THE OFFICIAL CC CONQUEROR’S CUP 4

[Qwert]

huhhh is there much difference between any of these.... i would personally like to see a total random draw for round 1 with a bracket running to the end..(not that it counts much because i will not be taking part)

so that if the draw order is..

kort
aka
the pack
tofu

kort will play aka the pack tofu then 2nd round will be the winner of these 2 games facing each other... or we could go with what i said before where....
top 25 play one side of the bracket bottom 25 other side with a random draw first round.... this will make it that a bottom half clan will have a chance to progress to the final gaining experiance as it goes along.

Let me understand correct- one side play top clans,,o ther side top botom ranks,? And in the End Top ranked clan will instead to play finale with other Top clan , will play finale with Some Low ranked Clan? Usualy in CC Quarterfinals-Semifinals and Finals play top ranked clans,and you can not predict outcome, but what you sugest we will know outcome of finale and its will be 70-10 for Top Ranked clan. I must say that i never heard of these system to work anywhere.

[eddie2]

huhhh is there much difference between any of these.... i would personally like to see a total random draw for round 1 with a bracket running to the end..(not that it counts much because i will not be taking part)

so that if the draw order is..

kort
aka
the pack
tofu

kort will play aka the pack tofu then 2nd round will be the winner of these 2 games facing each other... or we could go with what i said before where....
top 25 play one side of the bracket bottom 25 other side with a random draw first round.... this will make it that a bottom half clan will have a chance to progress to the final gaining experiance as it goes along.

Let me understand correct- one side play top clans,,o ther side top botom ranks,? And in the End Top ranked clan will instead to play finale with other Top clan , will play finale with Some Low ranked Clan? Usualy in CC Quarterfinals-Semifinals and Finals play top ranked clans,and you can not predict outcome, but what you sugest we will know outcome of finale and its will be 70-10 for Top Ranked clan. I must say that i never heard of these system to work anywhere.

this i would say you are wrong in Europe we have the champions league(top ranked teams from each league) and the European cup(league cup winners) the winner of these 2 tournaments then play a game against each other...

like you have just stated the final 16 in the ccup are all the top ranked clans so where is the incentive for lower ranked clans to participate when we have the newcomers cup. all we are doing is making up figures to take part in something that lasts for more than 12 months and every year there is a argument about this event starting because the prior one has not ended.... and really we have no chance of winning it or progressing in it.

what i have put forward will be like the 2 football cups held in europe...

top ranked clans play 1 tourney (meaning top 25-26 clans) with bottom (25 26 clans) playing another one.. So instead of having 26 rounds to get to the final the 2 cups will only have 13 making it that it can be completed within 1 year... then the 2 cup winners play each other, which could be done in the 1 year time frame as well.

this way i feel would encourage all clans to participate and will also sort out the problem about format and clashing with previous years event.

So make a joke of it if you want but this will be the best way forward and make it that lower ranked clans have a chance of winning something for the time and effort they put into running this event for there clan..

[crispybits]

Sorry eddie but I don't get it either - are you effectively now suggesting we split the competition in two? I don't see how the analogy works as the champions league is a whole different competition to the europa league, and each has their own winner. They do have a winner vs winner match for the european super cup, but that's a third separate competition which doesnt have anything like the attention on it or prestige (at least from an English perspective, it may be different on the continent) as the other two have.

[Vid_FISO]

Not sure that'll work here eddie2, especially when you consider that the current European Champions got knocked out of this season's CL in the group stage but by coming third in the group continue in the EL and are favourites to win it.

[Leehar]

Sorry eddie but I don't get it either - are you effectively now suggesting we split the competition in two? I don't see how the analogy works as the champions league is a whole different competition to the europa league, and each has their own winner. They do have a winner vs winner match for the european super cup, but that's a third separate competition which doesnt have anything like the attention on it or prestige (at least from an English perspective, it may be different on the continent) as the other two have.

The Community shield also has the League winner + FA Cup winner face each other?
Intriguing idea that for else-where

[crispybits]

Absolutely - as a separate competition/one off war match a winner vs winner between CL and CC has a lot of merit (if it can be scheduled right, etc etc)

[Vid_FISO]

Sorry eddie but I don't get it either - are you effectively now suggesting we split the competition in two? I don't see how the analogy works as the champions league is a whole different competition to the europa league, and each has their own winner. They do have a winner vs winner match for the european super cup, but that's a third separate competition which doesnt have anything like the attention on it or prestige (at least from an English perspective, it may be different on the continent) as the other two have.

The Community shield also has the League winner + FA Cup winner face each other?
Intriguing idea that for else-where

It's actually "by invitation", normally EPL Champions vs FA Cup winner but in years when one team wins both (won't be this season ) league runners up gets the gig.

