to play any custom map CW regardless of balance, why should scenarios be restricted?

As clovis said, i dont see why there should be a "filter" on what scenarios you could CW on, even if its an unbalanced scenario it still takes both of the coalitions to agree to play on it ffs, if you think its unbalanced then simply dont play it.

Wait wait I meant RP duels

Edit: sorry I m just trolling njab, my favourite hobby when I can connect only from my phone...

Kirjoittanut Buffalo Soldier, 28.02.2016 at 03:57

Ik balanced scenario! King of the hill!

my elo agrees

Kirjoittanut clovis1122, 28.02.2016 at 07:11

CW we get Turk-Ukr, or UKR-UK-Germ combo.

the picking order(theoretically) prevents those combos. I say theoretically, most ppl just dont pick them.

i think scenario cws should be an option but... ww1 or 2 cw is unlikely to happen anytime soon. theres been 1 10 v 10 cw in the history of aw. even 5v5s are rare. Most scenarios are either too big or require too many players. Cws on them will be super rare unless suddenly there are more clans and players.

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 28.02.2016 at 09:56

i think scenario cws should be an option but... ww1 or 2 cw is unlikely to happen anytime soon. theres been 1 10 v 10 cw in the history of aw.

Ultimate WW2 requires 19 players.
The War to end all Wars requires 11 players.
Endsieg requires 8 players.

As you can see not all of them requires 20 players

Also, SM's 500th anniversary isn't the only 10vs10 CW in atWar history. I remember evoL doing the same.