Conquer Club

Hello, please change Agents of Chaos' roster to:

1. jetsetwilly
2. Nicky15
3. slaylark
4. NanoTheGreat
5. angola
6. eaglebyrob
7. Hook2
8. slickstm
9. Jippd
10. Steiner75

Thanks.

hi Ice

can you explain map usage? I'm also understanding it as we can use map once per set,
but there is no limit to how many times we can use a particular map?

uckuki wrote:hi Ice

can you explain map usage? I'm also understanding it as we can use map once per set,
but there is no limit to how many times we can use a particular map?

Correct, so long as it is not used more than once per set.

Sorry for the delayed reply, yesterday had a family univ graduation ceremony / party all day.
Anyway, yes the maps can be reused. But unless all members of your clan know the same map very well, you'll likely have to use more maps if you want members to be medal qualified.

Also - i believe (sorry its v early here) that there are stricter map restrictions in the post season, but you can look in the write up there to clarify that

icePack

Make this a non-clan tournament so I can play!

Rodion wrote:Make this a non-clan tournament so I can play!

You could join a different clan?

he is a cow...

are you guys just not interested in joining the tourney or too late?

reptile wrote:he is a cow...

are you guys just not interested in joining the tourney or too late?

Mooooooooooooooooooooooooo

They have spilled all the milk they could...

we did not seek and we will not serve as the alternate

Ok. Cheers!

In other news - after technical difficulties the schedule is wrapping up and soon to be released.

And in non-ICL related news, yay for my new iMac that will save me from future technical difficulties!

IcePack

reptile wrote:he is a cow...

are you guys just not interested in joining the tourney or too late?

I'm guessing it's this rule that is causing the problem:

"Unlimited reinforcements are allowed on conquest maps only."

KORT likes to use unlimited, and for some reason that is not being allowed here, and was not allowed in dubs in CL4. I'm no fan of KORT but I certainly think the rule is bullshit, same with no nukes. They are part of the game, and the less restrictions we have the better.

Ace Rimmer wrote:

reptile wrote:he is a cow...

are you guys just not interested in joining the tourney or too late?

I'm guessing it's this rule that is causing the problem:

"Unlimited reinforcements are allowed on conquest maps only."

KORT likes to use unlimited, and for some reason that is not being allowed here, and was not allowed in dubs in CL4. I'm no fan of KORT but I certainly think the rule is bullshit, same with no nukes. They are part of the game, and the less restrictions we have the better.

I'm a big fan of nukes, we didn't allow it because its "standard practise" and unlike CC3 or other 1 vs 1 clan war type events, nothing can be negotiated for specific match ups as its inter mixed.

Unlimited we've restricted to conquest maps this year, we didnt' receive much feedback on it while we had discussions. Next year, if they're interested in signing up / having the rule changed we will certainly discuss any modifications.

IcePack

I guess i dont care about it either way, as i see both sides of the unlimited rule. I stray away from unlimited forts especially on doubles because it leaves too much to the drop. It adds too much luck in my opinion and since this relates to clans most would try to stray away from luck to prove their clan is better or what not. So in a way i support the rule of no unlimited forts, but would not complain if it were changed ...

I think "no nukes" is a stupid standard practice. They've been out for well over a year. Flat rate is much more luck-based than unlimited or nukes but nobody has an issue with allowing it. And if a clan wants to use unlimited forts in doubles, they run the risk of not going first and losing. It's a risk some clans are willing to take.

Not attacking you IcePack, just pointing out that the standard practices are wrong.

Ace Rimmer wrote:I think "no nukes" is a stupid standard practice. They've been out for well over a year. Flat rate is much more luck-based than unlimited or nukes but nobody has an issue with allowing it. And if a clan wants to use unlimited forts in doubles, they run the risk of not going first and losing. It's a risk some clans are willing to take.

Not attacking you IcePack, just pointing out that the standard practices are wrong.

I'll be happy to discuss next years ICL event another time. This years rules are set in place and we can review how it ended up afterwards.

IcePack

Ace Rimmer wrote:I think "no nukes" is a stupid standard practice. They've been out for well over a year. Flat rate is much more luck-based than unlimited or nukes but nobody has an issue with allowing it. And if a clan wants to use unlimited forts in doubles, they run the risk of not going first and losing. It's a risk some clans are willing to take.

