CCup 4 format discussion (ver 5, p. 28)

[Foxglove]

Sorry but I back Qwert on this one.

There has been an underlying implication running all of the way through this thread that there would be a vote in CD&F regarding seeding and the draw. I'm pretty shocked that this will not happen now.

I don't think it was ever implied by the organizer, though.

My two cents - I think that it was good to have the discussion about alternate seeding and draw mechanisms, but ultimately it seemed like as many people in this thread were interested in leaving things the way they were from the previous cups as were interested in something new. Since this will be the 4th edition of the cup, it probably makes sense to stick fairly closely to the original set up unless a significant majority of people support a change. Also - I think the people most interested in changes or not will have been following this thread and posting. If someone had a strong opinion in any particular direction, here was the spot to voice it. There's no real guarantee that the players in CDF will have followed the details of the discussion here.

I think Dako has done a great job. He opened up the discussion, listened to opinions, and made changes to tighten up and update the rules (rules about remaking games, adding trench and nuke settings, etc). He was open to major changes, but the final result is a tournament that's remarkably similar to the very successful cup 1, cup 2, and cup 3. Cup 4 should be just as fun.

[chemefreak]

Okay. So not paying attention to the voice of clans in CDF is approved by a member of KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen. Any other takers?

I think if everyone stays silent on this, Dako might as well just give KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen a bye to the semi-finals and the rest of us can just play for the scraps. Anyone else see where this is going?

[Foxglove]

Okay. So not paying attention to the voice of clans in CDF is approved by a member of KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen. Any other takers?

I think if everyone stays silent on this, Dako might as well just give KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen a bye to the semi-finals and the rest of us can just play for the scraps. Anyone else see where this is going?

(Can I post this twice, or just once?)

[Doc_Brown]

Okay. So not paying attention to the voice of clans in CDF is approved by a member of KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen. Any other takers?

Also Empire, AKA, and Atlantis. In fact, of the people (10) that responded positively or negatively, 70% so far liked the latest revision.

[chemefreak]

Okay. So not paying attention to the voice of clans in CDF is approved by a member of KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen. Any other takers?

Also Empire, AKA, and Atlantis. In fact, of the people (10) that responded positively or negatively, 70% so far liked the latest revision.

Another vote from TOFU...

The bottom line is that the revision is completely unilateral. It ignores so much effort by clan leaders in CD&F.

ps...it should also be noted that The Voice is not an Empire leader, Foxglove is not a KoRT leader, eddie is eddie (I do love him though), and Atlantis is not even eligible without special permission (not that they should be excluded or anything, but they haven't fought a war yet). Each of these clans has a CD&F representative (except Atlantis to my knowledge) and I am sure they want their clan's voice heard, after meaningful discussion, not just one member who happens to see this thread.

[Chariot of Fire]

Okay. So not paying attention to the voice of clans in CDF is approved by a member of KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen. Any other takers?

Also Empire, AKA, and Atlantis. In fact, of the people (10) that responded positively or negatively, 70% so far liked the latest revision.

Another vote from TOFU...

The bottom line is that the revision is completely unilateral. It ignores so much effort by clan leaders in CD&F.

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet that this has become a tournament run by a member of a clan (in this case TOFU) and have inferred that it shows favouritism ("Dako might as well just give KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen a bye to the semi-finals and the rest of us can just play for the scraps"). Why would you write such a thing? When the format is going to be as close as it can to the previous edition, where was your complaint when Chuuuuck (also TOFU) ran it then?

Personally I don't get it. Some positive progress has been made, the tourney is staying true to already-proven principles, yet because there is now a discussion forum and a CDF forum people are getting their noses put out of shape because they might not have been able to change anything.

Have faith in the TO and trust him to do his job. If there is any criticism make it constructive, i.e. "xxxxxxx could be changed", rather than just throwing a wobbly and making glib remarks such as the one I quoted in Para.1.

This event is fun, let's not detract from that. Thanks

[chemefreak]

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet that this has become a tournament run by a member of a clan (in this case TOFU) and have inferred that it shows favouritism ("Dako might as well just give KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen a bye to the semi-finals and the rest of us can just play for the scraps").

I understand and applaud you for sticking up for your clan mate. However, I think it proves my point. If Dako were a member of a lower ranked clan I am sure he never would have suggested earlier on that the lower ranked clans play a "play-in" match that would be ineligible for medals and privileges. Or even go so far as suggesting that those clans could just use the invite system like we all used to.

