Clan Medals

[stahrgazer]

Let's add to this that some rankings based on an UNofficial ladder are mere perceptions.

Now, if some sort of ladder becomes official by an authorized process, and published very openly, with clear, agreed-on rules about how many divisions between the ladder qualify as an acceptable skirmish (and which shouldn't be played at all because after all, farming is ILLEGAL on the site) then any member of any clan can review the ladder to see whether they would be for or against a particular challenge or challenge series.

Of course, that ladder must also have an agreed-on and timely update process.

Doing anything less than a very public OFFICIAL ladder is making arbitrary and wrong decisions about which challenges are legal and which aren't.. again, farming on CC is illegal, so those who participated in wars that are refused medals because of farming should be disciplined with more than just, "no medal."

If you disagree that this arbitrarily-decided accusation of farming should be disciplined per normal site rules, then you're admitting it wasn't farming after all.

Seriously, though, if I had been aware that participating in the Cup series might result in LoW being implied as farmers (withholding or delaying clan medals based on 'farming' does imply we - and others in the series - FARMED) I would've voted we stay home.

So I need to see that "unofficial" list before I can vote on further Legends challenge participation. Maybe not all clans take a full-member vote about challenges, but many do and LoW is one of them.

[Leehar]

Let's add to this that some rankings based on an UNofficial ladder are mere perceptions.

Wouldn't the fact that it's a ladder that the officials use make it an official ladder by definition?

But anyway stahr, I don't think your raising a stink right now is helping anyone. You do make some valid points but the cd's have stated they may be revising the guidelines to accommodate the Conqueror's cup, so let them do that work without antagonizing them further.

With regards to some of your points, I think we all accept that all these rankings are still somewhat subjective and that farming basis is perhaps based more on the CD's perceptions themselves, so perhaps we shall be getting guidelines on how those are dealt with as well, but as cheme mentioned, things like tofu-tnc were very much on the opposite ends of any scale.

Also, I'm not sure I agree with your cc farming to clan farming legality issue. If we look at it from a perspective that cc has placed new recruit farming as impermissible, then it makes similar sense for cd's to put forth that farming of [url]new[/url] clans is not acceptable for medals, even though that has no direct impact on the overall cc conception of farming.

And just as I think we jokingly referred to the Pack-KoA battle as farming, I don't really have qualms with saying that other clans similarly 'farmed' in the cup if they have been involved in lopsided results. There doesn't necessarily have to be evil connotations attached to that.

[stahrgazer]

Let's add to this that some rankings based on an UNofficial ladder are mere perceptions.

Wouldn't the fact that it's a ladder that the officials use make it an official ladder by definition?

But anyway stahr, I don't think your raising a stink right now is helping anyone. You do make some valid points but the cd's have stated they may be revising the guidelines to accommodate the Conqueror's cup, so let them do that work without antagonizing them further.

With regards to some of your points, I think we all accept that all these rankings are still somewhat subjective and that farming basis is perhaps based more on the CD's perceptions themselves, so perhaps we shall be getting guidelines on how those are dealt with as well, but as cheme mentioned, things like tofu-tnc were very much on the opposite ends of any scale.

Also, I'm not sure I agree with your cc farming to clan farming legality issue. If we look at it from a perspective that cc has placed new recruit farming as impermissible, then it makes similar sense for cd's to put forth that farming of [url]new[/url] clans is not acceptable for medals, even though that has no direct impact on the overall cc conception of farming.

And just as I think we jokingly referred to the Pack-KoA battle as farming, I don't really have qualms with saying that other clans similarly 'farmed' in the cup if they have been involved in lopsided results. There doesn't necessarily have to be evil connotations attached to that.

If this ranking unofficial thing is done by CD perception then it's still perception, not reality... conducted behind secret doors because this one or couple of people say, omigosh, that's a top notch clan facing peons.

It's unf*gbelievable to me that ANY pre-existing clan who agreed to give a newcoming clan a chance for experience as a one-time thing,is perceived by ANY definition, as farming. So I do have qualms with anyone saying that just because there's potential lopsided results, it's automatically farming, and there IS something evil with saying it is.

It should be REALLLLLLLLLY offensive to both parts of those skirmishes.

Farming by definition must be systematic. If THOTA, or LOW, or TSM, or others... were actively engaging in a systematic attempt to bash the little guys, I'd see the point.

And this, "give them time" thing? From what I gather, they've had this decision for months.. only folks like me who innocently voted to join skirmishes were not AWARE that they'd had that decision sitting there in the private back corners of devious CC minds. But they did. So, they've had months.

