Moderator: Clan Directors
Armandolas wrote:Foxglove/jghost7 wrote:...
I will summarize my opinions, for people who won't read all of josko's comments.
I think many clans are failing to comprehend the difference between a system that treats every clan exactly the same (completely random) and a system that will produce a great competition with competitive match-ups.
Option 1 (the system for the previous three cups) Single Elimination seeded bracket. All teams go from start.
Option 2, the completely random draw. Not even a change that is consistent with this tournament.
Option 3 a seeded system that has 2 rounds of play-in games.
lol sorry, I liked this comment...lol---->(GOLDEN TICKET!!!!@!, f*ck YEAH!@#$@).
Sry, but you seem a bit harsh on your points.Thats not what i understood from josko suggestion. Your argumentation is only about top clans avoiding eachother. So i believe your interpretation of josko arguments is wrong.
It looks like the one wanting a free ticket to an advanced stage is you, not the lower clans.
Even if i would agree in a pure random draw since round 1 , the chance of 2 great clans achieving the final is great.
The way it looks you see it , is that u want a fixed draw.Well...why dont we just proceed to the semi final with the top 4 clans and ignore the rest?
A draw is part of a cups fun...it should not be entirely fixed until the final. But i believe top clans are in the top by merit, so they should forfeit in the earlier rounds.
The other must earn in game the right to play with them.
Foxglove wrote: People who are against this option probably fall into 2 camps:
1. They don't think anyone deserves a bye. Fair enough - then we should go with option 1.
2. They want the option that will allow their clan the highest chance to succeed, regardless of ranking. This means they probably favor possibly easier progress for lower ranked clans
IcePack wrote:Leehar wrote:The middle-ground does exist, and I'm sure it can be reached
After months and months and pages and pages of debate. Maybe. Maybe not? So we can expect this to start....in the fall? CD's still haven't given a timetable to start or when all the debate and voting will end.
Leehar wrote:Foxglove wrote: People who are against this option probably fall into 2 camps:
1. They don't think anyone deserves a bye. Fair enough - then we should go with option 1.
2. They want the option that will allow their clan the highest chance to succeed, regardless of ranking. This means they probably favor possibly easier progress for lower ranked clans
If it wasn't for your acceptable bias towards josko's option , and some slight digs at people (and therefore alienating those that voted differently), I would totally use your arguments to campaign for votes on Option 3
Leehar wrote:It's nonsensical to give a schedule since things have rarely(if ever) gone to plan. However, Voting is already scheduled to end in 3 days, I imagine we can estimate optimistic Start to be Mid-April
Foxglove wrote:I think this brings to mind a point that josko made which might have been forgotten - Option 3 allows for cups to overlap, because the first rounds of the next cup can run concurrently with the final round(s) of the current cup. Half of the clans who participate get eliminated in round 1 (assuming 32 clans), so at least 16 clans probably go for a year in between their active cup participation. That's a long wait! Option 3 allows for them to participate more quickly, and allows them to face a more equally ranked clan, which also allows them a higher probability to play in subsequent rounds.
IcePack wrote:Not only that, but the debate is still going on. The vote is "scheduled" to end in 3 days, but one of the CD's has already stated it could be extended. Since there is no single point of contact for the event, hard to know whether Leehar is right or the other one(s) are until someone posts an OFFICIAL schedule.
But, that timeline does not appear to work for several of the options being voted on. Something the CD's need to consider as well as the duration of each seeding option being voted on. IMO there should be some sort of rough draft schedule for each of the options so people know what kind of timeframe / timeline people are looking at. But votings already halfway through...so, not likely to happen at this point. Vote blindly and find out the consequences later i suppose.
Foxglove wrote:IcePack wrote:Not only that, but the debate is still going on. The vote is "scheduled" to end in 3 days, but one of the CD's has already stated it could be extended. Since there is no single point of contact for the event, hard to know whether Leehar is right or the other one(s) are until someone posts an OFFICIAL schedule.
But, that timeline does not appear to work for several of the options being voted on. Something the CD's need to consider as well as the duration of each seeding option being voted on. IMO there should be some sort of rough draft schedule for each of the options so people know what kind of timeframe / timeline people are looking at. But votings already halfway through...so, not likely to happen at this point. Vote blindly and find out the consequences later i suppose.
