Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Rautainen_Biisoni

Rework for CB/Clan Brawls to make them interesting

41 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
226 posts
13,756 battles

I personally lost interest in CB years ago season 3 or 4. In short the CB gameplay is 4 hours of playing one ship, one line up, one tactic and one spot game after game. That is 16 hours a week for several weeks if u want to play it all the time. Very little changes happen. I can't really think of anything more boring. King of the seas tournament is so stale and boring that even some commentators yawn in boredom. This sure could use some refreshing.

 

Meta and min-maxing mentality of competitive drops 90% of ships out of the selection because they are just not good enough. Those ships we never get to play and never face in CB when it comes to top tier clans.

We had ships Hindenburg dominating early years and dropped instantly after nerf. Henry was used for one season, nerfed and dropped out. Kremlin was used when we had 2 BBs. That's gone. GK, Republik and Conqueror were a rare sight also.

Now in CV season its Stalingrads and Venezias only along with Haku. Maybe 1 DD which is often Halland because of AA. BB class is gone.

 

We have rarely if ever played "uncommon" line ups like:

2 x BB, 1 x CA, 4 x DD

3 x CA + 4 DD 

1 x BB + 3 x CA + 3 x DD

 

I sure would like to play short 1-2 week clan brawls where we are being forced to use different line ups rather than going down the old path of min maxing a mostly cruiser line up.

I'd like if WG forced us to use different ships and line ups. It would make games interesting if you can't put the same supercruisers like Stalingrad and radars such as Des Moines or spam 4 Venezias into the line up round after round.

Introduce a cooldown period for ships so clans would be forced to use 60-75% of the ships of the whole tier.

 

Imagine if a clan has to play 2 x BB, 1 x CA, 4 x DD line up but they have already all their DD killers like Klebers in "cooldown" and they are left with Yamato and Conqueror as BB. 

It would be real competitive in my eyes to see clans figure out how to max out "unwanted" ships in line ups they are not used to play.

 

Newer clans can easily be given rentals.

Start something like this in fun clan brawl and you could easily force weekly periods in real CB season where line ups change.

Other games have mods or gamemodes where you are given a random gun or a unit to play with and that is often hilarious.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
Players
2,946 posts
10,579 battles
25 minutes ago, Rautainen_Biisoni said:

Introduce a cooldown period for ships

You do realise that a large portion of cb players have just one or maybe two tier tens available? 

 

Although I agree with your statement that clanbattles have grown stale, I don't necessarily think these are the best options in fixing the problem. Imo clanbrawls scratched the surface of what is possible in a fun AND competitive gamemode. 

 

What made clanbrawls so fun was that:

 

- it took known maps and cut a certain part out of it to be used in a different mode such as epicenter. 

 

- different modes than domination

 

- different tiers than tier 10

 

- even when it was tier 10 it was different due to the aforementioned points

 

- short games, not waiting in kiting position for 7 minutes on enemies that never came, or being a radar bot next to an island for 20 minutes. 

31 minutes ago, Rautainen_Biisoni said:

I sure would like to play short 1-2 week clan brawls where we are being forced to use different line ups rather than going down the old path of min maxing a mostly cruiser line up

Hell yeah! 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,273 posts
11,668 battles
43 minutes ago, Rautainen_Biisoni said:

In short the CB gameplay is 4 hours of playing one ship, one line up, one tactic and one spot game after game.

 

Well, if you thought it was boring because of this back then, then you sure would "love" this season ^^

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[XTREM]
Players
2,054 posts
15,134 battles
12 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

I'd say next season 2Cvs and 5 submarines. :Smile_playing:

 

parksPC.gif.09acb87db69d004fcb83f342a45f9c27.gif

  • Funny 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,400 posts
9,841 battles

Clan Brawls are generally much more fun than CBs, but please not that 9x9 or 12x12 stupid BS, because we never get those players available. Also 4x4 T8 with CVs was BS too. T8 CVs *cough Enty cough* is way too strong in T8 only against 3 surface ships.

And would be nice if those clanbrawls wouldnt be on saturday always, which was often a problem for me in the past...

