Conquer Club

JPlo64 wrote:I just don't see why we try to treat this like it's soccer/football...

Why put so much value on such a small sample of games?

What is the anwser to the hypothetical scenario where a clan goes 9-1 where each win is 10-0 and the loss is 3-5. but then another clan goes 10-0 with each win 5-3. The first clan goes 93-5(+88) and the second 50-30(+20).
does clan 2 really deserve the title?

This is a game with a lot of luck included, to put so much value on such small sample sets opens up the oppertunity for the worthy champion to not be the winner.

I don't see an argument AGAINST my suggestion other than that it's not what has been done in the past... (I beg someone to present a solid argument... would love to hear it)

If it were set's of 20+ per "match", then fine. I guess I see SOME merit. But with such small sets, I think there is too much luck to treat them like they have been in past.

First off, sorry about the delayed reply. Hopefully nobody minds.

I do think you have a good argument, and I just want to present a counter argument for the sake of... idk.. fun. Picture this scenario:

Clan X goes 9-3 in every match for 16 rounds to go to 144-48. Another clan, Y, goes 12-0 in 11 matches, 3-9 in one (a loss to the clan that went 9-3 each time), 10-2 in one, and loses 0-12 in the 3 remaining matches. But let's also suppose that their losses (3-9, 0-12, 0-12, 0-12) were against the other 4 best clans in the league.

X is 144-48, but Y is 145-47. However, they racked up their wins by cleaning up the worst in the league, while clan X was able to beat every clan pretty handily 9-3 regardless of whether they were mediocre or amazing. I think that shows more skill than clan Y and they deserve the win, which they get in the current system but not in one purely based one winning %.

Of course, in the end, I agree that neither are perfect metrics and the one you proposed may more often than not predict the best clan over the course of the season, but it is not always going to and a case could be made for the current system. Probably, a more sophisticated scoring system would be needed to come up with something most agreeable to all, but who has time for that.

In the end it's a random league and there is gonna be a lot of luck no matter what, so trying to fine-tune the scoring system is an effort in futility in some ways because the case could always be made that luck screwed clan Z over, regardless of scoring system.

Anyway, it's an interesting point and I was just having some fun thinking about it while I suffer from my typical insomnia.

I'm all for the simpler the better.
if it needs a mathematical formula I'm against it.

can we just go with best win % overall with 24 minimum?
it got 53% of the votes

uckuki wrote:I'm all for the simpler the better.
if it needs a mathematical formula I'm against it.

can we just go with best win % overall with 24 minimum?
it got 53% of the votes

keep it simple and don't do voting, but since you did, go with this
it's fine

II. Competition Format
- Random maps, round robin style;
- 12 games, approx. every 2 weeks: 2 dubs, 2 trips, 2 quads;
- 6 games are 'home' and 6 are 'away';
- Maximum 4 games per player per 12 set; limit 2 games per home/away set;
- Point allocation: 2 pts win, 1 pt tie, 0 pts loss

Hey, is it 2 pts if I win my home set and 2 pts if I win the away, or it is 2 points for away + home ?

Donelladan wrote:

II. Competition Format
- Random maps, round robin style;
- 12 games, approx. every 2 weeks: 2 dubs, 2 trips, 2 quads;
- 6 games are 'home' and 6 are 'away';
- Maximum 4 games per player per 12 set; limit 2 games per home/away set;
- Point allocation: 2 pts win, 1 pt tie, 0 pts loss

Hey, is it 2 pts if I win my home set and 2 pts if I win the away, or it is 2 points for away + home ?

for 12 games

I don't see a limit on dubs/trips/quads; just 2 per home/away set. Correct?

ViperOverLord wrote:I don't see a limit on dubs/trips/quads; just 2 per home/away set. Correct?

Correct mate

home + away count as 1 match

2 games max per player per set, so 4 total per match

I'll close the poll and apply for mvp medal with
best overall %, mimum 24 games played criteria

Round 1 matches are all underway; few missed invites in Rounds
2 & 3, pms sent.

there was a max game count violation, but the offended team hadn't noticed
it until some games already finished. I now see that the rule is a bit vague.

I urge contacts to be careful. also, for offended teams: the complaint must be
timely. I assume the violation aren't or won't be intentional. so, punishment
should fit the crime:
# Rule amendment: teams need to notice the violation and make their decision on time, before the end of Round 1 at the latest.

does this sound ok?

uckuki wrote:there was a max game count violation, but the offended team hadn't noticed
it until some games already finished. I now see that the rule is a bit vague.

I urge contacts to be careful. also, for offended teams: the complaint must be
timely. I assume the violation aren't or won't be intentional. so, punishment
should fit the crime:
# Rule amendment: teams need to notice the violation and make their decision on time, before the end of Round 1 at the latest.

does this sound ok?