The CDs had issues with chuuuuck as well (see the medal issues in earlier cups). The CDs, in conjunction with the CLA, brought chuuuuck proposed rules that he implemented as the will of the clans (perhaps a little begrudgingly). Dako is ignoring this right now. Whether it is pride, or just an attempt to flex his muscles, I really don't know. But the clans deserve a voice in this since it has become much more than just another clan event. It is one of two primary clan events. I guess I just can't figure out why he is choosing to take this course.

I agree that we do not want to start this whole process over. Version 4 was damn close to where a majority wanted to be. Then, unilaterally, things were removed/added, and then there is the whole business regarding the "disappearance of the TO". That is just a shot at the CDs and CD&F. It was uncalled for.

I must sleep. I can't wait to see what happens in the next 6 hours or so.

[Chariot of Fire]

I understand and applaud you for sticking up for your clan mate. However, I think it proves my point.

Whoah! Steady on. It has nothing to do with 'sticking up for my clan mate'. I don't even agree with half of the rules (map use, player quota, byes, etc) but I do know when to end my argument that tried to support my cause. Now that this is nearing a fait accompli I'll do all I can to support it, regardless of who the TO is. I applied the same principle to this as I did to CL5, run by a non-TOFU member.

And I thought 'Disappearance of the TO' was a good addendum. Cover all bases I say. It certainly wasn't a shot at anyone (how could it be?). Besides, we all know how dangerous those Russian roads are - and he rides a m/bike!

[Vid_FISO]

As a leader of one of the weaker clans, the opinions of our members (so far) is that we're not going to be lambs led to the slaughter. We'll be looking for wars that we can negotiate terms fully against opponents that we believe that we have a decent chance of running close or even beating instead.

[angola]

As a leader of one of the weaker clans, the opinions of our members (so far) is that we're not going to be lambs led to the slaughter. We'll be looking for wars that we can negotiate terms fully against opponents that we believe that we have a decent chance of running close or even beating instead.

Out of curiosity, does this mean you folks won't participate in CC4? Or does this mean you want a random draw?

[Vid_FISO]

As a leader of one of the weaker clans, the opinions of our members (so far) is that we're not going to be lambs led to the slaughter. We'll be looking for wars that we can negotiate terms fully against opponents that we believe that we have a decent chance of running close or even beating instead.

Out of curiosity, does this mean you folks won't participate in CC4? Or does this mean you want a random draw?

We won't compete. We do realize a random draw could have paired us with a top clan anyway, but that's a gamble, say an even chance we'd face someone that should beat us easily or someone we'd have a decent fight with. Top v bottom is just shooting fish in a barrel.

[angola]

As a leader of one of the weaker clans, the opinions of our members (so far) is that we're not going to be lambs led to the slaughter. We'll be looking for wars that we can negotiate terms fully against opponents that we believe that we have a decent chance of running close or even beating instead.

Out of curiosity, does this mean you folks won't participate in CC4? Or does this mean you want a random draw?

We won't compete. We do realize a random draw could have paired us with a top clan anyway, but that's a gamble, say an even chance we'd face someone that should beat us easily or someone we'd have a decent fight with. Top v bottom is just shooting fish in a barrel.

So, are you also OK with byes for the top clans?

(Just trying to feel out your position).

[angola]

With the timing out rule now being optional - and I really don't see how it is subjective, you conquer a territory you get a card - Agents of Chaos is very unlikely to sign up. We got burned on this in a CLA final and we are not keen on getting burned by this loophole again.

[Arama86n]

Okay. So not paying attention to the voice of clans in CDF is approved by a member of KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen. Any other takers?

I think if everyone stays silent on this, Dako might as well just give KoRT, TOFU, and the Fallen a bye to the semi-finals and the rest of us can just play for the scraps. Anyone else see where this is going?

It is sad to see somone I had respect for as an objective and level-headed person reduced to this. This is the second time this week I've had to read a post by you that has made me stare at the screen and shake my head sadly.
You are better than this Cheme.

[Dako]

With the timing out rule now being optional - and I really don't see how it is subjective, you conquer a territory you get a card - Agents of Chaos is very unlikely to sign up. We got burned on this in a CLA final and we are not keen on getting burned by this loophole again.

I think you should be familiar with the meaning of the word subjective as you are American. It means a decision is based on personal opinion. Right CC doesn't award spoils at the end of timed out turn by flawed design. But when person times out a turn you cannot say if he did so for strategic advantage or he had black out. You have to guess when you make a call what really happened. That means the decision is based on personal opinion and is therefore subjective.

