Forum

I don’t see why a team would take a risk in US style over EU style. US seems far more…committed in a sense.

You go all out, it’s either smash them or get smashed. In US, you drop a round and that’s that. It’s a black mark against you and you only have an allowance of a further 4 rounds.

EU? Drop a round, but if you can do it properly next round and take it, you’ve just “negated” the bad round you’ve had.

I think i’ve had games where we’ve gone 4-0 down to end up winning 6-5 and such. It doesn’t happen that often but it can happen. The lobby system tends to use first to 5, which tends to piss me off because there’s been some games that has been really tight going 2-3, 3-3, 4-3 etc. and with plenty of time left but then suddenly it hits 5-4 and it’s over. Meh.

As I said before, kind of indifferent but both have their flaws and it’s a lot of effort. Happy to try though. I agree with the mentality thing really. I notice it more from players i’ve played with – those from prem are ‘impatient’ somewhat (I use the term loosely), those right at the bottom take too long because they think they have to wait for ubers or blah blah, and then there’s a mix in between.

I’m a relatively reserved and defensive player, a safety player I guess. I wouldn’t want to just chuck away rounds under the US ruleset. I don’t mind dropping a couple at the start right now because if you start to pull it back then you have every chance of being able to continue that.

I think it’s all in the mindset as people are saying though, and it will take a lot more time to break that, even with a new ruleset.

Quoted from Nymthae

You go all out, it’s either smash them or get smashed. In US, you drop a round and that’s that. It’s a black mark against you and you only have an allowance of a further 4 rounds.

EU? Drop a round, but if you can do it properly next round and take it, you’ve just “negated” the bad round you’ve had.

I have a feeling that this is exactly the reason TF2 feels like a turtle game at times – you don’t want to let your opponent negate the bad round they’ve just had. On the other hand, winlimit makes it so that the round difference doesn’t matter, it’s a race towards five round wins for both the teams and at any point during the game they are on the same field when it comes to their goals.

You may get rid of maps that are decided early, but you also lose moments a la i40 final. tied games where it’s a race against the clock are pretty intense.

Another thing to consider, is do you want to play a single map against your opponents in the league, or play two maps?

It would be nearly impossible to run the US system, and play two maps in a night. I think with the US system, a lot of prem teams especially would complain about the weeks they have scheduled against certain opponents.

Say, Broder’s best map is Granary, and BFF get their Granary week scheduled against broder. If the game was scheduled another week, the scoreline might be a lot different.

It still happens with the current system, but at least there’s a second map that you could overcome your opponents from, rather than just lose to your main league rivals on their best map, with no recovery option.

– Also, not every game needs to be a nail biter. You need some boring games to make the ones that are really close, feed much more special and intense.

EU rules cause more comebacks then NA rules

There was 1479 maps played this season (Season 14). There are only 12 maps in this entire season that would possibly resulted differently if we had NA rules instead of EU rules. That’s less than 1%. Even some games of which; the winning team would have won anyways.

http://etf2l.org/matches/38681/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/38683/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/39689/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/39080/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/38882/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/39164/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/38692/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/39380/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/39235/ <- Unknown first to 5 team
http://etf2l.org/matches/40385/ <- Would have won still under NA rules
http://etf2l.org/matches/38537/ <- Would have won still under NA rules
http://etf2l.org/matches/40371/ <- Would have won still under NA rules

If anything, the reverse would be more likely be true if you think about all those good games/comebacks that had to stop because of the time limit.

Stop bringing this point up in defence of EU rules.

Quoted from Henghast

[…]

If we do it that way considering the difficulty of organising games would’nt you expect that we’d end up effectively extending the season by a huge margin.

Yeah I imagine there’s probably going to end up being more overflowing games like that. I’m guessing just a couple of extra weeks will knock out the running of 3 seasons a year? I’d prefer to keep 3 seasons under current rules rather than doing 2 under a new rule set, I think.

We could adopt the 8 weeks and 8 maps system, but that means we’re missing 3 maps. 5 maps means 5 weeks, and that’s a short season :(