Migration 04/14/17We have migrated the site to a new host Some stuff may not be working as expected If you do encounter any issues, let us know!
Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'afc rule revamp'.
The search index is currently processing. Current results may not be complete.
Found 1 result
DISCLAIMER: The respective admins of AsiaFortress have the right to change the rules to the AFC regular season (although they should put it in the rules but this is why i'm here so yeah xd) Recently, I have noticed the Division 1 Match (AFC11) between BBQ and BBT that BBQ has used two postpones(or it looked like it from their comment on the match thread). This made me question the rule stated in section 3E. Now this certainly was alarming to me. Under taking consideration the two postponements of BBQ, I realized that if the rules were clarified/enforced (depends on how you look at it) more, the match between TDi and CtZ wouldn't have been so disastrous. TDi losing their main caller and their roamer, they believed that they were forced to play the game without the chance to postpone and I wouldn't blame them. At first glance, it is certainly one postpone for the entire season... or is it? My Main Qualms with the Rules It is not explained in detail. Since AFC follows two tournament types per season, it is unknown to what extent these rules can still apply. Some of the rules can easily be exploited. Here is a rule stated in 4J. This is an example of another ambiguous rule. Case and point, the phrase "exhibit technical issues". Clearly exhibiting technical issues that inhibit their gameplay, it seems like a logical rule but once you notice that the only way to do that is to actually FPS or Internet lag. I want to provide a viable solution/suggestion to this rule. It being this... Anyway, it's late and I will fix this sentence maybe tommorow but here are its' main improvements... Pauses are made to aid the teams that utilize them, that is why they need to have the power to determine when and what to pause on. The pauses are not going to be exploited because the moment the pause exceeds four minutes, both teams have the power to unpause. Overall, I believe that limiting pauses for VISIBLE technical difficulties would be a huge mistake since pauses are made to ensure that the quality of the game is to be maintained consistently and as fairly. There are many gameplay inhibitions that exist in the gaming world, that is why limiting the acceptance/tolerance to pause through only two reasons is absolutely mind boggling to me. Next is the rule in 4C. I know it's a nitpick but I believe that we need to explain or clarify what we mean by mercenaries here. For experienced/old players, it might seem obvious but definitely new players still mistake mercenaries/mercs' original meaning. The rules are here to clarify things, not to put even more fog in the mix. The next on the agenda is the rule in 4IC. The least fleshed out rule in my opinion, reason being, that there is no golden cap configs/specifications. I am under the impression that both Shana and AsiaFortress (main servers being played on AFC) have a config specifically designed for Golden Cap (If there is, then I stand corrected). It is imperative to have configs designed for this because what most teams usually do is run the Golden Cap with another normal/default AFC config. The problem occurs is when the whole 30 minute mark comes down and the game ends. If the enemy team capped four points, do they have to reset? What if the enemy team was pushing last and was about to win then suddenly the timer ran out? I think the best solution for this is by adding another rule. It's 2:37 AM in the morning right now and I'm ready to discuss this in the comments below. Also, I'll add more tomorrow or later. I can't do it now because I'm tired. EDIT LOG 5/1/17 Clarified the situation of BBQ using two postpones 5/1/17 Added a disclaimer 5/1/17 Changed "forfeit" to "postpone" 5/1/17 Added the Edit Log 4/30/17 Fixed spelling mistakes