Conquer Club

dwilhelmi wrote:

stahrgazer wrote:And, your assessment of only giving top 4 or winner a medal is in the garbage when at the same time, you look, and a different "clan tournament" series is being given medals for ALL rounds.

Existing interpretations are full of reverse-Rank bias. Newcomers can earn clan war medals for clan tournaments, ALL rounds (they have, go look!), but participants in a series that's less discriminatory (but still requires EXPERIENCED clans) cannot.

Totally different scenario. The Newcomers tournament is designed for new clans to flex their muscles a bit. Giving them medals for victories there makes sense, not least of which because since they are all new clans, rank should most likely be pretty close to even, while the same is not true at all in this tournament.

No slight intended towards Newcomers, but that is kinda like comparing trophy systems between Little League and the Majors. Different setup, different scenario, plausible different rule set.

Not necessarily siding with either group here, I personally am still neutral on this topic, but just wanted to throw that thought out there for your consideration stahrgazer.

And the Conqueror's Cup is intended for experienced clans to flex their muscles a bit. NOT a totally different scenario.

So again.. you're saying that because Ccup chose to not be quite as discriminatory as the other cup series, it should be treated as worse.

"MInor leagues" deserve a medal for wins, but "Major leagues" don't.

But last I knew, anyone "good enough" to play in a Major League ball game got the same rewards for wins no matter how far down on the scale some of their opponents were.

LoW didn't beg to have to play in play-in rounds, you know. We weren't chomping at the bit to wipe some lesser-ranked-but-experienced-enough-for-Major-leagues clans out of the competition. We grudgingly agreed to do so when it worked out as it did (when a few extra clans were deemed experienced enough, "Major League" enough to enter) which meant we were required to do play-ins as well as rounds of 16.

So on CC, clans who agree to participate in the (first 2, anyway) rounds of "Major Leagues" are farmers if we win.

yup, the fertilizer is getting real deep, no wonder they want to label so many farmers to spread it

Edit: and, nippersean? and Leehar? No. Unless the rules change, you'll be FARMERS to beat us in the quarter-finals, and as FARMERS you won't deserve a medal for beating clan 4 when you're clan 3... only the semi and finals are currently targeted for medals in the CCup (despite ALL rounds being given medals in Newcomer cup).. likewise, if we beat you, we'll be FARMERS to have beaten the clan ranked over us. (Because it's the "anti farming" rule that got applied behind sealed doors to prevent awarding all rounds of the CCup skirmishes any clan war medals.)

Lol, right on Stahrgazer.!

I have to agree with Stahr.

AoC faced VDLL in the play-in round, they have been around longer than we have, so I don't think that can be called farming.

TFFS gave us a good battle, that they could have won, yet they would have had nothing to show for it (unless they went on to beat THOTA).

AoC haven't bothered with any challenges lately, because of our interests in the league and cup. So if we are playing all of these 41 game match ups for nothing, I'm wondering if it's going to be worth participating next year.

Yeah, I don't buy the excuse that we are given. We don't get to choose our opponents in the cup so therefore none of the games can be called competitive? These challenges are more competitive and interesting than most of the other wars that are being played. If you really want to say that a few challenges in the first round are too loopsided, so be it. But disqualifying all challenges up to the final 8 or finalist or whatever you are doing now... that's just nonsense.

Namor wrote:
TFFS gave us a good battle, that they could have won, yet they would have had nothing to show for it (unless they went on to beat

TFFS beat ID in the first round. That should be more than plenty to get a medal for them, yet they don't get one...

And it also shows that they are good enough to warrant a medal to us for beating them.

For those that are perhaps a bit late to the party and maybe missed the discussion from 10 pages ago, all these points and more seemed to have been raised already and seemingly there is an effort on the CD's part to adapt their medal requirements so that events such as this one can get medals for those deserving of them. I assume the cla reps would be more in the loop with regards to why it was previously decided that the first 2 rounds were not medal-worthy, but I personally feel there is good hope that we can receive such medals from what has been told to us.

Therefore, hopefully we can all wait for the new guidelines that the cd's will seemingly unveil shortly before tearing it to shreds, and that while some here will obviously continue ranting and raving as they have seemingly made a hobby off, others will be more willing to show the virtue of patience which seems to be a rare commodity of late.