And if no one else is willing to step out in public and shout to the world how wrong it is; and if I've got to stand alone shouting it, damned right I'm gonna shout!

And if they're "antagonized" because I am? So f*n what? I'm antagonized to be even REMOTELY tainted with a, "farming" brush by this delay and denial.

And so should anyone else who has participated in skirmishes that were long enough/large enough to qualify for a medal if there wasn't this unofficial back-door rule that implies, "You winners are farmers, and you newer clans are just peon noobs unfit to fight a fair skirmish."

[Bones2484]

I guess I was under the assumption that all challenges in CC2 would qualify for a medal as they fit the requirements to do so...

I mean, why would G1 not deserve a medal for beating Dynasty (the match-up was 14 v 22 based on the latest power rankings). It was 41 games and heavily weighted towards team matches.

Pretty ridiculous to not include this, in my opinion. I see absolutely no reason why all of these aren't being counted.

[danryan]

I'm pretty sure the CD's said it was under consideration. There's an awful lot of hand waving going on right now. I think in the end medals will get awarded for the winners of each clan war, but if it doesn't is it really that big of a deal? I mean, we played challenges between clans long before there was a little .jpg as a reward for the win; were those any less fulfilling before lack got a medal for the clan wars?

[Bones2484]

I'm pretty sure the CD's said it was under consideration. There's an awful lot of hand waving going on right now. I think in the end medals will get awarded for the winners of each clan war, but if it doesn't is it really that big of a deal? I mean, we played challenges between clans long before there was a little .jpg as a reward for the win; were those any less fulfilling before lack got a medal for the clan wars?

Oh, I agree that it's pointless to be worried about a little number on our profiles. Just don't understand why certain challenges would be excluded when they clearly meet the requirements. If we're going to give medals for winning clan challenges, as stupid as they are, they needed to be handed out in a consistent manner by the qualifications that are set.

[danryan]

I'm pretty sure the CD's said it was under consideration. There's an awful lot of hand waving going on right now. I think in the end medals will get awarded for the winners of each clan war, but if it doesn't is it really that big of a deal? I mean, we played challenges between clans long before there was a little .jpg as a reward for the win; were those any less fulfilling before lack got a medal for the clan wars?

Oh, I agree that it's pointless to be worried about a little number on our profiles. Just don't understand why certain challenges would be excluded when they clearly meet the requirements. If we're going to give medals for winning clan challenges, as stupid as they are, they needed to be handed out in a consistent manner by the qualifications that are set.

By the way, have I mentioned that I have 125 medals? That's a lot. I'm awesome.

[Pirlo]

By the way, have I mentioned that I have 125 medals? That's a lot. I'm awesome.

quit bragging dude!

and yes you are

*jealous*

[chemefreak]

I think everyone is making great points. No decision on anything is final yet and I'm sure input will be requested from the CLA or the clans themselves prior to the implementation of any "official" policy. IMO (as a clan leader) LoW should get a medal for beating us in the CC2. IMO (as a clan leader) LoW should get a medal for beating OSA and we should get our medal for beating the Reapers. Also, IMO (as a clan leader) TOFU should get a medal for beating T4C. I'm a huge fan of the "positive experience" theory when it comes to "farming". This would all be retroactive looking at the fact that no "clear" policy is really in place at this point.

However, I think you can all tell that we are heading toward and OFFICIAL ladder. The ladder is the fairest, least subjective method of ranking that we can think of at this point. Also, as time goes on, it will get even better and better. JPC is not ready to unleash this monstrosity on the general public yet, but the CLA has had some access to it for a while. Once the ladder is in place it will clearly define farming by spots. You will know right away whether or not your challenge is medal eligible (not medal worthy) based on clearly defined policies.

Until then, everyone's consternation is noted and medals have not been completely taken off the table for ANY challenge that has occurred, CC2 or otherwise.

[TheMissionary]

I'm disappointed that Manual isn't acceptable for clan medals. If the two clans in a challenge agree on manual, it shouldn't effect the earnings of a medal. I understand the CCup and League being no manual, but two clans on their own fairly negotiated battle should be able to play manual if they so choose and not have it effect anything. Manual settings are part of the game, and some people choose to practice on all settings of the game. I think the restrictions for medals are a bit ridiculous, and takes away the participating clans in forming challenges among each other that fit to their interests. Isn't that what negotiations are for?

