Page 1 of 1
HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:20 pm
by Natewolfman
just wondering, but what would qualify as a "Large Team" tournament?
Just wondering if my Foundry Update Special fits that bill.
1/2 players on cairnswk side, 1/2 players on WidowMakers Side, but they only play members of the opposite team, and when the sides are uneven (do to one side winning more games) players get by's so they will never play eachother until one side is completely whipped out.
Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:52 pm
by Gilligan
I think it does. As long as there's a 'large team'.
I was curious though if it would still be considered a large team if only one person wins.
Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 5:18 pm
by Natewolfman
Gilligan wrote:I think it does. As long as there's a 'large team'.
I was curious though if it would still be considered a large team if only one person wins.
I duno, its kind of a grey area... like, the conquerer of conquer club tournament, 5 player teams play togeather in quads, doubles, triples, singles, but at the end when a group is found winner, they play eachother to find the true winner, but im sure that would be large team
Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 5:18 pm
by Gilligan
Natewolfman wrote:Gilligan wrote:I think it does. As long as there's a 'large team'.
I was curious though if it would still be considered a large team if only one person wins.
I duno, its kind of a grey area... like, the conquerer of conquer club tournament, 5 player teams play togeather in quads, doubles, triples, singles, but at the end when a group is found winner, they play eachother to find the true winner, but im sure that would be large team
That's what went through my mind last night in the update.
Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:11 pm
by Night Strike
I moved this here b/c of gilligan's slip-up comment in the post above this.
Anywho, Nate, I think that 5 person team one would count as Large Team.
Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:12 pm
by Gilligan
Slip-Up? That part was confidential?

Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:28 pm
by Natewolfman
Gilligan wrote:Slip-Up? That part was confidential?

i would guess until they announce us, aye?
though that may not be so bad since its general knowledge that gilligan was helping with HoF before this was done with us
Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:35 pm
by Night Strike
Technically, all the public knows is that Gilligan added the URLs for OP. I'm going to try to put together an announcement within the week.
Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:04 pm
by Natewolfman
Night Strike wrote:Technically, all the public knows is that Gilligan added the URLs for OP. I'm going to try to put together an announcement within the week.
cool, thanks NS, I know we are causeing some more work then helping at this moment

but some time and we will pick it up and the three of us (gozar, gilligan and myself) will be a well oiled machine

Re: HoF clarification
Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:55 am
by Gilligan
Natewolfman wrote:Night Strike wrote:Technically, all the public knows is that Gilligan added the URLs for OP. I'm going to try to put together an announcement within the week.
cool, thanks NS, I know we are causeing some more work then helping at this moment

but some time and we will pick it up and the three of us (gozar, gilligan and myself) will be a well oiled machine

Got that right!
