Conquer Club

This is really getting ridiculous.

viewtopic.php?f=90&t=70929
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=70928
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=70930
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=70933
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=70932
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=70935
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=70931
viewtopic.php?f=91&t=70418
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=71001

All of the above tournaments are announced for 2500+ only. This probably eliminated close to 90-95% of the players who play tournaments. Sure I may be whining because I don't qualify myself at this point in time... but I am of the opinion that ALL tournaments should be made available to every player on the site.

If anything, these elitist games can be ran by PM or in the callouts forum. Trying to pass these off as "tournaments" are a complete joke. This blatant discrimination and conceited attitude has already ruined most aspects of this site, and I don't want to see it ruin the only thing I am still on CC for: tournaments.

Either open up a bracket for each rank (as in the recently announced "League of XXXX", or don't do them at all.

Does anyone else think that point restriction tournaments are a bad idea?

i agee this is a very bad idea but sadly its not against the rules.

GrimReaper. wrote:i agee this is a very bad idea but sadly its not against the rules.

Well... Rule number 3 of the handbook:

At least 50% of the spots available must be for open/public sign-ups, and not filled with special invitations.

This may be stretching the rule, but I don't feel as though setting such requirements allows for "open/public" sign-ups. Perhaps we could get it clarified or even added into the book as another rule.

I don't see a problem with point restrictions on entry, as long as there is an equal tournament being offered for all the other ranks. Something like the "League of...." touneys that are going on now. But, to offer half a dozen tournaments that are only open to the top 250 (or so) players is just elitist bullshit. The tournament forum is not the place for it.

There have been tournaments offered before for just cooks, etc. Since this has been allowed, I think this issue needs to be clarified because of the recent glut of 2500+ tournaments.
I don't think this sudden flood of tournaments for just 2500+ is a good idea either and I don't know why the same thing couldn't be accomplished in call outs or some other forum.
I think you should put a poll up Bones and have people vote about possibly reviewing/revising the tournament handbook rules.

Marfski wrote:There have been tournaments offered before for just cooks, etc. Since this has been allowed, I think this issue needs to be clarified because of the recent glut of 2500+ tournaments.
I don't think this sudden flood of tournaments for just 2500+ is a good idea either and I don't know why the same thing couldn't be accomplished in call outs or some other forum.
I think you should put a poll up Bones and have people vote about possibly reviewing/revising the tournament handbook rules.

Thanks for the thoughts, Marfski. I have added it to my original post. If you think of any other options please let me know and I will add it in there.

You bring up a good point about "cook" tournaments. Honestly, I don't really feel as though they should be allowed if we are also trying to stop "2500+" ranks as well. I don't want to be a hypocrite.

Anyways. I voted for option 2. I think everyone should have a chance for every tournament, and I also believe this is the intent that the original Rule Book was written for.

Thos tournaments are all made by the same person. Did you consider just asking him to stop?

Bones2484 wrote:You bring up a good point about "cook" tournaments. Honestly, I don't really feel as though they should be allowed if we are also trying to stop "2500+" ranks as well. I don't want to be a hypocrite.

One difference: There are 250 players over 2500 points, but there are nearly 2000 players under 800 points. That's nearly 10 times as many cooks eligible for a cooks only tournament than for a colonel+ tournament.

That's all I'm saying for now.

BaldAdonis wrote:Thos tournaments are all made by the same person. Did you consider just asking him to stop?

I don't have a special color for my user name; it's not my place to do anything of the sort. All I can do is see if others agree or if I am just being silly.

edit: And besides, I'm just going to assume he'd ignore me just as he has ignored the sub-2500 players that have tried to sign up in the tournaments I listed.

Night Strike wrote:

Bones2484 wrote:You bring up a good point about "cook" tournaments. Honestly, I don't really feel as though they should be allowed if we are also trying to stop "2500+" ranks as well. I don't want to be a hypocrite.

One difference: There are 250 players over 2500 points, but there are nearly 2000 players under 800 points. That's nearly 10 times as many cooks eligible for a cooks only tournament than for a colonel+ tournament.

That's all I'm saying for now.

I see what you're saying, and I went back and forth on my opinion of cooks vs colonels only.

On that note, though, I don't think there'd be any problem with making a cook or colonel tournament that saved 50% of the spots for cooks or colonels. Seems like that would be in the spirit of the rule.

Night Strike wrote:

Bones2484 wrote:You bring up a good point about "cook" tournaments. Honestly, I don't really feel as though they should be allowed if we are also trying to stop "2500+" ranks as well. I don't want to be a hypocrite.

One difference: There are 250 players over 2500 points, but there are nearly 2000 players under 800 points. That's nearly 10 times as many cooks eligible for a cooks only tournament than for a colonel+ tournament.

That's all I'm saying for now.

