I'm open to different formats.

This

Sounds good.

On the topic of random civs, yeah mirrored civs are the best way to go. There are plenty of great or fairly even civ/position match ups, how u go about deciding which games are worth playing for this purpose is the harder bit.

3v3s or 4v4s go pasta

One way that I was thinking about it, was random civs, then switch civs, and in the case of tie, which is very likely, both team has free choice of 2 civs of each set of civs.

For example: byz persians goths maya vs sar turks china aztecs, for the third match Team A decided to choose persians, maya and sar and turk, while Team B opted for byz persians and sar and china. It doesnt have to be a mirrored match, maybe the will choose the same civs, or maybe not, is up to them.

I hope I made the example clear for everyone. This is my way to promote varieties of civs instead of playing the standards one, because imo thats what CBA is about.

?
noob drew trolling like the fag that you always are.
4vs4 same civs is ****ing dumb its just a fact,going to raze for bloodlines and ****s at the beginning cause there is 8 bases and its too wide,instead of fighting in 1 area.

mirror rdm civs could work,but then if the both teams keep winning the 'best' civs...that thing about choosing civs for tie would be chaos as well.

it's funny how you seem to always try and attack Eot yet you have zero skill in any map. You're just butthurt over the times you've been beaten by us..

also it's funny how the only way you could ever do remotely good would be in a random civ full on civ rape... but hey, im sure we'll get a chance to play each other in these next series of cba... but then again, you run from us enough so i don't think you'd turn up




Also, i know it's abit late BG but i wanna ask you something;

4v4 random civs and then mirrored would be perfect.
In case of a tie the fastest win would proceed to the next round, pretty obvious imo.
This wouldn't make winning the only purpose, you'd have to be concerned with the time of the win as well.

I think both teams should agree on whether a civ matchup is worth playing. In the case of outcivs, I'm not sure seeing who can civ rape each other faster is the best idea. Just adding time to the equation is a bit dodgy imo.

Maybe there can be some set civ/pos matchups thought up by some appointed ppl for each round. The kind where both teams have a good chance of success but still retaining the assymetry and interest of random tgs.

good idea here.

Make it 1v1 instead.