 

back to CBs:

Ive previously said, id be in favour of making a 1 ship limit, like you cant pick 4 venezias or Stalingrads, you can pick 1 of each. Its like the most boring crap you can imagine now, every game is literally the same.

I think that would be a better solution than to make a ship cooldown, because it would impact people with only few TX ships too much.

Also different set of rules would allow for different seasons, like you dont have to make every season the same. However, CVs are BS and need to go again, they made this the worst CB season EVER.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
6,747 posts
9,556 battles
3 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Clan Brawls are generally much more fun than CBs, but please not that 9x9 or 12x12 stupid BS, because we never get those players available. Also 4x4 T8 with CVs was BS too. T8 CVs *cough Enty cough* is way too strong in T8 only against 3 surface ships.

And would be nice if those clanbrawls wouldnt be on saturday always, which was often a problem for me in the past...

Agreed man. I really enjoyed the T7 though. 

 

3 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

back to CBs:

Ive previously said, id be in favour of making a 1 ship limit, like you cant pick 4 venezias or Stalingrads, you can pick 1 of each. Its like the most boring crap you can imagine now, every game is literally the same.

I think that would be a better solution than to make a ship cooldown, because it would impact people with only few TX ships too much.

Also different set of rules would allow for different seasons, like you dont have to make every season the same. However, CVs are BS and need to go again, they made this the worst CB season EVER.

My guess was a CV and 6 Stalins/Klebbies. Wasn't that far off. :Smile_trollface:

 

7 minutes ago, Miragetank90 said:

 

parksPC.gif.09acb87db69d004fcb83f342a45f9c27.gif

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RAIN]
Community Contributor
1,314 posts
17,499 battles

As @thisheepsuggested on the french forum, maybe a 2 ships limit per nation can be good for the CW.

For ewemple if you pick a Kremlin and a stalin you are not allow to pick a RU ship anymore.

So the teams will have to make a choice rather than spam 1 or 2 ships

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
1 hour ago, GarrusBrutus said:

- it took known maps and cut a certain part out of it to be used in a different mode such as epicenter. 

As long as it wasn't Two Brothers Epicenter. That felt just absolutely stupid, with the center being around that corner in the middle.

1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

Also 4x4 T8 with CVs was BS too. T8 CVs *cough Enty cough* is way too strong in T8 only against 3 surface ships.

4x4 T6 with CVs? Or T4? :Smile_trollface:

6 minutes ago, malimoo said:

As @thisheepsuggested on the french forum, maybe a 2 ships limit per nation can be good for the CW.

For ewemple if you pick a Kremlin and a stalin you are not allow to pick a RU ship anymore.

So the teams will have to make a choice rather than spam 1 or 2 ships

Not sure about this one. If we look past the current CV CB, usually you don't see monoteams aside from maybe memes like RU wall.

 

And most nations only have few choices, so if we take traditional format (7x7, max 1 BB), you'd see Kremlin, Moskva/Stalin, double Venezia, double DM, Shima or Smaland. That isn't exactly "novel", is it. Cuts down on Somers and Ohio usage, I guess. But most nations only have 1-2 ships that are "meta" anyway. Even with second BB, you'd likely just see a DM replaced by a second non-Kremlin BB (Thunderer? Ohio? Yamato? Bourgogne? All possiblle with the rule).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RAIN]
Players
3,029 posts
21,854 battles

Mali <3

 

Beyond the obvious issue of the CV presence in competitive, recent CBs seasons have shown their limits:

 

Summer 2019 Clan Battles: Spam of Kiev

Fall 2019 Clan Battles: Spam of Kleber

Winter 2019/2020: Still a few Kleber Spam

Spring 2020: Spam of Venezia or Stalin

 

 

I don't think WG will let the CV remain in competitive, I don't even want to debate or begin to explain how wrong it would be.

 

What they could easly do in the same time is add that ship limit in Clan Battles. This way, you avoid the meta breaker spam of one ship. You force the teams into interesting theory crafting: "If we pick Kremlin, then we have to chose between Smolensk and Stalin"

You also force the pick of less popular nations. With the renting ships and the amount of T10 currently in game, that's more than enough. 