Not attacking you IcePack, just pointing out that the standard practices are wrong.

You can blame me for the rules as I was the one who basically concepted them. The idea was to keep this more challenging and reduce the amount of luck based games. You can argue for against the ways we tried to achieve this, but from my (our) perception, not allowing unlimited forts and nukes keeps the event more competitive between all clans on the whole.

KORT did not join, because as I was told, "not one person voted to participate in the event."

KORT is a small clan (23 members, roughly 9 of them freemium/retired, which drops our roster to 14 active players, give or take).

That considered, KORT as a clan has enough on its plate with CC3/CL4 (it didn't help that the unlimited situation removed Josko's interest from the competition).

Could I possibly bounce back and forth between 2 clans so I'd be in KORT whenever needed for CC3/CL4 purposes (period between "sending home games to the opponent" until "games are joined by both clans and start") and use my available time outside the mentioned period to play some ICL games for another clan?

Bo Jackson and Deion Sanders sort of did that with baseball and football, so I figured I had to ask if I could try something similar.

MNDuke wrote:You can blame me for the rules as I was the one who basically concepted them. The idea was to keep this more challenging and reduce the amount of luck based games. You can argue for against the ways we tried to achieve this, but from my (our) perception, not allowing unlimited forts and nukes keeps the event more competitive between all clans on the whole.

I know we've gone over this before a lot, but I'm struggling to get my head around how unlimited is supposed to increase the luck factor. If anything it greatly decreases it, on many maps.

And it seems a weird thing to limit, when you're apparently allowed to play as many doodle games as you want?

IcePack wrote:I'll be happy to discuss next years ICL event another time. This years rules are set in place and we can review how it ended up afterwards.

IcePack

+1

The time to discuss allowable settings for the inaugural season has passed. Let's see how the season goes with the rules that have already been decided upon and discuss changes for Year 2 in the off-season (right after the Dragoons' ICL Championship victory parade).

The rules are fine they way they are, i agree we can change them next year.. clan tourney is perfect on the first try and will never be exactly as all the clans want it as they all have different opinions/preferences. So lets at least wait until this tournament is winding down before creating next years.

Everyone will enjoy this years either way, thanks for putting it on. I am glad that someone finally came up with a league like this, thanks for putting it on.

As far as the rules go, I will cede to IcePack and MNDuke.

Rodion, I will bring up your proposal with the CDs and the group and see what they think. Don't get your hopes up. Do you have another clan to play with anyway?

And now, the real reason I came to post: I just finished everyone's schedule for the season. I sent it to IcePack and he should be looking it over for mistakes, etc. He'll be the one to pass out/post the schedule information. Just wanted to let everyone know I finished scheduling.

chapcrap wrote:Rodion, I will bring up your proposal with the CDs and the group and see what they think. Don't get your hopes up. Do you have another clan to play with anyway?

Not a chance in hell!

niMic wrote:

MNDuke wrote:You can blame me for the rules as I was the one who basically concepted them. The idea was to keep this more challenging and reduce the amount of luck based games. You can argue for against the ways we tried to achieve this, but from my (our) perception, not allowing unlimited forts and nukes keeps the event more competitive between all clans on the whole.

I know we've gone over this before a lot, but I'm struggling to get my head around how unlimited is supposed to increase the luck factor. If anything it greatly decreases it, on many maps.

Unlimited forts can increase the luck factor depending on drop and turn order and quickly sway the game. Essentially they turn every map into a conquest map, much the same way manual drops can have that effect. That's my opinion or reasoning for not including them. Another was that not all clans and players are not that familiar with unlimited and nukes. Which is also why they weren't included.

The way the rules were designed was to keep everyone on even footing. You can make arguments for both sides. It depends on how you are looking at it. Either way, everyone is playing by the same rules and has the same advantage.

How can clans not have people who do not know how to play unlimited forts? They have been around forever! Nukes over a year now. There is no luck involved in unlimited forts. Flat rate has way more luck than unlimited forts. People who know how to play unlimited forts will run over people who are marginal on the setting. Luck has nothing to do with it. If a home team picks the setting they also know they risk not going first and I am sure they would account for it.