I allowed 2400 scores in there and said they could be 100 points below, which makes about 325 players, I had no idea there was this much ruckus about this, lol, you all are way too much, there is literally hundreds of tournies going on and you worried about 7, as I discussed in length with some in here on these 2500+ tournies, this will be my last batch. several liked them and wanted more, i thought i was sparking cc by trying to get more involved in tournies as many high ranks dont, but many started to come around after i invited some. again, i have no problem not making anymore of these after these are done if that makes all happy. I had no idea you thought we were elitist cause of a 2500 score? thats a joke, but u got a right to your opinion, they were only meant to get some higher players liking tournies more, and the reason many dont play them is because they lose a ton of points!!!!! why do 90% of the people that win tournies feel good when the top 10% in scores are never in them, do you feel like you really competed agains tthe best players on the site? cause you have not, so many of the same players join every single tourney hoping to win one, let me join 100 so i cna win a few, and against who? low scores? and you win one? lol, what does that mean? only fair to have a few high score tourneys, agreed? I mean, look at all the tournies made, a vast majority, over 90% have been for all, and very few, if you look at the big picture have been made for higher scores, and just recently. The 1 on 1's are a joke but kinda fun, they were made to again, get some higher players involved in some other tournies soon.. but after these are done, i am thru with putting limits on my tournies if many dislike, i have no problem with that, didnt realize i was braking some rule. but, I do think, every once in a great while a tourney or 2 here and there would be ok with this, since you have like 20 to 1 for all other scores, and only small % of these are made. i dont think anyone is being or trying to be elitist here, those that cry or yell that are filled with envy and need to check themselves. I currently have 2 trips and 2 quads that need filling and ALL and any can JOIN, go join them, go, waiting for you alll to go join those, they are best of 3 series/ quick bones and all, go join them? you are invited? if you dont join them, I wonder what your issue really is? cause there is 4 you can join right now, but I dont see you joining them? so please all go join the four I made that are open to all, even a cook joined one waiting for you to join the 4 tournies, and if not or none of you do, stop whining like babies. I said i was going to be done with these when they fill and if I make any in the future it will be open for all, but every once in a great while, I may make a tourney or 2 for 2500 plus. As far as I know, I never broke any rules, the tournament organizers allowed them, so all must be ok. I just think they should be limited. We really do not want to continue to leave the top 350 players out of every single tournament always due to unfairness of points. maybe we can negotiate something like 2000+ which allows a lot more of a population to join. i would be ok with this. Maybe they can implement this new cc rule in jan 2009. hope this may serve helpful. I dropped them down to 2300 and 2100 scores and there is a 100 point le-way, so 2200's and 2000 scores can join at bare minimum, hope that helps some, now over 600 plus can join them, better? I lost over 600 points in tournies, and I dont care, it is more to get others involved that dont play these.

yeah i have seen these tournament
its just more pussys afraid for there points

if you dont like the tourny...just dont join it...whats the problem?? make your own i did

Blitz you said "why do 90% of the people that win tournies feel good when the top 10% in scores are never in them, do you feel like you really competed agains tthe best players on the site? cause you have not, so many of the same players join every single tourney hoping to win one, let me join 100 so i cna win a few, and against who? low scores? and you win one? lol, what does that mean? only fair to have a few high score tourneys, agreed?"

Why shouldn't they feel good about winning any tourney? You LOL at them because it doesn't mean anything because the higher scores won't join, but then you make tourneys so that lower scores can't join. How can they win a tourney with the higher score in them if they can't play in the same tourneys.

I sure hope I misunderstood what you said because I have a lot of respect for you, your score the tourneys you have run.

Can someone decipher the wall of text that Blitz put up there? I'm not even going to bother trying to read it.

edit: Ok, I tried to read it. Blitz, that is exactly the elitist attitude I was talking about. I don't care WHO is in a tournament, it is still hard to win ANY tournament. And besides, how are those of us who win tournaments supposed to "prove ourselves" as you say when we can't even compete against the "good players".

And as for the players who don't want to play in tournaments because of their points? Screw 'em. That isn't the attitude that is welcomed in tournaments. I don't play tournaments to win points, I play for the competition and fun of it. And by doing this, you are now plaguing the tournament forum with the elitist crap that is elsewhere on this site. The tournaments used to be the only place for anyone to get involved.

I sure hope I misunderstood what you said because I have a lot of respect for you, your score the tourneys you have run.

I agree 100%. But sadly, I don't think we are misunderstanding him. I think we are reading him exactly right.

Soldier4Christ wrote:if you dont like the tourny...just dont join it...whats the problem?? make your own i did

You are missing the point completely. There are plenty of tournaments that I'm not interested in that I don't join. The difference here is that I, along with 95% of the site, can't join these even if we want.

Blitzaholic wrote:why do 90% of the people that win tournies feel good when the top 10% in scores are never in them, do you feel like you really competed agains tthe best players on the site? cause you have not

I call fucking bullshit on this. Blitzaholic, let's see you bring your boys and play in a real tournament that is set up to actually find the best players and see how you fare, shall we? I bet at least half of you won't make it out of the first round against some of us "lesser" folks. There is so much more involved with playing in a tournament that you've never even thought about.

"Haven't played against the top 10%, so you haven't played the best,".... what a joke!

