THE OFFICIAL CC CONQUEROR’S CUP 4

[chapcrap]

Is there any reasonable kind of time frame for when this might start?

[jghost7]

If any random element were to be involved, then I would suggest that the top 16 clans according to the F400 be seeded accordingly, and then you can randomly draw their opponents. Play from there would be from the bracket.

I think this will also address the anomalies of good clans starting at the bottom, like Atlantis, if they get to join, are obviously stronger than their rank would indicate.


Here is an example of what it looks like before the draw:


Once the drawing is held, then we would fill in the bracket and proceed like a normal bracket tournament.

It is simple and straightforward.

Thanks,

J

[IcePack]

If any random element were to be involved, then I would suggest that the top 16 clans according to the F400 be seeded accordingly, and then you can randomly draw their opponents. Play from there would be from the bracket.

I think this will also address the anomalies of good clans starting at the bottom, like Atlantis, if they get to join, are obviously stronger than their rank would indicate.


Here is an example of what it looks like before the draw:


Once the drawing is held, then we would fill in the bracket and proceed like a normal bracket tournament.

It is simple and straightforward.

Thanks,

J

This is pretty close to what i had pm'd jet about as well, IF we were to go a random route. This is kinda where i would prefer it head.

[Qwert]

these above its same like classic bracket-- low ranked clans could just quit to play,,because hes chances to get medals are close to zero. I realy dont understand what you have against that in round 1 clans from 17 to 32 play betwene? Why dont give hem equal opponents in first round? Why do you want to play against low ranked right in first round?
I can bet that any high ranked clan, will try to avoide to play against 32 ranked clan(except fall, or im wrong). I realy dont see any benefit to play in first round with easy opponent, but maybe you can see?

[IcePack]

these above its same like classic bracket-- low ranked clans could just quit to play,,because hes chances to get medals are close to zero. I realy dont understand what you have against that in round 1 clans from 17 to 32 play betwene? Why dont give hem equal opponents in first round? Why do you want to play against low ranked right in first round?

It isn't the same, opponents are drawn at random for first round. I still prefer the classic bracket, not any random involved.
But, we debated this for 30 pages in the other thread. I'm not about to start again. The CD's will hold a vote, and everyone can move on. I certainly dont want to discuss the same things over and over as the other thread, for 30 pages. if you and josko want to add another 25 pages here, knock yourselves out.

IcePack

[jetsetwilly]

If any random element were to be involved, then I would suggest that the top 16 clans according to the F400 be seeded accordingly, and then you can randomly draw their opponents. Play from there would be from the bracket.

I think this will also address the anomalies of good clans starting at the bottom, like Atlantis, if they get to join, are obviously stronger than their rank would indicate.


Here is an example of what it looks like before the draw:


Once the drawing is held, then we would fill in the bracket and proceed like a normal bracket tournament.

It is simple and straightforward.

Thanks,

J

Rather than put in a 5th option we can change option 3 to look like this. I don't think option 3 as it currently stands has had a huge deal of support and this option is probably more of a half way house between 1 and 2. Two of you have suggested it so I'm happy to make that final change. We would love to include every variation but the list can only be so long to be practical.

[jghost7]

...

1.Fixed bracket system

Top clans are kept apart for as long as possible using the F400 and you know who are likely to meet as the cup progresses.

show: Option 1 - CC3 Example

2. An entirely random draw for every round.

For round 1 the 32 teams are pulled from a hat at random
For round 2 the 16 remaining teams are pulled from a hat at random.
etc.

top clans could meet each other in an early round and we might see some big name casualties.

show: Option 2

3. Seed the top 16 to play random opponents in round 1 then proceed with a bracket.

The top 16 clans according to the F400 be seeded accordingly, and then you can randomly draw their opponents. Play from there would be from the bracket.

show: Option 3

4. Alternative system

Clans 1-8 get a bye in Rounds 1 and 2 and join from Round 3
Clans 9-16 get a bye in Round 2 and join in Round 2

There are 2 similar alternatives within option 4 but for the purposes of the initial discussion we propose to keep them as a single option. If this option proves to be the winner then we could determine which of the 2 to go for.