Well, the CDs have assured us that under their leadership and ownership the cup will run to schedule, so I'm sure that they're considering the time requirements for each of these options and conveying them properly to the people who are voting.
IcePack wrote:Foxglove wrote:IcePack wrote:Not only that, but the debate is still going on. The vote is "scheduled" to end in 3 days, but one of the CD's has already stated it could be extended. Since there is no single point of contact for the event, hard to know whether Leehar is right or the other one(s) are until someone posts an OFFICIAL schedule.
But, that timeline does not appear to work for several of the options being voted on. Something the CD's need to consider as well as the duration of each seeding option being voted on. IMO there should be some sort of rough draft schedule for each of the options so people know what kind of timeframe / timeline people are looking at. But votings already halfway through...so, not likely to happen at this point. Vote blindly and find out the consequences later i suppose.
Well, the CDs have assured us that under their leadership and ownership the cup will run to schedule, so I'm sure that they're considering the time requirements for each of these options and conveying them properly to the people who are voting.
As a voter in the CDF, there hasn't been any discussion of schedule beyond a few people (non cd's) who are bringing it up.
Keefie wrote:Ahunda makes some good points, but one theme runs throughout his post: this is a cup for the top clans.
So why not restrict entry to CC4 to just the top 16 clans, after all they're the only ones who really count.
Keefie wrote:Ahunda makes some good points, but one theme runs throughout his post: this is a cup for the top clans.
So why not restrict entry to CC4 to just the top 16 clans, after all they're the only ones who really count.
Leehar wrote:The feeling was that this [Option 3] was even more elitist and inequitable than option 1. It's not about having a better chance to win in round 1, it's about all clans being treated equally in how the competition is set up.
Whats your response Josko?
I'm just trying to grasp the differing opinions here, and why in essence being Seeded seems grossly unfavourable to some clans.
Edit: Perhaps the Bye's are an issue? Why should a low-ranked clan have to fight similar quality opponents for 2 tough rounds before coming up against rested and refreshed Top 8 clan
Armandolas wrote:I would like to give my opinion.My opinion is only based om my competitive view and not on personal matters or my own clan interests.
I believe option 3 is the best until round3. In round 3 ALL matches should be pure RANDOM. Enough of seedings, because this is still a cup and a cup should be unpredictable.
(to illustrate this try to imagine old days Champions League draws..you have seedings in early stages, then its pure random)
I think this is by far the most fair and entertaining system.
Vid_FISO wrote:Again, regarding random draws, the followers of teams/ clubs in an open sport cup competition will have the very basic viewpoint, to win the cup you have to beat the 2nd best team (or the team that beat them) somewhere along the way, whether it be round 1,2,3, the semi or in the final itself.
CC is not a spectator sport and neither does it have fans, there is absolutely no need to manipulate/ seed to a "spectacle" final, beyond those involved and a mere handful of others, no-one cares!
ahunda wrote:I actually think, that joskos ideas are a serious attempt to accommodate the interests & wishes of those lower ranked clans. His suggestion would avoid any one-sided challenges in the early rounds, where the top dogs beat up the lower ranked clans, but instead let the lower ranked clans have some serious challenges among themselves, against clans of similar rank, giving them a chance get some wins in the course of the tournament, earn themselves a reputation (and medals, yawn), gain experience and then get a shot at a top clan in the later rounds, that they will likely not get outside of this tournament.
This sounds to me like a fair enough incentive for lower ranked clans to participate in the CCup, have fun playing it, taking something out of it. Whilst at the same time preserving the main character of the tournament, that has been the incentive for the top clans in the first 3 editions.
Maybe a compromise could be reached, if the bye system was not quite so extreme ? Not giving 8 clans bye´s for 2 entire rounds, but maybe only 4 (the semi-finalists of the last Cup) or even only 2 (the finalists) ? Give the others (3-8 or 5-8) only 1 round ?
The lower ranked clans, who are opposing the bye idea as *unfair* and/or *advantageous for the top clans* should consider here, that this system would in fact give them a much more even playing field in the early rounds, guaranteeing them opposition of similar rank & skill, whereas a total random draw could still put them up against one of the top clans in Round 1.
benga wrote:OSA has beaten BOFM while they were ranked 5, OSA was then around ranked around 30.
benga wrote:OSA has beaten BOFM while they were ranked 5, OSA was then around ranked around 30.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users