And for the record, I am not going to make those calls.

[Vid_FISO]

As a leader of one of the weaker clans, the opinions of our members (so far) is that we're not going to be lambs led to the slaughter. We'll be looking for wars that we can negotiate terms fully against opponents that we believe that we have a decent chance of running close or even beating instead.

Out of curiosity, does this mean you folks won't participate in CC4? Or does this mean you want a random draw?

We won't compete. We do realize a random draw could have paired us with a top clan anyway, but that's a gamble, say an even chance we'd face someone that should beat us easily or someone we'd have a decent fight with. Top v bottom is just shooting fish in a barrel.

So, are you also OK with byes for the top clans?

(Just trying to feel out your position).

Given that the target is for a 32 team, 5 round KO then more or less entries requires a form of bye for a number of clans - a "play in" round could be viewed as a 64 team, 6 round KO comp, but with a lot of first round byes.

32 entries exactly then byes would complicate things unnecessarily, so no byes.
31 entries then one bye is required, in a random draw I'd suggest adding a 32nd slip with "bye" on it into the hat, whoever gets it, gets it.
Less than that and the risk is drawing bye v bye meaning that there would be a 2nd round bye so something would need to be done to prevent it.
33 entries would require one play in match, who the 2 clans would be playing the extra round (31 clans getting a first round bye) though?
34 entries = 2 1st round matches with 30 clans getting byes.

So other than having exactly 32 entries, byes are inevitable. How that's gone about and who gets them is another argument (or not).

My earlier suggestion was for a tennis style bracket where the top 8 seeds seeds are placed in the same way into a fixed bracket.
I'd have no objections to the first 8 byes in the round of 64 going against them
if there are only 4 required then top 4 get them
1-3 byes random draw for the top 4
5-7 byes then top 4 + random for clans 5 to 8
over 8 then top 8 then random draw into the rest of the bracket (making sure that there is no bye v bye)

[angola]

With the timing out rule now being optional - and I really don't see how it is subjective, you conquer a territory you get a card - Agents of Chaos is very unlikely to sign up. We got burned on this in a CLA final and we are not keen on getting burned by this loophole again.

I think you should be familiar with the meaning of the word subjective as you are American. It means a decision is based on personal opinion. Right CC doesn't award spoils at the end of timed out turn by flawed design. But when person times out a turn you cannot say if he did so for strategic advantage or he had black out. You have to guess when you make a call what really happened. That means the decision is based on personal opinion and is therefore subjective.

And for the record, I am not going to make those calls.

I'm quite aware of what subjective means, as you say. And I will continue to point out that timing out shouldn't be acceptable whether or not the site allows it or not. The site allows things that this tournament doesn't.

Agents of Chaos likely won't participate if timing out isn't forbidden.

[angola]

As a leader of one of the weaker clans, the opinions of our members (so far) is that we're not going to be lambs led to the slaughter. We'll be looking for wars that we can negotiate terms fully against opponents that we believe that we have a decent chance of running close or even beating instead.

Out of curiosity, does this mean you folks won't participate in CC4? Or does this mean you want a random draw?

We won't compete. We do realize a random draw could have paired us with a top clan anyway, but that's a gamble, say an even chance we'd face someone that should beat us easily or someone we'd have a decent fight with. Top v bottom is just shooting fish in a barrel.

So, are you also OK with byes for the top clans?

(Just trying to feel out your position).

Given that the target is for a 32 team, 5 round KO then more or less entries requires a form of bye for a number of clans - a "play in" round could be viewed as a 64 team, 6 round KO comp, but with a lot of first round byes.

32 entries exactly then byes would complicate things unnecessarily, so no byes.
31 entries then one bye is required, in a random draw I'd suggest adding a 32nd slip with "bye" on it into the hat, whoever gets it, gets it.
Less than that and the risk is drawing bye v bye meaning that there would be a 2nd round bye so something would need to be done to prevent it.
33 entries would require one play in match, who the 2 clans would be playing the extra round (31 clans getting a first round bye) though?
34 entries = 2 1st round matches with 30 clans getting byes.

So other than having exactly 32 entries, byes are inevitable. How that's gone about and who gets them is another argument (or not).