Us stop ranting and raving? You sir are insane!

Leehar wrote:For those that are perhaps a bit late to the party and maybe missed the discussion from 10 pages ago, all these points and more seemed to have been raised already and seemingly there is an effort on the CD's part to adapt their medal requirements so that events such as this one can get medals for those deserving of them. I assume the cla reps would be more in the loop with regards to why it was previously decided that the first 2 rounds were not medal-worthy, but I personally feel there is good hope that we can receive such medals from what has been told to us.

Therefore, hopefully we can all wait for the new guidelines that the cd's will seemingly unveil shortly before tearing it to shreds, and that while some here will obviously continue ranting and raving as they have seemingly made a hobby off, others will be more willing to show the virtue of patience which seems to be a rare commodity of late.

I might agree with you, Leehar, except for this:

These cd's have known for months that they had made this decision, and apparently very few others did.

Why, one of those very cd's is OFFENDED that their past ruling implies we've farmed them for beating them, so offended he made a reportable remark in our thread.

and that's one point.. while they've made this arbitrary ruling AND LET IT STAND - it's OFFENSIVE to those on either side.
and another point is, their ruling isn't being consistently applied when you look at two cup challenges side by side.

You see, while you're busy "showing patience" for events such as this to get medals, there's ALREADY an event such as this GETTING medals without delays.

Inconsistency and offensiveness deserve a bit of rant.. especially since apparently NOT everyone knew.

Now, they know.

stahrgazer wrote:These cd's have known for months that they had made this decision, and apparently very few others did.

Why, one of those very cd's is OFFENDED that their past ruling implies we've farmed them for beating them, so offended he made a reportable remark in our thread.

Again, your report was ridiculous in the context of a clan challenge thread and my reaction had nothing to do with being a CD.

Again, the agreement with the tournament organizer was Top 8. Updating the CCup2 thread to reflect this change from the first cup was not the CDs job. The danger of farming in the play-in round was just one aspect of an overall decision to wait on medals for this particular event. There was never a determination that all challenges were farming.

Again, Top 8 get medals (at least at this point).

Again, months? Really? Hiding the decision for months? Check your facts.

Again, everyone needs to just settle down. All this guessing and complaining isn't going anywhere. We get it. Everyone should get medals for every challenge. Point taken.

I personally don't care what you all decide to do. If you ask my opinion, I think every war here deserves a medal because it encourages clans to play everyone and ultimately comes up with some very competitive matchups.

But, like I said, I don't care.

What amazes me, is that you all don't get what is causing all of the problems. You are better off saying nothing than saying, "we are talking about it, changes are coming soon." If you haven't learned anything from this site, then let me give you a lesson in Conquer Club public opinion 101. Anything going on behind closed doors is a no-no. Just be straight forward about your intentions and what you are thinking and let the public weigh in on it. Then make a reasonable executive decision and you get much less complaints because it is transparent.

When you appear mischievous and authoritative, then everyone assumes you are doing what isn't in their best interest and I see no real reason to go against popular opinion. This site is here for the customers, when you aren't doing what the majority of the customers want, then you shouldn't be serving this site.

Chuuuuck wrote:You are better off saying nothing than saying, "we are talking about it, changes are coming soon."

Chuuuuck wrote:Anything going on behind closed doors is a no-no.

I absolutely love the circular nature of the logic here. The sad part is it is true. Oh well.

Haha yes, sad but true.

But what I meant by the first part, "you are better of saying nothing than something is coming," is you would be better off not having people even know a change is coming and there is nothing going on behind closed doors. Then just spring on them something new later.

But, you would ultimately be best off just putting it all out there for everyone to see. Otherwise everyone assumes the worst. I have faith you all will do the right thing, but I don't see why it has to take so long to get there.

stahrgazer wrote:These cd's have known for months that they had made this decision, and apparently very few others did.

All of the CLA was aware of it April 24th
viewtopic.php?f=295&t=133225&start=180#p3132362

Chuuuuck wrote:Haha yes, sad but true.

But what I meant by the first part, "you are better of saying nothing than something is coming," is you would be better off not having people even know a change is coming and there is nothing going on behind closed doors. Then just spring on them something new later.

