Conquer Club

Georgerx7di wrote:

Dako wrote:I think O&H are good, in top-7 for sure. Don't think they are higher than 5, actually. (was thinking about their challenges and the games vs our team in CLA and TLO II tournament).

But they are way above average.

it's unfortunate that nemesis has to play thota in round two of cup if they get there. It's too soon, they aren't ready yet. Very close, but they need to ripen just a bit imo.

mgconstruction wrote:

Georgerx7di wrote:

Dako wrote:I think O&H are good, in top-7 for sure. Don't think they are higher than 5, actually. (was thinking about their challenges and the games vs our team in CLA and TLO II tournament).

But they are way above average.

it's unfortunate that nemesis has to play thota in round two of cup if they get there. It's too soon, they aren't ready yet. Very close, but they need to ripen just a bit imo.

We will come back with our shields...... or on them.

Gold Knight wrote:

mgconstruction wrote:

Georgerx7di wrote:

Dako wrote:I think O&H are good, in top-7 for sure. Don't think they are higher than 5, actually. (was thinking about their challenges and the games vs our team in CLA and TLO II tournament).

But they are way above average.

it's unfortunate that nemesis has to play thota in round two of cup if they get there. It's too soon, they aren't ready yet. Very close, but they need to ripen just a bit imo.

We will come back with our shields...... or on them.

Unfortunately THOTA has a few more Immortals than the Persians had...

mgconstruction wrote:

Gold Knight wrote:

mgconstruction wrote:

Georgerx7di wrote:

Dako wrote:I think O&H are good, in top-7 for sure. Don't think they are higher than 5, actually. (was thinking about their challenges and the games vs our team in CLA and TLO II tournament).

But they are way above average.

it's unfortunate that nemesis has to play thota in round two of cup if they get there. It's too soon, they aren't ready yet. Very close, but they need to ripen just a bit imo.

We will come back with our shields...... or on them.

Unfortunately THOTA has a few more Immortals than the Persians had...

So an emphasis on the "or on them" part then?

Blitzaholic wrote:

Dako wrote:I think O&H are good, in top-7 for sure. Don't think they are higher than 5, actually. (was thinking about their challenges and the games vs our team in CLA and TLO II tournament).

But they are way above average.

no comment on Nemesis?

Dako wrote:

Blitzaholic wrote:

Dako wrote:I think O&H are good, in top-7 for sure. Don't think they are higher than 5, actually. (was thinking about their challenges and the games vs our team in CLA and TLO II tournament).

But they are way above average.

no comment on Nemesis?

Not yet. Haven't studied them enough to comment.

freakns wrote:

Blitzaholic wrote:Does anyone else think O+H and Nemesis clans are on the rise? or is it just me on their bandwagons from the beginning?

we arent on the rise...



we have already risen

Blitzaholic wrote:

freakns wrote:

Blitzaholic wrote:Does anyone else think O+H and Nemesis clans are on the rise? or is it just me on their bandwagons from the beginning?

we arent on the rise...



we have already risen

something rose after all your flirting with Leia.

MarVal wrote:Hello Blitz,

in 2008 BSS is on the list, but they won 1 Clan Challenge and played only 1 clan challenge.
We (De Veroveraars der Lage Landen) played in that year 3 Clan Challenges and won 2 of them. How come BSS is on the list and we are not?

Further a big for all the work you do for the clans.

Grtz
MarVal

Georgerx7di wrote:

MarVal wrote:Hello Blitz,

in 2008 BSS is on the list, but they won 1 Clan Challenge and played only 1 clan challenge.
We (De Veroveraars der Lage Landen) played in that year 3 Clan Challenges and won 2 of them. How come BSS is on the list and we are not?

Further a big for all the work you do for the clans.

