I played my first CB under CG rule set the other day and was shocked when i realised how the actual battle took place. For example, the idea of one side defending until 13 in my idea is unfair. for example a team to win attacking on a map such as terminal where its near impossible to plant the bomb when the whole opposing team is camping outside the terminal waiting for you to run past. I just mean for the teams that started at the bottom of the s&d ladder are going to be faced with maps to attack on that are very one sided, however on the other hand teams such as sBd(not having a go at sBd because i love you milan and ngy) that started as number one and haven't won a game yet and are still in third, where as there are teams that have one 3 battles (AFS) and are still in 7th place.


I just feel that the old school method of CB's works a lot better, but i don't want to take anything away from the CG admins and all the people that went into organising such a well put together tournament.


Your buddy, Jews

Fair point, but i will explain as best i can.

Firstly, 1 team doesnt defend until they get 13 rounds.
Its best of 24 rounds, 1 team defends for 12 rounds, then they swap sides and attack for 12 rounds. You are both playing the same ammount of rounds, does the order they are played matter that much?

I'ts set that way so teams can get a rythm going, rather than swapping spawns every few rounds. Teams are also allowed a break inbetween to change classes and setup for their attacking/defending rounds.

Also, what system/rulesets are you comparing too?

@ the current ladder postitions: teams are still pretty much ranked in the order that they joined the ladder (which is brand new), so it will take a while for the teams to settle before we see a true indicator of good teams on the ladder.

i think the attacking/defending system is good. It is just extremely hard to attack on maps such as terminal

Agreed. Terminal is fairly hard to attack on. It comes down to who can post the bigger defence score. The rules are good, just some one sided maps, thats all.

if u can get 4-6 wins on attack on tht piece of shit map, then ur set up pretty well for defense...

but anyways you guys give 3 maps for them to pick, simply dnt put terminal there?????

derrr

very good point. lol

if u didnt want terminal why did u pick it as one of ur maps? and we defended 10 -2 . if you had of defended 10- 2 as well , it would have went into overtime .If u had of defended better than 10-2 you would have won .. the reality is we defended stronger than you guys did ( 4-3 ) and thats the end of it .. enough said.

we kind of new we were gonna lose at the last stage of that game.

i really agree with this its not just that im aFs* myself nd im feling hard done by its just doesnt seem reasonalble that a clan with 0 wins nd a loss is 4 places ahead of a clan with 3 wins nd no losses

omg, sum1 has to start in 1st :S

whats the ****in problem

i just find it a strange way of scoreing. i would have thought 1st place would have the most wins and second would be just off them and so on, so on

The system is tried and tested. Give it a bit more time and you wil see.

It Takes a lot of stratting to get maps such as terminal on lock while attacking, on the 360 ladder a lot of teams are now able to rush A effectively. So what im saying is the more you strat and scrim the easier attacking will become.

The reason that its not on wins is because lets say a great clan herd about this website halfway through season... then they would not make finals.... because they would need heaps of wins if you keep the current system then you can assure that any team can make the finals no matter if they start at the start of season or middle..

Well this is why you say ***** you* to CG and go play on fair ladders.

But, majority of 6A hate MW2 so don't bother looking for ladders there as likely the game will be dead after BFBC2 is released.