Optimus Prime wrote:

Blitzaholic wrote:why do 90% of the people that win tournies feel good when the top 10% in scores are never in them, do you feel like you really competed agains tthe best players on the site? cause you have not

I call fucking bullshit on this. Blitzaholic, let's see you bring your boys and play in a real tournament that is set up to actually find the best players and see how you fare, shall we? I bet at least half of you won't make it out of the first round against some of us "lesser" folks. There is so much more involved with playing in a tournament that you've never even thought about.

"Haven't played against the top 10%, so you haven't played the best,".... what a joke!

OP, I guarentee you that of the top 300 players on the scoreboard, they are 90% of the best players on this site, while there may be 10% outside it. I have played against the best and all the best cc has to offer and held my own and did quite well as well as our clan has in all of its challenges, and those were against good teams, not sure what you are talking about. I respect all n here, but bones started this and calling names of elitism, well i just fired back with a little spite was all. do not personal it, it was out of emotion and i like and respect all the tourney players, just wanted to give some tournies to some higher scores, but will balance it out fairly from all from now on, no biggie.

Blitz, you are blind if you think that those players in the Top 300 are the best "all around" players this site has to offer. I would venture to guess that a majority of them got to that point specializing in one type of gameplay, and doing that does not mean that they are the best.

I'm sorry to burst your precious little bubble, but of those Top 300, very few have a clue as to what it takes to really win a tournament, let alone know how to use strategy in a tournament beyond just the game at hand. They may be good at their style, or their favorite setting, but that is about it. Saying you've "done well" in your clan challenges doesn't mean anything when 90% of tournaments have nothing to do with team games, nor do they have anything to do with scoring systems that are anywhere close to those found in a clan challenge.

I stand by my statement that they would not fare nearly as well as you think they would in a tournament setting where any and all players of all scores, styles, and ranks were allowed. You, to be quite frank, have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to this subject.

Until all of you up there on the first page of the scoreboard start showing up for any and all tournaments regardless of player score or style of play, I will continue to believe you do not have what it takes to truly play in them. You cannot claim to be the best if you aren't willing to play others who truly are the best at their craft.

You, my dear sir, are not the best at this particular craft, and won't be until you prove it by doing it the right way, and not the weak ass, self-protecting way.

Some people have said that these tournaments are only open to "elitists" and the "best all around"... we'll.. i've been having a laugh against some of my opponents who really don't know how to play, even if they do have 2500 points.

But on topic..

Point Restictions have been here for a long time, it's used by lots of organizers. Just because this restiction only allows the top 300 on the scoreboard to join... well.. how is this diffrent to use a 1200p requirement? It's still a point requirement. Sure, it's open to more than 300 players. But that shouldnt matter. I'd say, either take away all point restrictions or leave it as it is.

White Moose wrote:Point Restictions have been here for a long time, it's used by lots of organizers. Just because this restiction only allows the top 300 on the scoreboard to join... well.. how is this diffrent to use a 1200p requirement? It's still a point requirement. Sure, it's open to more than 300 players. But that shouldnt matter. I'd say, either take away all point restrictions or leave it as it is.

AndrewB runs two tournaments a year for Majors+. No one's complained, and I doubt it's because 4 times as many players are allowed in. Maybe because it's only two a year, and not 7 in a day? It also probably helps that he strives to put together a high quality tournament, instead of a throwaway 16 player bracket. No one could say he's just abusing the set up to get more medals.

i dont see a problem.

some "higher ups" (like me) dont want to play cooks in tourneys the pt lose is far too big if i get some really bad dice.

PS: Blitz make a feudal 1v1 one plz

blitz is quite right about all of the above. having watched me pops get hung drawn and n00b quartered in 'battle for escalating supremacy' i can safely say the only singles tournaments i'll be joining are ones that offer some kind of checkpoint in ability level. if its elitist to try and avoid a rampaging stripe in a meaningless tournament game then count me in

I don't understand how tournaments that allow maximum 5% of the whole CC population join, are even allowed and get privileges. I see it as complete bullshit and I'm glad to see that other people who have been around in tournament forums as long as I have and put a lot of effort to either creating tournaments or playing in them and trying to win them see it the same way (or almost the same way).

Tournament forums have been my sanctuary and kept me in this site for awhile now. Tournaments are what made me buy premium. Ironically, "thanks" to tournaments I will also pull back from CC life and not be actively part of CC and tournaments anymore. Tournaments were such a nice place when I first got into them, only place in CC where there was only friendly people and attitude but lately is has filled with whiners, whiners and more whiners which ruins not only my mood, but I'm sure that the nice experience of tournaments to many others. I think we've always been welcoming new people but lately it has turned into a joke what is going on in here.

Thank you Bones for the poll and I encourage organisers to post in here and also introduce this thread to players and ask to vote and post what they think because I'm sure that there are a lot of tournament regulars who have something to say and who would like to state their opinion (even if it is just by voting).


amazzony

Bones2484 wrote:Well... Rule number 3 of the handbook:

At least 50% of the spots available must be for open/public sign-ups, and not filled with special invitations.

I have always been a promoter of folks running tournaments in any manner they would like. However, the TDs made it clear that they did not support invitation lists based on the above rule. I feel that point restrictive tournaments are a much greater affront to the letter of the above law.