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

Abandoned challenges and other old information.

Moderators: Clan Directors, Global Moderators

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby benga on Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:51 am

Keefie wrote:Indeed it does, but they're in in round 3, which is the last 64. So it's quite possible for Man Utd to draw Chelsea at that stage.


yeap, but that would like 1/4 of CC
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class benga
 
Posts: 4497
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:15 pm
Medals: 173
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (31) General Achievement (16)
Clan Achievement (38) Challenge Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby Keefie on Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:55 am

benga wrote:
Keefie wrote:Indeed it does, but they're in in round 3, which is the last 64. So it's quite possible for Man Utd to draw Chelsea at that stage.


yeap, but that would like 1/4 of CC


I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. The last 64 contains the PL teams but also all of the Championship sides and the 24 survivors from round 2. Those survivors could and often do include some non-league sides.

Our last 8 would pretty much conly contain clans from the top 16 seeds.

K
Image
User avatar
Major Keefie
 
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:05 pm
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Medals: 77
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (6) General Achievement (3)
Clan Achievement (16) Challenge Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby josko.ri on Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:43 am

Reading this discusion, I got an idea of format. I agree with stated argument that it is not fun having 1v32 2v31 etc in round 1, matches that finished like 36-5 or so. Nor top clan has fun in winning that way, nor low clan i suppose has any fun in being spanked so hard. Mainly, it happens that top organized clan plays vs some clan which is new on clan scene, without even having any sort of organization at that stage. This is format proposal which would eliminate this effect and have more exciting wars for lower clans (than being spanked by 20+ margin) and in the same time, top clans would get enough rest after CC2, and even CC4 would be possible to overlap with CC3 because of those byes. Also this format is flexible to be made for any number of participating teams (by reducing number of byes)

Example of 32 clans:
clans 1-8 get bye in Rounds 1,2 and got included in Round of 16 (Round 3)
clans 9-16 get bye in Round 1 and got included in Round 2

R1: clans 17-32. Draw: 17v32; 18v31 ... 24v25. Total 8 matches.
R2: clans 9-16 play vs 8 winners from R1. 9v(24v25); 10v(23v26) ... 16v(17v32). Total 8 matches.
R3 (Round of 16): 8 winners from R2 play vs clans 1-8. 1v[16v(17v32)]; 2v[15v(18v31)] ... 8v[9v(24v25)]

Example of 34 clans: (for every 2 more clans, number of byes in round 3 decreases by 1)
clans 1-7 get bye in Rounds 1,2 and got included in Round of 16 (Round 3)
clans 8-16 get bye in Round 1 and got included in Round 2

R1: clans 17-34. Draw: 17v34; 18v33 ... 25v26. Total 9 matches.
R2: clans 8-16 play vs 9 winners from R1. 8v(25v26); 9v(24v27) ... 16v(17v34). Total 9 matches.
R3 (Round of 16): 9 winners from R2 join vs clans 1-7. 1v[16v(17v34)]; 2v[15v(18v33)] ... [8v(25v26)]v[9v(24v27)]

Example of 40 clans:
clans 1-4 get bye in Rounds 1,2 and got included in Round of 16 (Round 3)
clans 5-16 get bye in Round 1 and got included in Round 2

R1: clans 17-40. Draw: 17v40; 18v39 ... 28v29. Total 12 matches.
R2: clans 5-16 play vs 12 winners from R1. 5v(28v29); 6v(27v30) ... 16v(17v40). Total 12 matches.
R3 (Round of 16): 12 winners from R2 play vs clans 1-4. 1v[16v(17v40)]; 2v[15v(18v39)] ... [8v(25v32)]v[9v(24v33)]

Example for odd number of clans... 33 clans.
Principle is the same like for 34 clans, just we give one bye in R1, to #17 ranked clan.
clans 1-7 get bye in Rounds 1,2 and got included in Round of 16 (Round 3)
clans 8-17 get bye in Round 1 and got included in Round 2

R1: clans 18-33. Draw: 18v33; 19v32 ... 25v26. Total 8 matches.
R2: clans 8-17 play vs 8 winners from R1. 8v(25v26); 9v(24v27) ... 16v17 (they can start match during R1). Total 9 matches.
R3 (Round of 16): 9 winners from R2 join vs clans 1-7. 1v(16v17); 2v[15v(18v33)] ... [8v(25v26)]v[9v(24v27)]