[eddie2]

Sorry eddie but I don't get it either - are you effectively now suggesting we split the competition in two? I don't see how the analogy works as the champions league is a whole different competition to the europa league, and each has their own winner. They do have a winner vs winner match for the european super cup, but that's a third separate competition which doesnt have anything like the attention on it or prestige (at least from an English perspective, it may be different on the continent) as the other two have.

yes i am saying split it into 2...

the reason for this is that this event was started when there was only 20 clans and could easily be completed within 1 year there are now more than 50 clans. bottom half clans (lower than 26 on the f600) have the newcomers cup and top ranked can have this event... with both meeting each other after they win there event....

i have thought last season that this event is really for the top ranked clans and lower ranked ones are only there to make the figures up then like with last year there is arguments about start dates because it clashes with the previous years one. if we split the event into 2 it will make it more manageable and more appealing for lower ranked clans.. it will also make it more of a challenge for higher ranked clans. me personally i like to play games i can have a chance of winning against opponents that will make it fun to play. josko has also stated his view is that he would like to play clans of equal capability and does not like facing the lower ranked ones because it is 2 easy for them... this i would say is the same thoughts of most clan members when they play they want a chance to win or want a challenge in the teams they face.

[catnipdreams]

I like the idea of two different events, or two phases of the same event, with the upper half of the clans producing a champion, and the lower half of the clans producing a champion, and then those two clans facing off. I haven't read every single post in this thread carefully, but it seems to me like this solution addresses most, if not all, of the concerns folks have.

[eddie2]

I like the idea of two different events, or two phases of the same event, with the upper half of the clans producing a champion, and the lower half of the clans producing a champion, and then those two clans facing off. I haven't read every single post in this thread carefully, but it seems to me like this solution addresses most, if not all, of the concerns folks have.

i see you are thinking the same as me.

[Qwert]

heh, eddie your idea could be work in Uefa, because you have enough quality teams who can compete for Champion LEague title, but here things are very diferent.

You have so little top clans here, so If you have one Cup from 1 to 25 and other cup from 26 to 50, you have several problems.

In First Cup some teams will still be outsider, and can not compete against Top 8.
Lets say that KOrt become winner of first Cup, defeating in tough game other Top clan, what will be hes motive to play another match again very weak team from Cup 2 ?

These Super Finale will not be some great match,, its will be Joke Finale.

Like some pointed previous-we have newcomers cup who are perfect example what you say for these where all low ranked clan can compete, so why will now need to have almost identical competition , so called Cup 2 for teams from 25 to 50 place?

Well next year i will again proposed Option 3, maybe these time people will recognize true value of these format

[eddie2]

Did i say make a matching event like the newcomers cup or did i say incorperate it in to this cup

[eddie2]

Sorry for double post. You say it will be unfair for the final 1v1 but which ever format this goes with out of the options would it not be unfair for 10+ clans. Like what someone else said before this way to do it takes out 95 percent of the arguements it also means clans are not signing up for something that could last 18 months

[Doc_Brown]

It's an interesting proposal. Let me offer a variation on it: How about a super-cup tournament that will host the winners of CCup, CL, ACC, and NCC? Granted, now we're talking 2 additional wars, but a competition between those winners is likely to be a pretty good event. That way we're not talking about a potential #1 vs #25. You could see a #1 win CCup, a #4 win CL, a #7 win ACC, and a new #15 or so win NCC.

I realize this is starting to get off topic again. Since Eddie had brought up a top v. bottom type event, I thought this could take a form like that. If CCup retains a strict ranking-based bracket structure and starts to cater more to top clans while the ACC is more oriented to the lower ranked clans. Anyway. Not trying to push either way, I just wanted to throw out an idea that could incorporate Eddie's suggestion.

[IcePack]

[Chariot of Fire]

I have to ask a very important question. Are the CDs going to use the F400 or the previous results of the Cup to determine seedings? Personally I have always been in favour of using the previous cup results (mainly because those clans still have an obligation to play a 60 game challenge) so if seedings = byes then it makes sense. There now appears to be another very good reason.......

If the F400 is used then it may be said that a clan's standing on it is very important, right? Well a recent result in the Random League which went 10-2 in TOFU's favour actually cost us points. We would have had to win 11-1 not to lose points on the F400. This I find pretty ridiculous and is a very good reason why I support Josko's earlier statement that top-ranked clans should not be drawn against low-ranked clans - not when a 90% win rate is needed to maintain position on the F400.

So Eddie's proposal has merit - create two tournaments that run in synch, one for the Top 50% and one for the Bottom 50% and prevent the lopsided match-ups that we've witnessed in the past (e.g. #1 vs #32) because those challenges don't produce winners - they produce one clan that lost (probably badly) and the other clan that also lost (position on the F400) which is a ridiculous scenario.

