Moderator: Clan Directors
chapcrap wrote:I'm mad that I can't play for another clan. I switched clans in the middle and now I can't compete at all because I'm not allowed to play for my new clan or my old clan. That's pretty stupid.
chemefreak wrote:Great-Ollie wrote:Keefie wrote:Well said Nicky15
I'd just like to add that myself and all of the members of the Headless Horsemen are fully behind the CL4 organising team and really apppreciate their efforts.
Well done guys
+1
+2
chapcrap wrote:I'm mad that I can't play for another clan. I switched clans in the middle and now I can't compete at all because I'm not allowed to play for my new clan or my old clan. That's pretty stupid.
Leehar wrote:not to argue over semantics, but it does say League in quite a few places...
chemefreak wrote:chapcrap wrote:I'm mad that I can't play for another clan. I switched clans in the middle and now I can't compete at all because I'm not allowed to play for my new clan or my old clan. That's pretty stupid.
I find it pretty amusing that a TOURNAMENT DIRECTOR is complaining about a rule in a TOURNAMENT! I like the rule. Cup Tied. Good stuff.
chapcrap wrote:chemefreak wrote:chapcrap wrote:I'm mad that I can't play for another clan. I switched clans in the middle and now I can't compete at all because I'm not allowed to play for my new clan or my old clan. That's pretty stupid.
I find it pretty amusing that a TOURNAMENT DIRECTOR is complaining about a rule in a TOURNAMENT! I like the rule. Cup Tied. Good stuff.
Except it's not a cup. I'm not sure how it's amusing at all. This isn't my forum. Just because it's in a tournament type format doesn't mean that I had any say at all. And it definitely doesn't mean it's not a stupid rule. I should be able to play for one clan at least.
chemefreak wrote:chapcrap wrote:chemefreak wrote:chapcrap wrote:I'm mad that I can't play for another clan. I switched clans in the middle and now I can't compete at all because I'm not allowed to play for my new clan or my old clan. That's pretty stupid.
I find it pretty amusing that a TOURNAMENT DIRECTOR is complaining about a rule in a TOURNAMENT! I like the rule. Cup Tied. Good stuff.
Except it's not a cup. I'm not sure how it's amusing at all. This isn't my forum. Just because it's in a tournament type format doesn't mean that I had any say at all. And it definitely doesn't mean it's not a stupid rule. I should be able to play for one clan at least.
Yikes! I thought you were sorta joking...
Chariot of Fire wrote:Can this forum be as much about suggestions for CL5 as it is for complaints about CL4? I see this as being far more productive to resolving issues as, let's face it, whatever has happened in CL4 is already a fait accompli. The rules were set and every clan has had to comply with them - same for everyone (though some have seemingly coped better than others, but that's an admin thing by the look of it). If there have been problems with a particular TO then I'm sure this will be taken into consideration when the next series comes along, but for the meantime can we all just apply ourselves to seeing this through and upholding our obligations, both as TOs and as 1st Contacts. It would be great.
Now here's something that I think warrants closer scrutiny. It is the system adopted by UEFA for the European Championships 2012 in which there were 51 countries divided into nine qualifying groups. Not too dissimilar to the conundrum organisers of CL4 were faced with when deciding how best to 'qualify' the top clans from each division. Have a read:
"There were nine groups. Six of these groups had six teams; the remaining three groups consisted of five teams. Group competition was a double round robin: each team hosted a game with every other team in its group. The first-placed team in each group qualified, along with the second-place team with the most points against teams ranked in the top five in the group. The remaining eight second-place teams are paired for two-game play-offs, with the winner of each tie qualifying for the finals"
So what UEFA have done is take each 2nd-placed team in a group and calculate the points they earned against the four other teams in the Top 5. This is a clever system as it has no bearing on the 1st-placed team (i.e. if 1st place beat last place those points still stand, which is fair enough as everyone in each group had the same opportunity) but it does create a level playing field for the 2nd-placed teams who were in a group of only five countries. Their 4 results against opponents are comparable to the 4 results of a 2nd-placed team in a group of six. This is far better than the 'share a draw' system applied in CL4.
Only other thing I'll add (for now) is the restriction on Unlimited Forts. Personally I don't like them, but to have a quota placed on the number of games that can use them seemed unnecessary and possibly a deliberate handicap to KORT. This seems unfair. If they happen to be bloody good at those settings why penalise them? It's the first time I've ever known of unlimited forts being restricted and it seems unreasonable to me. It is a very standard game setting across all spheres of CC gameplay (tournies, challenges, etc).
Cheers
CoF
Leehar wrote:Moving forward, this was a discussion I already had with some other people, but is Phase 3 really necessary?
Phase 2 ensure that all the top clans play each other in a proper league format, and phase 4 is useful in determining a more worthy winner since it's a proper full length head to head, but phase 3 just seems like an unnecessary addendum?