Advantages of this system (in random order):
1. Lower clans will get more or less equal field in earlier round. If they are able to progress to round 3 to match vs top clan, they will do it on escalating way. first fight someone ranked lower than 16 in R1, then get stronger opposition ranked 9-16 in R2, and then get some of plain top clans in R3. I suppose this way of escalating opposition quality would be much more interesting for lower clans than having strong opposition in R1 and being kicked hard with a big margin. As conclusion, every of the round will have very equal fields of play in almost every match, not like now where early rounds have blowouts. Nor winners nor losers enjoy in blowouts, everybody enjoy in tough matches.
2. Top clans will get enough rest between CC3 and CC4, as they will get byes in rounds 1&2. Lower clans already had enough rest as their last CCup activity was around last June, so I suppose they hard expect next edition, while clans still in CC3 would probably like to have some rest after the 60 games wars.
3. This would speed CCup in general. CC4 can then overlap with CC3 because nobody will be active in both editions at the same time.
4. As it was in CC3, top clans got by default opposition from bottom of rank, which often means some new clan, unexperienced, not yet organized. It is no wonder big margin blowouts was happening in that time. If we apply this format, and some lower ranked clans achieve to pass R1 and R2, it will be different story. Now we will have top clan vs lower clan who already has 2 wins in a row. With 2 wins in a row, their appetite will grow up, their organization will raise and they will put much better fight compared to fight that they would give in R1 of existing format. USe OSA as example. If they faced KORT in R1 of CC3, I suppose KORT would win much easier. But they faced us when they were already in great mood by having 2 upsets in a row, so they were for sure higher motivated and put better performance vs KORT.
5. Whoever comes to face top clan in R3, their "weight" will be 2 wins, whether lower clan who won R1 and R2, or clan from 8-16 who won in R2 vs some opponents who won in R1. In both cases "weight" of clan who will face 1-8 clan in R3 will be 2 wins so top clans will get better opponents, in comparing with CC3 draw where someone could be opposition of top clan in Round of 16 just because of luckily gotten rank (example is a new clan, just played 3 matches vs low ranked clans with average success, which put them at score around 1000 and in top 16)
6. This format can easily be applied to any number of participating clans, by just a little adjusting number of byes, as described in the format proposal.
Image
User avatar
Brigadier josko.ri
 
Posts: 1801
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:18 pm
Medals: 104
Conqueror Achievement (1) Monthly Leader Silver (1) Monthly Leader Bronze (2) Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2)
Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (27) General Achievement (17) Clan Achievement (18) Challenge Achievement (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby benga on Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:43 am

nice josko =D>
Last edited by benga on Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class benga
 
Posts: 4497
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:15 pm
Medals: 173
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (31) General Achievement (16)
Clan Achievement (38) Challenge Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby Qwert on Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:06 am

interesting josko,, but can we arange some random placement in cup scheme? I mean why every time need to play 1 v32 -2 v 31?

i need these to be translate in english
Hteo sam pitati,zasto ne bi izvacili parove slicno kao u CL5?
Zasto svaki put mora 1 na 32 2 na 31?
Jednostavno na tvom primeru broj jedan (32)
-R1- prvi sesir timovi od 17 do 24 mesta--drugi sesir timovi od 25 do 32 mesta.Uparuje se tako sto se izvlace prvo jedan iz prvog sesira pa onda jedan iz drugog sesira,i tako dok se ne dobiju svi parovi. Interesantno i zanimljivo.
-R2-prvi sesir timovi od 9 do 16 mesta--drugi sesir pobednici iz R1, isti sistem izvlacenja kao u R1
-R3-prvi sesir timovi od 1 do 8 mesta---drugi sesir pobednici iz R2,isti sistem izvlacenja kao u R1
-R4- jedan sesir sa 8 pobednika iz R3 ,izvlace se cetvrtfinalni parovi
-R5- Polufinale , 4 pobednika is R4, izvlace se polufinalni parovi
-R6-Finale-dva pobednika iz R5
--------------------------------------
Mislim da ovo daje jos vecu sansu i slabijima da prodju sto dalje, a sa druge strane opet stiti ove jace iz prvih 8 da se sretnu tek u cetvrtfinalu, tako da i jedni i drugi imaju podjednake sanse za visok plasman, do sada u svim prethodnim, ipak su top klanovi imali vise privilegija, a sad ce svi imati podjednake sanse.
Image
NEW REVOLUTION-NEW RANKS PRESS THESE LINK viewtopic.php?f=471&t=47578&start=0
User avatar
Major Qwert
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 9193
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:07 pm
Location: VOJVODINA
Medals: 77
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (6)
Training Achievement (2) Map Contribution (8) Tournament Contribution (22) General Contribution (4)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby josko.ri on Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:25 am

qwert wrote:interesting josko,, but can we arange some random placement in cup scheme? I mean why every time need to play 1 v32 -2 v 31?

To be as much as possible equal schedule for everyone, not easier and harder sides of draw. I see there are much diversity between seeded and random draws, we may put that to voting I think.