If so much weight is going to be given to the F400 then I feel it is imperative to avoid inequitable challenges.

[IcePack]

I have to ask a very important question. Are the CDs going to use the F400 or the previous results of the Cup to determine seedings? Personally I have always been in favour of using the previous cup results (mainly because those clans still have an obligation to play a 60 game challenge) so if seedings = byes then it makes sense. There now appears to be another very good reason.......

If the F400 is used then it may be said that a clan's standing on it is very important, right? Well a recent result in the Random League which went 10-2 in TOFU's favour actually cost us points. We would have had to win 11-1 not to lose points on the F400. This I find pretty ridiculous and is a very good reason why I support Josko's earlier statement that top-ranked clans should not be drawn against low-ranked clans - not when a 90% win rate is needed to maintain position on the F400.

So Eddie's proposal has merit - create two tournaments that run in synch, one for the Top 50% and one for the Bottom 50% and prevent the lopsided match-ups that we've witnessed in the past (e.g. #1 vs #32) because those challenges don't produce winners - they produce one clan that lost (probably badly) and the other clan that also lost (position on the F400) which is a ridiculous scenario.

If so much weight is going to be given to the F400 then I feel it is imperative to avoid inequitable challenges.

This was the #2 clan (almost the #1 clan) literally playing dead last. Similar to the conqueror playing a 50 pt cook. (tho not a perfect example) It expects better than 10-2 for TOFU, which i would agree with. 10-2 going from very top to very bottom isnt exactly asking a lot. The fact it was random league just makes it a "little" bit harder, but random league is not the place to compete if you are so concerned of your rank.

[Chariot of Fire]

It's irrelevant if it is random league or not. If you seriously expect a top-ranked clan to beat even the worst clan by a margin of 90% every time then you seriously don't know much about the nature of this game, especially when the lower-ranked clan is picking half the maps.

My argument is that match-ups such as this should be avoided if possible in the draw for the Cup. If it's all random then so be it - that's the luck of the draw - but to orchestrate such an imbalance would be a mistake. It's a point that I believe deserves consideration.

[IcePack]

It's irrelevant if it is random league or not. If you seriously expect a top-ranked clan to beat even the worst clan by a margin of 90% every time then you seriously don't know much about the nature of this game, especially when the lower-ranked clan is picking half the maps.

My argument is that match-ups such as this should be avoided if possible in the draw for the Cup. If it's all random then so be it - that's the luck of the draw - but to orchestrate such an imbalance would be a mistake. It's a point that I believe deserves consideration.

Not everytime. There's a reason why some "win some and lose some" and that there are margins of victory for each. And they dont consider whether its random or not. Which is why it would still expect you to come up with a solid performance.

[josko.ri]

I have to ask a very important question. Are the CDs going to use the F400 or the previous results of the Cup to determine seedings? Personally I have always been in favour of using the previous cup results (mainly because those clans still have an obligation to play a 60 game challenge) so if seedings = byes then it makes sense. There now appears to be another very good reason.......

F400 is the best determination for seedings. If we go with your suggestion then for example, if CC4 started last month, someone unseeded will play vs damaged BOTFM (seeded), get easy win, and just because of that draw luck, they would get next year seeding place (assuming that 1.b option with 16 seeds win). The example is even worse if we use random draw (option 2.b), then someone will get golden draw and ticket for final 16 or final 8, which means they were not lucky just in this Cup by having great draw but are also lucky for next edition by getting seeding place. F400 presents clan performance over 2 years period and is for sure the best determination of clan strength/seedings. Placement in last Cup a lot depends on draw, so it is not the best determination of clan strength.

If the F400 is used then it may be said that a clan's standing on it is very important, right? Well a recent result in the Random League which went 10-2 in TOFU's favour actually cost us points. We would have had to win 11-1 not to lose points on the F400. This I find pretty ridiculous and is a very good reason why I support Josko's earlier statement that top-ranked clans should not be drawn against low-ranked clans - not when a 90% win rate is needed to maintain position on the F400.

If so much weight is going to be given to the F400 then I feel it is imperative to avoid inequitable challenges.

I do not see problem here. You were played vs the last clan on ranking so it is really normal to expect 11/1 win, lower result penalizing your clan, and that or higher give additional points to your clan. As IP said, if some from top of scoreboard plays vs Cook and achieve 10/2 result, he will lose more points than gain. If you think 11/1 is unreal to achieve, look at last KORT results in CL5. 8-0 in away field vs DB, 7-1 on away field vs OSA, 7-1 vs HH. And all those clans are much higher ranked than MB, so I do not see why expectation of 11-1 result to improve your rank is unreal expectation. It is very real expectations for given ranks of each clan, and you achieved lower result than expectation was so there goes your losing points.