Option 4a uses a random method of pairing the clans. 4b uses a bracket system.

4a:

R1: Clans ranked 17-24 are randomly paired with the clans ranked 25-32
R2: Clans ranked 9-16 are randomly paired with the winners from R1
R3 Clans ranked 1-8 clans are randomly paired with the winers from R2
QF: Remainng clans ranked 1-4 are randomly paired with those ranked 4-8
SF: Remaining clans ranked 1-2 are randomly paried with those ranked 3-4

4b:

R1: Clans ranked 17-24 are paired with the clans ranked 25-32 using the system 17v32; 18v31 ... 24v25
R2: Clans ranked 9-16 are paired with the 8 winners from R1. 9v(24v25); 10v(23v26) ... 16v(17v32)
R3 Clans ranked 1-8 clans are paired with the winners from R2. 1-8. 1v[16v(17v32)]; 2v[15v(18v31)] ... 8v[9v(24v25)]
QF: Remaining 8 clans - 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5 (or winners of their previous matches)
SF: Remaining 4 clans - 1v4, 2v3 (or winners of their previous matches)

show: Option 4a

As with 4, can 1 and 3 be combined to 1a and 1b due to their similar structure. I am sure that they are similarly matched in content. I think the following will more accurately produce the results you desire:

1.Seeded bracket system


There are two similar options within option 1 but for the purposes of the initial discussion we propose to keep them as a single option. If this option proves to be the winner then we could determine which of the 2 to go for.

Option 1a uses a strict seeding method for the entire bracket to pair the clans.
Option 1b uses seeding for the top half of the bracket to pair the clans with a randomly drawn opponent.

show: Option 1a - Seed the entire bracket

show: Option 1b - Seed the top 16 to play random opponents in round 1

2. An entirely random draw for every round.

For round 1 the 32 teams are pulled from a hat at random
For round 2 the 16 remaining teams are pulled from a hat at random.
etc.

top clans could meet each other in an early round and we might see some big name casualties.

show: Option 2

3. Alternative system

Clans 1-8 get a bye in Rounds 1 and 2 and join from Round 3
Clans 9-16 get a bye in Round 2 and join in Round 2

There are 2 similar alternatives within option 3 but for the purposes of the initial discussion we propose to keep them as a single option. If this option proves to be the winner then we could determine which of the 2 to go for.

Option 3a uses a random method of pairing the clans. 3b uses a bracket system.

3a:

R1: Clans ranked 17-24 are randomly paired with the clans ranked 25-32
R2: Clans ranked 9-16 are randomly paired with the winners from R1
R3 Clans ranked 1-8 clans are randomly paired with the winers from R2
QF: Remainng clans ranked 1-4 are randomly paired with those ranked 4-8
SF: Remaining clans ranked 1-2 are randomly paried with those ranked 3-4

3b:

R1: Clans ranked 17-24 are paired with the clans ranked 25-32 using the system 17v32; 18v31 ... 24v25
R2: Clans ranked 9-16 are paired with the 8 winners from R1. 9v(24v25); 10v(23v26) ... 16v(17v32)
R3 Clans ranked 1-8 clans are paired with the winners from R2. 1-8. 1v[16v(17v32)]; 2v[15v(18v31)] ... 8v[9v(24v25)]
QF: Remaining 8 clans - 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5 (or winners of their previous matches)
SF: Remaining 4 clans - 1v4, 2v3 (or winners of their previous matches)

show: Option 3a

I truly think this would be the best way to present this.

Thanks,

J

[jetsetwilly]

I think this is a very sensible suggestion to simplify the voting. This is the final change we have time to make ahead of the vote tomorrow.

I will pm all the reps again to ensure they have seen the change. In the event that any clan has begun to run an internal vote already they can add the votes for the previous 1 and 3 together.

1.Seeded bracket system


There are two similar options within option 1 but for the purposes of the initial discussion we propose to keep them as a single option. If this option proves to be the winner then we could determine which of the 2 to go for.