The format proposal can also be adjusted without hard fixed seeding. Maybe semi-random, top half of clans in every round to be seeded, and bottom half to be random paired with seeds.
Example (for 32 clans):
R1: seeds 17-24 clans. random paired 25-32 clans
R2: seeds 9-16 clans. random paired winners from R1
R of 16: seeds 1-8 clans. random paired winers from R2
QF: seeds 1-4 clans. random paired other 4
SF: seeds 1-2 clans. random paired other 2

To be more fair draw, pairings can be always done before any round starts with real time rank (updated results from previous round). Theoretically, with that system #24 clan can always be seeded clan. In R1 they achieve high margin win which boosts them to #14 rank, then in next round draw they enter in seeds place again because of the great result. If they repeat their high performance, they will boost their rank round-by-round and possible "earn" seeding place by that. Imagine for example if someone makes high upset like almost did OSA v KORT, the upset would raise lower clan to much higher rank and possible earning seeded place in next round.
In CC3, seeding were done April 1st, with KORT#1, PACK #4 and TOFU #5. just 2 days later CL4 phase 1 results were entered into ranking, which then changed to KORT #1 PACK #2 TOFU #3, which were all 3 on the same side of the draw. Real time draw with real time added seedings will add much more excitement and value real time performance, not some performance which was done in a single time increment.
Last edited by josko.ri on Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:35 am, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Brigadier josko.ri
 
Posts: 1801
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:18 pm
Medals: 104
Conqueror Achievement (1) Monthly Leader Silver (1) Monthly Leader Bronze (2) Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2)
Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (27) General Achievement (17) Clan Achievement (18) Challenge Achievement (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby Keefie on Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:32 am

If there's to be seeding of any kind then I really like josko's last suggestion.
Image
User avatar
Major Keefie
 
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:05 pm
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Medals: 77
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (6) General Achievement (3)
Clan Achievement (16) Challenge Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby Qwert on Wed Mar 06, 2013 7:27 am

to be more correct
qwert wrote
Hteo sam pitati,zasto ne bi izvacili parove slicno kao u CL5?
Zasto svaki put mora 1 na 32 2 na 31?
Jednostavno na tvom primeru broj jedan (32)
-R1- prvi sesir timovi od 17 do 24 mesta--drugi sesir timovi od 25 do 32 mesta.Uparuje se tako sto se izvlace prvo jedan iz prvog sesira pa onda jedan iz drugog sesira,i tako dok se ne dobiju svi parovi. Interesantno i zanimljivo.
-R2-prvi sesir timovi od 9 do 16 mesta--drugi sesir pobednici iz R1, isti sistem izvlacenja kao u R1
-R3-prvi sesir timovi od 1 do 8 mesta---drugi sesir pobednici iz R2,isti sistem izvlacenja kao u R1
-R4- jedan sesir sa 8 pobednika iz R3 ,izvlace se cetvrtfinalni parovi
-R5- Polufinale , 4 pobednika is R4, izvlace se polufinalni parovi
-R6-Finale-dva pobednika iz R5
Mislim da ovo daje jos vecu sansu i slabijima da prodju sto dalje, a sa druge strane opet stiti ove jace iz prvih 8 da se sretnu tek u cetvrtfinalu, tako da i jedni i drugi imaju podjednake sanse za visok plasman, do sada u svim prethodnim, ipak su top klanovi imali vise privilegija, a sad ce svi imati podjednake sanse.


josko transation
The format proposal can also be adjusted without hard fixed seeding. Maybe semi-random, top half of clans in every round to be seeded, and bottom half to be random paired with seeds.
Example (for 32 clans):
R1: seeds 17-24 clans. random paired 25-32 clans
R2: seeds 9-16 clans. random paired winners from R1
R of 16: seeds 1-8 clans. random paired winers from R2
QF: seeds 1-4 clans. random paired other 4
SF: seeds 1-2 clans. random paired other 2
To be more fair draw, pairings can be always done before any round starts with real time rank (updated results from previous round)


thanks josko for translation :)
Image
NEW REVOLUTION-NEW RANKS PRESS THESE LINK viewtopic.php?f=471&t=47578&start=0
User avatar
Major Qwert
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 9193
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:07 pm
Location: VOJVODINA
Medals: 77
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (6)
Training Achievement (2) Map Contribution (8) Tournament Contribution (22) General Contribution (4)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby jetsetwilly on Wed Mar 06, 2013 7:47 am

I also like Josko's proposals. Definitely worthy of discussion.
Image
User avatar
Colonel jetsetwilly
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:31 am
Location: United Kingdom
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) General Achievement (3)
Clan Achievement (14) General Contribution (2)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby Great-Ollie on Wed Mar 06, 2013 8:04 am

jetsetwilly wrote:I also like Josko's proposals. Definitely worthy of discussion.

