How about it? We could have 4 players from 5 clans on the Dragon Lakes map!

This time, we have to have the players lined up before we start, so we have equal numbers of players.

Let''s huddle up with our clanmates and figure out who wants to play, which clans get to play, etc.

Sounds great Moggy!

WARLORDS are definitely interested if you go 1T/day. Maybe, if you go 2T/day.
Regards,
H.

These are so great I see no reason make it more than one turn a day, nobody gets left out. Plus, I can make it with a long inactive time too.

D~S may be interested. The question is, "what clans will team up with what clans"?

Silly question, Lord HOSA. We''re Dog Soldiers - EVERYBODY hates us!

COC... D~S... WARLORDS...

That left 1 more... Hmm...

BOS then

Maybe instead of clans, we could makes it a 10 VS 10 player game without any clan affilation...

Something like North Vs South or Red Vs Blue (Everyone choose a colour or we can designate 2 leader to choose player between a list of names. It will be a more balanced fight this way )

First come first serve basis with 20 names...
Then we chooose 2 leader out of the list of names. and those 2 will in turns pick names off the list until everyone is picked. Everyone on the same team pick the same colour to avoid confusion. It will gives a more balanced player base in each team if we go this way. What do ya think? Just my 2 cents to add to the excitement!


At least we get to mix around and anyone who is active also gets to play

Last Edited : Wednesday, 4 July 2007 - 05:55

I like Lons idea.. 10 V 10, 2 captains that pick their 9 remaining players from a list..

I''m IN !

Sadly, the great CoC can''t even field 5 players, so I don''t think you can count us in...well, maybe we''ll have to huddle up and see what our greatness can do. It would be a great tragedy for us to not defend our greatness in a true 4 clan battle.

Nebugreatnezer

I like Lons idea too. Everyone can play that way, even CoC!

I would play if the turn time is 1 per day.

10 vs 10 would be preferable, though I''d play either.

yes I think Lons idea is great Tho id prefer to see a N vs S battle over picking teams. Unless req could set the starting places for us so the teams were in N and S after we picked them?

I like the North South idea a lot. We get a nuetral party (Req) to put the names of all the clans in a hat and draw them to see who''s North and South.

You mean names of all players...and if it''s North vs. South, you can''t put the names of players in a hat and pick sides. The `hat`, as it were, is actually the playing field. 10 on top vs. the 10 on the bottom. The only tricky part is making sure everyone knows where the boundaries are, so that someone on the South doesn''t think he''s playing for the North.

i think the problem with a N vs S in a 20 player game is that 5 players from each side would never have time to get into the war before it was already decided. The 20 player map is a BIG map. I think the 10 or 12 player map would be better for a N vs S.

Alternatively, you could pick teams, as had been mentioned, in a 20 player map and then everyone would have action early.

I think I''d like to be involved in this, whichever way it turns out if possible

I think the N vs S ideally should be a 12 player map...

For 20 player map.. I think we should pick names instead... So we can all start randomly... and have a havoc trying to create safe zone... I think it will be pretty busy from turn 1 onwards

How about it? Two leader picking from a list of 20 willing player and all choose the same colour on the same team and we slug it out? Only thing is, we want active player which can stick till the end of the whole game. No going inactive half-way... That the commitment you have to give if you want in...

If it''s ok then let us begin with it. Any dis-agreement then state it here b4 it began
First come first serve basis...
1) Lons

I originally suggested 5 four player teams, not 4 five player teams.

I agree with Biscuit that N vs S isn''t a workable game. Also, too many people are just going to be support to the firing line guys, not much fun.

As for commitment, I suggest a huge penalty for anyone going inactive for any reason whatsoever, like being dropped from the clan they are in. If you can''t play consistently you have no place in a clan game and I am sick of seeing good games go to hell because of a vacation someone should have known about long in advance. Even getting sick is just too bad. You either commit or you suffer, is my opinion. We can have a long inactive period in case your relatives show up unexpectedly or whatever, but more than two or three days and you have let your clan down disasterously anyway.

I''d prefer this be something to do with actual clans, otherwise let''s just start a new thread (not in clan forums) about variant game styles like picking players from a hat.

My opinion is to have a 20 player game, 5 clans with 4 members each, randomly situated on the Dragon Lakes map and best clan wins! Since the game would be more even than the last try, I''d suggest no alliances, no deals, no ganging, just each clan doing the best it can with what it gets dealt. In other words, not a political game, a war game. No NAP''s. If they aren''t in your clan, they die, or you do.

LOL...

Sorry for hijacking your threads... I think we should move the picking player from the hat thingy to another thread... This is after all a clan game forum

I like the idea...there are 4 of coc allready, Mog, Neb, ^ector and me, it will be a vicious battle. Other teams?