Option 1a uses a strict seeding method for the entire bracket to pair the clans.
Option 1b uses seeding for the top half of the bracket to pair the clans with a randomly drawn opponent.

show: Option 1a - Seed the entire bracket

show: Option 1b - Seed the top 16 to play random opponents in round 1

2. An entirely random draw for every round.

For round 1 the 32 teams are pulled from a hat at random
For round 2 the 16 remaining teams are pulled from a hat at random.
etc.

top clans could meet each other in an early round and we might see some big name casualties.

show: Option 2

3. Alternative system

Clans 1-8 get a bye in Rounds 1 and 2 and join from Round 3
Clans 9-16 get a bye in Round 2 and join in Round 2

There are 2 similar alternatives within option 3 but for the purposes of the initial discussion we propose to keep them as a single option. If this option proves to be the winner then we could determine which of the 2 to go for.

Option 3a uses a random method of pairing the clans. 3b uses a bracket system.

3a:

R1: Clans ranked 17-24 are randomly paired with the clans ranked 25-32
R2: Clans ranked 9-16 are randomly paired with the winners from R1
R3 Clans ranked 1-8 clans are randomly paired with the winers from R2
QF: Remainng clans ranked 1-4 are randomly paired with those ranked 4-8
SF: Remaining clans ranked 1-2 are randomly paried with those ranked 3-4

3b:

R1: Clans ranked 17-24 are paired with the clans ranked 25-32 using the system 17v32; 18v31 ... 24v25
R2: Clans ranked 9-16 are paired with the 8 winners from R1. 9v(24v25); 10v(23v26) ... 16v(17v32)
R3 Clans ranked 1-8 clans are paired with the winners from R2. 1-8. 1v[16v(17v32)]; 2v[15v(18v31)] ... 8v[9v(24v25)]
QF: Remaining 8 clans - 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5 (or winners of their previous matches)
SF: Remaining 4 clans - 1v4, 2v3 (or winners of their previous matches)

show: Option 3a

[BGtheBrain]

TNC votes #2

[Keefie]

Keep your powder dry BG, this isn't the vote thread

[BGtheBrain]

Hmmmm
unvote

[HardAttack]

Deliberately timing out in Escalating and Nuclear games to avoid taking a spoil will not be tolerated by any players.

This is ABSOLUTELY weird.
Once i turn it, how dare you speak/call it what i am gonna do, what i am gonna like to do ?
Maybe, you may like to show me/say it where to attack then it s all fine and stay inside rules, and where not to attack ?

Before i go more spesific, do you hear what you say here ? Someone please put down some logic to proove you are any correct in this.
You are simply pushing a player's strategy here...Well that and this annoys me big time.
I dont know who made your CDs and stuff, but you are not there to tell me if i am gonna run out time, miss my card, deliberately or unconciously...
How dare you put your nose in way i play my game ?

[HardAttack]

Deliberately timing out in Escalating and Nuclear games to avoid taking a spoil will not be tolerated by any players.

This is ABSOLUTELY weird.
Once i turn it, how dare you speak/call it what i am gonna do, what i am gonna like to do ?
Maybe, you may like to show me/say it where to attack then it s all fine and stay inside rules, and where not to attack ?

Before i go more spesific, do you hear what you say here ? Someone please put down some logic to proove you are any correct in this.
You are simply pushing a player's strategy here...Well that and this annoys me big time.
I dont know who made your CDs and stuff, but you are not there to tell me if i am gonna run out time, miss my card, deliberately or unconciously...
How dare you put your nose in way i play my game ?

To add one more, here one comes from me,

what bout LETS UNWELLCOME team mate killing for recash in escalating games ?

[ahunda]

HA, stop attacking the CDs for this. You obviously don´t know the history & background of this rule.

This goes back to a long debate right here in the public Clans forum, where a great majority, lots of players from different clans, almost unanimously deemed this practice unacceptable & wanted to ban it from clan games.

If you don´t like it, then feel free to argue & maybe ask for a new vote on the issue, but don´t blame the CDs for it. It was not their personal idea or initiative.

What we are talking about are situations like this: Team 1 has nailed Team 2 to the wall, forced them into a situation, where they either need to break a bonus of Team 1, thus getting a card & setting themselves up for a kill with midturn-cash (which will likely mean the win for Team 1) or leave the bonus alone (which will likely mean the win for Team 1 as well). Now Team 2 goes ahead, breaks the bonus, but then times out & doesn´t get the card.