I think he has come up with a great solution, well done.
Image
User avatar
Major Great-Ollie
 
Posts: 910
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 9:53 pm
Location: Great white north.
Medals: 121
Conqueror Achievement (1) Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (4) Quadruples Achievement (4)
Terminator Achievement (4) Assassin Achievement (4) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (2)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (4) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (4) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (3)
Random Map Achievement (4) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (23) General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (17) Challenge Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby Keefie on Wed Mar 06, 2013 8:12 am

They are Qwert's proposals. Josko has translated them.
Image
User avatar
Major Keefie
 
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:05 pm
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Medals: 77
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (6) General Achievement (3)
Clan Achievement (16) Challenge Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby IcePack on Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:39 am

I don't think any of those proposals could be done on a challonge bracket site, without Dako doing his own.

Also, I just prefer simple. What's wrong w what has been done in the past? CL has changed every year. CC has been running smoothly and change very little. (because it works).
Image
12:11:16 ‹Swifte› good thing we have the beta program to weed all these problems out
12:15:00 * IcePack joins Social
12:15:35 ‹Swifte› well that's just bad timing
User avatar
Lieutenant IcePack
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 6527
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:42 pm
Location: California
Medals: 103
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (9)
General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (16) Challenge Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (12)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby chapcrap on Wed Mar 06, 2013 10:31 am

I do not think anyone should be given two rounds of byes. Especially 8 clans. That's a lot of clans that automatically make it to the top 16, IMO.
Image
User avatar
Captain chapcrap
 
Posts: 9581
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:46 am
Location: Kansas City
Medals: 168
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (3) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (31)
General Achievement (16) Clan Achievement (17) Training Achievement (6) Challenge Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (34)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby benga on Wed Mar 06, 2013 11:02 am

chapcrap wrote:I do not think anyone should be given two rounds of byes. Especially 8 clans. That's a lot of clans that automatically make it to the top 16, IMO.


according to F400 you would be no.8 ;)
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class benga
 
Posts: 4497
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:15 pm
Medals: 173
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (31) General Achievement (16)
Clan Achievement (38) Challenge Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby IcePack on Wed Mar 06, 2013 11:38 am

benga wrote:
chapcrap wrote:I do not think anyone should be given two rounds of byes. Especially 8 clans. That's a lot of clans that automatically make it to the top 16, IMO.


according to F400 you would be no.8 ;)


That in itself should tell you we aren't speaking out in our interests, but for a better clan area and event as a whole.
Image
12:11:16 ‹Swifte› good thing we have the beta program to weed all these problems out
12:15:00 * IcePack joins Social
12:15:35 ‹Swifte› well that's just bad timing
User avatar
Lieutenant IcePack
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 6527
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:42 pm
Location: California
Medals: 103
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (9)
General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (16) Challenge Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (12)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby benga on Wed Mar 06, 2013 11:47 am

IcePack wrote:
benga wrote:
chapcrap wrote:I do not think anyone should be given two rounds of byes. Especially 8 clans. That's a lot of clans that automatically make it to the top 16, IMO.


according to F400 you would be no.8 ;)


That in itself should tell you we aren't speaking out in our interests, but for a better clan area and event as a whole.


The most clans here, at least so far, have been crying to change, so they don't get either severely butchered or playing boring games.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class benga
 
Posts: 4497
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:15 pm
Medals: 173
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (31) General Achievement (16)
Clan Achievement (38) Challenge Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby hyposquasher on Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:15 pm

For what it's worth, I think the tried and true CC format has treated us well.
This image cannot be clicked.
Image

High Score: 3763 - 09-21-2014
User avatar
General hyposquasher
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:19 pm
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (13)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby Qwert on Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:33 pm

IcePack wrote:I don't think any of those proposals could be done on a challonge bracket site, without Dako doing his own.

Also, I just prefer simple. What's wrong w what has been done in the past? CL has changed every year. CC has been running smoothly and change very little. (because it works).


well sometime you need to change system so that every clan have benefit. In previous cups, clans from 17 to 32 position have little chance , and all above have at least big chance for one medal award. Maybe you dont care for all these clans, because in old system you will have easy job for medal against 25 ranked team, but then what motive will have these clans to play in CC?
Give equal chance to all, then you will get bigger and stronger competition, these its what we all want to happen,right? Think about that.
Image
NEW REVOLUTION-NEW RANKS PRESS THESE LINK viewtopic.php?f=471&t=47578&start=0
User avatar
Major Qwert
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 9193
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:07 pm
Location: VOJVODINA
Medals: 77
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (6)
Training Achievement (2) Map Contribution (8) Tournament Contribution (22) General Contribution (4)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby IcePack on Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:53 pm

qwert wrote:
IcePack wrote:I don't think any of those proposals could be done on a challonge bracket site, without Dako doing his own.

