CCup 4 format discussion (ver 5, p. 28)

[BGtheBrain]

*****

[Dako]

I just dont understand what could possibly be so difficult here.

In short, we have three questions pending right now

1. Why Dako runs CCup4 and who gave him the authority
2. Why CD's own the event and what does it mean
3. Least important, as it seems, are you ok with draft #5

I am interested in #3 only so please answer that one if you can.

[BGtheBrain]

*****

[Dako]

Thanks BG. Tie-breaker can be changed if both clans agree to another map, so it is up to you to negotiate the map. World 2.1 is set there as the default tie-breaker.

[Vid_FISO]

"FISO won't be lambs lead to the slaughter" - yet I've seen you literally joke about this very fact in your regular wars against very lopsided competition. You clearly didn't have a problem before with this, until it conveniently came to CC4. Which I might add, is fully negotiable wars like you request.

Yep, joked about it but actually won the war that resulted from that post, our first win after 6 losses, most of them heavy. New on the scene, we needed to see where we were, so a year of so learning. Criticised for taking on the likes of OSA (who were actually 2 or 3 steps ahead of us rather than just one), but you don't know until you try, regardless of what others may say/ think. Who hasn't burnt their fingers once or twice in their lives when the advice was to keep your hands away from the fire? It's the human learning process at work.

Our current rematch against AKA shows that we've learnt something and closed the gap somewhat in the last year, barring a minor miracle we'll lose by a couple of games this time and there were missed chances is some that could/ should have won us the war, although AKA will no doubt also be able to point to a game here and there that got away from a decent position.

So we accept that we are one of the weaker clans, improving as we go along, but now fully aware that at present some of the competition is far too hot for us, we've enough burns and scars right now thanks all the same.

[jghost7]

This latest version(5) seems good for the most part.

I would offer up these opinions:

1. I would think that the timing out rule could be negotiated out rather than in.
2. Round Limits negotiated in rather than out or just remove them altogether.

Thanks,

J

[Doc_Brown]

I'm not sure where all the grief about the latest rules is coming from. There was a long discussion about who had the right to run this tournament. Although it was never very clear (and please, let's not start that over again!), it sounded like the CDs didn't want to assume control of the tournament, but they wanted a few elements included. Dako accepted the minimum number of games and the maximum use of maps that was requested by CDF. He is not requiring membership in CDF for eligibility, and he has not included the timing out rule. Apparently a few clans are hesitant to join CDF for whatever reasons, and it doesn't seem necessary to exclude them just because they've chosen not to have their own representative in CDF and are willing to allow other clans to represent their interests in any disputes where CDF input is required.

On the timing out, I can understand the positions of both sides. Someone made the point that the Cup was originally envisioned as a collection of wars, and each pair of clans should have the right to negotiate rules and settings. V4 rules had the timing out rule proposed by CDF. V5 recognizes that intentional timing out can be abusive but relies on the clans to agree to a rule. I'd point out that unlike in standard wars where newer and weaker clans may be willing to accept less favorable terms in order to enter into a war against a strong established clan, these pairings are set by the brackets, and there is no such incentive. What about a compromise on the timing out rule along the following lines:

Timing out a turn (PROPOSAL)

Timing out turns to gain strategic advantage is forbidden. Clans are expected to arrange timing-out rules and penalties between themselves as they wish. It is recommended that they consult the CDF for arbitration in any disputes. A possible timing out rule (not enforced by CCup unless requested by both clans), and referred to as the CDF Timing Out Rule, is as follows:
CDF Timing Out Rule

• Timing out in spoils games will not be tolerated by any players or clans that abuse this.
  
  1. First offense of a team: the game will be remade.
  2. Second offense of a team (in the same game): the game will not be considered as a win for the offending clan for CCup purposes. If they do win, then the game will be declared a draw. In these circumstances, games may still count towards other statistics, such as ranking systems.
  3. If a clan has been penalized (as above) for two offenses in one game, then commits a single further offense in any game in the same round the same penalty will apply: the game will not be considered as a win for the offending clan for CCup purposes. If they do win, then the game will be declared a draw. In these circumstances, games may still count towards other statistics, such as ranking systems.
  4. If a clan have been penalized twice during the CCupthen any single further offense in any game during the entire CCup will result in the same penalty will apply: the game will not be considered as a win for the offending clan for CCup purposes. If they do win, then the game will be declared a draw. In these circumstances, games may still count towards other statistics, such as ranking systems.
  5. Timing-out, missing turns or dead beating in No Spoils games will not be investigated, or result in any penalties.
• Clan Directors (Nicky15 and Leehar) will personally investigate all cases and make final judgment if timing out a turn was abusive or not.

