CCup4 - KORT Wins!!

Finished challenges between two competitive clans.

Moderator: Clan Directors

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
betiko
Posts: 10941
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pm
Gender: Male
Location: location, location

Re: CCup4 - Round of 8 Set

Post by betiko »

well let's hope we'll get the priviledge to face you guys! those aquamen are giving us a hard time..
Image
User avatar
hyposquasher
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:19 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs IA or TSM

Post by hyposquasher »

Congrats and good luck to all of those in the Semifinals! (except TOFU. You guys should consider rolling lots of 1's)
This image cannot be clicked.
Image

High Score: 4112 - 11-30-2014
New High Score: 4164 - 4/9/20
New High Score: 4315 - 4/5/21
betiko
Posts: 10941
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pm
Gender: Male
Location: location, location

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs IA or TSM

Post by betiko »

hyposquasher wrote:Congrats and good luck to all of those in the Semifinals! (except TOFU. You guys should consider rolling lots of 1's)


i don't mind rolling a lot of defensive 1s while you guys roll attacking 1s all war long ;)
Image
User avatar
hyposquasher
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:19 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs IA or TSM

Post by hyposquasher »

betiko wrote:
hyposquasher wrote:Congrats and good luck to all of those in the Semifinals! (except TOFU. You guys should consider rolling lots of 1's)


i don't mind rolling a lot of defensive 1s while you guys roll attacking 1s all war long ;)


I see what you did there.
This image cannot be clicked.
Image

High Score: 4112 - 11-30-2014
New High Score: 4164 - 4/9/20
New High Score: 4315 - 4/5/21
User avatar
Leehar
Posts: 5492
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 12:12 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Johannesburg
Contact:

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Leehar »

Some general announcements.

The CD's have graciously allowed the 2 day extension requested by Tofu & the Ace-Tofu war will have games exchanged on the 4th of Feb.


Unfortunately at the same time, the CD's have not so graciously disallowed dualta from competing in the war, despite Ace agreeing to the waiver of the player eligibility criterion.
As always, slight rule adjustments are subject to CD approval, and in this instance it was felt by the CD team that the Player eligibility rule was outside the bounds of the adjustable settings regulations (which relate more to the likes of changing the tiebreaker map, decreasing/increasing the trench limitation etc)
It was felt that the Player Eligibility rule provides a crucial protection to smaller clans against the common ailment of 'sailing for greener pastures'. While I sympathise with dualta in my personal capacity on the disbandment of his clan, the player eligibility criterion as it is currently written has been used & previously conveyed throughout this current competition as a hidebound rule meant to dissuade more mercenary actions, and it was felt necessary to enforce it as written.

With that said, this criterion will be raised during the deliberation of the next CCup as a topic for deliberation & possible amendment (It has been previously raised whether cup-tied should only last for 1 round etc)
show
Foxglove
Posts: 1308
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 1:05 pm

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Foxglove »

Leehar wrote:Unfortunately at the same time, the CD's have not so graciously disallowed dualta from competing in the war, despite Ace agreeing to the waiver of the player eligibility criterion.
As always, slight rule adjustments are subject to CD approval, and in this instance it was felt by the CD team that the Player eligibility rule was outside the bounds of the adjustable settings regulations (which relate more to the likes of changing the tiebreaker map, decreasing/increasing the trench limitation etc)


Wow! I'm shocked that the CDs have overridden the agreement by the two clans involved re: Dualta. I think this is the first time that's happened in all four years of the Conqueror's Cup.

Leehar wrote:It was felt that the Player Eligibility rule provides a crucial protection to smaller clans against the common ailment of 'sailing for greener pastures'.


I'm fairly certain none of the 4 remaining competitors qualify as smaller clans. So I guess the CDs were protecting the interests of clans who have already been eliminated in this particular competition, even though this rule is subject to potential change for the next cup?
Dako
Posts: 3987
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 9:07 am
Gender: Male
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Contact:

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Dako »

I agree with Foxy here. I don't think this rule ever did any good to CCup (ie prevented someone sailing for greener pastures) but did more harm and grief in the end (good players unable to play, discussing and flame on the forums).

I am strongly againt this rule (I think I even excluded it from my CCup rule set) and I would like to change it in the next season.
Image
angola
Posts: 2076
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Washington state

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by angola »

I'm more appalled that TOFU needs another 2 days to get ready for ACE. Their war with ATL was decided more than two weeks ago, yet they need another 48 hours?

Are they run by a bunch of newbs? What is going on over there? No time to do research?

Is Peyton Manning running TOFU?
Highest rank: 48th. Highest score: 3,384. Feb. 9, 2014.
User avatar
Denise
Posts: 1376
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:43 am

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Denise »

I agree with Foxy, too. Always in the past it was left up to the two clans involved to hash out if the rule should be enforced and never was the privilege of a clan to control this aspect of their war taken away.