Also, I just prefer simple. What's wrong w what has been done in the past? CL has changed every year. CC has been running smoothly and change very little. (because it works).


well sometime you need to change system so that every clan have benefit. In previous cups, clans from 17 to 32 position have little chance , and all above have at least big chance for one medal award. Maybe you dont care for all these clans, because in old system you will have easy job for medal against 25 ranked team, but then what motive will have these clans to play in CC?
Give equal chance to all, then you will get bigger and stronger competition, these its what we all want to happen,right? Think about that.


Not at all. I used to be in KOA, ranked 20th back then. When I first got into clans CC2 was in sign ups and I desperately wanted to be apart of it. Yes it was difficult but I thought the competition was fair, exciting, and fun. We couldn't join that year and finally signed up for CC3 1 year later. We were around 18th? And got knocked out first round. Guess what? It was still fun to be apart of the event.

There's nothing wrong w braket tournaments, many sports use them. And 1st plays last, 2nd plays second last, etc. it encourages you to work hard and move up the ladder fr next year of you don't want to be 32nd and playing #1 - do something about it during the off season!

All these random draws and make it fair and easy for clans to get thru to the next round do nothing to encourage competition, it encourages mediocrity and complacency because why work harder to go higher for next year, if you can just hope to get lucky on some stupid random draw and go further in the competition than you really should have.

Sorry I don't buy it. Lifes not fair, if you want something work for it. Earn it. The old system worked fine and was simple, everyone could participate or choose not to - or run another event if they don't like how the cup was run. That's why there are other events and leagues w random draws etc. this was always designed and suppose to be a simple braket tournament.

IcePack
Last edited by IcePack on Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
12:11:16 ‹Swifte› good thing we have the beta program to weed all these problems out
12:15:00 * IcePack joins Social
12:15:35 ‹Swifte› well that's just bad timing
User avatar
Lieutenant IcePack
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 6527
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:42 pm
Location: California
Medals: 103
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (9)
General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (16) Challenge Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (12)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby benga on Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:56 pm

IcePack wrote:
qwert wrote:
IcePack wrote:I don't think any of those proposals could be done on a challonge bracket site, without Dako doing his own.

Also, I just prefer simple. What's wrong w what has been done in the past? CL has changed every year. CC has been running smoothly and change very little. (because it works).


well sometime you need to change system so that every clan have benefit. In previous cups, clans from 17 to 32 position have little chance , and all above have at least big chance for one medal award. Maybe you dont care for all these clans, because in old system you will have easy job for medal against 25 ranked team, but then what motive will have these clans to play in CC?
Give equal chance to all, then you will get bigger and stronger competition, these its what we all want to happen,right? Think about that.


Not at all. I used to be in KOA, ranked 20th back then. When I first got into clans CC2 was in sign ups and I desperately wanted to be apart of it. Yes it was difficult but I thought the competition was fair, exciting, and fun. We couldn't join that year and finally signed up for CC3 1 year later. We were around 18th? And got knocked out first round. Guess what? It was still fun to be apart of the event.

There's nothing wrong w braket tournaments, many sports use them. And 1st plays last, 2nd plays second last, etc. it encourages you to work hard and move up the ladder fr next year of you don't want to be 32nd and playing #1 - do something about it during the off season!

All these random draws and make it fair and easy for clans to get thru to the next round do nothing to encourage competition, it encourages mediocrity and complacency because why work harder to go higher for next year, if you can just hope to get lucky on some stupid random draw and go further in the competition than you really should have.

Sorry I don't buy it. Lifes not fair, if you want something work for it. Earn it. The old stem worked fine and was simple, everyone could participate or choose not to - or run another event if they don't like how the cup was run. That's why there are other events and leagues w random draws etc. this was always designed and suppose to be a simple braket tournament.

IcePack


wow, well put ;)
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class benga
 
Posts: 4497
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:15 pm
Medals: 173
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (31) General Achievement (16)
Clan Achievement (38) Challenge Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (31) General Contribution (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby josko.ri on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:21 pm

IcePack wrote:There's nothing wrong w braket tournaments, many sports use them. And 1st plays last, 2nd plays second last, etc. it encourages you to work hard and move up the ladder fr next year of you don't want to be 32nd and playing #1 - do something about it during the off season!

My primary suggestion was format, semi-random draws was just secondary suggestion/option.
Reading your arguments, I found only this argument to be against proposed format (other arguments are more against random draw).

