The Team League July signup

I want to play. And l'm without a team. I hope it's not too late? Does anyone need a player?

Hey KorrrD join us? send message to Haidang2014

we have 3 need 1 more

Hello,

Team:Japanese donuts with a hole

Alliance: Special Federation Platoon

Players:

paczek_z_dziurką

truban

Yamamoto

Cold Cuba, (leader)

Greetings,

Team: Маке it Easy

Players:

GoldPain

KorrrD

Rezalut

war-play (leader)

unpredictabl wrote:

Hey KorrrD join us? send message to Haidang2014

we have 3 need 1 more

I just need one more pick up for my team. PM me if you are looking.

A reminder for everyone who intends to play. Before you will be able to log into the match you MUST read and agree to abide by The Team League Rulebook, the Game Rules, and the Terms of Service.

I see a few signups that do not include a team name or an identified team leader.

The thread which contains the rulebook and also where you acknowledge and agree to abide by the rulebook, game rules, and terms of service can be found here: https://forum.callofwar.com/index.php?thread/27134-the-team-league-official-rulebook/

Yes

Alliance: United Assault Force

Team Name: UAFX Grim Reapers

Players:

1. The Federation (Team-Leader)
2. axgrinder
3. pigcutter28
4. AdriantheStrategist

WarzawL wrote:

I would like to sign up but I'm still forming my team .

Team name : Northern Lights HQ

1. WarzawL

2. Deathmaste

3. SFVeteran82

4. Spetsnaz_

At the moment I see 12 teams

To fit the plan of each team having an equal starting position without being too empty the 50 player map should have seven, eight, or nine teams

So if we can get 2 more teams to sign up we can do two maps, Otherwise we might have to put a few teams on a 22 player map as “overflow”

My plan at the minute is to allow signups for 12 more hours. Then I will decide how to divide up the teams and create the maps. I will force the maps to start in about 18 hours.

guys, I need 1-2 days, provide composition

guys, I need 1-2 days, provide composition

kir79 wrote:

guys, I need 1-2 days, provide composition

VorlonFCW wrote:

kir79 wrote:

guys, I need 1-2 days, provide composition

can you be ready in 24 hours?

I will try

Question on the Capital Rule...

It is a common enough technique to leave an AI country with one or two provinces so that they will rebuild a capital and you can take it a second or third time. How does this fit in your capital bonus plan... maybe you want to amend that you only get one credit bonus per country unless it is run by a player who builds a second capital and loses that one also.

I have a strong dislike for the lack of diplomacy in the game as there are strategic situations where it makes for superior play to have a peace deal with a neighbor. You may be running into the tacit understandings to circumvent your stated objective.

EZ Dolittle wrote:

Question on the Capital Rule...

Greetings Dolittle,

I want to point out that there is a thread for Rulebook Q & A located @(Click Here) where you can ask all the questions you would like. This thread is for signups and we would like to keep it clear of questions so we don't miss any requests to join the fun. Since the rulebook has already been published and distributed for this month I also want to make it clear that there can be no changes in the rules for any matches this month.

Having said that, the only interpretation of the rules as they read now would be ANY capital taken. Since there were no restrictions on it per the rules, you could theoretically take any number of capitals within the match. However, I would expect the MOD, who has full and final authority within the match, to have something to say about that. Especially if there is a potential for abuse as an exploit.

In this case, since there is no clear instruction on the limitations of capital sacking, the only recourse the MOD would have to remedy an imbalance would be to deny the claim of that nation & team. Thus there wouldn't be an infinite source of multipliers for any one team. That would open up an appeal if that team wanted to pursue one, since the MOD's authority in the case is ambiguous. It would thus land into the hands of the Council of Leaders (CoL) who would then vote to UPHOLD the appeal or DENY the appeal. If a 2/3 majority isn't reached by the team leaders in the CoL the MOD's original denial of the claim would hold.

Since the rest of the teams would have something to lose by agreeing to one or even a few teams milking AI's for the capital cap bonus, I doubt very seriously it would be thought of positively.

In the end there can only be one winner.

I would also suggest that this will be corrected by the time August's signup thread is posted.

team has been filled

1) grandpooba52

2) edepedable

3)Outkast1

4) Dude IDK

EZ Dolittle wrote:

I have a strong dislike for the lack of diplomacy in the game as there are strategic situations where it makes for superior play to have a peace deal with a neighbor.

EZ Dolittle wrote:

You may be running into the tacit understandings to circumvent your stated objective.

On the lack of diplomacy...

I would imagine that you aren't the only one, for I know of at least one participant in this process who also felt the same way. I will simply tell you what I told him: There are many more events coming, of that I guarantee you. One of them, if not more than one, will actively focus on diplomacy as the core to victory.

There will also likely be events that use a more standard "ad hoc" ruleset akin to what you experience every day in non-event Call of War rounds. I even believe we may see a version of the Player's League we all knew and loved brought back, although without the issues that led to it's demise.

The Team League is designed to foster intense and fluid gameplay that makes full use of the CoW tech tree and outstanding tactics and strategies each player will bring to the table, while doing so inside a gold free experience. It was designed from the ground up to remove diplomacy as an option in order to draw out the pure combat aspect of Call of War. In many ways it was thought of as AWC "lite" or an AWC practice grounds/intramural league.

This purist gold free experience is something I know is greatly desired by the players. Just the love of the game, the units, the tactics, the strategies.. dive into the moment of 1939 when each nation depended on the decisions of of it's leaders. Nothing to get in the way of the pure enjoyment of the game.

----------------------------------------------

As for tacit understandings...

I think you will find the Rulebook deals with that in a finite way. Any cooperation between teams, including NAPs, Right of Way, Share Map, or Share Intel would lead to an immediate disqualification. Certainly not worth the risk, especially with the double cross option in place.