I understand the need for consistency and if this has been the answer to all clans wishing to use an ineligible player, then I wouldn't want it changed this late in the competition. However, I strongly believe this is an example of the CD's taking too much control and think they should leave these types of things to the clans involved, unless for some reason the clans can't reach an amicable decision. I hope that we can change this rule for the next CCup, or do away with it completely.

A little off topic but why should the CD's take it upon themselves to try to prevent a player from changing clans if they want to? This rule has never made any sense to me.
Image
User avatar
Denise
Posts: 1376
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:43 am

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Denise »

angola wrote:I'm more appalled that TOFU needs another 2 days to get ready for ACE. Their war with ATL was decided more than two weeks ago, yet they need another 48 hours?

Are they run by a bunch of newbs? What is going on over there? No time to do research?

Is Peyton Manning running TOFU?


:lol: Yes, you guessed it, Angola. We brought Peyton Manning in to strengthen our offense. I just hope we can get past ACE's defense. :?
Image
HardAttack
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by HardAttack »

Denise wrote:I agree with Foxy, too. Always in the past it was left up to the two clans involved to hash out if the rule should be enforced and never was the privilege of a clan to control this aspect of their war taken away.

I understand the need for consistency and if this has been the answer to all clans wishing to use an ineligible player, then I wouldn't want it changed this late in the competition. However, I strongly believe this is an example of the CD's taking too much control and think they should leave these types of things to the clans involved, unless for some reason the clans can't reach an amicable decision. I hope that we can change this rule for the next CCup, or do away with it completely.

A little off topic but why should the CD's take it upon themselves to try to prevent a player from changing clans if they want to? This rule has never made any sense to me.



Leaving matters for clans to deal with in between emselves instead setting clear clean rules, time has always shown it that to create problems...
There is always a problem face/trouble maker...To play on the mud, squeel, and more...History books and cc forums are full of such HEROES !!!!

So, i am not any fan of leaving things to be negotiable in between clans as much as possible. Allright, assume you have it the right to deal this player eligability sorta things be negotiable in beetween clans, then take me for example be your oppo, can you give me a single reason why i wud accept it my opponent use of a player whose situation (eligable/or not) purely due to if i accept it say yes go ahead play or not...Why should i let my opponent clan has 1 more player playing against me ? Wud you accepted it yourself for your opposing clan ?

Number two;
Letting players leave a clan join into another like a cangooroo losing in cc one stage and join in a winner clan, then leave it to another (i can hear ppl laughing at hardattack at this point though since i am one of the best clan hoppers in cc history), dont you think this wud mess around more than i did myself ? :lol: :lol: :lol:

To me, there should be a good trade in between approaches.. mAYBE lets have first couple of rounds (rounds before Q.Finals) and rest (Q.Finals-S.Fianls-Finals) be two distinct periods. And, allow it only players be eligable if a player changes his clan into another from first period into second with no additional ruling...Do not let player changes/switchings in same phases but allow it only from first rounds into Q/S/F finals period ? Just like how it goes in european football.

Sorry for the mess.
My usual. :lol:
LEGENDS of WAR
Dako
Posts: 3987
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 9:07 am
Gender: Male
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Contact:

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Dako »

angola wrote:I'm more appalled that TOFU needs another 2 days to get ready for ACE. Their war with ATL was decided more than two weeks ago, yet they need another 48 hours?

Are they run by a bunch of newbs? What is going on over there? No time to do research?

Is Peyton Manning running TOFU?

You didn't know but we outsource most parts of war organizing to eddie and his team. They are doing great but our shipment of Dr. Pepper and sweets got delayed on the border (heavy snow storms etc) so we were forced to ask for another 48h. But it was him who was so eloquent and got us this extension by talking to cheme in his own personal way. So please understand us.
Image
Chariot of Fire
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:13 am
Gender: Male
Location: Buckinghamshire U.K.

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Chariot of Fire »

If it was a request from eddie then cheme would need more than 48 hours just to decipher it!
Image
Highest position #5 (18 Nov 2010) General 4,380pts (11 Dec 2010)
User avatar
IcePack
Multi Hunter
Multi Hunter
Posts: 16847
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:42 pm
Gender: Male
Location: California

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by IcePack »

I'm going to predict an upset by ACE and TSM ;)
Image

fac vitam incredibilem memento vivere
Knowledge Weighs Nothing, Carry All You Can
HardAttack
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by HardAttack »

IcePack wrote:I'm going to predict an upset by ACE and TSM ;)


considering it ACE being best part of EMPIRE/AOC,
considering it EMPIRE 2 years now before had a 40-20 win over TOFU,
considering AOC always had shown real strong stand whenever and whereever,
considering ACE's previous results so far they got....

then how dare ACE if they win be upset ?

