http://haxball-champions.com/index.php

Group A
Hc Warriors - Poland
Blaugrana - France
Cathletico - UK
HxStarz - Germany

Group B
ZaqHax Team - Poland
Pyongyang - France
Deja Reloaded - UK
Meisterkracher - Germany

Group C
WHF - Poland
Harmony - France
ARRIBA! - Mexico
Nerdlucks - Germany

Group D
HBAL White - Poland
Canonniers - France
Masterchefs - UK
Slackers - Germany

Fuck slackers, might as well give up now.

Do we have fixtures yet?

Times will be in CET, so take off an hour for GMT.

Schedule of group stage
I round:

19.03.2012 - Monday:
20.30 HC Warriors - Blaugrana
20.55 Cathletico - HxStarz
21.20 ZaqHax Team - Pyongyang
21.45 Deja Reloaded - Meisterkracher

20.03.2012 - Tuesday:
19.00 WHF - Harmony
19.25 ARRIBA - Nerdlucks
19.50 HBAL White - Canonniers
20.15 Masterchefs - Slackers

II round:

26.03.2012 - Monday:
20.30 Harmony - ARRIBA
20.55 Nerdlucks - WHF
21.20 Canonniers - Masterchefs
21.45 Slackers - HBAL White

27.03.2012 - Tuesday:
19.00 Blaugrana - Cathletico
19.25 HxStarz - HC Warriors
19.50 Pyongyang - Deja Reloaded
20.15 Meisterkracher - ZaqHax Team

III round:

02.04.2012 - Monday:
20.30 ZaqHax Team - Deja Reloaded
20.55 Meisterkracher - Pyongyang
21.20 HC Warriors - Cathletico
21.45 HxStarz - Blaugrana

03.04.2012 - Tuesday:
19.00 HBAL White - Masterchefs
19.25 Slackers - Canonniers
19.50 WHF - ARRIBA
20.15 Nerdlucks - Harmony

Could you put the country at the side of each team?

Done.

Thanks

Masterchefs' group

Good luck against Slackers Masterchefs lol

Who are Slackers?

Cath wants cathletico replaced, lpc in?

Shit of champions league with only 4 countries and 4 teams per country...
I know spanish teams that would slap more than 50% of the teams there

If there is 3 or less players from one team on kick-off, def-lose for that team is called. Because of that it is highly recommended to have at least 8 players in the team. Of course in really dramatic situations(electicity shut down in big area, whole team is sick) there is possibility to move the match on another day. Excuses like "my best player is not available" are not accepted.

LOL.

Mebbe we should send 4 teams of 2 teams together or somink.

This slackers team is no problem #masterchefswag

Donny wrote:If there is 3 or less players from one team on kick-off, def-lose for that team is called. Because of that it is highly recommended to have at least 8 players in the team. Of course in really dramatic situations(electicity shut down in big area, whole team is sick) there is possibility to move the match on another day. Excuses like "my best player is not available" are not accepted.

LOL.

Except that the only funny thing about this is that FM is the only haxball community with ridiculously small roster limits.

Girgensons wrote:

Donny wrote:If there is 3 or less players from one team on kick-off, def-lose for that team is called. Because of that it is highly recommended to have at least 8 players in the team. Of course in really dramatic situations(electicity shut down in big area, whole team is sick) there is possibility to move the match on another day. Excuses like "my best player is not available" are not accepted.

LOL.

Except that the only funny thing about this is that FM is the only haxball community with ridiculously small roster limits.

Not ridiculous at all. We play 3v3, 5 man squad is perfect for 3s. Any more and players would never get a game. If you wanna cry about FM you know where the Log Out button is. I do think we'll struggle sometimes for fielding 4 players though.

Donny wrote:

Girgensons wrote:

Donny wrote:If there is 3 or less players from one team on kick-off, def-lose for that team is called. Because of that it is highly recommended to have at least 8 players in the team. Of course in really dramatic situations(electicity shut down in big area, whole team is sick) there is possibility to move the match on another day. Excuses like "my best player is not available" are not accepted.

LOL.

Except that the only funny thing about this is that FM is the only haxball community with ridiculously small roster limits.

Not ridiculous at all. We play 3v3, 5 man squad is perfect for 3s.

Newsflash: we don't play just 3v3. We play 3v3 and 4v4, plus the best teams play in the Champions league. And we might switch to only 4v4 in the next season.

Any more and players would never get a game.

Are you saying this, because you're not good enough to be in the first line-up, if the roster limit gets increased?

