Battle Rules Updated - 13th Feb 2014
Printed From: Lyrical Assault
Category: Community Forums
Forum Name: News & Announcements
Forum Description: News & Announcements for the site
URL: http://www.lyricalassault.co.uk/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28508
Printed Date: 27 March 2026 at 4:57am
Topic: Battle Rules Updated - 13th Feb 2014
Posted By: Scotty32
Subject: Battle Rules Updated - 13th Feb 2014
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 8:45pm
|
The battle rules have been updated and will take effect at midnight tonight GMT. Any battle created after this time will be bound by the new rules. All existing battles will be bound by the old rules. I would recommend everyone reads them so they are up-to-date. If you have any questions, don't understand any of the changes or just want to be a dick for the sake of it, then post in here and I will either answer your question or ignore you depending which is most relevant. The new rules can be found here: http://www.lyricalassault.co.uk/battles/rules.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.lyricalassault.co.uk/battles/rules.htm The old rules can be found here: http://www.lyricalassault.co.uk/battles/text-rules-2005-10-25.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.lyricalassault.co.uk/battles/text-rules-2005-10-25.htm -------------  |
Replies:
Posted By: Dougysnuggy
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 8:53pm
| Word. I like the minimum deadline... |
Posted By: Nigma
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 8:55pm
|
In the Default/House Rules section what does the term 'feeding' refer to? -------------  |
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 8:58pm
|
Feeding off your opponents verse, the same as flipping. ------------- |
Posted By: Nigma
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 9:06pm
|
Gotchoo. Only rule I don't agree with is not being appointed a win if ya get no-showed. I see reasoning behind it but it feels like adding insult to injury, spending the time writing a verse, receiving no feedback on it, then getting nothing in return. I see you're able to reuse the verse however that doesn't feel very practical. ------------- |
Posted By: Dougysnuggy
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 9:11pm
| Reusing a verse would look weak as fuck tbh |
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 9:18pm
|
The only reason for explicitly stating you can reuse all or part of the verse if someone no-shows on you is because of the "no recycling rule". Whether you do or not is pretty much irrelevant. As for the "no show win", I won't go into reasons behind it, as I'm sure you can already guess. But when someone no-shows they receive an N, this is pretty much the same as a loss as far as the rankings are concerned. ------------- |
Posted By: Titu
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 9:51pm
 appreciate the work, scotty.------------- Fuck That Fat smelly cunt Donald Trump, a racist asshole who is fucked in the head. |
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 25 November 2013 at 10:14pm
|
Yes, Text and Audio rules have been merged. ------------- |
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 26 November 2013 at 12:05am
|
reason being the rules were identical anyway ------------- |
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 12 February 2014 at 10:06pm
|
The Site's Battle Rules have been updated again and will take affect as of 13th February 2014. A few of the significant changes are listed below. However you should read the rules them selves to be safe. Disqualifications DQs will now be added to battle scores. They will take the place of, and include, No Shows currently on profiles. They will be denoted under the Battle Form with a D. No Shows will continue to be denoted with the N. This will be applied retrospectively. Personal's As mentioned ages ago, off-site personal's are off limits, unless shared by the relavant person on LA. This has now made it into the rules. There is a more expanded explanation in the Battle Rules. For those people who who still wish to allow any personal to be used, you must add "No Holds Barred" clearly the first post of your battle. If you do not understand or need a rule clarifying then you should post your questions in this thread. ------------- |
Posted By: U.N.L.M.
Date Posted: 12 February 2014 at 10:18pm
|
I like the additions a lot, they were needed...Question tho, How about adding something about "voting stipulations"...I think we should be allowed to name names...For instance, "Scotty is not allowed to vote on the battle"...But, I think stipulations like "must have 150+points to vote" don't really help anyone...New battlers may vote poorly, but there are also new battlers who can vote fairly and well...I think those restrictions just make it tougher for battles to get votes and make more work for mods to go through to make sure everyone meets the "voting requirements". ------------- 
|
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 12 February 2014 at 10:33pm
|
I don't feel it needs spelling out in the rules my self, as to begin with there would be an endless list of what is ok and what isn't. I personally have no problem with specific people or user groups being excluded from voting or minimum points required to vote. I feel it is up to both battlers to make this decision, and if it results in little or no votes, it is there fault. What I do have a problem with is the vague rules, such as "no n00b votes" (what counts as a 'n00b'?) or "No shawn aliases" (obv they cannot vote as they would be banned). I feel these are too vague, unclear and open to interpretation. As I have mentioned previously on the site, this vague and unclear rules will be void and ignored by moderators. After cleaning up the fields today, I also see a problem with people either stating the bleeding obvious ("only fair votes"), repeating House Rules or completely ignoring the Site Battle Rules altogether ("1 hour deadlines"), and this is AFTER it has already been pointed out to them that the minimum is 48hrs. It should probably be added that the vague rules do not count, any suggestions for how to word it would be very much welcome. ------------- |
Posted By: JBrenn
Date Posted: 12 February 2014 at 11:04pm
|
very nice stuff brother... good rule break down... pretty good stuff scotty32 -------------  |
Posted By: D_Vour_
Date Posted: 12 February 2014 at 11:27pm
*cough* me *cough* *cough* LOL
|
U.N.L.M. wrote:Posted By: Flossaurus
Date Posted: 12 February 2014 at 11:29pm
|
If anyone puts a 4 week time limit, they should be stabbed. No show should be a win. ------------- Allow me to retort, you cowards is just learnin the shit we been teachin |
Posted By: U.N.L.M.