Same goes for TSM, great players and clan, never easy it is to surplasse IA in cc4 q.finals,
again, wudnt called it upset if TSM kicks our ass through...

lets watcha :lol:
LEGENDS of WAR
User avatar
Keefie
Clan Director
Clan Director
Posts: 6748
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:05 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Sleepy Hollow

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Keefie »

Denise wrote:I understand the need for consistency and if this has been the answer to all clans wishing to use an ineligible player, then I wouldn't want it changed this late in the competition. However, I strongly believe this is an example of the CD's taking too much control and think they should leave these types of things to the clans involved, unless for some reason the clans can't reach an amicable decision. I hope that we can change this rule for the next CCup, or do away with it completely.



Denise,

The CD's are taking no more control than the rules of the competition allow. This is the rule that all clans agreed to by signing up.

"If the old clan of a player loses the round in which the player has played, that player is considered "eliminated" with their old clan and cannot play for another clan for the rest of the tournament"

All we are doing is ensuring that the competition rules are being adhered too.
Image
User avatar
hyposquasher
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:19 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by hyposquasher »

You all will have to forgive angola. While we were a bit surprised at the request for an extension, angola is a big Seahawks fan. So he had been on a steady diet of beer and adrenaline all day. By the time he came here to post, the Super Bowl was over. He had shed his clothes and ran 4 laps around his house. So the combination of cold and black-out level inebriation may have made him a little punchy :)
This image cannot be clicked.
Image

High Score: 4112 - 11-30-2014
New High Score: 4164 - 4/9/20
New High Score: 4315 - 4/5/21
friendly1
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 11:41 am
Gender: Male
Location: Canada

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by friendly1 »

Denise wrote:I agree with Foxy, too. Always in the past it was left up to the two clans involved to hash out if the rule should be enforced and never was the privilege of a clan to control this aspect of their war taken away.

I understand the need for consistency and if this has been the answer to all clans wishing to use an ineligible player, then I wouldn't want it changed this late in the competition. However, I strongly believe this is an example of the CD's taking too much control and think they should leave these types of things to the clans involved, unless for some reason the clans can't reach an amicable decision. I hope that we can change this rule for the next CCup, or do away with it completely.

A little off topic but why should the CD's take it upon themselves to try to prevent a player from changing clans if they want to? This rule has never made any sense to me.


I like what the CDs have done! They are enforcing the rule in place, and explaining that the rule needs to be reconsidered, not the enforcement of it. I do regret that this rule has prevented some players eligibility in CCup (and there has been a few) and I hope the rule is changed for CCup5 along with some others. But bashing the CDs for rules that exist makes no sense, or at least doesn't make sense to me. Course I'm pretty easily confused and rather moronic at the best of times...
betiko
Posts: 10941
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pm
Gender: Male
Location: location, location

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by betiko »

I do understand that it s the rule and you guys are enforcing it.
The only questionable thing here, is that his former clan with which he participated in the event disbanned. Therefore, he necessairly wouldn t be in the same stop-existing clan 6 month later, it has nothing to do with protecting smaller clans.
Image
HardAttack
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by HardAttack »

betiko wrote:I do understand that it s the rule and you guys are enforcing it.
The only questionable thing here, is that his former clan with which he participated in the event disbanned. Therefore, he necessairly wouldn t be in the same stop-existing clan 6 month later, it has nothing to do with protecting smaller clans.


why do we need a fashion/trend to protect smaller clans really ?
where do these SMART/BRIGHT !!! ideas come from all the times ? :lol:
f*ck em, the smaller clans i mean...
well isnt it what always happens since cc1 now ?
i havent seen any small clan in top 4 ever...
LEGENDS of WAR
angola
Posts: 2076
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Washington state

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by angola »

hyposquasher wrote:You all will have to forgive angola. While we were a bit surprised at the request for an extension, angola is a big Seahawks fan. So he had been on a steady diet of beer and adrenaline all day. By the time he came here to post, the Super Bowl was over. He had shed his clothes and ran 4 laps around his house. So the combination of cold and black-out level inebriation may have made him a little punchy :)


My rule has always been if I don't remember posting it, it didn't happen. And I certainly don't remember posting last night.
Highest rank: 48th. Highest score: 3,384. Feb. 9, 2014.
chemefreak
Posts: 3451
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:30 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Columbus (Franklin Park), Ohio

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by chemefreak »

HardAttack wrote:
betiko wrote:I do understand that it s the rule and you guys are enforcing it.
The only questionable thing here, is that his former clan with which he participated in the event disbanned. Therefore, he necessairly wouldn t be in the same stop-existing clan 6 month later, it has nothing to do with protecting smaller clans.


why do we need a fashion/trend to protect smaller clans really ?
where do these SMART/BRIGHT !!! ideas come from all the times ? :lol:
f*ck em, the smaller clans i mean...
well isnt it what always happens since cc1 now ?
i havent seen any small clan in top 4 ever...