 

Forbiding picking more than twice the same ship could also work.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ENUF_]
Beta Tester
318 posts
17,268 battles

I once proposed a Nation vs Nation game mode that could also be used for CBs. It would certainly mix things up:

 

On 6/12/2019 at 8:38 PM, Captn_Crap said:

I know I'm not the first one to propose Nation vs Nation battles. There are obvious reasons why it didn't work in Wot (I never played Wot so I don't know how they implemented it exactly). One problem is that nations are not balanced against each other but with the following system it might work:
 
- team battles (for example 7vs7)


- no fixed tier but a point system: For example 60 tier points which get split up among the team (tier 10 costs 10 points, tier 7 costs 7 points, etc.). Total points should increase/decrease depending on serverwide winrate of a nation to balance the nations automatically. 


- each ship only once


- no CVs (only 3 nations have a CV tree)


- possibly 1 BB max


- T6-T10


- 6 nations (US, UK, Germany, Russia, France, Japan)
 

Example of a Japanese and American team with 60 tier points: 
 

  Reveal hidden contentsReveal hidden contents Reveal hidden contents

Japan

- Musashi
- Zao
- Azuma
- Atago
- Mogami
- Kitakaze
- Shiratsuyu

US

- Worcester
- Missouri
- Alaska
- Black
- Kidd
- Baltimore
- Indianapolis


After 1 week of battles the winrate might look like this: US 54% and Japan 46%. If we decrease/increase the total points by 1 point per 2% increase/decrease in winrate the total points for each nation look like this: US 58 Points and Japan 62 Points.

Example of a Japanese and American team with 62/58 tier points:
 

  Reveal hidden contents

Japan (62 Points)

- Yamato
- Zao
- Azuma
- Atago
- Mogami
- Kitakaze
- Kagero

US (58 Points)

- Worcester 
- Missouri
- Alaska
- Black
- Baltimore
- Indianapolis
- Monaghan



At some point every nation should even out at around 50% WR while the system can react to meta changes accordingly.


 

 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
108 posts
1,054 battles
4 minutes ago, Captn_Crap said:

I once proposed a Nation vs Nation game mode that could also be used for CBs. It would certainly mix things up:

 

On 6/12/2019 at 7:38 PM, Captn_Crap said:

I know I'm not the first one to propose Nation vs Nation battles. There are obvious reasons why it didn't work in Wot (I never played Wot so I don't know how they implemented it exactly). One problem is that nations are not balanced against each other but with the following system it might work:
 
- team battles (for example 7vs7)


- no fixed tier but a point system: For example 60 tier points which get split up among the team (tier 10 costs 10 points, tier 7 costs 7 points, etc.). Total points should increase/decrease depending on serverwide winrate of a nation to balance the nations automatically. 


- each ship only once


- no CVs (only 3 nations have a CV tree)


- possibly 1 BB max


- T6-T10


- 6 nations (US, UK, Germany, Russia, France, Japan)
 

Example of a Japanese and American team with 60 tier points: 
 

  Hide contents

Japan

- Musashi
- Zao
- Azuma
- Atago
- Mogami
- Kitakaze
- Shiratsuyu

US

- Worcester
- Missouri
- Alaska
- Black
- Kidd
- Baltimore
- Indianapolis


After 1 week of battles the winrate might look like this: US 54% and Japan 46%. If we decrease/increase the total points by 1 point per 2% increase/decrease in winrate the total points for each nation look like this: US 58 Points and Japan 62 Points.

Example of a Japanese and American team with 62/58 tier points:
 

  Hide contents

Japan (62 Points)

- Yamato
- Zao
- Azuma
- Atago
- Mogami
- Kitakaze
- Kagero

US (58 Points)

- Worcester 
- Missouri
- Alaska
- Black
- Baltimore
- Indianapolis
- Monaghan



At some point every nation should even out at around 50% WR while the system can react to meta changes accordingly.


 

 

 

I've never played clan battles but that does sound like a nice idea, with the points system I guess it could partially sort out the "issue" of everyone spamming Venezias and Stalingrads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts

Gameplay will be stale as long as the 3rd party spotting exists. No lineup changes will change this.

