League News

Season 1 8v8 Playoffs

Season 1 8v8 Playoffs Bracket

Congratulations to all teams who were able to finish out the season strong. We will have a quick and interesting 4 team playoff for season one before going into the second season of Battlefield 3. We will use Seine Crossing and Grand Bazaar for the playoff maps. For 8v8, playoffs will begin on March 1st.

Scheduling, Playoffs, and Next Season

We know there was some confusion for some teams about scheduling. We should have corrected it via an email we sent out to you when the schedules were completed last week. Due to Valentines Day matches were not required to be played last night, but schedules were posted early enough for teams to be able to do so if they wanted to. Those several teams who did play last night, just view this as a week off before playoffs start.

As for the playoffs, for both 4v4 and 8v8 we will be going with a short 4 team playoff. We want to try to keep those teams who have spent the last 8 or 10 weeks participating in the CGL an opportunity to compete in a single-elimination bracket. There are a couple of teams that could still potentially fight their way in, but we will be basing the seeding off of the scoring system. Teams who joined the league late have received a natural penalty for each week they missed and did not make up those matches. This is an encouragement for teams to play an entire season and also make-up matches when possible.

Lastly, next season will begin quickly after the playoffs end. We feel that unlike basketball or football, there is no need to recover from “injuries”. There will be a one week break in match scheduling, but teams will be able to sign up quickly once this season is over for Season 2 of Battlefield 3. We are looking forward to it and hear that there are several more teams interested in joining next season to make for an even more competitive atmosphere.

M320 Will Stay For the Remainder of the Season

After reading several posts and comments we have decided that it is best not to alter the ruleset for this season. Hearing from several people very adamant about keeping it while others were adamant about removing the M320, we feel like it is best to not remove it towards the end of a season. Modifying rules mid-season should be reserved for patch changes and newly discovered things that directly make a change on the gameplay and need to be ruled on. The M320 has been around and been used regularly for quite a while now. The CGL will go ahead and keep the M320 in match play until the end of the playoffs.

More than likely we will see the M320 removed for Season 2 of Battlefield 3. This will give teams an opportunity during a two week preseason schedule to adjust to a modified ruleset.

Discussion: M320 Removal

In short, we would like to hear your opinions on removing the M320 from all competition. There has been some concerns that it has become a staple for competitive play and it is lowering the required level of skill in order to be a successful team. What we are attempting to do is provide a good platform in order for teams to not only be able to come up with creative and unique strategies in order to enhance the level of play and options for all teams, but also make the game as fun as possible to play in the competitive gaming.

Please, as before with when we discussed removing the MAV, please post your opinion as a comment to this news post (click on the title), why you feel it is important to keep or remove the M320, and we will be reviewing all opinions and taking them into consideration.

The CGL is looking for Writers

The Championship Gaming League is looking for additional admins. We are currently receiving several visitors daily, but we wish to develop news and content surrounding the matches, teams, and players for the Battlefield 3 community. Essentially, our hope is to be the one-stop place for all things Battlefield 3 competition related.

We are looking for someone who wishes to do weekly, if not daily, updates to the Championship Gaming League (CGL) website. Additionally, you will be tasked with writing about technology and other gaming news to drive additional brand awareness and new visitors to the CGL website.

If you are looking to give back to the community, be a part of a fun, relaxed, yet professional minded group with a history of success, then you will be an excellent fit to work with us. Please send an email to apply@thecgl.com telling us a little bit about yourself and how you would like to be involved in our growing community.

Playing Your Matches

There has been some concern we have noticed about playing the matches, when matches have to be played, etc. Our focus primarily is just that the matches get played. We would rather not see forfeit wins and be more lenient on when matches are played. The issue for us for the first four weeks was that we were attempting to wait until all matches were played before scheduling. However, understandably, a lot of teams have a lot going on each week and rescheduling is a must for a lot of teams. We ask that teams are lenient with one another and play the match at an agreed upon time.

