Conquer Club

Any clans interested in a 231 map clan war against the Fourskins? The current 230 maps+random. I'm envisioning taking turns making 10 games a week, where the creator gets to pick 10 maps to choose the settings on for that week, maybe clan that goes first would create 5 games to balance out any advantage from first pick of maps; up for ideas on that. This pace would keep game count reasonable but also keep war moving.

No freestyle, no manual deploy, no singles.

Other thoughts that are up for negotiation: Maybe 1 trench a week, unlimited only on conquest maps, no limit on dubs/trips/quads, all depends what you want to make for that week.

I'd like to have some sort of game count but not sure how to establish it. Maybe one player cannot be part of more than 3 games for that week?

Any takers?

EDIT: Probably an 8/15 or 9/1 start date. Also up for debate.

Clan 1 starting with 5 picks then rotates 10 each after that is a good idea.

Manual deploy on Conquest maps such as Realms or Feudals should be allowed.

greenoaks wrote:Clan 1 starting with 5 picks then rotates 10 each after that is a good idea.

Manual deploy on Conquest maps such as Realms or Feudals should be allowed mandatory.

Fixed.

I'd be ok with allowing manual on conquest maps.

So with you both replying and being from The Fallen; does that mean you guys are interested in taking us on?

patrickaa317 wrote:I'd be ok with allowing manual on conquest maps.

So with you both replying and being from The Fallen; does that mean you guys are interested in taking us on?

i can't make that decision for the clan but i wouldn't object.

patrickaa317 wrote:I'd be ok with allowing manual on conquest maps.

So with you both replying and being from The Fallen; does that mean you guys are interested in taking us on?

This is not something we are contemplating joining, sorry.

greenoaks wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:I'd be ok with allowing manual on conquest maps.

So with you both replying and being from The Fallen; does that mean you guys are interested in taking us on?

i can't make that decision for the clan but i wouldn't object.

Yay to greenoaks!

IcePack wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:I'd be ok with allowing manual on conquest maps.

So with you both replying and being from The Fallen; does that mean you guys are interested in taking us on?

This is not something we are contemplating joining, sorry.

Boooo to IcePack!

hmm...

patrickaa317 wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:I'd be ok with allowing manual on conquest maps.

So with you both replying and being from The Fallen; does that mean you guys are interested in taking us on?

i can't make that decision for the clan but i wouldn't object.

Yay to greenoaks!

IcePack wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:I'd be ok with allowing manual on conquest maps.

So with you both replying and being from The Fallen; does that mean you guys are interested in taking us on?

This is not something we are contemplating joining, sorry.

Boooo to IcePack!

This pretty much sums up our clan forum. Boooo to IcePack!!

pearljamrox2 wrote:hmm...

I don't remember facing off against Dynasty; would be a fun war I'm sure. You guys in?

I remember playing you when you were a Reaper. As for TFFS, we've had some run ins, mostly in team tournaments. RJ and I actually contemplated approaching aaron about the possibility of a merger once. Lots of respect for your "esteemed clan".

I have been considering this. Still not sure. 6 months seems like a long commitment. Sure, I have extra time now..and I might have the time. We are kind of running with a skeleton crew also right now. It wouldnt be a huge game load, but if we only have 12 guys active and all took 3 games a week we wouldnt be able to swing it if you threw all quads at us one week. 40 game slots and 36 available players (12 x 3). We might have a few more than 12..I'm not sure, I haven't run a challenge in about a year but we do have a small roster right now.

And since I'm a greedy SOB, I know I would shaft my clanmates by cherrypicking all my favorite maps and sticking some of them with the crappy ones. I was trying to figure out some way around that. I'm not proposing anything here, but I was thinking instead of 10 maps per week it would be cool to do a different map everyday, but have it be something like best out of 3 games. You could do a doubles, trips, and quads for each map with players only allowed one game (9 different players). And instead of keeping track of total games won, you could track total maps won. That would allow more people the chance to play on each map, but it would also add to the length of the challenge (since it would then be 7 maps per week). And some maps would be absolutely hell for doubles. I guess you could just have the clan who picks the map that day determine whether it would be a doubles a trips or a quads map. Best out of 3 for trips or quads (using 9 different players for trips, or 12 different players for quads) or best out of 5 for doubles (10 different players).

