regarding the (originally posted) rules, i have 2 general PROBLEMs:
- the reasoning behind some rules is WRONG (however, some rules could be saved by fixing the reasoning).
- the rules r not serious enough.
thus, at the time of this writing, the rules r improper. also, the thread is titled „procedure & etiquette”, even though it has nothing to do with procedures and etiquettes.
<insert_clan_here>: let it be known: we will refuse to scrim not following our rules, and will reference our rule thread anytime necessary. also, anyone refusing to scrim by our rules is a pussy.
(i'm assuming that u're using some weird-ass format of wins–losses–draws (instead of wins–draws–losses), and i'll use that as well).
first, let's not fall into the dichotomy of win/loss or draw. detailed scores contain more information than an extracted judgement. thus, a 1–0–1 should be recorded as a [...] 1–0–1 (well, the full replay yields even more information, but it's not systematic).
second, if a series has already practically begun, then there is no turning back: a final score should be recorded. eg., if (in the 1st match) humans somewhat recognized that it's more likely that the aliens have skipped / started moving the base in the first few seconds of the game by hearing / not hearing a dretch jump 10 seconds into the match — a significant tipping point, at least for hardcore games —, then the series has begun. if some matches were disrupted due to some externality (eg., the game server crashed during the series, or a meteor hit some relevant network lines), then that should be noted as well.
with the said proper recording of detailed information, no special „tiebraker” is necessary.
due to the asymmetry of the game, there should be no such things as odd „rounds” (ie., „3rd”, „5th”), only pairs of rounds.
nonsense, as i've explained. a 1–0–1 may not not be a proper victory, but it is definitely better than a 1–0–1 or 0–0–2.
no, it slows things down — compared to 10m; vice versa. the only good justification can be phrased as „because this is just right” (not saying that 20m is just right).
eg., ppl falling asleep ? support for such cases shows non-seriousness.
again, this non-commitment to play shows non-seriousness.
ur clan sux @ high-level understanding of 1.1.
no, this supporting of non-preparation shows non-seriousness. the „lifelines” to pause exist for a clan to get its act together, in case a plan is not working out.
i have a feeling that u r repeating urself.
don't u mean at most 1 substitution per 3 other clan-members (ie., max 2 substitutions with 8 players on a side, etc.)?
explain this feeling in detail. how does it compare to the feel of a GRANGER ?
to add to that, unless agreed otherwise, the 2 roles shall be divided randomly.
u r free to demand various options, and refuse to play otherwise, and independently for other reasons.
for example, a clan is free to refuse to scrim with ur clan, by arguing that u ppl r too n00b.
so also, for instance, if a clan does not win match 1, and then that clan has to leave — TOTALLY(TM)_UNINTENTIONAL(R)1(C), then...
also, multiple maps may be played at different times/dates. in other words, a 4-match series is just an agreement to play 2 pairs of 2-match series, and vice versa.