 

Sitting behind islands (or in smoke), spamming HE, is a winning strategy. Trying to make a play a liability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
226 posts
13,756 battles
6 hours ago, GarrusBrutus said:

You do realise that a large portion of cb players have just one or maybe two tier tens available? 

I do realize. I mention rentals in the end. All ships, no problems. We shouldn't hinder the fun because many have not researched every ship :cap_win:

5 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

back to CBs:

Ive previously said, id be in favour of making a 1 ship limit, like you cant pick 4 venezias or Stalingrads, you can pick 1 of each. Its like the most boring crap you can imagine now, every game is literally the same.

I think that would be a better solution than to make a ship cooldown, because it would impact people with only few TX ships too much.

Also different set of rules would allow for different seasons, like you dont have to make every season the same. However, CVs are BS and need to go again, they made this the worst CB season EVER.

Rentals baby! I honestly don't care what mechanic is used if we are just forced to use most of the ships in the whole tier.

 

One method would be to force clans fleet commanders to pick 4 line ups before the battles start. They would have to select ships that go into those line ups and you can't spam the best ships but you would have to spread out the best ships and radars to all the line ups. Or spend them all into one while making other line ups much weaker. After 4 battles the line ups would reset and commanders select ships again.

If you are forced to play a DD heavy line up with only 1 cruiser you will soon run out of daka daka DDs and tanky radar ships. Tactics would have to be adjusted. 

We then get to see most of ships in the game and unusual meta would appear.

50 minutes ago, Captn_Crap said:

I once proposed a Nation vs Nation game mode that could also be used for CBs. It would certainly mix things up.  I know I'm not the first one to propose Nation vs Nation battles. There are obvious reasons why it didn't work in Wot (I never played Wot so I don't know how they implemented it exactly). One problem is that nations are not balanced against each other but with the following system it might work:

Nations are not balanced but its balanced when everybody is forced to play the "weaker" nations. And if u win with a weaker nation it would put you ahead in score. :cap_like:

2 minutes ago, Olbax said:

Gameplay will be stale as long as the 3rd party spotting exists. No lineup changes will change this.

 

Sitting behind islands (or in smoke), spamming HE, is a winning strategy. Trying to make a play a liability.

Current spotting mechanism is the death of offense indeed but we cannot ask for the "impossible". Forcing clans to play with most ships and different line ups is easily doable.

 

Min-maxing and going for the best line ups is also the death of gameplay and fun. You can easily have competitive gameplay without them.

You could easily split a whole CB season to 2-4 sections where you force clans to play different line ups for a few weeks. Those who best adapt and plan would reign supreme. Sounds competitive to me.

Brawls is the best place to start tho. 16 hours a week of same ship, same line up, same tactic is what we have been doing for years now... well I stopped doing that long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CKBK]
Players
315 posts
13,714 battles

Clan brawls have become more fun than clan wars seasons as they are fresh every time and dont last too long. There are many good and bad ideas brought here my favorite being the limit on nation/ship picks.

 

Although I do know majority prefer t10 as clan battles I would like to see a tier 9 one with limit on ships and maybe a multi tiered clan wars. This game mode has so much potential to be creative and different but WG

seems to change 1 or 2 things each season and call it a day. 

 

Also agree on this being the most boring and worst season of all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
21 posts
8,600 battles

This may seem like a stupid idea for some. But why not a arms race with T9 clan battle season. 2BB max and 3 DD max in a 7/8 player lineup. Now hiding behind Islands wouldn't be the best tactic.

Maybe it would make CB less stale for once. I'm all for change for the next clan battles. Just Don't bring any more cv's in to it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
Players
2,946 posts
10,579 battles
37 minutes ago, Rautainen_Biisoni said:

I do realize. I mention rentals in the end. All ships, no problems. We shouldn't hinder the fun because many have not researched every ship

That would level the playing field. A very good plan if you ask me. Now some cannot participate because they do not have a Stalin/Venezia/Hakuryu... that is just dumb.

38 minutes ago, Rautainen_Biisoni said:

One method would be to force clans fleet commanders to pick 4 line ups before the battles start.