Lindax wrote:I just wish I had a clue what the Clan League is all about.
I don't know who we're playing (abbreviations of clans), I don't know where were standing, I don't know what I'm playing for, I don't know what settings we can and can't use and why, etc., etc.
This whole thing has gotten so complicated that even with my high intelligence level I cannot see the forest through the trees.
I'm going to ask my clan person in charge of clan wars to leave me out of this.
Lx
Chariot of Fire wrote:Only other thing I'll add (for now) is the restriction on Unlimited Forts. Personally I don't like them, but to have a quota placed on the number of games that can use them seemed unnecessary and possibly a deliberate handicap to KORT. This seems unfair. If they happen to be bloody good at those settings why penalise them? It's the first time I've ever known of unlimited forts being restricted and it seems unreasonable to me. It is a very standard game setting across all spheres of CC gameplay (tournies, challenges, etc).
Leehar wrote:
For the 2nd two Q's, most people like Pack seemingly play purely for medals, while others just to play for pride, to team with friends, or have the most competitive gaming experience to be found on the CC siteTM, and settings are really purely determined by what you really want to play! It can exclude anything, or include anything your clan would like to play, subject of course to if other clans are interested in playing it as well.
You'll find however most clans are amenable to almost anything!
Chariot of Fire wrote:Can this forum be as much about suggestions for CL5 as it is for complaints about CL4? I see this as being far more productive to resolving issues as, let's face it, whatever has happened in CL4 is already a fait accompli.
John Deere wrote:Leehar wrote:
For the 2nd two Q's, most people like Pack seemingly play purely for medals, while others just to play for pride, to team with friends, or have the most competitive gaming experience to be found on the CC siteTM, and settings are really purely determined by what you really want to play! It can exclude anything, or include anything your clan would like to play, subject of course to if other clans are interested in playing it as well.
You'll find however most clans are amenable to almost anything!
Thats pretty funny! Some of us like the medals but we play to be the best! You know like to be better than Empire! Its funny how a few of you Empire guys used to just say we were lucky, wait till you face a real clan etc..... now all you can do is find another way to throw mud at us from a distance. Get your foot out of your mouth, you look like a fool Oh since you have enough time on your have to talk trash here is some good reading for you http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=442&t=160092 I really like the title!
John Deere wrote:Leehar wrote:
For the 2nd two Q's, most people like Pack seemingly play purely for medals, while others just to play for pride, to team with friends, or have the most competitive gaming experience to be found on the CC siteTM, and settings are really purely determined by what you really want to play! It can exclude anything, or include anything your clan would like to play, subject of course to if other clans are interested in playing it as well.
You'll find however most clans are amenable to almost anything!
Thats pretty funny! Some of us like the medals but we play to be the best! You know like to be better than Empire! Its funny how a few of you Empire guys used to just say we were lucky, wait till you face a real clan etc..... now all you can do is find another way to throw mud at us from a distance. Get your foot out of your mouth, you look like a fool Oh since you have enough time on your have to talk trash here is some good reading for you http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=442&t=160092 I really like the title!
Lindax wrote:
This whole thing has gotten so complicated that even with my high intelligence level I cannot see the forest through the trees.
chemefreak wrote:Chariot of Fire wrote:Can this forum be as much about suggestions for CL5 as it is for complaints about CL4? I see this as being far more productive to resolving issues as, let's face it, whatever has happened in CL4 is already a fait accompli.
Come on! The subject of the thread is obviously tongue-in-cheek. I was tired of reading complaints in the main thread so I created this one. Makes it easier to ignore the bullshit.
The Voice wrote: I guess what I'm getting at is that I ate a banana once. Never again.
chemefreak wrote:The Voice wrote: I guess what I'm getting at is that I ate a banana once. Never again.
Thx for sharing this extremely personal experience...we promise not to tell anyone about your banana experimentation
chemefreak wrote:Chariot of Fire wrote:Can this forum be as much about suggestions for CL5 as it is for complaints about CL4? I see this as being far more productive to resolving issues as, let's face it, whatever has happened in CL4 is already a fait accompli.
Come on! The subject of the thread is obviously tongue-in-cheek. I was tired of reading complaints in the main thread so I created this one. Makes it easier to ignore the bullshit.
Bones2484 wrote:chemefreak wrote:Chariot of Fire wrote:Can this forum be as much about suggestions for CL5 as it is for complaints about CL4? I see this as being far more productive to resolving issues as, let's face it, whatever has happened in CL4 is already a fait accompli.
Come on! The subject of the thread is obviously tongue-in-cheek. I was tired of reading complaints in the main thread so I created this one. Makes it easier to ignore the bullshit.
Good to know you don't care about some of the legit complaints. Makes the G1 decision to never participate in such events look like even more of a correct decision.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users