Multiplayer battles results

[AnkLrd]

Do you think 8 hour MP battles are too short to have a winner ? i mostly see 8 hour MP battles giving "no tac or str. winner designated" result. We must have longer ones maybe which would be another problem that people wont like to spend that many hours for a live battle or we ll have to settle for more draws than victories around ?

[Count von Csollich]

Do you think 8 hour MP battles are too short to have a winner ? i mostly see 8 hour MP battles giving "no tac or str. winner designated" result. We must have longer ones maybe which would be another problem that people wont like to spend that many hours for a live battle or we ll have to settle for more draws than victories around ?

two things:

1) I think/hope this will change rapidly as soon as different clans/clubs meet - IF the skills and tactics are different! - if not then it will certainly change as soon as new people join the teams - then the "old guard" will defeat them all swiftly....

2) I totally agree that a draw can be a little disappointing - had many with other games recently.....over some I was very happy as I didn't get squashed by an elite player - others I wasn't to happy as I knew I could have achieved more - I don't wanna start the historical side again - but not every battle was such a decisive victory as Austerlitz and Friedland...and always keep in mind that the reason for these victories was always a capital mistake on the other side - which in our case, if all players have the same level of experience and understanding, shouldn't make!

CvC

[AnkLrd]

talking to you give me an idea of rewarding also the people who spend their hours and get a draw result.
eh not much but 0.5 point for tac. & 0.5 point for str. league match draws  * thnks CvC  
http://nwg.freeforums.org/hwlg-cw-league-rules-t1231.html

[Gunner24]

LG is not an easy game to win, against real people, with equal forces, we should expect a lot of draws.  At the moment (generally speaking) people are playing very conserative, more to not lose than to win, once people get a little more "aggressive" that may change - they may win better, or they might lose badly - if things don't work out as planned.

Equal forces, equal skill level and the nature of the game = lots of draws, no problem for me.

More than 8 hour battles become a problem with "real time"....our 8 hour battles are played at 10/60 for a short while, then 15/60 for a short while, then 20/60 for most of the time......playing quicker, 6/60 and 10/60, tends to be a little too fast.

[AJ]

We could try some 10 hours at 15/60 instead of 8 hours at 20/60, just a trial

[Gunner24]

We could try some 10 hours at 15/60 instead of 8 hours at 20/60, just a trial

That could work, it would take 2.5 hours real time, which is ok, and it would help to get a clear winner, having said that I do think 8 hours is long enough, when everyone gets more used to fighting MP games. 

NBC could try this AJ, if we remember to change the battle duration first !!.

[AnkLrd]

the same day i started this topic we had a 2v3 (AJ & Ges v g24, NapLrd & Dougie) 8 hour Multiplayer battle on Xfire having a result of significant tactical victory and decisive strategic victory ... what a reply to my post