Conquer Club

I used Random.org

or make 2 get eliminated or how about this beggining of every round we declare that we want to alliance tht way we work together right away and its legal cuz we asked for the alliance

i would say 4 man game, 2 go through, 2 eliminated, because understandably the initial people will gun for the new players entering the ring, but at least this gives the 2 players entering a chance to go against the other 2.

Ok the only fair way to handle this, in my opinion, is to go with a compete restart with 3 man games and 1 player advancing.

1st game will be sent out right now.

You should run the tourney the way you wish, and I'm okay with players teaming up. They just need to announce that that's what they're doing the first turn (or, rather, offer and accept). The third player (and/or fourth player) has to be told that's what's going on and should have a chance to either break up the alliance or make a separate one.

In terms of adding multiple players, and this is just brainstorming. What if a new player was added after five rounds or so? (Meaning a new game is started, until a maximum of 8 players are in.) This would give new players a better shot against a smaller team and a larger alliance would be harder to maintain. You could even, as the tournament organizer, decide to make the next game doubles (two- or even three-team).

You're the commissioner, you make the rules and, in the Royal Rumble, chaos should reign. I would not re-start the tourney but, as it's getting predictable, shake it up!

As for the alliance between skillfusniper33 and puzzleman, I'll not post an official complaint. Just be aware that you should start all singles games un-allied and have to form the alliance in-game.

There have been a lot of nuggets I've taken so far. Next time I run this one, I'll have a lot of better ideas for improving it.

Huntyr Green wrote:You should run the tourney the way you wish, and I'm okay with players teaming up. They just need to announce that that's what they're doing the first turn (or, rather, offer and accept). The third player (and/or fourth player) has to be told that's what's going on and should have a chance to either break up the alliance or make a separate one.

In terms of adding multiple players, and this is just brainstorming. What if a new player was added after five rounds or so? (Meaning a new game is started, until a maximum of 8 players are in.) This would give new players a better shot against a smaller team and a larger alliance would be harder to maintain. You could even, as the tournament organizer, decide to make the next game doubles (two- or even three-team).

You're the commissioner, you make the rules and, in the Royal Rumble, chaos should reign. I would not re-start the tourney but, as it's getting predictable, shake it up!

As for the alliance between skillfusniper33 and puzzleman, I'll not post an official complaint. Just be aware that you should start all singles games un-allied and have to form the alliance in-game.

Thanks huntyr, I don't make alliances very often, even in my clan games, so i'm pretty new to the whole idea, I would rather play most games all on me, unless they are team games.

either way i do think it is a cool tourny and i love the map its on

6612570 - game won by me

We're nearing the final games in the ladder. Thanks to all who have competed so far.

Congrats to Captain_Morgan13

Bump for Mod