What is the roster limit for football teams? 12? 15? The point is not to field everyone, but to have a competitive squad at all times. Are we a some sort of a senior amateur league? Players have different qualities and the strategy and formation can be changed to fit the style of play employed by the opponent. When you have a roster limit of 5 people:
a) there is no variation;
b) there's always a risk of a player or two missing.

The second point would be invalid, if matches could be moved if a team can't field enough players, like it's done in every other league. If there's an unexplained wish to stick to a fixed schedule, the roster limit should be increased.

We EASILY have enough players to do that, so I can't see a single reason why it shouldn't be done.

Girgensons wrote:Newsflash: we don't play just 3v3. We play 3v3 and 4v4, plus the best teams play in the Champions league. And we might switch to only 4v4 in the next season.

A Div 2 team who loses in the first round of the cup plays 14 3v3 games and 1 4v4 game. Hmm... Yeah...

Are you saying this, because you're not good enough to be in the first line-up, if the roster limit gets increased?

What is the roster limit for football teams? 12? 15? The point is not to field everyone, but to have a competitive squad at all times. Are we a some sort of a senior amateur league? Players have different qualities and the strategy and formation can be changed to fit the style of play employed by the opponent. When you have a roster limit of 5 people:
a) there is no variation;
b) there's always a risk of a player or two missing.

The second point would be invalid, if matches could be moved if a team can't field enough players, like it's done in every other league. If there's an unexplained wish to stick to a fixed schedule, the roster limit should be increased.

We EASILY have enough players to do that, so I can't see a single reason why it shouldn't be done.

You might be a dick and not be fussed about leaving like 5 players out of a team but there is some captains on here that aren't keen on leaving players out, especially a load of players from the way you're sounding. I was a captain in the first season and part of the second so I know it isn't great leaving out players. You're sounding like you're selfish care more about winning then everyone getting to play, at the end of the day its a flash game. I'm sure 90% of the people on here would rather be playing first team Haxball in a 5 man squad in the league then be the 7th choice in an 8 man squad. We don't need massive squads for a league that is mainly 3v3, it's a dickhead move that and I'm not even thinking about myself, I don't care if I'm a first choice player in a Div 1 team or 10th choice in a Div 2 team.

In my mind, the league comes before the Champion's League, so sticking with 3v3 and 5 man teams is great.

Donny wrote:

Girgensons wrote:Newsflash: we don't play just 3v3. We play 3v3 and 4v4, plus the best teams play in the Champions league. And we might switch to only 4v4 in the next season.

A Div 2 team who loses in the first round of the cup plays 14 3v3 games and 1 4v4 game. Hmm... Yeah...

A succesful team will have to play 7+ 4on4 matches this season.

You might be a dick and not be fussed about leaving like 5 players out of a team

An ad hominem argument and a straw man all in one sentence.

1) Unless players are self-centered twits, rotation of players has never been a problem in the numerous teams that I've played. My Russian team currently has 11 players, no one has whined about it. So I'm not sure who's the dick, if you consider whining about not getting to play the norm.
2) If the roster limit would be increased to 6 (which is what I reccomended), leaving 5 players out would mean that the team would have to field only 1 player in a competitive match, which is an impossible scenario. Your exaggeration is ridiculous and it doesn't help your argument.

there is some captains on here that aren't keen on leaving players out, especially a load of players from the way you're sounding.

So:
a) don't have 6 players on your team, no one is forcing you to do that;
b) rotate the players -- problem solved.

I was a captain in the first season and part of the second so I know it isn't great leaving out players.

So don't.

You're sounding like you're selfish care more about winning then everyone getting to play

First of all, what you're presenting is a false choice. Second, winning=fun. Losing=not fun. Every hax player that I know is playing to win and thoroughly enjoys winning. Maximizing the chances of winning thus is in the best interests for every member of the team.

at the end of the day its a flash game.

Yes, it is. What is your point?

I'm sure 90% of the people on here would rather be playing first team Haxball in a 5 man squad in the league then be the 7th choice in an 8 man squad.

I'd rather be a 7th choice in a succesful 1st Div team rather than the top guy in a shit Div 2 squad.

Also - you're assuming that the 7th guy doesn't get to play, which is BS.

We don't need massive squads for a league that is mainly 3v3

We don't need massive squads, no.

I don't care if I'm a first choice player in a Div 1 team or 10th choice in a Div 2 team.

So, to conclude, there's no reason to not increase the roster limit.

Girgensons wrote:We don't need massive squads, no.

