site-wide competative clan rankings

[General Mojo]

Could hulmey be more delusional??

Please explain to me how in your warped sense of reality DRS somehow refuses to fight your clan?

This ought to be comical....

[xxtig12683xx]

A couple of thoughts.....

- scoring on the same basis as they do in CC won't work fairly for one simple reason: clanmates talk and cooperate. Put one quality player in a team with three cooks who will follow his every directive, and the opposing team may just as well be playing four officers (but they won't receive the score for it).

- obviate the need for a complex scoring system by adopting a ladder, just as they do in squash clubs. Beat a clan and you assume its place on the ladder and the beaten clan drops down one place. Make a rule that you can only re-challenge a clan after you've played all the other clans (to prevent everyone going for the top spot all the time). The higher-ranked clan has the prerogative to decline a challenge from a lesser-ranked clan UNLESS the lower-ranked has already played every clan below it OR the higher-ranked has not faced a challenge within one calendar month.

They are pretty much all the rules one needs, and there's no need for scoring nor concern about the rank of clan members who participate.

Seems good to me. Thoughts?

i think this is a great idea, however the bold part is a little much, as there are a lot of competitive clans. Also for this ranking system you need to have a standard game # and game type for the ranking. Such as 30 clan games, 10 dubs, 10 trips, 10 quads...and a standard tie braking game. Just my thoughts, lemme know what the rest think.


-tig

[Juan_Bottom]

How about a link next to each clans name, on the ranking system; For those clans that have members who actually play challenges? Some clans have the same few members play them all... That way before you issue a challange, you'll already know who you're supposed to play....

????
Just an idea to keep the conversation rolling.

i think this is a great idea, however the bold part is a little much, as there are a lot of competitive clans. Also for this ranking system you need to have a standard game # and game type for the ranking. Such as 30 clan games, 10 dubs, 10 trips, 10 quads...and a standard tie braking game. Just my thoughts, lemme know what the rest think.

I dunno... I like how any challenge CAN be unique.

[xxtig12683xx]

How about a link next to each clans name, on the ranking system; For those clans that have members who actually play challenges? Some clans have the same gfewmbers play them all... That way before you issue a challange, you'll already know who you're supposed to play....

????
Just an idea to keep the conversation rolling.

i think this is a great idea, however the bold part is a little much, as there are a lot of competitive clans. Also for this ranking system you need to have a standard game # and game type for the ranking. Such as 30 clan games, 10 dubs, 10 trips, 10 quads...and a standard tie braking game. Just my thoughts, lemme know what the rest think.

I dunno... I like how any challenge CAN be unique.

yea so do i, but for the purposes of a ranking system, i think you need to have a standard from which to judge everyone. Nothing is stopping you from having side clan challenges on the side for bragging rights and fun


-tig

[hulmey]

Could hulmey be more delusional??

Please explain to me how in your warped sense of reality DRS somehow refuses to fight your clan?

This ought to be comical....

cena-rules sent you a pm and you i thnk you didnt reply or refused his challenge!!! Is he lying as well???????????????

[hulmey]

How about a link next to each clans name, on the ranking system; For those clans that have members who actually play challenges? Some clans have the same gfewmbers play them all... That way before you issue a challange, you'll already know who you're supposed to play....

????
Just an idea to keep the conversation rolling.

i think this is a great idea, however the bold part is a little much, as there are a lot of competitive clans. Also for this ranking system you need to have a standard game # and game type for the ranking. Such as 30 clan games, 10 dubs, 10 trips, 10 quads...and a standard tie braking game. Just my thoughts, lemme know what the rest think.

I dunno... I like how any challenge CAN be unique.

yea so do i, but for the purposes of a ranking system, i think you need to have a standard from which to judge everyone. Nothing is stopping you from having side clan challenges on the side for bragging rights and fun


-tig

Yes, Im in TOTAL agreement with you

[Juan_Bottom]

I just don't like it.
The map part I mean, not the set numbers of games, and game types.
Who is to say that any handful of maps should be the great decider? That I have to be great at Middle Earth or USApocalypse or AoR or whatever to be a great clan mate?
I like sticking to the "you pick half, and I'll pick the other half." I wholly believe it's better for clan battles to have some variety.