But, you would ultimately be best off just putting it all out there for everyone to see. Otherwise everyone assumes the worst. I have faith you all will do the right thing, but I don't see why it has to take so long to get there.

You're right, Chuuuuck.

But add, we have reason to doubt, to assume the worst. That reason is: the existing conflicting policy, where one series has no delay, the other does.

and cheme? your conduct in that thread is what was ridiculous.

A final ridiculous thing is that, with each answer I got, the story changed. When holes were punched in the supposed logic, the story would change again.

Continually changing/conflicting information is hardly "calming" material.

chemefreak wrote: The danger of farming in the play-in round was just one aspect of an overall decision to wait on medals for this particular event. There was never a determination that all challenges were farming.

I've been following this thread, and I do apologize if I missed something already stated, but may I ask what other aspects contributed to the current decision?

you mean like the fact that previous editions of this particular event also did not recieve medals for non finals games>?

SirSebstar wrote:you mean like the fact that previous editions of this particular event also did not recieve medals for non finals games>?

That isn't actually true. Every winner starting in the round of 16 in CC1 received medals. I don't believe the play-in rounds from CC1 qualified for medals, but those were much shorter, 21-game affairs rather than the larger 41-game challenges in this year's first round.

SirSebstar wrote:you mean like the fact that previous editions of this particular event also did not recieve medals for non finals games>?

Like Inca points out, you are entirely wrong here. Everyone got a medal from the 1st round of the cup last year, so I really don't understand how anyone can say that the final 8 isn't automatically qualified to get a medal this year. It should be the same thing... Final 16 should even be good enough.

Incandenza wrote:

SirSebstar wrote:you mean like the fact that previous editions of this particular event also did not recieve medals for non finals games>?

That isn't actually true. Every winner starting in the round of 16 in CC1 received medals. I don't believe the play-in rounds from CC1 qualified for medals, but those were much shorter, 21-game affairs rather than the larger 41-game challenges in this year's first round.

Quite so. THOTA, the 1st seed beat Left4Dead, who were seeded 16th.

As is expected for a 40 game challenge between clans, THOTA received medals for the win.

Surely the decision has to be to award medals to all clan battles of 40+ games, regardless of the arena. Clans don't farm.

cmon guys, do you play for fun or for medals?

are you asking a medalhunter or just everybody in particular?

FYI, in a pm yesterday, JP indicated medals would be awarded; he did not specify, but since the issue was about all rounds, I'm guessing he meant ALL rounds.

Legends play for fun, I'm not a medals-hunter and don't think any LoW is; but if CC offers a medal I deserve, then I want it. It's that simple. Those who feel otherwise can probably make a request that CC remove all little medal pictures from your wall and profile.

The extended amount of conversation you see here, challenge threads, and Clan Medals thread is because I was receiving conflicting and illogical answers to the original problem. I chose to squawk VERY loudly about it because NOT everyone was aware there was a problem in the first place.

Eyestone wrote:

SirSebstar wrote:you mean like the fact that previous editions of this particular event also did not recieve medals for non finals games>?

Like Inca points out, you are entirely wrong here. Everyone got a medal from the 1st round of the cup last year, so I really don't understand how anyone can say that the final 8 isn't automatically qualified to get a medal this year. It should be the same thing... Final 16 should even be good enough.

When going back to issue historical medals anything that looked like a clan war and quacked like a clan war got one, primarily based on size.

jpcloet wrote:

Eyestone wrote:

SirSebstar wrote:you mean like the fact that previous editions of this particular event also did not recieve medals for non finals games>?

Like Inca points out, you are entirely wrong here. Everyone got a medal from the 1st round of the cup last year, so I really don't understand how anyone can say that the final 8 isn't automatically qualified to get a medal this year. It should be the same thing... Final 16 should even be good enough.

When going back to issue historical medals anything that looked like a clan war and quacked like a clan war got one, primarily based on size.

This statement made me laugh...

Chuuuuck wrote:

jpcloet wrote:When going back to issue historical medals anything that looked like a clan war and quacked like a clan war got one, primarily based on size.

This statement made me laugh...

It's not that unusual that accomplishments are measured by the size. In fact, humanity is so focused on size and shape that even bullets and rockets have a specific size and shape - it's also usually said that the bigger, the better.