Grtz
MarVal

This is interesting. Ignoring for a moment who the clans were that you played against, do you think that 2-1 is better than 1-0 or worse. I think 1-0 is better because you could then go on to be 3-0 possibly, at the same time, they clan that is 2-1 has more experience so maybe I'm wrong?

freakns wrote:i dont wanna be devils advocate here, but you are missing a point.
first of all, clan league can not carry same weight as clan war if for nothing else, for the reason doubles are making 50% of games. its fun, it is somehow significant, but overall, can not carry that much weight.
from my point of view, looks a lot like LoW can not accept the fact they arent top 3 clan anymore. and that is a fact. THOTA, TSM and TOFU are leading the pack now, i think its more then clear, and its not my or blitz point of view(for that matter, you may ask Inca, Chuck or Foxy, i put LoW above TOFU in my voting for conquer cup), its an opinion shared through CC community. and yeah, that loss to O&H hurts your reputation big time, and even winning CLA wouldnt change that as people are paying much more attention to clan wars.
and is THOTA still no1 clan? yes, they are. well, i guess their marketing is doing hell of a job... and will possible LoW win of CLA change that? nope. i guess you guys need to work a bit on your marketing...

PS. nice to have any kind of list here. newcomers like me can see who were the great clans in the beginning of CC

Chariot of Fire wrote:I don't understand your logic here Marko. In one sentence you say one thing and then contradict it in the next.

freakns wrote:

Chariot of Fire wrote:I don't understand your logic here Marko. In one sentence you say one thing and then contradict it in the next.

its just because you dont see a big picture(me being an idiot is one part of that picture )

i do believe TOFU is one of top 3 clans atm, but putting my votes i have consider clan history as much as their current strength. and its simple, right now LoW have greater history then TOFU

Chariot of Fire wrote:

freakns wrote:

Chariot of Fire wrote:I don't understand your logic here Marko. In one sentence you say one thing and then contradict it in the next.

its just because you dont see a big picture(me being an idiot is one part of that picture )

i do believe TOFU is one of top 3 clans atm, but putting my votes i have consider clan history as much as their current strength. and its simple, right now LoW have greater history then TOFU

And here I was thinking you were smart. How can clan history have anything to do with current ability to win the Conquer Cup? That makes no sense at all and explains why some of the numbers were strange. The votes 1-20 were based on future predictions, not a clan ladder - this is some people's misconception.

pmchugh wrote:

Chariot of Fire wrote:

freakns wrote:

Chariot of Fire wrote:I don't understand your logic here Marko. In one sentence you say one thing and then contradict it in the next.

its just because you dont see a big picture(me being an idiot is one part of that picture )

i do believe TOFU is one of top 3 clans atm, but putting my votes i have consider clan history as much as their current strength. and its simple, right now LoW have greater history then TOFU

And here I was thinking you were smart. How can clan history have anything to do with current ability to win the Conquer Cup? That makes no sense at all and explains why some of the numbers were strange. The votes 1-20 were based on future predictions, not a clan ladder - this is some people's misconception.

Did chuuuuk actually say this was to be the basis of your votes? If so certainly not in the first post. I don't think its his misconception, more like a different interpretation.

pmchugh wrote:Some would argue that LoW deserve to be seeded 3rd because of their past achievements, i.e. they've earned it. Its also less subjective.

Anyhow it doesn't matter now, the ranking are done and are as agreeable as they ever will be.

Chariot of Fire wrote:

pmchugh wrote:Some would argue that LoW deserve to be seeded 3rd because of their past achievements, i.e. they've earned it. Its also less subjective.

Anyhow it doesn't matter now, the ranking are done and are as agreeable as they ever will be.

Seedings should be based on ability in whatever tourney it may be (hence at Wimbledon the world rankings go out the window and seeds are categorized according to prowess on grass).

If tomorrow I stage a tennis tourney with Bjorn Borg and Tim Henman as participants, who are you going to seed higher? Borg coz of his achievements, or Henman coz you recognize the fact he's more likely to beat Borg? That's the point I'm trying to get across and which is why freakns statement and vote were totally contradictory to one another.

You've just picked a conveniant sport, take football (soccer to americans) or many other sports that seed according to past performances despite any transfers or changes to teams.

I'm not saying who is right or who is wrong i merely saying that your way of ranking may not be the same as everyone elses.

Chariot of Fire wrote:

You've just picked a conveniant sport, take football (soccer to americans) or many other sports that seed according to past performances despite any transfers or changes to teams.

I'm not saying who is right or who is wrong i merely saying that your way of ranking may not be the same as everyone elses.

I merely chose an example that made the best analogy for my argument. The same could be said of football though. Aston Villa are in the final group for the FA Cup and have won it on many occasions before. Does that automatically make them higher seeds than Chelsea? I think not based on current form and projection.

CoF wrote:and a tournament seeding (which is a forecast based on current ability).