[Smokingdude420]

maybe we should do something rather then having a set number of games being played. We have something like the more games played the more points at risk? So the more games you play in the clan war the more point to be gained or lost and the less games you play the less points gained or lost

[xxtig12683xx]

My theory works with the ladder system, i dont like like the idea of having +24 points gained to a clans ranking for a clan victory. I think it should be a Ladder system, where you create a system from top to bottom based on avg. rank per clan.

So, should they want to partake Thota would be top dog to start with an avg. of 2700 points per player(i have no idea, but i know there is a thread that has that information) The next clan partaking would be 2 overall and so forth. Any new clans that have not formed, or enter when the system is to be put into effect start at the bottom of the ladder regardless of ppp. Also, should a clan be absent from clan challenges for a month or so, they face a penalty and slide down the list, however far seems reasonable.

could also keep 2 sets of W-L standings, ie. total clan wins and losses and games that were played wins and losses. Lets say one clan is 3-0 in battles but onle 50-40 in games played vs another clan being 3-0 but has a record of 70-20, clearly clan 2 should be ahead of clan 1.

These are all just ideas that pop into my head, i have more but ill let this sit out there and see what people think.


-tig

[Juan_Bottom]

Well SD,

I would prefer that the clans themselves work out the details.
How many games, what settings, and what maps. But if you lose, you lose. Even if you only play 3 games. But I'm not opposed to having a set number of games. My quibble is that I don't want any clan to have an upper hand. I think the fairest way to do it is to let the clans work out the challenge. (with the ladder system only)

Personally, I prefer the idea of treating the ranking system the way TIMMINZ put forward, by treating each clan like an individual. Points and all. It's pretty much what we do now, but with official standings. That way challenges can still be refused(on grounds of points potentially lost). That not only protects the clans overall points, but each person's individual points also.

I would also like to see some way to stamp a game as "offical clan challenge game." Or something similer.

[xxtig12683xx]

Well SD,

I would prefer that the clans themselves work out the details.
How many games, what settings, and what maps. But if you lose, you lose. Even if you only play 3 games. But I'm not opposed to having a set number of games. My quibble is that I don't want any clan to have an upper hand. I think the fairest way to do it is to let the clans work out the challenge. (with the ladder system only)

Personally, I prefer the idea of treating the ranking system the way TIMMINZ put forward, by treating each clan like an individual. Points and all. It's pretty much what we do now, but with official standings. That way challenges can still be refused(on grounds of points potentially lost). That not only protects the clans overall points, but each person's individual points also.

I would also like to see some way to stamp a game as "offical clan challenge game." Or something similer.

but thats not what you want, ideally you want every clan to want to accept the challanges.


-tig

[Juan_Bottom]

but thats not what you want, ideally you want every clan to want to accept the challanges.


-tig

Ideally, That's exactly what I would like. And I think that would work best with the ladder system? I'm not sure, but yeah that's what I would like.

The problem with that however, is when a with an average of 1000 points challanges a clan with an average of 1600 points. Lose some games, and they'll kill your points. Even if you win the challenge, you still lose points-wise. Unless the clan's members wouldn't lose points individually, then there would be fierce resistance to this type of system. Justifiable too, I believe. Not to mention, who wants to be constantly bothered having to swat flies? Unless we made a system where you play everyone once, but then we run into the problem I posted earlier.

But If anyone could figure out a fair way to make it so you wouldn't want to refuse challenges, I'm all ears.

[owenshooter]

oh, so this is a way to make clans play your clan? ha!!!! that is beyond hilarious... if a clan doesn't want to play you, you can't make them do it. and if a clan doesn't care to be in the "standings", you can't force them to be in the standings. it is that simple, it is that complex... BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD!!-0

[General Mojo]

Could hulmey be more delusional??

