[gooch2k9]

Originally Posted by mystic86

this is quite a common way... Anyway we can do it both ways?
:-)

What you mean both ways?

I played in a FIFA thingy like this during the World Cup last year ( for lack of a current gen rugby game before I'm ridiculed), and they had some program listing the teams and players names and it drew them randomly. Think L'prof organised it.

[mystic86]

Originally Posted by gooch2k9

What you mean both ways?

I played in a FIFA thingy like this during the World Cup last year ( for lack of a current gen rugby game before I'm ridiculed), and they had some program listing the teams and players names and it drew them randomly. Think L'prof organised it.

we can play 2 comps, one with chosen teams as chosen in here and one where teams are chosen at random

[gooch2k9]

Originally Posted by mystic86

we can play 2 comps, one with chosen teams as chosen in here and one where teams are chosen at random

Sounds grand. You're organising so its your decision

[GTR63]

Here is a review of the game,haven't even read it myself.
http://nzgamer.com/x360/reviews/1419...challenge.html

[mystic86]

Originally Posted by gooch2k9

Sounds grand. You're organising so its your decision

actually, we found out the ridiculous info that regardless of what team you're using online the team stats will be even (normalized) so the random draw thing might not be necessary

[gooch2k9]

Originally Posted by mystic86

actually, we found out the ridiculous info that regardless of what team you're using online the team stats will be even (normalized) so the random draw thing might not be necessary

So Aironi would be level with the ABs?

[mystic86]

Originally Posted by gooch2k9

So Aironi would be level with the ABs?

apparently. To me that is bloody ridiculous decision to do it like that. I know they wanted to make games about user skill, but they really just should have accounted for players playing with uneven teams in terms of stats by awarding more leaderboard points to a lower rated team that beats a higher rated team and vice versa

[gooch2k9]

Originally Posted by mystic86

apparently. To me that is bloody ridiculous decision to do it like that. I know they wanted to make games about user skill, but they really just should have accounted for players playing with uneven teams in terms of stats by awarding more leaderboard points to a lower rated team that beats a higher rated team and vice versa

Exactly, if both teams are made even it takes away from the achievement of grinding out a result against better sides...

[purpleblaa]

This looks like it could be a top game. I used to love the Jonah Lomu game from the PS1.
What a player that man was. Terrible what happened to him.

[kensutz]

Edinburgh and Castres.

[EmacB]

From what i heard its only in ranked matches that the stats are the same. In custom matches they're different for every team.

[B0X]

Originally Posted by EmacB

From what i heard its only in ranked matches that the stats are the same. In custom matches they're different for every team.

Yeah I don't see why people are getting worked up about this. It'd be crap to have everyone playing as the All Blacks because of higher rating. Multiplayer should be about skill, not what team you picked.

[cython]

Originally Posted by B0X

Yeah I don't see why people are getting worked up about this. It'd be crap to have everyone playing as the All Blacks because of higher rating. Multiplayer should be about skill, not what team you picked.

I can see the merits of this system, certainly, but I can also see how people would like to at least have the option of unbalanced teams - there would be less of an achievement in using Connacht, for example, to beat, or even mount a challenge to a mate playing with the ABs if both teams are auto-balanced. Not to mention that if someone has played a game a lot more than a friend as before, a not uncommon means of handicapping the experienced player is in team selection - that option no longer exists.

[B0X]

Originally Posted by cython

I can see the merits of this system, certainly, but I can also see how people would like to at least have the option of unbalanced teams - there would be less of an achievement in using Connacht, for example, to beat, or even mount a challenge to a mate playing with the ABs if both teams are auto-balanced. Not to mention that if someone has played a game a lot more than a friend as before, a not uncommon means of handicapping the experienced player is in team selection - that option no longer exists.

But you can still play with the proper team rankings it's just the match won't be ranked.

[DarkJager]

Looking forward to this but was pleasantly surprised by RWC 2011. Sure the graphics are atrocious and nobody looks anything like their real life counterparts, but as a 2 player game it's quite fun to play. Probably not worth a purchase, but definitely a good rental.

Any release date set for this yet?