That´s cheap play, abuse of a loophole, as close to cheating as you can get. And I for one don´t want to see this kind of thing happening. So the rule has my full support.

[Ace Rimmer]

That´s cheap play, abuse of a loophole, as close to cheating as you can get. And I for one don´t want to see this kind of thing happening. So the rule has my full support.

Conquer Club was created in January 2006 with the option to time out your turn and not get a card. It is now March 2013. This part of the game mechanism has been in place for over 7 years. This is not a loophole, this is how the site and game mechanics were designed. You can disagree with it (personally I think that you should get a card as long as you conquer/bombard a terit to zero regardless of whether or not you click End Turn) but I would not call it a loophole. It is working as designed.

Compare this to the way that team games finished when they hit a round limit. It was originally set up for the PLAYER with the most troops to get the win for his team (instead of the TEAM with the most troops). This was changed after public opposition. If there is an issue with the game mechanics allowing conquering without cards, then the game mechanics should be changed, there should not be a subjective rule in place to address this issue.

Conquering and timing out is a strategic option (the same as teammate killing, or trimming a stack without conquering, or starting a turn, dropping on a teammate, and not attacking).

Ace

[Doc_Brown]

Has a suggestion been submitted to change the site and automatically give a card to a player that times out? If the suggestion was offered and rejected, then it seems like it should be an acceptable, albeit distasteful, practice. A change in the game mechanics would eliminate concerns about subjective judgements on whether a timing out was accidental or intentional.

[jetsetwilly]

Appreciate the support Ahunda. This discussion has been held before, people are more than welcome to discuss it again but not on this thread please.

[Genoke]

Conquering and timing out is a strategic option (the same as teammate killing, or trimming a stack without conquering, or starting a turn, dropping on a teammate, and not attacking).

I agree with this. And i wouldn't call it cheating, since everybody is able to choose that kind of option...
Meaning, that every team should be prepared to the possibility of the option by the other team.

[josko.ri]

Can we name qwert's and my option " Progressive Format"?

[IcePack]

Can we name qwert's and my option " Progressive Format"?

Or keep them all neutral and say Format A, B, C etc. So there is no "influencing" the voters, like you were so worried about previously.

[Keefie]

Or keep them all neutral and say Format A, B, C etc. So there is no "influencing" the voters, like you were so worried about previously.

+1

[HardAttack]

HA, stop attacking the CDs for this. You obviously don´t know the history & background of this rule.

This goes back to a long debate right here in the public Clans forum, where a great majority, lots of players from different clans, almost unanimously deemed this practice unacceptable & wanted to ban it from clan games.

If you don´t like it, then feel free to argue & maybe ask for a new vote on the issue, but don´t blame the CDs for it. It was not their personal idea or initiative.

What we are talking about are situations like this: Team 1 has nailed Team 2 to the wall, forced them into a situation, where they either need to break a bonus of Team 1, thus getting a card & setting themselves up for a kill with midturn-cash (which will likely mean the win for Team 1) or leave the bonus alone (which will likely mean the win for Team 1 as well). Now Team 2 goes ahead, breaks the bonus, but then times out & doesn´t get the card.

That´s cheap play, abuse of a loophole, as close to cheating as you can get. And I for one don´t want to see this kind of thing happening. So the rule has my full support.

Maybe my pointing CDs was wrong since i am told it that this thing is not their own/personal willing but something wanted by many ppl.
Well this is a democratic platform and if 51 over 100 wants something then allright...
However, i will disagree with you, i see every way to be valid as long as it brings me the victory excluding certain abuses, such as sitting abuses.
Site gives me the option to run out of time, and once i see running out of time in any particular circumstance going to work for me, i will do, i will follow that path, why not ?
If this is against rules/ and if my clan is going to suffer from this, then i will not do, however i will feel and believe it that i am NOT wrong here.
I dont see this being any piece of badsportmanship/cheap tactic whatever you like to call it.
This is an option there stays, and i am simply utilizing the given option.
Are we aware of it that lately we are shaping the gaming practice in two ways, that is rules for clan games and rules for other type of games...I dont know where this is going to take us to, how many more limits are going to be defined and so...