Please explain to me how in your warped sense of reality DRS somehow refuses to fight your clan?

This ought to be comical....

cena-rules sent you a pm and you i thnk you didnt reply or refused his challenge!!! Is he lying as well???????????????

I never received a PM from you or anyone from your clan. I've stressed repeatedly on this forum that DRS called you out multiple times and you guys never stepped up to the plate. If you want to claim otherwise, go for it...I'm through putting you in your place.

[Juan_Bottom]

Ok OWENSHOOTER, a little less pessimism, and a little more help would be appreciated. Surely you have a thought up a good idea yourself? I can't even tell if you're supporting this?

oh, so this is a way to make clans play your clan? ha!!!! that is beyond hilarious... if a clan doesn't want to play you, you can't make them do it.

Am I to assume that you're saying this to me? Because, this is pretty much what I've been saying. That you can't force any clan to battle. Ideally any clan should wan't to play, but that's not always fair to those involved.

and if a clan doesn't care to be in the "standings", you can't force them to be in the standings.

We all agreed when Hulmey said this:
"Those who want in the league all good and those that want dont join"


I'm not even sure how much more we can improve this though. Really, it's sounding very good ATM. We have a chance to make "competative clan" mean something here.

[Chariot of Fire]

I'm sure this is being made more awkward than it really needs to be. To reiterate what I said earlier, in addition to adding thoughts on format (as the subject of 'standard maps' came up) how does this sound:

1. Clans are invited to join a new 'Clan Ladder', deadline 23rd September.

2. 24th September a list of participating clans is drawn-up, with the name of the clan rep alongside his clan's name.

3. By the 30th September challenges will have been made and declined/accepted. In the challenge (from one rep to another) the details of eight games will be mentioned: 4 singles, 2 doubs, 1 trips & 1 quads. If the receiving clan accepts the challenge they reply with details of their 4 singles, 2 doubs, 1 trip & 1 quad. Total 16 games. The clan who receives this reply (i.e. the one which made the initial challenge) has the option to turn it down, negotiate, or try another clan.

4. 1st October all games may commence.

5. During October we should have some results. A clan that has won 9 of the 16 games will move up a place. A losing clan will move down a place. A draw (it's possible) keeps the clan in the same place on the ladder. A clan that has not posted a result by month's end will drop 1 place (prevents slow play - tho with this number of games it should be over in a fortnight - and also punishes clans who don't fight).

6. After the first month there will be a number of clans who have risen a place (they will be =1st), draws will be =? (depends how many above them), losses or no results will drop a place and be =?rd. Any late results (i.e. those games that began 1st October but finished, say, 3rd Nov, the winning team moves up a place and the loser to the bottom rung.

The ladder is thus started, and an order is forming. Before the end of the month in which games are being played the new challenges are going out, so that in November a new series of challenges can get underway. You move up 1 place for a win, down 1 place for a loss or a 'no result'.

This sytem eliminates the need for complex scoring based on players' ranking (or overall clan score average). It encourages fast play on both sides (or both sides drop a place by month's end). It allows the Captain to pick a squad of up to 15 if he so wishes, or just play with 4. This accommodates the demands of big clans and small, giving everyone an opportunity to play. It's also a doddle to administer. The correspondence is done by clan reps between each other, and all that's posted to the Admin is the result by month's end.

A rule I think is fair is that once two clans have faced each other they cannot do so again until they have challenged the other clans. Is this reasonable? Of course, if the challenge is declined then it's still classified as a 'challenge' and the clan can move on to another opponent, even one it has already played (on the basis all other clans have been challenged beforehand).

Thoughts please

[Juan_Bottom]

I don't think thast you can force any clan to play another, for reasons I have already posted. I'm not opposed to a ladder system... But It's not my first choice.