So yea, I've been thinking about it, but..I'm not sure just yet. I'm just kinda blabbering right now, there is nothing wrong with your original idea.

Thanks, I remember you mostly from playing in some of my tourney's than actual clan wars. And I actually just looked and you and the rest of DYNASTY beat TFFS 31-30 back at the end of 2011/early 2012. Forgot about that until I saw the thread, makes me really want to make this work.

TFFS is also running about 13-14 active members, so we are also running a little short staffed. I really like the idea of a dubs/trips/quads best of three on each map though with 231 maps, that'd take 231 days just to hit each one. Not saying I wouldn't be down, just turns into a 693 game war!

If you are worried about us throwing all quads in a week; i'd be cool with making a rule where there can be no more than 4 quads/week; and/or raising the number of players that can play per week to 4 or 5 or whatever.

And definitely open for taking a week or two off if RL gets to be a pain for either clan, it'd allow a good catch up period on all active games.

Or if you want to push this up to run a little faster, I'd be cool where one person makes 5 games and the other makes 10 games per week, thus bringing it up to be about 4 months instead. Proposed limits would be changed as needed of course.

Oh yes, I remember that war. We really pulled that one out of our ass!

I don't want to get your hopes up nor do I want to down play my interest. I'll just say for now I'll continue to meditate on the idea. I do appreciate your willingness to be flexible. I'm sure if we decide to give it a go, we will have no problem hammering out an agreement that will work for both sides. I'll try to get back to you soon, one way or the other.

MD would be interested. I like the idea of 10 games per week. It keeps the flow. Trust me. It sucks to have a marathon challenge stall.

ViperOverLord wrote:MD would be interested. I like the idea of 10 games per week. It keeps the flow. Trust me. It sucks to have a marathon challenge stall.

Hey Viper. How does everything else look? Anything you'd like changed? I think I probably owe Dynasty first right of refusal since they posted first but otherwise I'm down. I'm happy to play either as I know it'll be a fun match and a good challenge.

patrickaa317 wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:MD would be interested. I like the idea of 10 games per week. It keeps the flow. Trust me. It sucks to have a marathon challenge stall.

Hey Viper. How does everything else look? Anything you'd like changed? I think I probably owe Dynasty first right of refusal since they posted first but otherwise I'm down. I'm happy to play either as I know it'll be a fun match and a good challenge.

There's probably a few details to hammer out. But, I'd be fine with the 10 games per week format.

I'd want something like 3 dubs, 3 trips, 3 quads, 1 TBD to keep a balance.

ViperOverLord wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:MD would be interested. I like the idea of 10 games per week. It keeps the flow. Trust me. It sucks to have a marathon challenge stall.

Hey Viper. How does everything else look? Anything you'd like changed? I think I probably owe Dynasty first right of refusal since they posted first but otherwise I'm down. I'm happy to play either as I know it'll be a fun match and a good challenge.

There's probably a few details to hammer out. But, I'd be fine with the 10 games per week format.

I'd want something like 3 dubs, 3 trips, 3 quads, 1 TBD to keep a balance.

I thought about a balance like that but at the end you might end up with a pile of maps that are great for dubs but are forced to play quads on them to stick to the 3-3-3-1 rule; it seems though a good balance might force bad settings towards the end. I'd be cool if we said no more than 5 of one type per round; so you could do 5 dubs & 5 trips. Or 5 dubs, 1 trips, 4 quads. or 4 dubs, 4 trips, 2 quads; Well you get the picture; i'm just rambling now.

Hey, you have no obligation to us. I haven't committed. If MD wants to jump on it, I wont take any offense. We can have a more orthodox rematch some other time.

thanks pearljam, just didn't want to skip over you at all.

Viper - if you want to PM me to finalize things that way rather than through here.

viewtopic.php?f=441&t=193505

This can be archived, TFFS & MD have reached an agreement for above thread.