Nicestash, I appreciate your stating your reasons for favoring automatic over manual deployment. I read and considered what you wrote carefully, but remain unconvinced.
"Manual deployment is not a skill based option, and the vast majority of players would agree with me."
Assertion followed by Appeal to Authority (majority of players) logic fallacy.
"Because of this, manual drop is barred from basically every clan war (I've never seen a clan war where it is allowed) and very few tournament directors incorporate it into their tourneys."
Appeal to Authority (clan war directors and tournament directors) logic fallacy. Just because tournament directors seldom use manual drop does not prove it is a bad idea. I suspect tournament directors at this site are in the throws of "group think" (see Wikipedia article on this topic).
"The reason why manual deployment is so unpopular is because of the high frequency of "noobing"."
Unpopular among whom? Those with artificially inflated ratings? Sources of ratings inflation have been listed previously by me in this thread. I won't belabor my points. I frequently get called a "noob" despite years of playing at CC simply because I don't subscribe to the group think assumptions and mentality of the artificially highly rated. Being called a noob has not lead me to adopt their thinking. Nor have their artificially inflated ratings.
"Noobing is where a player (usually inexperienced) attacks a stack with their own, completely destroying any chance either player had of winning."
One of the many group think assumptions of the artificially highly rated is that it is always wrong to attack a nearby stack. This is insultingly called noobing by those unable to think outside their little boxes. It is often, perhaps even usually, wrong to attack stacks, I agree, but not always, and I can easily imagine a set of circumstances where it could be right.
"With a manual drop, players generally cluster their troops into somewhere between 1-3 regions, so one instance of noobing can be absolutely devastating. While it is possible to leave 3s on each region like in standard deployment, this puts a player at an equally heightened disadvantage-everyone else is more compact, and as they look to take a bonus, they feel no qualms with taking out a 3 because the bonus will yield a much larger bonus."
Finally, we are given an argument based on reason rather than rhetoric (logical fallacy)! I agree with everything you wrote here, but I see it as an argument in favor of skill in manual deployment. Is it better to place 3 troops everywhere? You say no because this leaves one too weak everywhere and one's 3s get knocked out by the players with stacks. So you must place your troops in 1 to 3 drops. But how many? And which is best for which map given various chances factors: 1, 2, or 3? These are key strategic questions that need skill and judgement, perhaps even experience, for determination.
"Some players claim that there is a lot of "skill" in determining the drop, but this can only be argued to apply in 1v1 or team games. With 8 players it's impossible to predict where everyone will start meaning no matter what you do, you can very easily be noobed."
I am one of those players that make this claim for the use of skill in determining the drop. If you make your big drop on a Standard 42-country world map in Australia or South America, probably even in Africa in an 8-player game, you increase your chance of being noobed. Even novices know it is good to go for easy bonus territories. In an American Civil War game, drop your stack in New England, Texas, Maryland, or Virginia, and yes, someone will likely have his stack nearby and you will have a rough time. Put your stack in the Badlands or on the ships, and you have only maybe one person to defeat (or avoid) who thought likewise. You are better positioned to win the game of survival, and yes nuclear is more a game of survival (particularly on small maps) than any other variation. Every map has nuances like this.
Sure, bad luck in finding your stack surrounded by other player's stacks can lead to early defeat. However, it remains my opinion that skill in original placement, and subsequent avoidance vs. confrontation decisions, and how one goes about this (leaving stacks next to others stacks is often insufficient avoidance) more determines the game's outcome than the luck factor of where other players drop stacks.
In sum, while I concede that their is a bad luck factor of being "noobed" out of a game early on, I still believe there are more skill factors involved, and that these factors more than compensate. So far the voting is
Manual deployment - General Quigley
Automatic deployment - nice stash
a 50/50 combination of both - Alex Everard
If no majority votes on a change, I will leave things as they are. I will extend voting one additional day to provide voters one last chance to get their vote in if they wish to, and close the voting at 0000 GMT Monday morning, which is Sunday evening in most US time zones.
Cheers,
General Quigley
By doing this, Wolfboy actually eliminated himself from the game allowing Alex to win while literally asleep. That's what I call intimidation! 