I'd prefer we keep doing challenges the way we always have. Only know with the clans being treated as a person, what Timminz said.

[Chariot of Fire]

No-one is 'forcing' a clan to play another. The option's always there to decline. But a clan will drop a place if they don't challenge another within a month.

[Juan_Bottom]

No-one is 'forcing' a clan to play another. The option's always there to decline. But a clan will drop a place if they don't challenge another within a month.

OOOOH! I missread! I thought that you ment if another clan didn't accept the challenge they would drop! My fault.

[max is gr8]

<snip>
1. Clans are invited to join a new 'Clan Ladder', deadline 23rd September. Why set a deadline? Surely an idea would be after all new comers join at bottom

2. 24th September a list of participating clans is drawn-up, with the name of the clan rep alongside his clan's name. Good Idea

3. By the 30th September challenges will have been made and declined/accepted. In the challenge (from one rep to another) the details of eight games will be mentioned: 4 singles, 2 doubs, 1 trips & 1 quads. If the receiving clan accepts the challenge they reply with details of their 4 singles, 2 doubs, 1 trip & 1 quad. Total 16 games. The clan who receives this reply (i.e. the one which made the initial challenge) has the option to turn it down, negotiate, or try another clan. Why does it have to be clan vs clan. Maybe doubles games could include 4 clans, 4 teams. Or singles could include 8 clans and then you could add terminator and assassin
<snip>

MADE COMMENTS IN BOLD

Also some questions who picks the maps and settings?

I prefer the idea of a clan leader board. Then ranks will change over time and it allows a variety of settings such as assassin and terminator which the other does not.

Of course both could work together.

[Juan_Bottom]

"3. By the 30th September challenges will have been made and declined/accepted. In the challenge (from one rep to another) the details of eight games will be mentioned: 4 singles, 2 doubs, 1 trips & 1 quads. If the receiving clan accepts the challenge they reply with details of their 4 singles, 2 doubs, 1 trip & 1 quad. Total 16 games. The clan who receives this reply (i.e. the one which made the initial challenge) has the option to turn it down, negotiate, or try another clan."

"Why does it have to be clan vs clan. Maybe doubles games could include 4 clans, 4 teams. Or singles could include 8 clans and then you could add terminator and assassin"
<snip>

That's brilliant. BRILLIANT.... A points system is the only way to pull it off though.... I'm heavily favoring it now....
MAX IS GR8!

[barterer2002]

So let me see if I've got it now.

On September 3 you've got 10 clans in the Clan League. For sake of simplicity call them clans A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I and J. On September 24 each clan starts with 1000 points. Clan A challenges Clan G and they work out the number of games they're going to play with the winner receiveing 20 points from the loser so that Clan A which won now has 1020 points and Clan G now has 980. Or does each game count for points? If you're going to have 6 or 8 team doubles its going to have to be each game isn't it?

Are there any rules on how often one player can participate in his clan's games? For instance John Doe is in Clan B, and is clearly their best team player. Can they send John out for every game or does it need to rotate through or is it really just up to the clan?

Is there a minimum of number of active competitive players each clan needs to have to compete and what would constitute active in this league?

What are the restrictions on challenging other clans. Earlier there was some discussion about having to challenge each of the other clans before repeating but I think that part of the discussion went by the wayside?

[max is gr8]

Are there any rules on how often one player can participate in his clan's games? For instance John Doe is in Clan B, and is clearly their best team player. Can they send John out for every game or does it need to rotate through or is it really just up to the clan?

Is there a minimum of number of active competitive players each clan needs to have to compete and what would constitute active in this league?

I think they shouldn't be able to send the same player out to every single game. Or it would be heavily weighted (Thinks I met set up thread now.) I'm sending messages to the competitive clan leaders to get feedback otherwise it would be useless

[max is gr8]

I would send them but my PMs keep on failing *strokes chin*

[Night Strike]

Juan_Bottom, you wanted to know some of what's being planned?? Head to Callouts.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=61423