No it doesn't sound ok to me at all.
As a player, I only have two games, and will not go check out if my opponents are in 2 or 3 others games before playing. I am assuming it is the same for 99% of other players out there. If we aren't clan leaders we just play our games and do not go check any other games, so it will be noticed way after end of round 1 all the time.
What you are suggesting is fine for a fog of war offense, in this case reclamation should happened asap. But for a game count violation I consider it is 100% ok to realize it after the games are even finished, and ask for a remake of one of the game.

Donelladan wrote:

uckuki wrote:there was a max game count violation, but the offended team hadn't noticed
it until some games already finished. I now see that the rule is a bit vague.

I urge contacts to be careful. also, for offended teams: the complaint must be
timely. I assume the violation aren't or won't be intentional. so, punishment
should fit the crime:
# Rule amendment: teams need to notice the violation and make their decision on time, before the end of Round 1 at the latest.

does this sound ok?

No it doesn't sound ok to me at all.
As a player, I only have two games, and will not go check out if my opponents are in 2 or 3 others games before playing. I am assuming it is the same for 99% of other players out there. If we aren't clan leaders we just play our games and do not go check any other games, so it will be noticed way after end of round 1 all the time.
What you are suggesting is fine for a fog of war offense, in this case reclamation should happened asap. But for a game count violation I consider it is 100% ok to realize it after the games are even finished, and ask for a remake of one of the game.

I agree with Donelladan regarding Fog Rules and Games Count Violation ...

Note that Game count violation will essentially be visible in the active war page as game count occurs only when the game are over ...

I like the jp option team with highest games won is the best.

ok, so what do we do now, another poll?

IMO clan leaders should be checking for those infractions after home and away are filled. So from that date, I would probably say a week is plenty of time for infractions to be noticed by clan leader. So if some games went crazy fast maybe a doubles or something completef already but majority would be active. But if it's beyond a reasonable time, then you can't wait to near the end and look at it and rely on the game counter on clan tab to inform you they went over.

So more than just one round, but not the whole match either.

Also, Lindax is the CD in charge of large Tournaments like this, so if ever is needed he can intervene / weigh in and make decisions if things remain unresolved and you need assistance.

I thought that, in general, when there is a player not respecting game count, you can, afterwards, choose an already finished game and won by your opponent, and ask for a replay. Isn't it the way it's handled in other competition ? (CC and CL ? )

Donelladan wrote:I thought that, in general, when there is a player not respecting game count, you can, afterwards, choose an already finished game and won by your opponent, and ask for a replay. Isn't it the way it's handled in other competition ? (CC and CL ? )

CC is more or less like that, but you don't have to wait until the games are finished.

CL is a little different: Once all games have finished it's too late for any replay.

Lx

I don't think game player limit infraction is that big of a deal and, when it does happen,
it's usually a simple oversight, e.g. guy creating games not paying attention. a clan can easily
cheat, if they really want it: 1 guy can run their entire match by simply 'giving advice' in all the games,
and that would be unethical but perfectly legal.

The rule is certainly not applied in the Random League, as we have experienced. I won't bother spending my time counting how many games each player of the opposing clan is involved in in home and away games, since written rules are not followed anyway.

Donelladan wrote:I thought that, in general, when there is a player not respecting game count, you can, afterwards, choose an already finished game and won by your opponent, and ask for a replay. Isn't it the way it's handled in other competition ? (CC and CL ? )

uckuki wrote:I don't think game player limit infraction is that big of a deal and, when it does happen,
it's usually a simple oversight, e.g. guy creating games not paying attention. a clan can easily
cheat, if they really want it: 1 guy can run their entire match by simply 'giving advice' in all the games,
and that would be unethical but perfectly legal.

While I agree that in most case you're right and it will be probably due to an oversight, if we put a rule in place, we have to enforce it, or we should just delete the rule.
And I really think asking clan leader to notice a rule violation before round 1 is asking too much of us.
At the end you are the one organizing the event, so if that's your decision I'll accept it ofc, especially since there is very low chance I'll be affected by that rule or that it would change outcome of a match.

IMO it is every clan leaders job to check their and their opponents player count.
If there is an infraction of the rules, the injured team has the right to call for a remake of that game.
Simple.
Repeat offending teams (say two or three warnings) should forfeit those subsequent offending games.

A BIG thanks to all of the Priv Holders for being on the ball and getting their games made and posted in a timely manner.

You're all helping things run very smoothly

Sorry for the late reply, uckuki:

I hereby authorize a Clan Achievement Medal for the MVP, based on best winning percentage overall with a minimum of 24 games played.

Please edit your OP to reflect this correctly.

Thanks,

Lx

scores updated
viewtopic.php?f=441&t=213102#p4683602

Round 1 complete,
and approx. half of Rounds 2 & 3