[IcePack]

I'm pretty flexible on timing out rule - especially if it can be negotiated in / out as desired.

[josko.ri]

From where I stand, there was one person, who could have had a claim on the Cup, and that is Chuck. He started the whole thing as a private tournament, came up with the rules for the first Cup all by himself, and so he would have a real case here, that it should be him making the final call on any of this. But how does Dako deserve that role ?

As far as I can see, all that Dako did after Chuck disappeared during the last Cup, was updating the results in the official thread. Let´s not kid ourselves here. The Cup would have played out just as fine without him. That´s part of the beauty of the whole thing: That it pretty much runs itself, once the rules are agreed on. There probably should be someone to push some clans now & again to stay on schedule and to update results in the official thread, but that´s about it.

So how come, that a more or less random player steps up & claims the right to decide the rules for this tournament ? I am with Bruce here: After Chucks disappearance this event should belong to the entire clan world, it´s the obvious thing really. And so I find the approach of voting on key questions in CDF a very reasonable idea. The 5-10 people, who have been very vocal in this thread, shouldn´t fool themselves into believing, that their opinions are somehow representative of the clan scene in total

+1... Very well said, we shouldn't allow tyrannical way of leading the Cup. The one who consistently, from the very beginning, even after numerous requests, refuses any kind of voting and democracy in his decisions, should not have a power to run one of 2 the biggest events on CC. Chuuuuck could do whatever he wished with this project (even lead it tyrannically) as this was his idea so he practically had copyright of leading this, but Dako are obviously trying to copy his powers, without any rights to do so. CCup3 would end just like CC2 had ended (where Chuuuuck also had disappeared) with or without Dako so his stepping in just to update some results and declare dates for round starting should not give him power to take ownership of CCups.

Many will think my statement is personal, so just to say in the beginning that they are wrong. My statement is caused only because of obvious tyrannical leading. The major 2 issues, format and draw, he just left how it was before, obviously going through the line of the least resistance and principle "give them what worked so it should be ok" and making fools of all of us who spent a lot of time trying to improve the whole thing with our ideas. That is much easier than have balls of experimenting with something new which can improve the whole thing, or (in my opinion the best solution) give to everyone chance to make their own proposal, collect all proposals, and put all proposals into voting. Is it so hard to give people what majority of them want? Obviously, tyranny is more welcome here than democracy.

[IcePack]

How do you know that keeping seeding / draw isn't what the majority wants?

[jetsetwilly]

How do you know that keeping seeding / draw isn't what the majority wants?

Indeed we don't know, it might well be but that's not something we've voted on yet

[IcePack]

How do you know that keeping seeding / draw isn't what the majority wants?

Indeed we don't know, it might well be but that's not something we've voted on yet

I agree. But I keep saying people say the majority this or that when there is no way to know one way or another at this point.

[josko.ri]

How do you know that keeping seeding / draw isn't what the majority wants?

I do not know, do you know? Did I say he chose what majority do not want? No.

I said he did not give chance to majority to show what they want. See conclusion of my post if you still did not realize point:

"Obviously, tyranny is more welcome here than democracy."

How give the chance? By voting of course, this is the thing that I requested in (almost) every of my posts.

[Doc_Brown]

Just out of curiosity, is there any other tournament (clan or otherwise) where the organizer has presented all format and rule questions for a vote? I haven't followed all the various tournaments for very long, so this is an honest question. In my limited experience, tournament organizers always determine what the settings will be (possibly with some input and proposed modifications).

[IcePack]

The argument here is the original TO is no longer and because Dako isn't the original, apparently he should just organize an event that changes each year at the whim / vote of the clan world. Vote every year, w different set ups each one I guess.

It begs the question that's been asked before, if that's the case the CD's can do all the work and take it over there's no need for an "outsider" to run the event if he has no decision power. (what josko says is tyranny).

IcePack

[josko.ri]

Just out of curiosity, is there any other tournament (clan or otherwise) where the organizer has presented all format and rule questions for a vote? I haven't followed all the various tournaments for very long, so this is an honest question. In my limited experience, tournament organizers always determine what the settings will be (possibly with some input and proposed modifications).

In the case where you (honestly) asked question, tournament organizer come with his idea, starts tournament and make it how he wishes.

In this case, tournament existed and he alone assigned himself to run existing tournament, going over the ones who should have power to do so, CDs.