Or how about the players have to pick two or three ships and when you press 'battle' the matchmaker decides which of these ships you will play. So ship lineups would be random and every match would be different.

Then it is about who can think quick with the tools they're handed and not about perfecting this one strategy that works against most others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
550 posts
Vor 2 Stunden, Captn_Crap sagte:

I once proposed a Nation vs Nation game mode that could also be used for CBs. It would certainly mix things up:

 

 

This will not sit well with the 'two beer, a clan battle, two beer, a clan battle' crowd.

 

While I do enjoy the ideas presented here, complexity regarding team compositions has to be within somewhat reasonable levels. Alternatively have the 'advanced ruleset' apply to leagues higher than Storm only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
6,747 posts
9,556 battles
25 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Now some cannot participate because they do not have a Stalin/Venezia/Hakuryu... that is just dumb.

However, they way it is now, you can participate if you do not have those sure.

Granted you are cannonfodder but hey. Oh the happy happy joyjoy! :Smile_trollface:

ca1a1ed7-f491-4841-9561-a4562ec890bf.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,502 posts
18,075 battles
8 hours ago, Rautainen_Biisoni said:

I sure would like to play short 1-2 week clan brawls where we are being forced to use different line ups rather than going down the old path of min maxing a mostly cruiser line up.

I'd like if WG forced us to use different ships and line ups. It would make games interesting if you can't put the same supercruisers like Stalingrad and radars such as Des Moines or spam 4 Venezias into the line up round after round.

Introduce a cooldown period for ships so clans would be forced to use 60-75% of the ships of the whole tier.

 

Imagine if a clan has to play 2 x BB, 1 x CA, 4 x DD line up but they have already all their DD killers like Klebers in "cooldown" and they are left with Yamato and Conqueror as BB. 

It would be real competitive in my eyes to see clans figure out how to max out "unwanted" ships in line ups they are not used to play.

Mixed feelings. Personally I like the idea of specialized players for certain positions. It creates trust and respect within the team to know each player brings an individual feeling to the table.

If ships are on cooldown, that would promote a generalist approach. It would not solve the issue of dominant line-ups. If you force teams to take subpar line-ups, they will win battles where their line-up is superior and lose battles where they use inferior ships.

One could argue clans might take an even approach, taking a mix of good and bad ships in every battle to have the equal chance of winning in every battle. But then it's mostly a competition of line-ups, not players, much like the Ranked Sprint 10 - the duels.

I don't want to start a CB, see the enemy line-up and think "this is lost/won". I want a meta, where many ships are competitive and where it's the skills of the players that make a ship excel or disappoint, not the ship itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts

Gimmicky solutions are a stop-gap measure and usually end up biting in the [edited]at some point.

I'd still aim high and go for a spotting overhaul. To me it's the root cause for staleness. 

Previously I would have been hesitant for major changes as it completely alters the balance. Not anymore. It has pretty much been proven by now that ruining the game for entire ship lines is perfectly fine. Why not go one step further. At least the change would be a logical one.

Granted, I see two major flaws:
1. Player numbers would drop as paying attention to the minimap ads complexity. Some may even forget the art of breathing as there is a new skill to master.
2. Some old lines may become viable again. We cannot have that, now can we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
226 posts
13,756 battles
15 hours ago, HMS_Kilinowski said:

Mixed feelings. Personally I like the idea of specialized players for certain positions. It creates trust and respect within the team to know each player brings an individual feeling to the table.

If ships are on cooldown, that would promote a generalist approach. It would not solve the issue of dominant line-ups. If you force teams to take subpar line-ups, they will win battles where their line-up is superior and lose battles where they use inferior ships.

One could argue clans might take an even approach, taking a mix of good and bad ships in every battle to have the equal chance of winning in every battle. But then it's mostly a competition of line-ups, not players, much like the Ranked Sprint 10 - the duels.

I don't want to start a CB, see the enemy line-up and think "this is lost/won". I want a meta, where many ships are competitive and where it's the skills of the players that make a ship excel or disappoint, not the ship itself.

Experienced players can make most of the ships work and still be very deadly. Some ships just have better tools available. Its often "balanced" when everybody has the same problems.