So Eddie's proposal has merit - create two tournaments that run in synch, one for the Top 50% and one for the Bottom 50% and prevent the lopsided match-ups that we've witnessed in the past (e.g. #1 vs #32) because those challenges don't produce winners - they produce one clan that lost (probably badly) and the other clan that also lost (position on the F400) which is a ridiculous scenario.

That was something indirectly proposed as option 3 in previous voting, but option 3 was even better because both of "tournaments" are at the end included in one tournament. There were bottom 50% in round 1, bottom 75% in round 2, and then winners of those small "tournaments" buy their ticket to join top 8 in "their" tournament. In essence that was already proposed but not everyone is able to read between the lines.

[Chariot of Fire]

Yeah, coz it's well-known that we can consistently roll better dice than our opponents 9 times out of 10

[josko.ri]

Yeah, coz it's well-known that we can consistently roll better dice than our opponents 9 times out of 10

Nope, with that high skill difference, in average 5 of 10 times you will roll better dice, and 4 of 10 times you will outplay them even with worse dice.

[eddie2]

It's an interesting proposal. Let me offer a variation on it: How about a super-cup tournament that will host the winners of CCup, CL, ACC, and NCC? Granted, now we're talking 2 additional wars, but a competition between those winners is likely to be a pretty good event. That way we're not talking about a potential #1 vs #25. You could see a #1 win CCup, a #4 win CL, a #7 win ACC, and a new #15 or so win NCC.

I realize this is starting to get off topic again. Since Eddie had brought up a top v. bottom type event, I thought this could take a form like that. If CCup retains a strict ranking-based bracket structure and starts to cater more to top clans while the ACC is more oriented to the lower ranked clans. Anyway. Not trying to push either way, I just wanted to throw out an idea that could incorporate Eddie's suggestion.

i like what you are trying to say doc brown but i do not think it would work like that... top ranked clans are already trying to delay this event due to still taking part in last years event.. i brought this idea in mainly to reduce the timeline and fairness into this event which will give all clans some form of chance to progress...

and josko you are saying about top clans bringing there main game against lower ranked clans so as to win 90 percent.. So if a lower ranked clan produced there home set as luxumberg quads doodle quads which could result if they get first go and average dice in first shot (eliminating you first to go player) they could actually win 2 games without you even getting a shot...

and josko this is not the same as option 3... option 3 was still a event that would last longer than a year...

[Chariot of Fire]

Yeah, coz it's well-known that we can consistently roll better dice than our opponents 9 times out of 10

Nope, with that high skill difference, in average 5 of 10 times you will roll better dice, and 4 of 10 times you will outplay them even with worse dice.

Have to just correct you there mate. If we get better dice 50% of the time (fair average, right) it means we get worse dice in 5 of 10 games That means we'd have to beat them tactically in 4 out of 5 games, not 4 out of 10.

Whichever way the numbers are computed, the simple fact is a win rate of 90% is unfeasible. Not when the oppo choose half the maps.

[josko.ri]

Yeah, coz it's well-known that we can consistently roll better dice than our opponents 9 times out of 10

Nope, with that high skill difference, in average 5 of 10 times you will roll better dice, and 4 of 10 times you will outplay them even with worse dice.

Have to just correct you there mate. If we get better dice 50% of the time (fair average, right) it means we get worse dice in 5 of 10 games That means we'd have to beat them tactically in 4 out of 5 games, not 4 out of 10.

Whichever way the numbers are computed, the simple fact is a win rate of 90% is unfeasible. Not when the oppo choose half the maps.

You are again wrong, because the same like you expect to win 4 of 5 with bad dice, you can also lose some of the 5 with "better" dice. Did it never happen to you to lose when you rolled better dice? So still, You need in average win 4 of 10 where you have lower dice, and 5 of 10 when you have better dice but you still need to play well to make it win because it is also possible to lose with better dice.

However it is, the same is to everyone. We have just achieved 100% win rate in away field vs #37 clan when they chose ALL the maps, so if we are able to do so, then you for sure should be able to win over 90% on half home half away field vs #43 clan if you wish to jump over us in scoreboard. If not, well second place in scoreboard is still a good rank.

and josko this is not the same as option 3... option 3 was still a event that would last longer than a year...

Aaand again you are wrong. 25 clans in each tournament (which you proposed) would need 5 rounds to be finished, plus additional round where winners of each tournament play for ultimate winner = 6 total rounds. Option 3 also had 6 total rounds, so how it makes my proposal longer than your proposal? In fact, my proposal would made tournament shorter than 1 year because new edition would be possible to start before the old edition ends, because semifinalists and finalists of previous edition would not play 2 opening rounds of new edition. With your proposal it is impossible, we would need to wait to finish all 5+1 rounds before starting new edition, so my proposal would actually last way LESS than you proposal. As I said, not everyone is able to read between lines and therefore it is not weird that they make wrong conclusions.