Do not run out of time, pick a card to nuke your 3 territs in a nuclear game...Well, this makes not any sense to me.
I ll not accept this, but will obey the rules. Rules are rules, but rules are not correct everytime.
If this is cheap tactic, hey give me my cheap tactic medal which i am going to carry with pride.
Majority set the rules, but majority do not bring and put all the truths all the time.

[Doc_Brown]

HA, stop attacking the CDs for this. You obviously don´t know the history & background of this rule.

This goes back to a long debate right here in the public Clans forum, where a great majority, lots of players from different clans, almost unanimously deemed this practice unacceptable & wanted to ban it from clan games.

If you don´t like it, then feel free to argue & maybe ask for a new vote on the issue, but don´t blame the CDs for it. It was not their personal idea or initiative.

What we are talking about are situations like this: Team 1 has nailed Team 2 to the wall, forced them into a situation, where they either need to break a bonus of Team 1, thus getting a card & setting themselves up for a kill with midturn-cash (which will likely mean the win for Team 1) or leave the bonus alone (which will likely mean the win for Team 1 as well). Now Team 2 goes ahead, breaks the bonus, but then times out & doesn´t get the card.

That´s cheap play, abuse of a loophole, as close to cheating as you can get. And I for one don´t want to see this kind of thing happening. So the rule has my full support.

Maybe my pointing CDs was wrong since i am told it that this thing is not their own/personal willing but something wanted by many ppl.
Well this is a democratic platform and if 51 over 100 wants something then allright...
However, i will disagree with you, i see every way to be valid as long as it brings me the victory excluding certain abuses, such as sitting abuses.
Site gives me the option to run out of time, and once i see running out of time in any particular circumstance going to work for me, i will do, i will follow that path, why not ?
If this is against rules/ and if my clan is going to suffer from this, then i will not do, however i will feel and believe it that i am NOT wrong here.
I dont see this being any piece of badsportmanship/cheap tactic whatever you like to call it.
This is an option there stays, and i am simply utilizing the given option.
Are we aware of it that lately we are shaping the gaming practice in two ways, that is rules for clan games and rules for other type of games...I dont know where this is going to take us to, how many more limits are going to be defined and so...

Do not run out of time, pick a card to nuke your 3 territs in a nuclear game...Well, this makes not any sense to me.
I ll not accept this, but will obey the rules. Rules are rules, but rules are not correct everytime.
If this is cheap tactic, hey give me my cheap tactic medal which i am going to carry with pride.
Majority set the rules, but majority do not bring and put all the truths all the time.

Since Jetsetwilly has requested this discussion be moved elsewhere, I created a suggestion thread regarding this tactic requesting either that the possibility for the tactic be removed or that there be an official statement that it is an acceptable strategy.

Edit: Corrected spelling of Jetsetwilly

[Finsfleet]

That´s cheap play, abuse of a loophole, as close to cheating as you can get. And I for one don´t want to see this kind of thing happening. So the rule has my full support.

Conquer Club was created in January 2006 with the option to time out your turn and not get a card. It is now March 2013. This part of the game mechanism has been in place for over 7 years. This is not a loophole, this is how the site and game mechanics were designed. You can disagree with it (personally I think that you should get a card as long as you conquer/bombard a terit to zero regardless of whether or not you click End Turn) but I would not call it a loophole. It is working as designed.

Compare this to the way that team games finished when they hit a round limit. It was originally set up for the PLAYER with the most troops to get the win for his team (instead of the TEAM with the most troops). This was changed after public opposition. If there is an issue with the game mechanics allowing conquering without cards, then the game mechanics should be changed, there should not be a subjective rule in place to address this issue.

Conquering and timing out is a strategic option (the same as teammate killing, or trimming a stack without conquering, or starting a turn, dropping on a teammate, and not attacking).

Ace

Yes. Except. We`re talking about CC, the one which is scared of changes. Take your money and go site. The one that doesn`t care for its customers. Seven years is way too short for them.

[niMic]

Oh, I don't know. A LOT has changed since 2006.