So I win. gg no re. wp girgensons.

You would win if:
a) you would be arguing against someone that would try to introduce massive squads here;
b) you wouldn't be cut from a team that's at the very bottom of Div 2.

Wow. Poor from you. Lose so you bring up that I left my team without knowing the facts, like the one where I asked to leave.

Lets leave this now.

I'm not the only one who looked at it the other way round and wondered why they have ridiculously unnecessarily stupidly retardedly huge rosters then? Great.

Roster of 5 is perfect for our league, there is simply no need or requirement to increase it. Having 8 players in 1 team that plays 3v3 is just stupid as fuck.

Rachel wrote:I'm not the only one who looked at it the other way round and wondered why they have ridiculously unnecessarily stupidly retardedly huge rosters then? Great.

You obviously have 0 experience in 4on4.

Roster of 5 is perfect for our league

Why?

there is simply no need or requirement to increase it.

See posts above.

Having 8 players in 1 team that plays 3v3 is just stupid as fuck.

There's not a single team here that plays only 3on3 and I don't think anyone wants to have a roster limit of 8, so not sure what you're talking about.

Classy swearing, btw.

Pick players who turn up you have no problems.

Girgensons wrote:

Rachel wrote:I'm not the only one who looked at it the other way round and wondered why they have ridiculously unnecessarily stupidly retardedly huge rosters then? Great.

You obviously have 0 experience in 4on4.

Roster of 5 is perfect for our league

Why?

there is simply no need or requirement to increase it.

See posts above.

Having 8 players in 1 team that plays 3v3 is just stupid as fuck.

There's not a single team here that plays only 3on3 and I don't think anyone wants to have a roster limit of 8, so not sure what you're talking about.

Classy swearing, btw.

Why are you continuing to argue when you have no valid argument to argue for? We're fine with rosters of 5, and we're fine with 3v3. If you have problems, then leave.

So maybe a lot of players here play 4v4 in other leagues, that's OTHER leagues. This is FM, what they do outside of FM has absolutely no affiliation with our league.

Maddude wrote:Cath wants cathletico replaced, lpc in?

Fund it.

The captains have to sign up to - http://haxball-champions.com/index.php

Then you've got to post your squads before the end of tomorrow.

I remind to announce squads. Do it please as fast as possible. Deadline is 22:00 CET on Sunday.

I just posted my squad then deleted....
Do I need 8 players? :/

GOKU wrote:I just posted my squad then deleted....
Do I need 8 players? :/

No that's just reccomended. As long as you get 3 players to turn up then you're fine. All these eurofags seem to think you need a roster of 8 to guarantee 3 players turning up. So much mindderp it's unreal.

Rachel wrote:

GOKU wrote:I just posted my squad then deleted....
Do I need 8 players? :/

No that's just reccomended. As long as you get 3 players to turn up then you're fine. All these eurofags seem to think you need a roster of 8 to guarantee 3 players turning up. So much mindderp it's unreal.

It's 4's babe.

If you only have 3 or less for a game then you automatically lose.

Why are you continuing to argue when you have no valid argument to argue for?

Telling me that I don't have a valid argument doesn't make it true, dear.

The fact of the matter is that I haven't heard a single valid counter-argument so far.

We're fine with rosters of 5, and we're fine with 3v3. If you have problems, then leave.

Who's we? I'd rather here the thoughts of a team manager who's going to play more than 1 4on4 match this season.

"If you have problems, then leave" is probably the most narrow-minded thing I've read in this thread. And that's after Donny's ramblings. Also, would you say the same thing to Maddude, if he said it? Because he does support the same thing I do. No need to be stupid and xenophobic at the same time.

So maybe a lot of players here play 4v4 in other leagues, that's OTHER leagues. This is FM, what they do outside of FM has absolutely no affiliation with our league.

Ever heard of the Cup? Ever heard of the Champions League? Or you just don't give a shit how well our teams compete there?

GET A LIFE.

Zizou wrote:GET A LIFE.

NO, YOU GET A LIFE

I don't see what all the screaming is for, squad limit should be optional surely, 1 team might want to have 357 players whereas other will want only 4

I AM HOMO

MICK YOU HOMO, GET THE FUCK OUT OF ADULT TALKS.

you fucking faggot

You just make sure you have five active players, simple.

This is a 3v3 league primarily, and it shouldn't hard getting four of the five players online if you ask them to, if you pick the right players.

Cam_Sampbell wrote:You just make sure you have five active players, simple.