If you wanted comparison here is real honest comparison... What happens in Tournament section when TO abandons tourney (which is case here)? TOs put announcement if someone wish to rescue the tournament, and then interested player(s) say their wish, and they give to one of them to rescue the tournament. This analogy is what I am actually proposing. CDs put announcement to everyone to make their proposal how the CC4 should look, if more than one proposal comes, CDs put it on voting in their forum and give power of running the event to the one with the most votes. Isn't it the same principle which is already occurring in tournament section, which you (honestly) want to compare with this?

[ahunda]

Just out of curiosity, is there any other tournament (clan or otherwise) where the organizer has presented all format and rule questions for a vote? I haven't followed all the various tournaments for very long, so this is an honest question. In my limited experience, tournament organizers always determine what the settings will be (possibly with some input and proposed modifications).

The set-up of the Clan League, the other big clan event, has always been the result of debate & votes by clan representatives.

[IcePack]

@ josko - that's true for tournaments. However when someone takes over a tournament they don't alter the tournament format. They run it according to the originally defined rules.

@ ahubda - that's true. And out of the two major events (CC and CL) which has the larger history of problems, arguments, and which has overall run smoothly in comparison?

[Doc_Brown]

Obviously, tyranny is more welcome here than democracy.

Now that we've established that point, can we return to giving our Dear Leader feedback on V5 format?

[ahunda]

@ ahubda - that's true. And out of the two major events (CC and CL) which has the larger history of problems, arguments, and which has overall run smoothly in comparison?

You mean like the rule of 21 games being forfeit in the TOFU - KORT challenge some years back ?

[IcePack]

@ ahubda - that's true. And out of the two major events (CC and CL) which has the larger history of problems, arguments, and which has overall run smoothly in comparison?

You mean like the rule of 21 games being forfeit in the TOFU - KORT challenge some years back ?

Tell me how changing the seeding / draw would have improved that situation?

[josko.ri]

@ ahubda - that's true. And out of the two major events (CC and CL) which has the larger history of problems, arguments, and which has overall run smoothly in comparison?

You mean like the rule of 21 games being forfeit in the TOFU - KORT challenge some years back ?

Tell me how changing the seeding / draw would have improved that situation?

of course it was run smoothly because it had the most simple format. Kid who just learned mathematics can arrange format of 1v32 2v31 etc, it is very simple, and therefore runable smoothly by itself.

The fact that something is simple does not mean that it is the best/the most enjoyable. I already explained it to you by example, if simpler=better then we would all still play 6 players, classic, flat rate, adjacent. The fact is that simple can be run by itself and that people will have fun in it. But, with some changes it can be even better. Why not try it? or why at least not ASK people if we will try it, but rather choose tyrannic way of saying "It will be like this regardless of your wishes."

[IcePack]

Nobody is stopping you from running your own event if you feel so strongly about more options, random draws, or whatever else you care about.

What I'm opposed to is changing the cup - which was never intended to be more than a simple bracket tournament, and making it something completely different.

Then what the majority wants doesn't matter anymore. No votes needed. No hurt feelings. If your set up is far superior, then more clans will sign up for it. If this really has no support, it will die out naturally with little participation.

You can hold as many votes as you like, until every last detail is determined. Nobody is stopping you.

IcePack

[ahunda]

@ ahubda - that's true. And out of the two major events (CC and CL) which has the larger history of problems, arguments, and which has overall run smoothly in comparison?

You mean like the rule of 21 games being forfeit in the TOFU - KORT challenge some years back ?

Tell me how changing the seeding / draw would have improved that situation?

Eh ? What has that got to do with anything I said ? I am not arguing about the seeding/draw here. I don´t have any strong preference in that regard, and I haven´t mentioned the issue with a single word in my last posts.

You were implying, that the Cup has always run smoothly, and so I pointed out to you, that there have been problems & issues in the Cups history as well.

I fail to see the connection here anyway: What has the seeding/draw procedure, that is done before the actual start of the tournament, to do with the question, if the Cup itself then runs smoothly ?

[josko.ri]

Nobody is stopping you from running your own event if you feel so strongly about more options, random draws, or whatever else you care about.

What I'm opposed to is changing the cup - which was never intended to be more than a simple bracket tournament, and making it something completely different.

Then what the majority wants doesn't matter anymore. No votes needed. No hurt feelings. If your set up is far superior, then more clans will sign up for it. If this really has no support, it will die out naturally with little participation.

You can hold as many votes as you like, until every last detail is determined. Nobody is stopping you.

IcePack

CCup is there to serve wish of clans in overall as it is one of 2 major events, not to serve Dako's, my nor your wish. That said, clan world should determine in democratic way what THEY wish to have for the major event. Democracy in deciding is only what I am asking for. That is unfortunately not present in this format.