Conquer Club Olympics

[iAmCaffeine]

Sadly, you have been eliminated from the Tournament CC Olympics - Waggle Dancing after Round 1.

Thank goodness....don't know why I ever joined that one...never again on Hive....

It's an acquired taste. It is one of the most popular clan maps.

That's not quite true, really.

[josko.ri]

I think there was a bug in Scoring system in one of tournament which I have participated in:

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... y_id=11600

The bug is that I got third place while zmd9r6 got second place, and I think it should be viceversa.

Description about Scoring system from Tournament Help Page:

Scoring

By default scoring is based on number of Game Wins over the entire tournament. However, individual Rounds may Reset the scores, so that the scoring will begin again from that round. When the first round of the Tournament is seeded by score, the player's score at time of joining the tournament is used in that round only.

Ties in Score shall be broken by the following rules, applied in order:
> Percentage of wins in the tournament as a whole
> The cumulative number of Game rounds required to win the games they have won in the tournament (winning in less rounds is better)
> The order in which the player joined the tournament (first player to join wins)

The bolded part is where placing him as second and me as third is against rules.

As Scores were reseted in the final round and only 1 game was played, then winner gets gold, but for determining 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place, I think there was bug. This is the way how I see the tie-breaker rules:

1. > Percentage of wins in the tournament as a whole
According to this tie-breaker, zmd9r6 and me have 3 wins, while The Goof has 2 wins, thus The Goof is 4th placed and 2 of us are going to second tie-breaker criteria.

2. > The cumulative number of Game rounds required to win the games they have won in the tournament (winning in less rounds is better)
These games are my 3 wins in the tournament as a whole: Game 14710087 Game 14710086 Game 14756043.
The cumulative number of Game rounds required to win the games which I have won in the tournament = 10+ 12 +10 = 32
These games are zmd9r6's 3 wins in the tournament: Game 14710084 Game 14756039 Game 14756038.
The cumulative number of Game rounds required to win the games which zmd9r6 has won in the tournament = 14+ 12 +13 = 39

Thus, I should be second placed over him according to the second tie-break criterium.

[shoop76]

I think there was a bug in Scoring system in one of tournament which I have participated in:

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... y_id=11600

The bug is that I got third place while zmd9r6 got second place, and I think it should be viceversa.

Description about Scoring system from Tournament Help Page:

Scoring

By default scoring is based on number of Game Wins over the entire tournament. However, individual Rounds may Reset the scores, so that the scoring will begin again from that round. When the first round of the Tournament is seeded by score, the player's score at time of joining the tournament is used in that round only.

Ties in Score shall be broken by the following rules, applied in order:
> Percentage of wins in the tournament as a whole
> The cumulative number of Game rounds required to win the games they have won in the tournament (winning in less rounds is better)
> The order in which the player joined the tournament (first player to join wins)

The bolded part is where placing him as second and me as third is against rules.

As Scores were reseted in the final round and only 1 game was played, then winner gets gold, but for determining 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place, I think there was bug. This is the way how I see the tie-breaker rules:

1. > Percentage of wins in the tournament as a whole
According to this tie-breaker, zmd9r6 and me have 3 wins, while The Goof has 2 wins, thus The Goof is 4th placed and 2 of us are going to second tie-breaker criteria.

2. > The cumulative number of Game rounds required to win the games they have won in the tournament (winning in less rounds is better)
These games are my 3 wins in the tournament as a whole: Game 14710087 Game 14710086 Game 14756043.
The cumulative number of Game rounds required to win the games which I have won in the tournament = 10+ 12 +10 = 32
These games are zmd9r6's 3 wins in the tournament: Game 14710084 Game 14756039 Game 14756038.
The cumulative number of Game rounds required to win the games which zmd9r6 has won in the tournament = 14+ 12 +13 = 39

Thus, I should be second placed over him according to the second tie-break criterium.

I would say there is a bigger bug. Even though you didn't win the last game the scores never reset and you guys are all tied at 3. This means that the final round win is irrelevant and since he would be eliminated with first tiebreaker (only 2 wins in previous rounds), you would actually win the tournament.

[DoomYoshi]

Ok, it's being looked at. Sometime this week it will either be identified as a bug, or explained as not a bug.

[DoomYoshi]

Ok, as bigWham explained to me, the description was written before score reset was a feature of the autotournaments. So, the description has been changed to reflect that. The Score Reset works as would intuitively be expected, the games before the score reset do not count.

[josko.ri]

Ok, as bigWham explained to me, the description was written before score reset was a feature of the autotournaments. So, the description has been changed to reflect that. The Score Reset works as would intuitively be expected, the games before the score reset do not count.

Well, it was changed now, but players were managed their strategizing according to how rules were written.
If you look at the tournament results, I have managed my strategy to rush to kill my opponents, taking bigger risk of failing with that way.
Why I did that?
I had known that winning in shorter time will give me 1 extra "win" because if I achieve winning in shorter time, then everyone who will be tied with me will be lower placed than me in case of enforcing tie breaker.
You should follow the rules how they were written on the time when events took place.
It is now edited, so on this way should be applied for events which will start from now on, not for events which started in past.

