Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Yes or no? Treaty discussion subforum

Yes
34
72%
No
13
28%
 
Total votes: 47

Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by momuuu »

:mrgreen:
pecelot wrote:I'm not mad at you to begin with, but even then if you don't understand it, then well...

Hes just trolling lol.
User avatar
Austria KINGofOsmane
Pro Player
Posts: 3096
Joined: Feb 24, 2015
ESO: KINGofOsmane
Location: Walling Town

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by KINGofOsmane »

tready ._.
"Losing to Callen was the worst night of my life" Gibthedurrty 2019
"If hazza can get pr42 with team i can get pr50 with 1v1" Gibthedurrty 2018
Lecastete wrote: Dude i hate this game. I am bad and i also dont have luck
Tete cs:go experience
User avatar
United States of America illusioNtEk
Skirmisher
Posts: 189
Joined: Jun 25, 2015
ESO: illusioNtEk
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by illusioNtEk »

Im starting to notice more and more treaty players! Yes to Treaty Forum plz :)
User avatar
Canada _NiceKING_
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 1795
Joined: Sep 16, 2015
ESO: _NiceKING_
GameRanger ID: 9999999
Clan: Xbox

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by _NiceKING_ »

Just use [SUP] and [TR] before the names of the topics to differentiate them.
User avatar
Poland pecelot
Retired Contributor
Donator 03
Posts: 10459
Joined: Mar 25, 2015
ESO: Pezet

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by pecelot »

This sort of thing would require in my opinion changing the names of all the previous topics to make it clear, which would require some time to be spent on it.
User avatar
No Flag hunter
Dragoon
Posts: 456
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
Location: Rome, S.P.Q.R

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by hunter »

this would never get yes vote even if tr really deserved a different section cuz sup scrubs looking for treaty downfall simply outnumber even the total tr players
Jerom wrote: Garja is a better player than most of us here
Jerom wrote:Please don't bump old threads, especially when all you have to say is "lol"
United States of America evilcheadar
Gendarme
Posts: 5786
Joined: Aug 20, 2015
Location: USA

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by evilcheadar »

illusioNtEk wrote:Im starting to notice more and more treaty players! Yes to Treaty Forum plz :)

Treaty players have high IQ scores.
A post not made is a post given away

A slushie a day keeps the refill thread at bay

Jackson Pollock was the best poster to ever to post on these forums
User avatar
Bavaria Gichtenlord
Howdah
Donator 03
Posts: 1437
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by Gichtenlord »

evilcheadar wrote:
illusioNtEk wrote:Im starting to notice more and more treaty players! Yes to Treaty Forum plz :)

Treaty players have high IQ scores.

Storm999 is the perefect example :salt: :salt:
r]
User avatar
Poland pecelot
Retired Contributor
Donator 03
Posts: 10459
Joined: Mar 25, 2015
ESO: Pezet

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by pecelot »

What about now with the Treaty Patch release? It just feels awkward that TR FP-related stuff is being discussed somewhere in a random topic. A new section/subforum would be much more clear and visible for the rest of the community, which we should care about of course, maybe also because of the future possibility to conjoin both EP and FP launchers.
User avatar
Bavaria Gichtenlord
Howdah
Donator 03
Posts: 1437
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by Gichtenlord »

I dont know if it's necessary. People rarely ask questions about treaty. While there might be more topics about treaty, when there is a proper section for it.
r]
User avatar
No Flag howlingwolfpaw
Jaeger
Posts: 3476
Joined: Oct 4, 2015

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by howlingwolfpaw »

if the forums were a little higher paced I could see a need for it, but as is I think its fine.
User avatar
United States of America dicktator_
Howdah
EWT
Posts: 1565
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
ESO: Conquerer999

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by dicktator_ »

I think a treaty subforum would be cool because it would promote more treaty threads/discussion. I remember agecomm had a treaty subforum, and treaty players were much more active there than on ESOC. Obviously putting a [TR] tag in the thread title would work just as well to differentiate treaty threads from sup threads (sup players obviously don't need to put [SUP] in their thread titles because sup is the main/most active game type), however I think having all the treaty threads in one section would help promote treaty discussion.
steniothejonjoe wrote:I can micro better than 99% of the player base and that's 100% objective
:mds:
User avatar
Canada _NiceKING_
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 1795
Joined: Sep 16, 2015
ESO: _NiceKING_
GameRanger ID: 9999999
Clan: Xbox

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by _NiceKING_ »

@_H2O @91 @musketeer925 @Jerom @Mitoe @n0eL
Can you make it happen?
User avatar
United States of America illusioNtEk
Skirmisher
Posts: 189
Joined: Jun 25, 2015
ESO: illusioNtEk
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by illusioNtEk »

Yep it's time
User avatar
United States of America n0el
ESOC Business Team
Posts: 7068
Joined: Jul 24, 2015
ESO: jezabob
Clan: 팀 하우슀

Re: Separate treaty discussion/strategy section

Post by n0el »

Its done. Closing this thread.
mad cuz bad

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV