Forum

Quoted from DeNeusbeer

I think the “no players from above division 6” rule should just be dropped entirely.

it will be just another 6+3 vs 6+3 pro play than. no way.

Good to see more support for this. The admins need to have reasons to support it. ;)

Since my post from earlier, TWL HL is basically a dead ladder. UGC…we’ll have to wait and see, however, they historically have not advertised to any degree. Most certainly they should cherry pick on ETF2L hype. Who wouldn’t?

For ETF2L specifically, the EU playerbase is obvious to support such a format, in whatever div makeup, etc. Make it happen.

The NA people need some place with a system already. Again, citing the maturity of the playerbase now (e.g., much more likely for 9v9 teams to stay together after this experience. So to ETF2L, please consider working in the Yanks.

I have put out a feeler over on Steam to gauge NA ppl. This mostly because of the 100s of threads that came from ppl to build teams for the ETF2L Challenge.

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1570213

CommFT is looking to take up the charge, but as some that are following the NA 6v6 scene, there is this bickering of MGE/NATF2L/other hosts.

Let’s keep the Steam rolling for the low/new ppl. It’s not a problem for those used to doing comp, as those should be ambassadors anyway!

Quoted from Scatterbrain

I wouldn’t be so sure if a 7vs7 was put up in instead, because – and i think that this is the case for alot of teams – we would have to drop two players. i don’t want to be the one to tell two people in my team that we don’t need them anymore.

In 7v7 you still use all 9 classes, but you’ll have 2 players sitting out specific maps because it’s better having someone else play their class. So you don’t have to kick any players, just have them sit out sometimes.

Your point is valid, but it only affects a small fraction of teams, i.e. the teams that fulfill the following criteria:
– The team has already been created.
– The roster has ~9 players willing and able to play most matches.
– All of these players would prefer playing on their current team.

When these criteria are fulfilled, the extra players would have to find new teams if they’re not satisfied with being bench warmers. ;)

In any case, if we want a more sustainable system, we have to think a bit ahead and basically ignore this argument. ^^

I also think that several of the ‘advantages’ of a 7vs7 (easier to organise, more tactical depth etc) are moot, but that’s another story.

Please, do elaborate, rather sooner than later ;)

what seems more of a concern is a point that someone has already brought up – the manner in which such a league would be divided up, and how accomodating it would be of players moving up in the 6vs6 league. the rules atm are:

[…]

the question is, does this need tweaked and/or updated if a new league is to be put in place? if so, how?

so far in this tournament, the admins (credit to ’em) have come up with good ideas, and tricky questions like this have gone answered, so i don’t think it’s unreasonable to hope that it’s a problem that will be dealt with and that contingincies will be made for teams with players that have progressed from div6 to div5/4.
personally, i think there might end up being two/three seperate groups; one to cater for div5+ highlander teams (if there is demand for that, they may just carry on with 6vs6), one to cater for ‘standard’ highlander teams that follow the +1 buddy rule and possibly another for teams that finished in, say, the top 256/128/64 of the current league. that sounds a bit messy, but that’s just a vague idea of how it might be dealt with until the highlander scene is so established that it can just run in its own right, separate from the demands and pressures of 6vs6. if it’s given support then i can really see that happening – highlander is a whole different ball game, and i can imagine that, with time, the top teams of 6vs6 will look very different from the top teams of 9vs9. lower 9vs9 teams should, if you give the league enough time to develop, sort themselves out into lower divisions, and you end up with a system that looks very similair to 6vs6 anyway. it’s getting the transition between what we have now, and what that end result is, right.

*ramble over. maybe D:*

Why not just use about the same division system as in 6v6 (with the difference being that the highlander divisions being a bit imbalanced at start)?

EDIT: I got ninja’d 6 times.

Quoted from Skyride

Mjrnut, don’t take this the wrong way, just look at it from the etf2l admins perspective.

ETF2L is primarily a 6v6 league, the highlander league was a publicity stunt to pull more players into 6v6. Most of the admins aren’t really that interested in highlander playing highlander, so I doubt they’d really be interested in using huge amounts of their time to support a game that they don’t even play. :(

So add more admins from highlander!

Quoted from Skyride

ETF2L is primarily a 6v6 league, the highlander league was a publicity stunt to pull more players into 6v6. Most of the admins aren’t really that interested in highlander playing highlander, so I doubt they’d really be interested in using huge amounts of their time to support a game that they don’t even play. :(

Hence them saying that the league would have to be separated in many ways from 6v6, and that a new team of highlander admins would be needed.

I know what you’re thinking, but honestly despite there probably being 6x as many highlander teams as there is 6v6 teams, the level of dedication just isn’t comparable.

I don’t know what other people’s estimations are, but personally, I’d be glad if the first season has ~30 European teams play all of their matches (which is more than Wireplay has now).

You are coming to league – a community – and asking them to support your entirely different game for no reason other than you think it’d be really cool.

Sure. He’s saying that he’d play in such a league, just like at least hundreds of others would. That’s call “demand”. As with a lot of other things, it might be in the best interest of ETF2L to “supply”.

Quoted from yu

[…]

I’ve read it. No ‘pro’ players in highlander – it will ruin hole thing.

True. Just like how ‘pro’ players have completely ruined 6v6 -_-

Quoted from CanFo

Keep in mind that an extra league would need at least 6-7 admins to run it.
If we find these 6 people, I would be up to give it a try :>

pfft, 6 people :P
Getting 6 people won’t be a problem, but sure, keeping them is another story.

Quoted from MjrNuT

^cookies for payment?

I’ve got 24 crates, one of them might contain a cookie ;)