[Leehar]

I'm pretty sure the CD's said it was under consideration. There's an awful lot of hand waving going on right now. I think in the end medals will get awarded for the winners of each clan war, but if it doesn't is it really that big of a deal? I mean, we played challenges between clans long before there was a little .jpg as a reward for the win; were those any less fulfilling before lack got a medal for the clan wars?

Oh, I agree that it's pointless to be worried about a little number on our profiles. Just don't understand why certain challenges would be excluded when they clearly meet the requirements. If we're going to give medals for winning clan challenges, as stupid as they are, they needed to be handed out in a consistent manner by the qualifications that are set.

By the way, have I mentioned that I have 125 medals? That's a lot. I'm awesome.

Lol, I think they're .png though

With regards to your query tho Bones, from what I understand they didn't meet the requirements of the farming criteria or else the method of deciding which clans faced each other was determined to be at fault. But to reiterate again, the CD's do seem to be looking at ways to change the guidelines to make some of the Cup challenges to be acceptable for medals, from what I understand...

[Bones2484]

With regards to your query tho Bones, from what I understand they didn't meet the requirements of the farming criteria

Thanks Leehar.

Hopefully the CD's make a logical decision. Considering there was a "play in round" to try to weed out some of the lower clans I wouldn't consider any battle to be farming. Farming implies intent, but no clan who signed up for CC2 (whether they are ranked high or low) had any ability to choose their opponent. I can understand the farming rule outside of something organized like this, but to label anything in this Cup as farming is a poor decision.

Sorry for being late to the party, I was just notified all this was being discussed. We'll see what happens from here!

[waseemalim]

so you are saying that if OSA won the challenge versus LOW, they would get a medal -- because it wouldn't be "farming"? Seems awfully convenient. And if our win was so well expected, why did we even have to bother with the challenge?

I don't know what gives you the right to call us farmers. My clanmates spent an awful lot of time on this challenge, and it wasnt even a challenge that they handpicked.

It is not good enough that this will be "revisited". You have branded us as farmers for no reason, and if you have even the slightest bit of self-respect, you should come forward and apologize.

[shocked439]

If I win a regular game to a player 7 scoreboard spots below me can I have those wins not count as unique victories since clearly I was the better player and it was foolish for me to play them. Same goes for those rare times I beat someone 7 spots higher than me on a score board. And while we are at it if my opponent is not +/- 7 at the time we start the game can I lose no points for those too?

I am disappointed in the entire arbitrary nature of the clan medals. I understand the predefined tie breaker, I understand the minimum game count but the restrictions on settings and thisn perceived distance between the clans is sheer arrogance.

[stahrgazer]

If I win a regular game to a player 7 scoreboard spots below me can I have those wins not count as unique victories since clearly I was the better player and it was foolish for me to play them. Same goes for those rare times I beat someone 7 spots higher than me on a score board. And while we are at it if my opponent is not +/- 7 at the time we start the game can I lose no points for those too?

I am disappointed in the entire arbitrary nature of the clan medals. I understand the predefined tie breaker, I understand the minimum game count but the restrictions on settings and thisn perceived distance between the clans is sheer arrogance.

erm. No. If you look at what's going on, Newcomer's cup is receiving medals for all rounds (no delays, no need to 'rewrite' arbitrary guidelines, no horsesh*t about only top 8 or 4 or winner or tourney medal only, they're getting SKIRMISH medals as skirmishes complete in that series), despite they pitted top seed vs. bottom seed, like Chuuuck did.

so basically this means that you might or might not get a medal for above or below or equal depending on how someone chooses to interpret things. Maybe that day they'll look at total medals, maybe that day they'll look at score differences, maybe that day they'll pick on the color of your avatar, but it would be completely up to the discretion of the site to change rules around based on whim.. that's how this scenario would play out, if 1v1s were similar to how the Cup is being handled.

I understand that things "might" be fixed by the end of June. Until then there's this really nasty foul-smelling odor when you look for consistency of application.

Site farming rules require a series to be considered farming, and individual and team medals can be gained from joining tournaments. But if it's a clan tournament, individuals may or may not be able to earn their clan-team (clan wars) medals depending on whim; and it might be farming if you get pitted against a team that's "too low" on the non-official (one of FIVE different potential clan-ranking systems or is it a 6th method?)

What the f* is so hard about CONSISTENCY?

[Gold Knight]

Not sure if Im the only one, but I was and still am a bit dissapointed that clan medals were made in general. All they do is add more needless clutter and drama to the landscape, and Im pretty sure I dont judge a clan by a Roman Numeral under a cheap picture of a trophy. Not sure why everyone raises such a fuss over such a small thing: just play the games you like against whoever you like and enjoy the competition.

