Should There Be Battles On Mother's Day?

[bazongaman502]

What would exactly be different from an aux battle and a normal battle. It's still 2 maps being played, but with limited soldiers? No matter what the results will be the same (one army loses a map while the other gains one)... there really is no difference except attendance. You are basically still doing a normal battle night anyways.

[Fuzzy]

I'm a big fan of Raz's idea. Not many people like the randomness that factors into the auxillary battles anyway, this way, if just for a week, we can decide it on the battlefield and postpone the real battle for a week.

No, just no.

Auxiliary battles are almost more important than the primary battles in today's rules of engagements, we would have to play on the actual maps that the auxiliary battles are being fought on which gives people very little notice.

That would also be messing with the system and a huge hindrance for BLUE as they had a 95% chance of winning their auxiliary battle but if you were to play on the map they would lose all there budget they spent on that auxiliary and have it be decided by a battle...

I am the Field Marshal of the army that would be getting a significant advantage in that idea and I am STILL highly against it. BLUE's auxiliary was on Guardian and they have a 95% of winning it, almost an instant win yet if we were to play on that map it would be favoured for REDD as we just played that map last week and REDD won it by a lot. I am not going to agree on something that breaks the system and fucks over the opposing army.

[RaZ Vader]

Let's give the people a battle that means something than. I guess playing the aux battles would break the system. But ~40+ people should play something that means something.

[Gargoyle]

I think we should just keep the battles going. We understand some people might not be able to make it. However, the poll shows that the majority can/will show up. And you know there's even more people that haven't voted.

We've delayed too many weeks in this war anyway, we need to consistently get this ball rolling.

[Zeta Crossfire]

It sucks not everyone can attend but those are the breaks. Lets just field everyone who can show up, not everyone can make it every week.

[VerbotenDonkey]

That would also be messing with the system and a huge hindrance for BLUE as they had a 95% chance of winning their auxiliary battle but if you were to play on the map they would lose all there budget they spent on that auxiliary and have it be decided by a battle...

I agree with what you're saying, but you do realize that this doesn't affect this weeks battles, right? xD This is for next weeks battles. But I do agree that since Aux battles are left to chance, they shouldn't not be played on.

I say we still do the battles, and if we don't get enough people then we just break it down into Customs or other Events. But we used to do battles with way less people than are even posting that they can show up, I think we'll be fine. People don't realize that we used to only get ~40 people on a GOOD day in FC years back haha. And I've talked to several people who are discouraged because of how many days we take off, it just doesn't feel like an active War when there are so many holes in the days between battles.

[bazongaman502]

Have a weekend where it actually means something? Have that Sunday where it is a custom game night where both armies wager their army credits. That brings a new twist and something we can do every weekend that we chose to postpone the battles. That way no one is missing something that involves a family holiday. It's a win-win for everyone and a chance to do something different.

[Maxdoggy]

Ideas are now stewing in the WC forums, ladies and gents. Hopefully we can figure out what will be going on by this weekend so y'all can notify your mothers on our plans. :P

[KazuhLLL]

We shouldn't think about the poll in the raw numbers: 25 people can't make it? Well that's not too bad, we should keep going.

Think about it in percentages. If we view this vote as being generally representative of the FC population (including non-forum browsers) then 25/61 voters voting against it is about ~41% of the population. Trying to host battles with that great a drop in attendance is going to be as Phoenix said: stressful. Even those voting to keep the battles will start complaining again when the wait times are 20-30 minutes between each match.

EDIT: I'll also point out that there's a few more BLUEs voting against it and slightly more REDDs voting for it. Not too significantly in either way, but REDD would probably end up with 1 or 2 more squads than BLUE. You might say, "That's BLUE's own damn fault. Sucks for them!"

To that, I should also point out that of the BLUEs voting to cancel it, not a single one has been a member of Legacy or Sparta. We've had complaints about over-playing "stacked" squads in the past, and I would prefer not to see any more of that talk in the future. :P

[Deaf]

Kazuhll is right about looking at it as though it is the representative of the entire population. I for one don't want to play a battle where Blue only can field 1/4 of REDD. Also on Kazuhll's thought, I don't want to play an understrength army. I like playing teams at their very best. And Zeta, you're being incredibly rude.