So to counter this argument... The proposed format still values all what you have earned during off season. it is still 17v32 in R1, and 1v[16v(17v32)] in R3. So the difference between "let it like it was" and "consider the proposal" is not about that ranking will not be used at all, all wil be randomized, past achievements wil not be valued. It is about giving much more equal playing field (and therefore much more interesting matches) for lower ranked clans. Higher ranked clans already have equal playing field, for them it happens in later rounds when they meet each other. But do the lowest ranked clans have equal playing field? With this format I think no. They are regularly losing sometimes with 30+vs10-. Those wars are not interesting to anyone, nor to winners nor to losers. Your KOA example was some equal playing field, if you were 18th, you faced 14th and it was for sure interesting match. If you consider number of clans that signed up for CL3/CL4/CL5 and compare it with number of clans signed to CC2/CC3 you will see that evrey time League had much more competitors. Go into analysis deeper and you will see which clans signed for CL but did not sign for CC. Those are clans from bottom of ranking. All top ranking clans participated in CC2/CC3. And if you try to find a reason for that, maybe it was wish to not be hard kicked in round 1 in non-enjoyable match for anyone. The main advantage of the proposed format is giving more equal playing field to wider range of clans, therefore making it more interesting for lower clans to sign in and have some equal field fight instead of being hard kicked in Round 1.
Image
User avatar
Brigadier josko.ri
 
Posts: 1801
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:18 pm
Medals: 104
Conqueror Achievement (1) Monthly Leader Silver (1) Monthly Leader Bronze (2) Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2)
Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (27) General Achievement (17) Clan Achievement (18) Challenge Achievement (1)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby Qwert on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:24 pm

IcePack wrote:
qwert wrote:
IcePack wrote:I don't think any of those proposals could be done on a challonge bracket site, without Dako doing his own.

Also, I just prefer simple. What's wrong w what has been done in the past? CL has changed every year. CC has been running smoothly and change very little. (because it works).


well sometime you need to change system so that every clan have benefit. In previous cups, clans from 17 to 32 position have little chance , and all above have at least big chance for one medal award. Maybe you dont care for all these clans, because in old system you will have easy job for medal against 25 ranked team, but then what motive will have these clans to play in CC?
Give equal chance to all, then you will get bigger and stronger competition, these its what we all want to happen,right? Think about that.


Not at all. I used to be in KOA, ranked 20th back then. When I first got into clans CC2 was in sign ups and I desperately wanted to be apart of it. Yes it was difficult but I thought the competition was fair, exciting, and fun. We couldn't join that year and finally signed up for CC3 1 year later. We were around 18th? And got knocked out first round. Guess what? It was still fun to be apart of the event.

There's nothing wrong w braket tournaments, many sports use them. And 1st plays last, 2nd plays second last, etc. it encourages you to work hard and move up the ladder fr next year of you don't want to be 32nd and playing #1 - do something about it during the off season!

All these random draws and make it fair and easy for clans to get thru to the next round do nothing to encourage competition, it encourages mediocrity and complacency because why work harder to go higher for next year, if you can just hope to get lucky on some stupid random draw and go further in the competition than you really should have.

Sorry I don't buy it. Lifes not fair, if you want something work for it. Earn it. The old system worked fine and was simple, everyone could participate or choose not to - or run another event if they don't like how the cup was run. That's why there are other events and leagues w random draws etc. this was always designed and suppose to be a simple braket tournament.

IcePack

well you wrong, simple to say, we are not change to be easy for clans ,but to give low ranked clans, in start opponent with equal strength. The thing what will be change its that High ranked clans will get 1 medal less then in previous cups, ofcourse if you realy thing that for your clan are very importan that in round 1 get easy medal defeating some clan with 35-6, ok you will vote against changes, but maybe you will change your mind and say " well ok, lets give first round to low ranked clans so that they play 21-20 one excitement match, and let best get medal instead me" .
Ofcourse if you belive that clans from top 8 or 16 need to take all medals from round 1 to Finale, then you will be against,,but for me ,i think that for top 8 clans take medal in QuarterFinal or Semifinal have much higer value,then medal earned in First round against top bottom clans, but maybe im wrong?
Image
NEW REVOLUTION-NEW RANKS PRESS THESE LINK viewtopic.php?f=471&t=47578&start=0
User avatar
Major Qwert
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 9193
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:07 pm
Location: VOJVODINA
Medals: 77
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (6)
Training Achievement (2) Map Contribution (8) Tournament Contribution (22) General Contribution (4)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby IcePack on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:33 pm

josko.ri wrote:
IcePack wrote:There's nothing wrong w braket tournaments, many sports use them. And 1st plays last, 2nd plays second last, etc. it encourages you to work hard and move up the ladder fr next year of you don't want to be 32nd and playing #1 - do something about it during the off season!

My primary suggestion was format, semi-random draws was just secondary suggestion/option.
Reading your arguments, I found only this argument to be against proposed format (other arguments are more against random draw).

