[CL4] Clan League 4 - FINAL

[Teflon Kris]

"Clans in Divisions E to G will all automatically be awarded 1 point (and 9 game wins and losses) in view of equalising qualification possibilities for Phase Two vis-a-vis clans in larger Divisions playing one extra round. "

6 probably does make more sense tho!

are they mean 6 games wins and loses,because you have 12 games in each round,not 18 games in each round?

Correction made and posted in each divisional thread:

show: Progression to Phase Two

[WPBRJ]

All Tables, Schedules, Scores and fixtures UPDATED

[JCR]

When is phase 2 scheduled to begin? I assume all of Phase ones games will need to be completed and new divisions sorted out, then perhaps a week for planning. Is that about right?

[WPBRJ]

When is phase 2 scheduled to begin? I assume all of Phase ones games will need to be completed and new divisions sorted out, then perhaps a week for planning. Is that about right?

As soon as we are able to seed all clans into there divisions game dead lines will then be set and pms sent out to all 1st contacts

[Teflon Kris]

How does the cl4 crowning work? you will have 3 winners?

Was curious last night and went to look....and didnt really figure it out. Looking at the diagram it looks like once phase 1 is done you are put into divisions for the rest of the league. Then through each phase you eliminate half and move on until you have the final for each division. Who will then be the winner? thanks,

J

There will be a winner for each division (plus for the four knock-out tournaments).

Of course, the winner of Division 1 gets the bragging rights as League Champion

[josko.ri]

From rules: "Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only"

so, in Phase 1&2, when ho,me set is 2D 2T 2Q, it is allowed to have maximal 2 unlimited games per home set.

In phase 3 it will be 3D 3T 3Q per home set. does number of unlimited games grows proportionally with number of total games? will it then be allowed 3 unlimited games per home set in phase 3?

In phase 4 there will be 4D 8T 8Q per home set. does number of unlimited games also grows proportionally with number of total games? will it then be allowed 6/7 unlimited home games in phase 4?

[WPBRJ]

From rules: "Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only"

so, in Phase 1&2, when ho,me set is 2D 2T 2Q, it is allowed to have maximal 2 unlimited games per home set.

In phase 3 it will be 3D 3T 3Q per home set. does number of unlimited games grows proportionally with number of total games? will it then be allowed 3 unlimited games per home set in phase 3?

In phase 4 there will be 4D 8T 8Q per home set. does number of unlimited games also grows proportionally with number of total games? will it then be allowed 6/7 unlimited home games in phase 4?

At this point in time i don't see any reason to reopen this discussion were going to stick to 2 per home set thru out the entire league all 4 phases. maybe next year if CLA wants to add a bit more towards the end of the league that's fine and we can discus it in the CLA forum.

[josko.ri]

From rules: "Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only"

so, in Phase 1&2, when ho,me set is 2D 2T 2Q, it is allowed to have maximal 2 unlimited games per home set.

In phase 3 it will be 3D 3T 3Q per home set. does number of unlimited games grows proportionally with number of total games? will it then be allowed 3 unlimited games per home set in phase 3?

In phase 4 there will be 4D 8T 8Q per home set. does number of unlimited games also grows proportionally with number of total games? will it then be allowed 6/7 unlimited home games in phase 4?

At this point in time i don't see any reason to reopen this discussion were going to stick to 2 per home set thru out the entire league all 4 phases. maybe next year if CLA wants to add a bit more towards the end of the league that's fine and we can discus it in the CLA forum.

Number of games is growing proportional, for example, maximal number of games played per player is 35% of all games, so it will grow in phase 2&3 from 4 games phase 1 to 6 games phase 2 and 14 games phase 3. I do not see any reason why number of games per unlimited forts should not also grow proportional and increase together with total number of games per set.

Thanks for limit level of fun to us who like that settings, without real reason for it.

[Gunn217]

C'mon Josko! Why get sarcastic and disrespectful? These guys are running it and doing a pretty good job so far. They have said from the beginning that it's a work in progress and we'll try to change things next year if needed. So bring it up in the CLA forum and it'll be discussed, like the man said.

Cut em some fricken slack and just have fun with it.

[peanutsdad]

C'mon Josko! Why get sarcastic and disrespectful? These guys are running it and doing a pretty good job so far. They have said from the beginning that it's a work in progress and we'll try to change things next year if needed. So bring it up in the CLA forum and it'll be discussed, like the man said.

Cut em some fricken slack and just have fun with it.

Let me just ad +1,2,&3 on that...

[josko.ri]

C'mon Josko! Why get sarcastic and disrespectful? These guys are running it and doing a pretty good job so far. They have said from the beginning that it's a work in progress and we'll try to change things next year if needed. So bring it up in the CLA forum and it'll be discussed, like the man said.

Cut em some fricken slack and just have fun with it.

I just point that this decision is very unlogical, it is not the same if a challenge has 6 or 20 games per home set, but for some unknown reason, maximum unlimited fort games is the same in both cases.