Also, the rule itself, how it is re-written now, is terrible and paradoxal, against any spirit of the competition.
See for example what will happen in some other tournament if we follow that rule:

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=1270

See activity of player gubarretto in the tournament:

He deadbeated all his 5 games: Game 14695618 Game 14695617 Game 14695615 Game 14695612 Game 14885421 and do you know what he will win with this rule?
He will win Silver medal!

How?
He was the first one to join the tournament. There were 8 games in round 1 and 8 slots in the final. That means, in case that ANY player makes 2 wins in round 1 (and that case have high possibility to happen, I think it fact it had happened in all Waggle Dancing events), then one player with 0 wins will proceed to the final round.
Which player? The one who joined the tournament first. In case of the linked tournament, it is gubarretto.
Now, for final game scores reset, there is only 1 game, somebody will again win and be winner, so who will be second placed?
Of course, again gubarretto, because he will win tie breaker over all other players just because he was the one joined the first.

Do you see the terrible nonsense in rankings which will occur?
gubarretto, who deadbeated all 5 games, will win silver medal, and someone between Spartakus and me (or both of us), who won 2 of 5 games, will stay without medal (because we did not join the tournament amongst the first ones).

If the rules are enforced on the way how they are written, then at least a player who won more matches throughout the whole tournament, or in case of tie then the one who won it in the least rounds, would be awarded for his achievement, instead of automatically giving silver medal (!!!) to the player who first joined the tournament and did nothing.

[GioDuce]

Where can i view a total scoreboard ? ( for individual players )

Now I can only see the top 20 players on the scoreboard.

[DoomYoshi]

Where can i view a total scoreboard ? ( for individual players )

Now I can only see the top 20 players on the scoreboard.

Hi, it's always been that way. Inventor-based scoreboards are a drag on the system, so they are always limited in scope.

[Dukasaur]

56 for '56 tournament has been scored:


Subject: 56 for '56 (CC Olympics Event) [Complete]








.

[DoomYoshi]

The final scoreboard is up. We have a tie for first, which I wasn't anticipating. We are discussing with bigWham how best to resolve this.

Japan won the most medals, weighted per number of users. This is due almost single-handedly to josko.ri, who is actually from... Croatia?

FCCFP held on to the top spot, all the way to the end!

[DoomYoshi]

Tiebreak decided by participation ribbon. I accidently gave Osman 2 for the same event, that's why he has 11.

Stars and such are coming out now.

[fapostolo]

just hope my Bronze medals have gone to Portugal, my birth place, not my VPN.

[ViperOverLord]

FCCFP held on to the top spot, all the way to the end!

Just as a point of record, you mean from a certain point. They certainly were not in first from start to finish. Manifest Destiny likely had the most days in first. FCCFP did eventually pass us; but they had about 4X the members as us.

But...Manifest Destiny did end up finishing as the clan with the most points.

[iAmCaffeine]

Which means pretty much nothing, woohoo. Everyone give themselves a slow pat on the back.

[Dukasaur]

Congrats to all the Olympians!

[sempaispellcheck]

FCCFP held on to the top spot, all the way to the end!

As President and Commissioner of the FCCFP, I am proud to accept this honor on behalf of the entire Fédération.
I am glad to see that so many of our members participated in, succeeded in, and most importantly enjoyed this fine event. I am very proud of those members - and I should add that I do regret not participating myself.
Nonetheless, a fine showing by all, and many thanks to those who made this event possible.

FCCFP did eventually pass us; but they had about 4X the members as us.

Strength in numbers, my friend.

Which means pretty much nothing, woohoo. Everyone give themselves a slow pat on the back.

Meaningless accomplishments are still accomplishments, as far as I'm concerned.

sempai

[Endgame422]

FCCFP held on to the top spot, all the way to the end!

As President and Commissioner of the FCCFP, I am proud to accept this honor on behalf of the entire Fédération.
I am glad to see that so many of our members participated in, succeeded in, and most importantly enjoyed this fine event. I am very proud of those members - and I should add that I do regret not participating myself.
Nonetheless, a fine showing by all, and many thanks to those who made this event possible.

sempai

So im curious what color the FCCFP members will be identfiable as?

[DoomYoshi]

FCCFP held on to the top spot, all the way to the end!

As President and Commissioner of the FCCFP, I am proud to accept this honor on behalf of the entire Fédération.
I am glad to see that so many of our members participated in, succeeded in, and most importantly enjoyed this fine event. I am very proud of those members - and I should add that I do regret not participating myself.
Nonetheless, a fine showing by all, and many thanks to those who made this event possible.

sempai

So im curious what color the FCCFP members will be identfiable as?

Not sure yet.