So to counter this argument... The proposed format still values all what you have earned during off season. it is still 17v32 in R1, and 1v[16v(17v32)] in R3. So the difference between "let it like it was" and "consider the proposal" is not about that ranking will not be used at all, all wil be randomized, past achievements wil not be valued. It is about giving much more equal playing field (and therefore much more interesting matches) for lower ranked clans. Higher ranked clans already have equal playing field, for them it happens in later rounds when they meet each other. But do the lowest ranked clans have equal playing field? With this format I think no. They are regularly losing sometimes with 30+vs10-. Those wars are not interesting to anyone, nor to winners nor to losers. Your KOA example was some equal playing field, if you were 18th, you faced 14th and it was for sure interesting match. If you consider number of clans that signed up for CL3/CL4/CL5 and compare it with number of clans signed to CC2/CC3 you will see that evrey time League had much more competitors. Go into analysis deeper and you will see which clans signed for CL but did not sign for CC. Those are clans from bottom of ranking. All top ranking clans participated in CC2/CC3. And if you try to find a reason for that, maybe it was wish to not be hard kicked in round 1 in non-enjoyable match for anyone. The main advantage of the proposed format is giving more equal playing field to wider range of clans, therefore making it more interesting for lower clans to sign in and have some equal field fight instead of being hard kicked in Round 1.


What's wrong with having less clans compete in a bracket tournament? Isn't that why CL exists to give more opportunity in a different way to all clans? Why does each format have to be as inclusive as possible? Lower clans can skip CC if they worry about being hard kicked in round 1 and practise in newcomer cup or CL. That's why those formats exist!

A bracket tournament is there to determine a winner. Again I emphasize if you want better chances or seeding, improve in offseason. Yes your format proposal is better than random draw but if 32 beats 17 by luck and gets into the area where it faces top clans now (1-16), they'll get hard kicked at that point. I'd much rather see it the way now, nobody wants to see 32 vs 1 in round 3 or 4 (wherever they'd meet in yours).

What's wrong w what's in place now? We still see interesting matches, some clans take a run at others. We still have upsets and look at OSA. CC3 they were seeded 24th! They improved and advanced - deservingly so! They beat the odds. They even made a run at KORT.

I just don't understand why try to reinvent the wheel. There are other formats to fit in other preferences, while this again - was made as a simple bracket tournament for any clan to participate in. Maybe - if there is enough demand - someone can go make the Fairness Cup where all clans are welcome to a bracket tournament where all seeds are random, or top clans get a bye and the lower half duke it out.

But this isn't the fairness cup. This is Conquer Cup. Let's keep it that way.

IcePack
Image
12:11:16 ‹Swifte› good thing we have the beta program to weed all these problems out
12:15:00 * IcePack joins Social
12:15:35 ‹Swifte› well that's just bad timing
User avatar
Lieutenant IcePack
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 6527
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:42 pm
Location: California
Medals: 103
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (9)
General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (16) Challenge Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (12)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby IcePack on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:36 pm

qwert wrote:
IcePack wrote:
qwert wrote:
IcePack wrote:I don't think any of those proposals could be done on a challonge bracket site, without Dako doing his own.

Also, I just prefer simple. What's wrong w what has been done in the past? CL has changed every year. CC has been running smoothly and change very little. (because it works).


well sometime you need to change system so that every clan have benefit. In previous cups, clans from 17 to 32 position have little chance , and all above have at least big chance for one medal award. Maybe you dont care for all these clans, because in old system you will have easy job for medal against 25 ranked team, but then what motive will have these clans to play in CC?
Give equal chance to all, then you will get bigger and stronger competition, these its what we all want to happen,right? Think about that.


Not at all. I used to be in KOA, ranked 20th back then. When I first got into clans CC2 was in sign ups and I desperately wanted to be apart of it. Yes it was difficult but I thought the competition was fair, exciting, and fun. We couldn't join that year and finally signed up for CC3 1 year later. We were around 18th? And got knocked out first round. Guess what? It was still fun to be apart of the event.

There's nothing wrong w braket tournaments, many sports use them. And 1st plays last, 2nd plays second last, etc. it encourages you to work hard and move up the ladder fr next year of you don't want to be 32nd and playing #1 - do something about it during the off season!

All these random draws and make it fair and easy for clans to get thru to the next round do nothing to encourage competition, it encourages mediocrity and complacency because why work harder to go higher for next year, if you can just hope to get lucky on some stupid random draw and go further in the competition than you really should have.

Sorry I don't buy it. Lifes not fair, if you want something work for it. Earn it. The old system worked fine and was simple, everyone could participate or choose not to - or run another event if they don't like how the cup was run. That's why there are other events and leagues w random draws etc. this was always designed and suppose to be a simple braket tournament.

IcePack

well you wrong, simple to say, we are not change to be easy for clans ,but to give low ranked clans, in start opponent with equal strength. The thing what will be change its that High ranked clans will get 1 medal less then in previous cups, ofcourse if you realy thing that for your clan are very importan that in round 1 get easy medal defeating some clan with 35-6, ok you will vote against changes, but maybe you will change your mind and say " well ok, lets give first round to low ranked clans so that they play 21-20 one excitement match, and let best get medal instead me" .
Ofcourse if you belive that clans from top 8 or 16 need to take all medals from round 1 to Finale, then you will be against,,but for me ,i think that for top 8 clans take medal in QuarterFinal or Semifinal have much higer value,then medal earned in First round against top bottom clans, but maybe im wrong?