I have huge fun in playing CC and limiting my favourite settings is direct stealing that fun. Especially when real reason for it does not exist, as unlimited fort settings does not give any unfair advantage to anyone (like freestyle does).

[Teflon Kris]

C'mon Josko! Why get sarcastic and disrespectful? These guys are running it and doing a pretty good job so far. They have said from the beginning that it's a work in progress and we'll try to change things next year if needed. So bring it up in the CLA forum and it'll be discussed, like the man said.

Cut em some fricken slack and just have fun with it.

I just point that this decision is very unlogical, it is not the same if a challenge has 6 or 20 games per home set, but for some unknown reason, maximum unlimited fort games is the same in both cases.

I have huge fun in playing CC and limiting my favourite settings is direct stealing that fun. Especially when real reason for it does not exist, as unlimited fort settings does not give any unfair advantage to anyone (like freestyle does).

I like unlimited in quads sometimes too - but it does give a slight extra advantage to going first.

For that reasons, many clans would spit their dummies out, and possibly throw all toys out of the pram if we were to change the rules.

[josko.ri]

I like unlimited in quads sometimes too - but it does give a slight extra advantage to going first.

This you say, but I do not agree. With more than 70% wins in sequential unlimited fort team games with starting second, and playing it on home field only in games vs top 15 clans (according to F400) I think I have right to say your statement is not true. Going first have advantage for sure but it is no more than going first on chained fort.

For that reasons, many clans would spit their dummies out, and possibly throw all toys out of the pram if we were to change the rules.

Mainly home field is something where home team has advantage. so, if home team choose unlimited forts and on that way gamble that opponents will get first start and have "first turn advantage" why is it bad at all? Instead they choose some settings where they may have advantage given by experience or better map knowledge, they choose settings which give opponents 50% to have starting advantage by going first. I do not see how away team may have any harm by that.

And even if you have reasons to limit unlimited fort home games, limiting is made on very unlogical way, as I stated, it is not the same if home set is 6 games (Phase 1) or 20 games (Phase 3), but number of allowed unlimited games is the same. In history of CC competitions, EVERY maximum game number allowed to play were increased proportionally with total number of games.

[Gunn217]

Josko, it's fine to disagree with a rule. It's also fine to voice your disagreement and discuss changes you'd like to see. The problem was that you were openly critical and unnessisarily nasty. You are a smart guy and have been around along time. Read your original post again and tell me what good you think would come from saying something like that.

[WPBRJ]

This is all for not

This was decided in the CLA forum in discussions prior to the start of the competition and it was agreed on 2 per home set per round limited to trips and quads.

If you wanted more than this you should have spoken up then not in the middle of the tournament to be honest there was not much support for unlimited at all but every one agreed that it should be in for a small part due the few that actually play the setting.

Saying all of this the subject is closed I am not going to change rules just because Josko wants them changed in the middle of the event. Yes before you even say it we have changed a few things already but that was to make games exchange run smoother it had nothing to do with 1 players trying to get a advantage.

Any further discussion should be held in the CLA forum under the discussion thread CL5 Discussion

R.J.

[Qwert]

i think that we dont use unlimited fortification.

[josko.ri]

This was decided in the CLA forum in discussions prior to the start of the competition and it was agreed on 2 per home set per round limited to trips and quads.

If you wanted more than this you should have spoken up then not in the middle of the tournament to be honest there was not much support for unlimited at all but every one agreed that it should be in for a small part due the few that actually play the setting.

I wanted more, and I have spoken about it in CLA (check it there in forum if you do not agree), so it is really not needed to make me looking like this is first time I am speaking about this, and that I did not try to change it on the time. There was not any consensus in CLA, actually there in the thread more people said that they do not mind to restrict unlimited setings or they support unlimited settings, than the ones who said opposite.

Saying all of this the subject is closed I am not going to change rules just because Josko wants them changed in the middle of the event. Yes before you even say it we have changed a few things already but that was to make games exchange run smoother it had nothing to do with 1 players trying to get a advantage.

Am I superman that choosing settings that I like to play gives me "advantage"? TSM beat my team hard in the ongoing war in 2 unlimited games Game 10639293 and Game 10391024, without leaving us any chance to do anything. so I do not see that "advantage" that one player get with using that settings, the only what I see is playing settings that I like/enjoy, and every opponents can beat my team if they manage to have better strategy, just like in chained or adjacent fort games. I do not see any "advantage" there that I am "trying to get", just fighting to allow people who like that settings to play it, just like people who like adjacent or chained fort have their chance to play those settings how many they like.

[Kinnison]

Look, Josko...

You wanted it (unlimited) to show up more. Most wanted it less, or not at all. When the CL4 was posted, the rules were known. If you don't like 'em, don't play. this may be a clan event, but it's still a tournament. The TOs decides the rules, and those rules were known and posted. By joining, you AGREED to those rules.

Now, the TO has specifically asked you to take the complaints and discussion ELSEWHERE. It's not going to change in CL4, period.