[stahrgazer]

Not sure if Im the only one, but I was and still am a bit dissapointed that clan medals were made in general. All they do is add more needless clutter and drama to the landscape, and Im pretty sure I dont judge a clan by a Roman Numeral under a cheap picture of a trophy. Not sure why everyone raises such a fuss over such a small thing: just play the games you like against whoever you like and enjoy the competition.

Whether they should exist or not is moot, because they do.

Since they do, being denied because we supposedly Farmed for it by joining a multi-clan skirmish is a brush I don't like being tainted with. Similarly, I doubt those who finally agreed to give newer clans a chance at them in a 1v1 clan skirmish don't like being tainted with a "farming" brush for agreeing to one skirmish that's out of their normal routine of 'whom do we fight?"

Green Acres is only the place to be on 60's television or nick-at-nite reruns, tyvm.

[chemefreak]

Ugh.

[Electricksabers]

Who has said that LOW was farmers? I have seen several members of LOW say that, but I can't seem to find anybody else accuse you of that. Obviously you are not farmers because you didn't pick your opponent.

I am not sure if you read Chemefreak's previous post, but as he said, the event organizer knew before the event started which challenges would be eligible for medals and which would not. There was more factors in the decision than just the uneven playing field aspect.

Part of the problem is when clan medals were introduced there were no guidelines for hybrid events that structure clan wars into a tournament. That is why JP is trying to change / modify the existing rules to account for events like this.

I don't want to speak for JP or Masli, but I know Chemefreak and I agree that all of the wars should get medals, and hopefully that happens. All we are asking for is some patience

[stahrgazer]

Who has said that LOW was farmers? I have seen several members of LOW say that, but I can't seem to find anybody else accuse you of that. Obviously you are not farmers because you didn't pick your opponent.

I am not sure if you read Chemefreak's previous post, but as he said, the event organizer knew before the event started which challenges would be eligible for medals and which would not. There was more factors in the decision than just the uneven playing field aspect.

Part of the problem is when clan medals were introduced there were no guidelines for hybrid events that structure clan wars into a tournament. That is why JP is trying to change / modify the existing rules to account for events like this.

I don't want to speak for JP or Masli, but I know Chemefreak and I agree that all of the wars should get medals, and hopefully that happens. All we are asking for is some patience

I was in MM when the 2nd cup was first discussed, and at that time we asked and were told the Cup battles (all of them) WOULD be awarded medals. It changed later, but I didn't know it had, most Legends didn't know either, and from what I gather, NOT all clans knew that medals wouldn't be awarded for the Cup series.

As for the "factors in the decision" and "no guidelines for hybrid events," that's nonsensical garbage since the Newcomer's cup, a hybrid event designed JUST LIKE the CCup, is getting medals - no delays - for all wins, every round.

You ask where we came up with that farming accusation? By implication. We were TOLD that the "anti farming" rules had to be rewritten before any further discussion of medals for Conqueror's cup challenge. If it's the "anti farming" rules that are being non-universally applied, then you (team cc) implies that anyone who happened to play in play-in rounds and quarter finals rounds of the Conqueror's Cup are doing it to farm.

Legends of War just happens to be the topmost seed (per Ccup seeds, dunno where we stand in the hidden rankings that are used to determine whether a 1v1 skirmish outside of series is eligible for a medal) that had to play two rounds (Play-in and round-of-16) to get to quarter finals; and just happens to be the clan that some are scoffing at for thinking we deserve a medal because we were pitted (not by choice) against the newest clan to make the "major league" Conqueror's Cup series.

And, this isn't JUST about the CCup skirmishes, either.

Unless a topnotch clan is specifically targeting newer clans, it shouldn't be farming. All 1v1 skirmishes that meet the other criteria should be eligible for medals, unless/until it's shown that those topnotch clans are making a habit of predominately targeting noob clans. That would be consistent with any other "farming" guidelines on CC.

So Kort and whomever SHOULD be given medals for their wins... unless that's about all they'll play, in which case, more action than just, "no medal" should be taken... to discipline clans against farming just like cc would discipline individuals on a team for farming outside of clan wars.

Consistency isn't that hard, and if things were consistent, team CC would find people more understanding and less bitchy because there'd be alot less to bitch about.