Date Posted: 13 February 2014 at 2:16am
You could probably add it below the Default/House Rules...Or anywhere else you'd like to add this...Just something to make clear you will ignored any restriction that is not explained...I added an example below Default / House Rules
-------------
|
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 13 February 2014 at 10:16am
|
Thanks Unlm, I'll see what I can come up with for the next rule update. Floss, before 26th Nov you could have "unlimited" battles, and plenty of people did, so 4 weeks is actually a lot better. As for no show wins, they will never happen. ------------- |
Posted By: Flossaurus
Date Posted: 13 February 2014 at 10:52am
|
^ word. And wouldn't it be less work if there was just wins/losses. ------------- Allow me to retort, you cowards is just learnin the shit we been teachin |
Posted By: hanGing
Date Posted: 13 February 2014 at 1:18pm
No. -------------  |
Posted By: Cuba
Date Posted: 13 February 2014 at 6:33pm
|
I like the DQ...might be worth thinking about a bit of ruthless enforcement & saying that "any post in a battle thread other than verse, vote, rules or check in results in a DQ" And if you get X DQs you receive a ban... ------------- 
|
Posted By: fuckoff
Date Posted: 13 February 2014 at 10:18pm
|
it needs to be a no holds barred battle to use outside information. you cant flip in a no flip battle just cause youv thought of a good flip. -------------  |
Posted By: D_Vour_
Date Posted: 13 February 2014 at 10:33pm
Flame, -_-, lol... If it is NOT posted DIRECTLY on THIS website, both battlers have to agree to "No Holds Barred" in Call Outs in order to use punches about your opponent that you DO NOT find posted on THIS website.
|
Posted By: D_Vour_
Date Posted: 13 February 2014 at 10:41pm
No problem pal.
|
Posted By: Cuba
Date Posted: 14 February 2014 at 10:02am
|
Anyone else see the flaw? I agree to a no holds barred battle...someone goes on my FB & posts a photo on the site of me. That's now on LA, so I have a regular battle without the "no holds barred" stipulation & now anyone can use that photo... So basically once you agree to No Holds Barred you're gonna have to battle that way all the time otherwise you're disadvantaged... Maybe it's not that much of a problem, I dunno -------------
|
Posted By: Arthur
Date Posted: 14 February 2014 at 10:21am
valid point. personally i'd never do a no holds barred battle.
|
Posted By: IntelleKt
Date Posted: 14 February 2014 at 12:29pm
|
is it not possible to create an extra stat, apart from wins, losses and no-shows, If an opponent no-shows for your battle can we not add default wins to our tally, symbolised by the letter "D" perhaps. Looks something like this... W - 24 L - 12 N - 2 D - 3 Just a suggestion ------------- 
|
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 14 February 2014 at 2:13pm
Flame, Way to completely ignore the rest of the rules!
Cuba, I'll be honest, I don't know how well that would work with this part of the Personals rule
Though if you have a No Holds Barred match and somebody uses a picture, is it that much of a problem if others use it as well? Are people likely to reuse material thats already been used? Intellekt, not sure what you are on about, do you mean separate out No Shows and DQs? or is this extra D field for DQ wins? Also, no show wins do not, have not and will never count as a well. Yes it sucks if somebody noshows on you, but I feel it is at best a cheap win, and at worse encouragement to challenge a serial no-shower in the hopes of a easy win. ------------- |
Posted By: IntelleKt
Date Posted: 14 February 2014 at 3:19pm
|
no scotty, "default wins" where your opponent becomes a no show, you get a "D" win to acknowledge that you posted a verse atleast and participated in the battle -------------
|
Posted By: Cuba
Date Posted: 14 February 2014 at 6:33pm
|
Scotty, I agree it's uncreative but a load of people recycle personal info...just look @ the photo Keeks used for Bloodlines, people still posting that up in battles against him. But yeah, I know it's difficult to put in the rules...it's a tough one, that way might work but then what if it's just general personal info? -------------
|
Posted By: Trizzy Tre
Date Posted: 14 February 2014 at 7:30pm
|
[QUOTE=Cuba]Scotty, I agree it's uncreative but a load of people recycle personal info...just look @ the photo Keeks used for Bloodlines, people still posting that up in battles against him. QUOTE] I do agree with you on that part. That one damn pic of ki in the cardboard box always seems to poke its head out in battles against him. -------------  |
Posted By: Traffik
Date Posted: 15 February 2014 at 3:22pm
|
All the rules prove is that higher authority is scared of an L .. thats why they rarely battle fear is not good for man .. ------------- and Boosie he a target, so me?I got my 40 when I'm shittin on the toilet, I'm paranoid ... -- Boosie |
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 17 March 2014 at 5:35pm
|
Why do I keep seeing "crew votes?", if its not stated in the FIRST POST, then crew votes are not allowed. Is this to complicated for you fuckwits to understand? ------------- |
Posted By: Arthur
Date Posted: 17 March 2014 at 6:01pm
| i think Learning Disability is politically correct bro. |
Posted By: Scotty32
Date Posted: 17 March 2014 at 6:07pm
|
There fixed it for you Arthur ------------- |
Posted By: Arthur
Date Posted: 17 March 2014 at 6:47pm
| merci! |