So please, just drop it here, huh? I read this thread to find out news and progress... not to listen to folks bitch about how they want something changed. I have my own problems with the format, and my clan's performance in it... we did poorly, and I say that's in large part to my organization of this for us... we got in very late and woefully under-prepared. But I'm not trying to get things changed to favor what we like over the existing rules...


So please, give it a rest, already.

[Leehar]

I'm not sure, but wasn't the 2 game thing initially chosen on a percentage basis as well? (A third of the clans home games?) If so, it would make sense for it to increase proportionally rather then everyone wanting to keep it to a flat rate just to stick it to Josko.
Heck, all Josko was asking was for some clarity to the rules, and seemingly everyone wants to make sure the opposite happens to what he would want. Heck, if I remember correctly the TO's wanted to exclude unlimited completely before public opinion was able to sway them to at least allow Unlimited at a proportionally low level.
It really does seem to me that the only reason the goalposts are being moved is because it's seemingly josko that's asking them. Sure if you really believe that it's somehow completely the end of the world for unlim to be used on a proportional basis, then let it be judged objectively, rather than an arbitrary basis with bias against Josko.

I liked the reasoning that DJ used that perhaps Unlim is dependant on first turns, but Josko's response was no less valid that it would be the Home team that assumes the risk no differently then a Doodle Earth map popping up for someone's home.

[Pedronicus]

What bell end American came up with the scoring system where a win is 2 points and a draw is 1 point?

Jimmy Hill got it right...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_points_for_a_win

[WPBRJ]

I'm not sure, but wasn't the 2 game thing initially chosen on a percentage basis as well? (A third of the clans home games?) If so, it would make sense for it to increase proportionally rather then everyone wanting to keep it to a flat rate just to stick it to Josko.

it was never based on percentage at least as the TO's discussions it was always trying to get a new setting into the mix and see how it works out that's it.

Heck, all Josko was asking was for some clarity to the rules, and seemingly everyone wants to make sure the opposite happens to what he would want.

your right all he was asking is clarification and we clarified it for him and thats obviously not good enough for him he wont let it go

Heck, if I remember correctly the TO's wanted to exclude unlimited completely before public opinion was able to sway them to at least allow Unlimited at a proportionally low level.

yes there were few that backed it thats why its in there beyond that next year we will vote on it were all 40 plus clan have a say and we will find out just how popular it really is. even a few that stood up for josko might vote against it being in the rule don't be shocked if they do i know of at least 1 person that would.

It really does seem to me that the only reason the goalposts are being moved is because it's seemingly josko that's asking them. Sure if you really believe that it's somehow completely the end of the world for unlim to be used on a proportional basis, then let it be judged objectively, rather than an arbitrary basis with bias against Josko.

it really has nothing to do with josko except the fact he wont let it go and he wont bring the discussion up were it belongs. were way past changing a rule of this nature in this event it not a life and death rule it stands and if he so chooses to bring it up in the CLA forum ill be happy to discus it for next year and we can vote on it like i said.

I liked the reasoning that DJ used that perhaps Unlim is dependant on first turns, but Josko's response was no less valid that it would be the Home team that assumes the risk no differently then a Doodle Earth map popping up for someone's home.

this is actually meaningless to me every one has there own reason for liking or not liking i actually like the setting in many maps i hate it in dbls but some maps in dbl i like it tho.


the ruling stands i will not change the rules this late in the event for this particular rule only thing i am changing is something to make event run smoother if needed or if there is a major problem i will not respond to this subject any more.

[Foxglove]

Sheesh, you don't have to be so rude and dismissive, WPBJ.

It's not unreasonable for a person to ask a question and then engage in a discussion after responses are made. I didn't realize you had been appointed dictator of this thread, and in charge of instructing people when they can and cannot respond.

[josko.ri]

I have 2 questions about clarifying the rules, because I am not sure if I understand it correct.

1. "Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only"
I am not sure how this rule applies about using unlimited forts in doubles. There are 2 explanations that I can say about this rule. which one of those explanations is correct?
1.1. "Only" may mean that restrictions applies for triples and quads, but not apply to doubles. That would mean using unlimited forts in doubles is not restricted at all.
or
1.2. "Only" may also mean that allowing maximal 2 games applies only for triples and quads, but not apply to doubles. That would mean using unlimited forts in doubles is not allowed at all.


2. "Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only"
"Championship Matches will be a 41 game clan war involving 8 doubles, 16 triples, and 16 quads. All games to be played in 2 sets - first set will be 16 quad games and 1 tie-breaker game (Random Triples - Esc, Chained, Sunny). The second set will be 8 doubles and 16 triple games."

It is clearly written that in Finals it will be 2 sets, and that 2 games total are allowed per (one) home set. does it mean it will be allowed 4 unlimited home games total, 2 in first set (quads), and 2 in second set (triples)?

[WPBRJ]

Settings

• No Freestyle
• No Speed
• No Manual
• No Nuclear
• Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only

[hotfire]

looks pretty clear that this is the correct assumption
It is clearly written that in Finals it will be 2 sets, and that 2 games total are allowed per (one) home set. does it mean it will be allowed 4 unlimited home games total, 2 in first set (quads), and 2 in second set (triples)?