As long as we know that matches are going to be played we will not be posting a forfeit / tie for you. However, the issue is that you can only see one match communications at a time. If you wait until the following week to play the match, your following weeks opponent will be waiting to hear back from you. It is best to try to play all matches the week of the Tuesday (4v4) or Thursday (8v8).

I simply wanted to clarify though that Match Communications is what admins of the CGL can see. As long as your team is using those to communicate with your opponent, which it appears all teams are, then feel free to schedule the match for when it is best to be played rather than reporting forfeit wins or losses if at all possible.

MAV’s Banned from 4v4 and 8v8

The CGL didn’t want to make any hasty decisions, we spoke to several people personally, we also read every single comment pertaining to this issue. A lot of thought has been put into this decision because we want to be known as the league that is extremely careful with making these decisions. Our criteria to remove something is that it has to “break the game”. Based on what we have seen in the older patches, IRNV and Tactical Lights literally “broke the game”. We feel that the MAV, and it appears that most teams support this, does break the game. In competition, it’s used in a manner that causes teams to tailor their strategies to the MAV and removes several possibilities strategically in maps. With the MAV eliminated, a wider variety of strategies is encouraged.

As a side note, there was initially some thought of simply banning it from certain locations. We think this is still a possibility in the future. The reason we were unable to do this is because we have no way of truly monitoring it. There is no battlerecording feature in BF3, so it would make those calls and match disputes extremely difficult to rule on one way or the other. Therefore, since most people view that the MAV has certain downfalls, it is best to remove it all together until DICE/EA can fix the issues that it has. We hope that the entire competitive community will embrace this decision.

Should the MAV be removed from competitive play?

Please note that based on our ruleset, we have already proven that we prefer the barebones feel. Our guidelines for removing certain aspects of the game are only necessary if we feel they actually “break the game”. The MAV, for the reason shown below, we feel is a good indication that it breaks the game we all know, love, and prefer. We still want to hear what the community feels about it before making a quick decision.

There has been some discussion with recent modifications to MAV’s in Battlefield 3. Particularly in Squad Rush, in case you were unaware, MAV’s can be placed in strategic locations that provides consistent UAV to see where your enemies are located anytime they move. Generally the locations they are placed in makes it difficult on the attacking team to kill the MAV. How does the community feel about removing the MAV from both 8v8 and 4v4 in order to bring strategies back to placing people in strategic locations and not knowing what your opponent is doing or where they are coming from?

Please post a comment indicating what your preference is. We would like to hear from those teams playing in the Battlefield 3 community.

4v4 Squad Rush Wins – Reporting

It has come to my understanding that several teams played their matches last week, but reported their match 1-0. In the CGL, 1-0 victories are reserved for forfeit wins. If your match was played last week but was reported 1-0, please use our support form to send in a match dispute and provide the actual score.

Forfeit wins = 1-0
Matches that do not go into overtime = 2-0
Matches that have overtime rounds: 2-1

4v4 Ruleset Changes

We have discussed with several teams within the community how we could change the 4v4 ruleset to make it more competitive and allow for a better overall experience of those participating. The issue primarily was about how overtime should be implemented and how long matches should last. We feel we have come up with a solution that can work for all teams and allows a match most frequently to play out.

Please see “Playing the Match” section of the 4v4 Ruleset for how we wish to implement overtime into Squad Rush play. To give a brief rundown:

There will be a maximum of 3 overtime rounds with each round consisting of a team playing both the attacking and defending side. Winner is determine by MCOM’s destroyed. If at the end of the 3rd overtime both teams are still tied, the winner is chosen based on the time provided in-game of that round. In essence, the team that destroys the MCOM’s the fastest wins the match (the lower the time, the better).

We understand that most matches will not reach a 3rd overtime. However, to prevent matches from lasting so long that players are forced to leave the match and causing other logistical problems for the players, teams, and the league as a whole, we felt it was necessary to come to a definite way that a winner could be chosen that was based on game play, not on a random winner.