Has nothing to do with getting an easy medal. If they feel they are SO out matched and have NO shot at a win, they don't need to participate.

If you want everyone to be happy and hold hands and sing kum by ya together around a camp fire in a circle drinking soy lattes and tea with some marshmellows, go start a Fairness Cup competition.
Image
12:11:16 ‹Swifte› good thing we have the beta program to weed all these problems out
12:15:00 * IcePack joins Social
12:15:35 ‹Swifte› well that's just bad timing
User avatar
Lieutenant IcePack
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
Beta Tester Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 6527
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:42 pm
Location: California
Medals: 103
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (9)
General Achievement (7) Clan Achievement (16) Challenge Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (12)

Re: CCup 4 format discussion

Postby josko.ri on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:39 pm

IcePack wrote:
josko.ri wrote:
IcePack wrote:There's nothing wrong w braket tournaments, many sports use them. And 1st plays last, 2nd plays second last, etc. it encourages you to work hard and move up the ladder fr next year of you don't want to be 32nd and playing #1 - do something about it during the off season!

My primary suggestion was format, semi-random draws was just secondary suggestion/option.
Reading your arguments, I found only this argument to be against proposed format (other arguments are more against random draw).

So to counter this argument... The proposed format still values all what you have earned during off season. it is still 17v32 in R1, and 1v[16v(17v32)] in R3. So the difference between "let it like it was" and "consider the proposal" is not about that ranking will not be used at all, all wil be randomized, past achievements wil not be valued. It is about giving much more equal playing field (and therefore much more interesting matches) for lower ranked clans. Higher ranked clans already have equal playing field, for them it happens in later rounds when they meet each other. But do the lowest ranked clans have equal playing field? With this format I think no. They are regularly losing sometimes with 30+vs10-. Those wars are not interesting to anyone, nor to winners nor to losers. Your KOA example was some equal playing field, if you were 18th, you faced 14th and it was for sure interesting match. If you consider number of clans that signed up for CL3/CL4/CL5 and compare it with number of clans signed to CC2/CC3 you will see that evrey time League had much more competitors. Go into analysis deeper and you will see which clans signed for CL but did not sign for CC. Those are clans from bottom of ranking. All top ranking clans participated in CC2/CC3. And if you try to find a reason for that, maybe it was wish to not be hard kicked in round 1 in non-enjoyable match for anyone. The main advantage of the proposed format is giving more equal playing field to wider range of clans, therefore making it more interesting for lower clans to sign in and have some equal field fight instead of being hard kicked in Round 1.


What's wrong with having less clans compete in a bracket tournament? Isn't that why CL exists to give more opportunity in a different way to all clans? Why does each format have to be as inclusive as possible? Lower clans can skip CC if they worry about being hard kicked in round 1 and practise in newcomer cup or CL. That's why those formats exist!

A bracket tournament is there to determine a winner. Again I emphasize if you want better chances or seeding, improve in offseason. Yes your format proposal is better than random draw but if 32 beats 17 by luck and gets into the area where it faces top clans now (1-16), they'll get hard kicked at that point. I'd much rather see it the way now, nobody wants to see 32 vs 1 in round 3 or 4 (wherever they'd meet in yours).

What's wrong w what's in place now? We still see interesting matches, some clans take a run at others. We still have upsets and look at OSA. CC3 they were seeded 24th! They improved and advanced - deservingly so! They beat the odds. They even made a run at KORT.

I just don't understand why try to reinvent the wheel. There are other formats to fit in other preferences, while this again - was made as a simple bracket tournament for any clan to participate in. Maybe - if there is enough demand - someone can go make the Fairness Cup where all clans are welcome to a bracket tournament where all seeds are random, or top clans get a bye and the lower half duke it out.

But this isn't the fairness cup. This is Conquer Cup. Let's keep it that way.

IcePack

I already explained why and what is wrong (answers to your questions), see points 1-6 in my proposal post, so I do not plan to repeat it. We may disagree (you think it is good #1 spanks #32 hard in R1, I think it is not good) and that is something many will agree or disagree. Voting is the best way to see what majority clans wish, you are obviously against, I see some said idea is interesting, so why not vote to see what majority thinks?
Image
User avatar
Brigadier josko.ri
 
Posts: 1801
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:18 pm
Medals: 104
Conqueror Achievement (1) Monthly Leader Silver (1) Monthly Leader Bronze (2) Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2)
Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (27) General Achievement (17) Clan Achievement (18) Challenge Achievement (1)

PreviousNext

Return to Clan Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login