WG tries to fit all the ships into random games and make them diverse and experienced players figure out quickly what ships can be used in competitive and what cannot. 90% of ships get discarded sadly.

The only way we could get more diverse gameplay, ships and line ups is with forcing through rules.

I doubt we would think about winning or losing the match at the start if all clans have to spread out their best ships to different matches and line ups would change from time to time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,502 posts
18,075 battles
1 hour ago, Rautainen_Biisoni said:

Experienced players can make most of the ships work and still be very deadly. Some ships just have better tools available. Its often "balanced" when everybody has the same problems.

WG tries to fit all the ships into random games and make them diverse and experienced players figure out quickly what ships can be used in competitive and what cannot. 90% of ships get discarded sadly.

The only way we could get more diverse gameplay, ships and line ups is with forcing through rules.

I doubt we would think about winning or losing the match at the start if all clans have to spread out their best ships to different matches and line ups would change from time to time. 

As you wrote, "experienced players" can make it work. I start to figure out a couple of things lately and I couldn't claim I figured out most ship. A lot of players know less than me. I assume they might struggle.

I am not even talking about @GarrusBrutuspoint that many players only have a limited number of ships. But now i must come back to that.

Even knowing what ships would be part of the meta beforehand, didn't mean all of our players had all the ships available. The game interferes. Suddenly Wargaming announced LMs are going into the NTC and people needed to grind certain lines before the LM-missions disappeared forever. Suddenly the Moskva is announced to become a special ship and people need to grind the Moskva to make sure they get it. And then the season starts and the supply of Venezias and Stalingrads is limited. So it happens that our FC wants two Stalingrad but of 6 players only 2 have one, one of them utterly disliking the ship. I am not talking about vanities. I am talking about line-ups that work.

 

What you have in mind requires a full team of players who (a) have available a broad selection of T10-ships and (b) are familiar with these ships, ideally maybe don't hate the ships you need them to play.

And that is only the player side.

I know the top clans work a bit differently. They don't need a lot of FCing (Originally I had written "They can FC themselves." but that read a bit wrong). Can you imagine the chaos of an average clan if you rotate ships? In my experience, even rotating one or two players, while still having the same line-up, can throw the chemistry of a team. Now imagine rotating ships on top of that.

It's already hard to find a capable FC, someone who can do the job and wants to do it. The FCs tend to burn out over a season. The stress, the focus of their mind is pretty tense. Even under the current set of rules, it takes a while to familiarize with your team, with their play. It takes even longer for your players to get where they are usually expected to go, to develop certain standard tactics, so the FC doesn't have to micro manage every player on every map. If you get all that in order, the FCs job starts getting easier and he can focus on what he is supposed to do, read the individual battle and figure out how to deploy his team.

Now if you make the team a ship salad, where players rotate and on top of that jump between ships and positions and you as an FC need to figure out within 30s of the loading screen, how your line-up fits the current map and opponent, that is imo far too much to ask from an FC. It's far too much to ask from an average player.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong. What do I know? Maybe this is a great idea. Maybe I lack vision or I am too negative. All I can say is, it sounds like chaos to me. The idea makes me uncomfortable and I have serious doubts this would raise the quality of play.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
6,747 posts
9,556 battles
16 minutes ago, HMS_Kilinowski said:

Can you imagine the chaos of an average clan if you rotate ships? In my experience, even rotating one or two players, while still having the same line-up, can throw the chemistry of a team. Now imagine rotating ships on top of that.

This is why you should have two teams. 

The Allstar team (AKA the All-Tzar-team) and the OP-Taterteam. :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,502 posts
18,075 battles
2 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

This is why you should have two teams. 

The Allstar team (AKA the All-Tzar-team) and the OP-Taterteam. :Smile_trollface:

 

It's not a matter of two teams, two paces. Most clans have rather homogenous distribution of skill. You can differentiate between players who commit many hours a week to CB and others who have more family obligations, but that's it.

And that doesn't change the need to rotate players. Some come home from work late, others are in a different time zone and need to go to sleep early. So even the All-Star team needs to rotate and it is not all that all-star on average clans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×