My earlier suggestion was for a tennis style bracket where the top 8 seeds seeds are placed in the same way into a fixed bracket.
I'd have no objections to the first 8 byes in the round of 64 going against them
if there are only 4 required then top 4 get them
1-3 byes random draw for the top 4
5-7 byes then top 4 + random for clans 5 to 8
over 8 then top 8 then random draw into the rest of the bracket (making sure that there is no bye v bye)

I'm not against these ideas at all. I tend to lean toward the idea of a fixed bracket, but I also understand why lower-ranked clans wouldn't like this. I'm really coming around on the idea of a bracket where the seeds are randomly drawn - yet done so in a way to assure that 1 doesn't play 2 in the first round.

And I really am indifferent to byes - though I wouldn't mind one for my clan, as we are a tad burnt out (though if this tournament waited to start until CC3 was complete, that wouldn't be necessary).

[Vid_FISO]

I'm not against these ideas at all. I tend to lean toward the idea of a fixed bracket, but I also understand why lower-ranked clans wouldn't like this. I'm really coming around on the idea of a bracket where the seeds are randomly drawn - yet done so in a way to assure that 1 doesn't play 2 in the first round.

And I really am indifferent to byes - though I wouldn't mind one for my clan, as we are a tad burnt out (though if this tournament waited to start until CC3 was complete, that wouldn't be necessary).

In any case, I've had my say, the decision made regarding the seeded draw gives FISO no reason to enter, so we won't. I'll now wander away from this thread as it no longer concerns me.

[Dako]

I'm quite aware of what subjective means, as you say. And I will continue to point out that timing out shouldn't be acceptable whether or not the site allows it or not. The site allows things that this tournament doesn't.

Agents of Chaos likely won't participate if timing out isn't forbidden.

I agree with you that tactic is unacceptable. Unfortunately we cannot define a rule for this that will work every time.

[Qwert]

now im even more confused- Cd&F are excluded,,but we all ready have one vote in these forum about Map Use for CC4??
Its these another joke?

>>I need vote in CD&F to decide map use for CC4<<
>>Sorry for all people who vote in these issue, but these vote are now irrelevant and, because CD&F are excluded from CC4<<

[ahunda]

I find it a bit strange, that there is so much hostility in this thread towards the CDs, questioning their authority to make any decisions concerning the Cup. It begs the question, who gave Dako that same authority ?

From where I stand, there was one person, who could have had a claim on the Cup, and that is Chuck. He started the whole thing as a private tournament, came up with the rules for the first Cup all by himself, and so he would have a real case here, that it should be him making the final call on any of this. But how does Dako deserve that role ?

As far as I can see, all that Dako did after Chuck disappeared during the last Cup, was updating the results in the official thread. Let´s not kid ourselves here. The Cup would have played out just as fine without him. That´s part of the beauty of the whole thing: That it pretty much runs itself, once the rules are agreed on. There probably should be someone to push some clans now & again to stay on schedule and to update results in the official thread, but that´s about it.

So how come, that a more or less random player steps up & claims the right to decide the rules for this tournament ? I am with Bruce here: After Chucks disappearance this event should belong to the entire clan world, it´s the obvious thing really. And so I find the approach of voting on key questions in CDF a very reasonable idea. The 5-10 people, who have been very vocal in this thread, shouldn´t fool themselves into believing, that their opinions are somehow representative of the clan scene in total.

As for the timing out issue: As angola pointed out, there was a precedent with a timing out case in an official clan event, that caused quite a bit of stir & debate. And the great majority back then was clearly of the opinion, that this practice was abuse of a loop-hole, and that this kind of behaviour should not be tolerated in clan games. The issue surfaced again, when people started to push for the inclusion of Nukes into clan challenges. The timing out issue being the main concern & argument against Nukes.

So no: The timing out rule was not arbitrarily forced upon the clan world by the CDs on a whim. Quite the opposite actually: It was the CDs responding to the expressed wishes & concerns of a majority of clan players, who wanted to exclude this kind of practice from clan games.

[IcePack]

Cheme:
How did Dako ignore CDF? Terr were two votes held and both those results are reflected in ver 5.

I find it funny you say things like the vocal few from tofu, fall, and KORT want this or that and then say things like ver 4 was what the majority wanted (which is completely unprovable at this point, there never was a vote and indicating so is laughable).

Also - where is the warning to Angola on double posts? Or is that just for the ones who oppose your ideas cheme?

"FISO won't be lambs lead to the slaughter" - yet I've seen you literally joke about this very fact in your regular wars against very lopsided competition. You clearly didn't have a problem before with this, until it conveniently came to CC4. Which I might add, is fully negotiable wars like you request.

IcePack

[BGtheBrain]

*****

[IcePack]

Can someone summarize this and explain to everyone else wtf is going on here?

30 pages of arguing