i would join team Germany

I actually, i want to see interest because it would be nice to finalize with 32 teams since the perfect bracket.

Line-ups are not necessary until later, for now we need to confirm the teams themselves.

if we keep 31 teams as it is now you can maybe give the winner of nations cup 1 a free ticket to the second round

Good idea, but I think that there will be more than 32 teams, since there are 11 more days to register.

No reason to delay the start for two weeks after the end of registration, though?

Maybe for exercise? :)

One more team from Poland.

Poland 4
Herr http://warlight.net/Profile?p=421638191
Helmut Zdobywca http://warlight.net/Profile?p=542081256
♦CPU♦ Variat http://warlight.net/Profile?p=181413867
pi2you [PL] http://warlight.net/Profile?p=874430277
Knapik http://warlight.net/Profile?p=991144405

1. Brazil 1
2. Italy 1
3. Lithuania 1
4. Croatia 1
5. Israel 1
6. Netherlands & Flanders 1
7. Netherlands & Flanders 2
8. Netherlands & Flanders 3
9. West US 1
10. East US 1
11. Central US 1
12. Great Britain & Ireland 1
13. Great Britain & Ireland 2
14. Australia & New Zealand 1
15. Germany 1
16. Central US 2
17. Poland 1
18. Norway 1
19. Austria & Switzerland 1
20. Brazil 2
21. Brazil 3
22. Great Britain & Ireland 3
23. Czech and Slovak
24. France 1
25. France 2
26. Poland 2
27. Poland 3
28. Croatia 2
29. Serbia 1
30. Central US 3
31. Canada 1
32. Poland 4

Is that it guys, i think i will give until sunday for more teams registrations, otherwise we can do the seedings and sort out the games with this very good 32 number of teams.

I hope you make it so that two teams of the same country can only meet eachother in the Finals
If there are 3 or 4 teams make the first meeting possible in the semi-finals. It is not nice for countries to fight eachother quite soon. I think that if a country has multiple good teams then they should all have a change to reach the finals, and not have to eliminate eachother in the quarterfinals or so.

Usually all toournaments that do something about it try to avoid, and not help this situations.

I think the most fair is just naturally randomize them, but if everybody feel this is a good idea we can clearly do it.


One more thing, the 5v5 is not yet decided, its settings wont be repeated, so i want suggestions from all.

Which are the template for 1v1/2v2/3v3? how many games? how many point each games?

Why won't the 5v5 settings be repeated? I thought it was a good and fun template.

5v5 could also be on Issander's Big World.

Noooo! The 5v5 settings were amazing! Keep it in!

Israel's lineup:

[WG] Ineffable http://warlight.net/Profile?p=735146651
Avram http://warlight.net/Profile?p=293219155
brisk • apex http://warlight.net/Profile?p=597786678
dreuj http://warlight.net/Profile?p=735888782
Maze http://warlight.net/Profile?p=4913495722

In my opinion the 5v5 settings were good except for the fact that every neutral territory started with 3 armies. Could we please change it?

I personally think that the 3 neutral armies on every territory was part of the fun though, since that forced you to really work as a team to take bonusses. Quite often, you'd have to plan your takeovers with your teammates where you could get a territory by having someone else pick off a single army first and vice versa. The way a team handled the expansion phase was what often set apart the good teams from the bad. In my opinion, the 3 neutral armies is an essential part of the template and should be used more often in 0% luck, straight round team games.

NO... Not the 5v5 template. That was the most enjoyable template of all. Like Kingu said, it really forces you to work as a team.

I agree with brisk, the 5v5 template was good except for the 3 neutral armies.

i dont know the exact template, but usually: big teams(5 is that more or less) means a bigger map and thus a lot of expansion after the first run on bonuses, i m currently experimenting with higher army-values for neutrals while players starting out with more armies on starting spots.

Count me with Kingu (sorry JSA, Brisk): what's the point of having team games if you don't promote teamwork? Sure, you can be a team when the fighting starts (and there it will also make a big difference), but the three-armies-per-neutral gives a small edge to a group of players working as a team even when it doesn't seem immediately necessary yet.
When fighting an actual enemy, you never know exactly how many armies a territory is going to have, so 0%-luck-straight-round doesn't make as big a difference as you'd expect. It's precisely against neutrals where you can juggle (the timing of) your attacks in such a way as to take more territories and bonuses quicker. (Yes, it is a form of micro-management and some people hate that. Then again, doesn't the same apply to strategic templates, where getting your first bonus one turn too late pretty much means you've lost the game...?)

European Borders, Eastern Asia, Europe AD 1600, Rise of Rome (No superbonuses on any) seem to be the best options for 5v5 to me. Please no straight round 0%, that makes it too easy for someone to puppet the rest of the team if they have the time.