[jpcloet]

Thanks for your patience Stahr, as I've said before the primary reasons for not initially allowing medals was

1. 1 vs 32 was "non-competitive" in my mind and it would not be fair to issue medals to some in the opening rounds and not others, so a TEMPORARY agreement was made with the organizer. The word "farming" in in the rules, but that is not really the best word to describe what I wanted to avoid. Since medals were created, I have deemed a few wars non-competitive. However, you are correct in that we are looking for systematic patterns.
2. They are not clan wars as they are not-openly and fairly negotiated by the 2 clans. I pm'd Chuuuuck at the announcement and it was clear that a number of things could not be negotiated.

There are a lot of assumptions in this thread that people are stating as facts.

[shocked439]

Fact is if I only play Cooks and meet the game requirements for any medal the site will still award me that medal. Since the clan medal is not automated you are including personal bias in the medal requirements.

If I win a tournament and only play cooks in the tournament do I still get a tourney medal?
If I play quads oasis and only beat cooks would I still get a quads medal and a pretty star ranking?
Consistency would be great.

[Bones2484]

2. They are not clan wars as they are not-openly and fairly negotiated by the 2 clans. I pm'd Chuuuuck at the announcement and it was clear that a number of things could not be negotiated.

That doesn't seem to be a valid excuse in my mind. The fact that all clans entering CC2 had input on the rules of the challenge and thus had to agree to join based on these rules seems as though a "global negotiation" happened.

And regardless of this fact, nothing in the CC2 rules were anything that I wouldn't try to get in a normal 41-game challenge anyways. We, in G1, haven't been accepting other challenges the last few months because we were under the assumption that anything in CC2 would count as one.

If these matches don't qualify for medals, why were they always included in your ladders? If these aren't "clan wars", then our record against KORT is 0-0-1 instead of 0-2-1. And that just seems... well, dumb.

[jpcloet]

Fact is if I only play Cooks and meet the game requirements for any medal the site will still award me that medal. Since the clan medal is not automated you are including personal bias in the medal requirements.

If I win a tournament and only play cooks in the tournament do I still get a tourney medal?
If I play quads oasis and only beat cooks would I still get a quads medal and a pretty star ranking?
Consistency would be great.

I could argue that (and I have) small tournament like 16p 1v1 should not get medals IMO. Fact is that most medals here are more about longevity than anything else.

However, the fact of the matter is I do have a personal bias as to the future of the clan area. I won't deny that and never have. I also don't want to hand out meaningless medals which many areas do.

Fact is that they will get medals upon the policy update which has been said at least 5 times in the thread. People can continue to argue all they want but they are coming.

[stahrgazer]

Thanks for your patience Stahr, as I've said before the primary reasons for not initially allowing medals was

1. 1 vs 32 was "non-competitive" in my mind and it would not be fair to issue medals to some in the opening rounds and not others, so a TEMPORARY agreement was made with the organizer. The word "farming" in in the rules, but that is not really the best word to describe what I wanted to avoid. Since medals were created, I have deemed a few wars non-competitive. However, you are correct in that we are looking for systematic patterns.
2. They are not clan wars as they are not-openly and fairly negotiated by the 2 clans. I pm'd Chuuuuck at the announcement and it was clear that a number of things could not be negotiated.

There are a lot of assumptions in this thread that people are stating as facts.

If that was supposed to be sarcasm, jp, it fails. If you did, indeed, announce this to the TO when he announced the opening of Cup2, then you've had quite a few months to fix things... and you've allowed some inconsistencies along the way.


1. a) it wasn't 1 v32 it was 4v29, with seedings based on participants' perceptions of each clan. But if that's non-competitive and Newcomer's cup 1v is competitive, what's the limit of 1v in series' like this?
1. b) ANY game can be won by ANY clan, which makes it competitive.
1. c) How can one war be non-competitive if you're looking for systematic patterns?
1. d) If any wars are going to be claimed non-competitive, there should be a list about them. What constitutes the difference between non-competitive and giving an agressive newcoming clan who's had a couple minor victories a chance to take down the big dogs whose heels they've been yapping at?

2. a) yes, they are negotiated by the clans, except for the number of games and the tiebreaker match. Everything else was subject to adjustment (EVEN the dates of sends and ALL disciplines.)
2 b) it was as fairly negotiated as newcomer cup.

Fact is that they will get medals upon the policy update which has been said at least 5 times in the thread. People can continue to argue all they want but they are coming.

No.

1) Fact is, you said you were considering it for the policy update and that we should wait and see what happens.

2) Fact is, Newcomer's cup, which has every problem you've mentioned you had issue with for CCup, is already getting medals with no insinuation that the participants were unworthy ("non-competitive," your words, implies there are folks who were allowed in the CCup you think shouldn't have been allowed)