I like the Cup Tied Rule...without exceptions. It protects the integrity of the clan system. When it was a private tournament, it was not the private tournament organizer's prerogative to protect all clans. So the idea that the rule could be waived by agreement made sense. However, now that the Cup is run by the CD Team, it is important that distinctions and exceptions are not carved out to weaken the rule. A player that is Cup Tied is certainly allowed to play in other clan wars and clan events. Just not this one. The fact that a clan may only play in the CCup (and not other wars) is something a player joining that clan should inquire about.

The argument that a player's clan no longer exists is a facile argument. Elite clans would just need to poach enough players from any one particular clan to ensure that the smaller clan would fold. Or, in the inverse, enough players from a lower ranked clan could leave so that their clan would fold making them "free agents." This kind of temptation should not exist. Thus, the rule is written and enforced the way it was here, and (probably) in the foreseeable future.
:twisted: ChemE :twisted:
Image
братья в рукоятках
I ♥ ++The Legion++
Foxglove
Posts: 1308
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 1:05 pm

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Foxglove »

chemefreak wrote:I like the Cup Tied Rule...without exceptions. It protects the integrity of the clan system. When it was a private tournament, it was not the private tournament organizer's prerogative to protect all clans. So the idea that the rule could be waived by agreement made sense. However, now that the Cup is run by the CD Team, it is important that distinctions and exceptions are not carved out to weaken the rule.


I was initially surprised by the decision from the CDs, but it's fair and it does make sense.

chemefreak wrote: A player that is Cup Tied is certainly allowed to play in other clan wars and clan events. Just not this one. The fact that a clan may only play in the CCup (and not other wars) is something a player joining that clan should inquire about.


haha - very true! I'm not sure about other clans, but I know that KORT has not participated in a non-event war (cup or league) since 2010.

chemefreak wrote:The argument that a player's clan no longer exists is a facile argument. Elite clans would just need to poach enough players from any one particular clan to ensure that the smaller clan would fold. Or, in the inverse, enough players from a lower ranked clan could leave so that their clan would fold making them "free agents." This kind of temptation should not exist. Thus, the rule is written and enforced the way it was here, and (probably) in the foreseeable future.


The rule as originally written in the earlier versions of the CCup wasn't designed to benefit smaller clans whatsoever. It was created to prevent the top clans from bringing in great players in the later rounds to bolster the strength of their roster when they played against tougher opponents. This new kinder and gentler interpretation of its meaning is a decent one though. :)
Chariot of Fire
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:13 am
Gender: Male
Location: Buckinghamshire U.K.

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by Chariot of Fire »

As much as I like Dualta and would love to see him play in CCup4 I do respect the CD's decision and actually support it. Heck I think it was my idea to introduce the cup-tied rule in the first place. It does seem fair that once you've had a bite at the cherry and failed you shouldn't receive a second chance.

I'm not so sure the rule should be reviewed for the next edition though, as if it is then it could seem unfair right now not to consider a case-by-case basis (and with the semis about to start it would probably be the only case). It could result in previous and subsequent cases being allowed (CCup1-3 & 5 onwards) leaving one isolated incident, that of Dualta, standing on the record books. Somehow that seems rather unfair, though it's something we would accept without further ado.
Image
Highest position #5 (18 Nov 2010) General 4,380pts (11 Dec 2010)
User avatar
josko.ri
Posts: 5013
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:18 pm
Gender: Male

Re: CCup4 - TOFU vs ACE and KoRT vs TSM

Post by josko.ri »

Chariot of Fire wrote:
I'm not so sure the rule should be reviewed for the next edition though, as if it is then it could seem unfair right now not to consider a case-by-case basis (and with the semis about to start it would probably be the only case). It could result in previous and subsequent cases being allowed (CCup1-3 & 5 onwards) leaving one isolated incident, that of Dualta, standing on the record books. Somehow that seems rather unfair, though it's something we would accept without further ado.

Not true.
The same rule as this was in CCup1 and therefore thebest712, who was conqueror at that time, did not play in semis and in finals because he had previosuly played for VDLL in play-in round of CC1.

However, we knew rule was written like that so we respected the rule and did not bash the CD in threads for enforcing it but we rather accepted the decision as gentlemen so that is maybe the reason why most people will remember Dualta's case while nobody remembers thebest712's case.
Image
Post Reply

Return to “Complete Challenges”