This is a 3v3 league primarily, and it shouldn't hard getting four of the five players online if you ask them to, if you pick the right players.

Why shouldn't I, as a team captain, be able to have, say, 6 players on my team? Why? :>

Because you don't like having 6 players in your team? You don't have to have 6 players in your team. :>

Because you don't like that the players in your team can't play the whole length of every single of the 15-20+ matches of the season? It's not your team. If a player doesn't like it in a certain team, he can always ask the captain/manager to be traded away.

Players have certain positions that they play in. If someone can't make it and he can't be replaced by someone that excels in that same position, the game plan is ruined and the level of the game displayed decreases.

Why should I be held hostage to this ridiculous 5 player roster limit?

Haven't heard a single sound, logical answer to this question so far.

Well, what's better, having players compete to try to win places in teams, or having players rot as a 6th player in a team? As if there are 6 players in a team, managers who want success won't play all 6 players, except for the rare occasion that their players aren't available.

Cam_Sampbell wrote:Well, what's better, having players compete to try to win places in teams, or having players rot as a 6th player in a team? As if there are 6 players in a team, managers who want success won't play all 6 players, except for the rare occasion that their players aren't available.

You're making things up now.

As for my team, if the roster limit would be 6, FM would gain 1 new player. If it was 10, it would gain 5 new players. Is it not better to have more players and better, more competitive teams with less 2vs3, 2vs2, 3vs4 games and awkward position changes due to someone not turning up?

Girgensons wrote:

Cam_Sampbell wrote:Well, what's better, having players compete to try to win places in teams, or having players rot as a 6th player in a team? As if there are 6 players in a team, managers who want success won't play all 6 players, except for the rare occasion that their players aren't available.

You're making things up now.

As for my team, if the roster limit would be 6, FM would gain 1 new player. If it was 10, it would gain 5 new players. Is it not better to have more players and better, more competitive teams with less 2vs3, 2vs2, 3vs4 games and awkward position changes due to someone not turning up?

I've had all 5 players turn up to every game. Every one of my players can play at least 2 positions - so no 'out of position' is necessary. Therefore your point is entirely invalid here.

Rachel wrote:I've had all 5 players turn up to every game.

What's the probability of that happening 15 times in a row?

Are there 80 players in this community that are good at hax and able to be online every evening? No.

Every player that I picked for my team was online every night before the season started. Now one of them disappeared completely before the 1st Cup round. Is that something I could've predicted before? No. Does that hinder my chances of advancing to the 2nd round? Yes, it does. Would such a problem arise with a bigger roster limit? No, it wouldn't.

Every one of my players can play at least 2 positions - so no 'out of position' is necessary. Therefore your point is entirely invalid here.

Everyone can play several positions, the level of play though is going to differ. You don't see David Villa playing as a central defender very often, because Puyol has been injured, or Xavi as a GK?

Basically, the only thing you've said is that you don't want to have 6 players in your team. I'm not arguing with that, because it's your choice.

The question though is, why shouldn't other teams have 6 players on their roster if they feel that this would improve their game?

We've got 30 players rotting in the reserve league and loads of others that aren't free agents yet/anymore. We don't lack the players, so where's the problem?

Girgensons wrote:

Rachel wrote:I've had all 5 players turn up to every game.

What's the probability of that happening 15 times in a row?

Are there 80 players in this community that are good at hax and able to be online every evening? No.

Every player that I picked for my team was online every night before the season started. Now one of them disappeared completely before the 1st Cup round. Is that something I could've predicted before? No. Does that hinder my chances of advancing to the 2nd round? Yes, it does. Would such a problem arise with a bigger roster limit? No, it wouldn't.

>Well, that's just unfortunate, but as you say, there are plenty of players that could replace him if you feel the need to.

Every one of my players can play at least 2 positions - so no 'out of position' is necessary. Therefore your point is entirely invalid here.

Everyone can play several positions, the level of play though is going to differ. You don't see David Villa playing as a central defender very often, because Puyol has been injured, or Xavi as a GK?

>Haxball =/= Football, there is a vast difference between the skill levels needed for haxball and football.

Basically, the only thing you've said is that you don't want to have 6 players in your team. I'm not arguing with that, because it's your choice.

>The question though is, why shouldn't other teams have 6 players on their roster if they feel that this would improve their game?

We've got 30 players rotting in the reserve league and loads of others that aren't free agents yet/anymore. We don't lack the players, so where's the problem?

>Well, personally I'd rather see players playing regularly in a reserves league, and showing off their abilities, rather than playing very occasionally.