Difference between revisions of "Talk:THE SPOON"
From Armagetron
m |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
pez | pez | ||
| − | * | + | * About the "spoon playoffs": |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | About the "spoon playoffs": | ||
# Spoon Players should nominate judges (for match rescheduling or something like that - in case "america to europe" pings are all 400+ or some other major problem. | # Spoon Players should nominate judges (for match rescheduling or something like that - in case "america to europe" pings are all 400+ or some other major problem. | ||
# A team with missing players can "give up" or choose to play with less players than the other team. | # A team with missing players can "give up" or choose to play with less players than the other team. | ||
| Line 31: | Line 12: | ||
:To prevent a player (e.g. "zop") from playing for multiple teams, just bind him to the first team he plays for - afterwards he is on that team. | :To prevent a player (e.g. "zop") from playing for multiple teams, just bind him to the first team he plays for - afterwards he is on that team. | ||
| − | + | --[[User:Joda|Joda]] 10:57, 20 April 2006 (CDT)[edit: removed New Team Discussion] | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
:I'd vote for the "second third option" since it makes more sense to me. --[[User:Wrtlprnft|Wrtlprnft]] 13:22, 18 April 2006 (CDT) | :I'd vote for the "second third option" since it makes more sense to me. --[[User:Wrtlprnft|Wrtlprnft]] 13:22, 18 April 2006 (CDT) | ||
| − | + | :Should we increase/decrease the number of minimum required players ? To 8 vs 8 for playoffs makes sense. --[[User:Joda|Joda]] 10:59, 20 April 2006 (CDT) | |
Latest revision as of 11:59, 20 April 2006
- no discussion yet?
anyway, i really looking forward to it and good luck all
pez
- About the "spoon playoffs":
- Spoon Players should nominate judges (for match rescheduling or something like that - in case "america to europe" pings are all 400+ or some other major problem.
- A team with missing players can "give up" or choose to play with less players than the other team.
- A team should only be allowed to use the players written on the playoff rooster.
- OR
- To prevent a player (e.g. "zop") from playing for multiple teams, just bind him to the first team he plays for - afterwards he is on that team.
--Joda 10:57, 20 April 2006 (CDT)[edit: removed New Team Discussion]
- I'd vote for the "second third option" since it makes more sense to me. --Wrtlprnft 13:22, 18 April 2006 (CDT)
- Should we increase/decrease the number of minimum required players ? To 8 vs 8 for playoffs makes sense. --Joda 10:59, 20 April 2006 (CDT)
