Lihl rule changes ( new and hopefully final )

[supersexyy]

Well #1 won't be implemented as we just had a vote on that.

Lets give the polls a bit of a rest and I will re-run a 'Ban AS' poll, similarly as I did before: viewtopic.php?f=83&t=9367

[DonaldtheDuckie]

Well #1 won't be implemented as we just had a vote on that.

Lets give the polls a bit of a rest and I will re-run a 'Ban AS' poll, similarly as I did before: viewtopic.php?f=83&t=9367

? Elaborate Sexyy? This is the final vote, the other votes were cut off to include all options in this poll.

edit: I dont get why so many vote for option 3. It will make cross the new cheese in lihl as everyone will cross to make up for AS no longer being allowed. The whole point of banning as is to bann cross as well and maybe even double as well.

For those in doubt of the so called fine line between double and reverse it is extremely simple.

Reverse means you build my place, I build your place, our build lanes are as such reverse.

Double build means we both build at the same lane.

There is nothing unclear about these 2 terms. The scenarios sexyy put up were of various combinations between reverse and double buildings and can as such not only be an either or, but the clear and obvious answer being the both!

pps. I think option 3 is the worst option of the lot as it will make people reverse without the option to double build as an alternative. It is making 1 evil way worse whilst removing the alternatives.

[eldryan]

@supersexyy it's "cross building" when BOTH have more value ON OTHER SIDE then their own.

i voted option 5.

[Krayyzie]

I just have to point out here, since option 3 has most votes, does people know what that means for the game?
Cross build means you build on the other players side, which also means you get per automatic antistuck ( units goes to your own side after killing the side you build), this means you will not loose any gold.
While banning antistuck means Doublebuild will kill 1 side ,then leak other side to middle = lost gold

So by voting for option 3 you will kill the doublebuild and make Crossbuild more or less the only possible play, other plays will be way to weak

[dweiler]

I voted for 'ban all'. After having played a lot of 2v2 games I have come to see the stupidity of 3v3 and 4v4 as it is today. Weak vs 12? Just double-build after 10. Weak vs 14? Just double-build after 10. The only thing double-build and reverse-build accomplish is an impossibility (or near impossibility) to die before 20, with that needlessly elongate the majority of the games and giving too much weight to level 27 and 28.

Just a crazy thought, what if you could die on level 14 in 4v4? !

[supersexyy]

You're just not pushing your inc hard enough then.

[dark_magician]

At the time of my post here, there appears to be a 3 way tie (more or less) between options 1, 3 and 5... totaling 20 of the possible 22 votes.
I see one thing in common between all 3 options - that anti stuck is banned!

Hope this comes to pass, no matter what happens with the rules.

[Diablo_]

@ dark
Not necessarily, most players who didn't vote for #3 would rather keep the rules as they are (allowing all) instead of only banning AS.

[ILOCOS_NORTE]

I voted for 'ban all'. After having played a lot of 2v2 games I have come to see the stupidity of 3v3 and 4v4 as it is today. Weak vs 12? Just double-build after 10. Weak vs 14? Just double-build after 10. The only thing double-build and reverse-build accomplish is an impossibility (or near impossibility) to die before 20, with that needlessly elongate the majority of the games and giving too much weight to level 27 and 28.

Just a crazy thought, what if you could die on level 14 in 4v4? !

I totaly share your opinion, but thats basicly what my poll was about... which resulted in a tie 12:12
https://entgaming.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=15120
Maybe I deter some people with those "mid restrictions" If you dont realy understand what they mean, they could scare some people

Changed my vote to #1 "ban all". Pls change all from #3 to #1

[eldryan]

I guess that 1 person can be the tiebreaker.

[Drahque]

8 people want ban A+B+C
6 people want ban A
8 people want ban A+C

Should seriously just ban all the shit, or maybe ban A+C, so that double-building gets the disadvantage of not being able to anti-stuck and those forcing people to try to hold both sides (also so people can share auras).

P.S. In order to find out what people want the most, we can make one final vote between the 2 most voted option, it will force 6 people to revote and hopefully get a better idea if we should ban A+B+C or just A+C.

The only thing double-build and reverse-build accomplish is an impossibility (or near impossibility) to die before 20, with that needlessly elongate the majority of the games and giving too much weight to level 27 and 28.

So TRUE, we should really ban A+B+C, so that people are forced to teamwork more in 4v4. By one person building anti-14 and another anti-17 and a third anti-20. This really would make the game much more exciting and also make people more on their own, cause if they make too many mistakes they don't have someone to build on them, and those save them.

[BA_Fail]

Normally I would want to ban all, but as someone pointed out before, there is a 2v2 mode where there is no double building or cross building. It kind of feels wrong to take away double building and cross building when there is already a mode specifically made for people not being able to help each others lane.

Allowing #3 will basically guarantee a win for whichever team cross builds, although double build can still be effective without anti stuck, cross build is just way better once anti stuck is removed.

[Drahque]

there is a 2v2 mode where there is no double building or cross building. It kind of feels wrong to take away double building and cross building when there is already a mode specifically made for people not being able to help each others lane.

Very true, so the real question is, why do we even have to ban anything at all? Why not just leave the game as it is, we can't just add a rule every time someone comes up with ideas for a META change. We'd need to learn to adjust and instead find ways to counter whatever strategy is being used.

There exist NO tactic that doesn't have any disadvantages at all, and by allowing all we let most variety in ways to play, because 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 is all different - why do we have to make 3v3 and 4v4 alike 2v2? Why can't people just stick to whatever they like the most? Some people like 2v2+3v3 and others 3v3+4v4, so why do we have to merge them into one category, where everything is alike?

[Gouus]

vote #3

not violation = allowed (except merc )

why do create unnecessary rules??

[helekiller]

well, option 1 and 5 have 78% of the votes together now... i think both of them would be fine, doublebuilding wont be so op without the use of as, as u would lose alot of money leaking

i hope one of those can pass... i think most of the people voting on one of em would also agree with the other