Conquer Club Olympics - Rio Edition

[IcePack]

CC Olympics - Opening Ceremonies I do not think I have a participation ribbon for this.I dont have any ribbons and I doubt it will matter as I am stinking the games up.but someone else mentioned not getting a ribbon.

I have this 1x Challenge Participation Ribbon - Jan. maybe this is blocking ribbons for this event?

They get handed out when the event completes

[ooge]

CC Olympics - Opening Ceremonies I do not think I have a participation ribbon for this.I dont have any ribbons and I doubt it will matter as I am stinking the games up.but someone else mentioned not getting a ribbon.

I have this 1x Challenge Participation Ribbon - Jan. maybe this is blocking ribbons for this event?

They get handed out when the event completes

Thanks for the info

[josko.ri]

It seems like both Waggle dancing tournaments froze after round 1 without getting final game ready for Round 2.

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4526
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4530

[josko.ri]

It seems like both Waggle dancing tournaments froze after round 1 without getting final game ready for Round 2.

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4526
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4530

It started but started with mistake. 16 players advanced for 2 games and it should be 8 players advance for only 1 game. The issue is that with original setup of the tournament I secured silver medal by tie breaker even if i lose in finals but with current set up I may lose silver medal if I lose in finals and winner of the final match will not be winner of the tournament because there will be two winners. Please resolve this issue and send games properly how they were supposed to be,don't make changes in tournament setup in the middle of the tournament.

[josko.ri]

It seems like both Waggle dancing tournaments froze after round 1 without getting final game ready for Round 2.

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4526
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4530

It started but started with mistake. 16 players advanced for 2 games and it should be 8 players advance for only 1 game. The issue is that with original setup of the tournament I secured silver medal by tie breaker even if i lose in finals but with current set up I may lose silver medal if I lose in finals and winner of the final match will not be winner of the tournament because there will be two winners. Please resolve this issue and send games properly how they were supposed to be,don't make changes in tournament setup in the middle of the tournament.

Just to explain how new setup of Waggle dancing tournaments are influencing fair play of the tournament. By original setup, after round 1 scores resets and 1 final game of 8 players determines who will win the gold in the finals. So, at least silver medal in the finals will be awarded to the player who deserved it by making the most wins in round 1, in this case this is me who ensured at least silver medal by original setup. With new setup, there will be two winners in finals, so one will earn gold medal and other one will win silver medal, so the best player from round 1 will not anymore earn silver medal (like it was the case with original setup) but will win only bronze medal.

Therefore, by changing setup of the tournament, you stole already earned medal from deserved earners. That is in no way fair nor proper solution for the competition, and I want that organizers fix this mistake and send one final game as it was scheduled in original setup of the tournament, you should not chance tournament structure on midway of the tournament.

[dkmaster]

Is there a special reason why you can only win silver and bronze in Oxen Jousting ?

And not gold, silver and bronze like in the other tournaments with 16 players ?

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

DK. Why are you not carrying Mystica to the top?

[dkmaster]

DK. Why are you not carrying Mystica to the top?

Sorry Wing. Last year I only joined Mystica, just before the Olympic, to be able to play in all the tournaments.
And it turned out to be a great idea, as I was able to take down the overall individual title.

After the Olympic I switced to a clan ( TOP ) to be able to compete in the clan leagues as well

But with the luck I got this year, here in the Olympic, I wouldnt have helped you much anyway

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

DK. Why are you not carrying Mystica to the top?

Sorry Wing. Last year I only joined Mystica, just before the Olympic, to be able to play in all the tournaments.
And it turned out to be a great idea, as I was able to take down the overall individual title.

After the Olympic I switced to a clan ( TOP ) to be able to compete in the clan leagues as well

But with the luck I got this year, here in the Olympic, I wouldnt have helped you much anyway

Dead to me

[IcePack]

Mystica didn't reach the top last year either

[josko.ri]

Is there a special reason why you can only win silver and bronze in Oxen Jousting ?

And not gold, silver and bronze like in the other tournaments with 16 players ?

I am also interested in this question.

I can see the format is copied from last year when the tournament was speed and consisted of 8 players.
However, this year the tournament is not speed and consists of 16 players, so awards should be given proportionally like in the other tournaments with 16 players, with gold for first place, silver for second and then bronze for 3,4.

[IcePack]

I ended up getting a pm on this, but I don't run the event. However I brought duka in to help answer and the response was:

We tried to give more medals for harder tournaments, but there's no exact formula. We basically formed a subjective opinion, based on

• the total number of games
• the number of players
• the difficulty of the map, and
• the difficulty of the settings.

Oxen jousting does, as you say, have 16 players, but it's a well-known map and relatively common settings so it was probably easier than some of the tourneys on Random map or the Hive or some other tough ones.

It doesn't help that we're mixing events from three editions now. The original events (dating back to the 2014 Olympics) were written by DoomYoshi. In 2015 the new events added were written by bigWham. In 2016 the latest events were written by me.

I would like to get to some kind of empirical formula to give an objective number for the difficulty of a tournament, but obviously it's too late to do that for this year's event. We'll definitely have a look at that we we start thinking about the 2017 edition.

[djelebert]

just to highlight a problem in Mini Flonkerton.
3 rounds, no elimination. So why in 3rd round scores reset? 1st and 2nd round are just training?

There is a tournament already round 3 : https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... nt_id=4554

[shoop76]

just to highlight a problem in Mini Flonkerton.
3 rounds, no elimination. So why in 3rd round scores reset? 1st and 2nd round are just training?

There is a tournament already round 3 : https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... nt_id=4554

Same here. 1st round doesn't count.

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4492

[Dukasaur]

just to highlight a problem in Mini Flonkerton.
3 rounds, no elimination. So why in 3rd round scores reset? 1st and 2nd round are just training?

There is a tournament already round 3 : https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... nt_id=4554

Same here. 1st round doesn't count.

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4492

Yeah, this is a bit of an imperfect solution to a couple of intractable problems.

Last year a lot of people complained about 1v1 tourneys not being brackets (ie. no score reset between rounds.) This year, I had BW change everything so that all things that look like brackets actually were brackets. (Meaning that all head-to-head competitions like 1v1 and Polys had score resets every round.)

Then, this year, after the Olympics had already started, we found out that the Tribal algorithm can't handle eliminations, so BW had to take the eliminations out of those. Probably should have taken out the score resets at the same time, but neither of us thought of it. So, we ended up with a lot of tribal tournaments that have head-to-head matchups, no eliminations, and score resets. They are the bastard children of tournaments that were once pseudo-brackets but are not brackets at all now.

Last night all the remaining score resets were removed from those. However, doing it retroactively would probably result in more wrongs than it would fix, so it's not retroactive. In any of these Tribal tourneys with head-to-head matchups, score resets that already took place will stand, but score resets that haven't happened yet have been removed.

It's not a perfect fix, but best we could come up with given the rather chaotic way these Olympics have evolved.

[dkmaster]

Is score reset in round one also been taking out of this one

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... nt_id=4603

now that round one aint finished yet ?

[josko.ri]

I was searching for answer but could not find it.

Which is tie breaker criteria for the case that two or more players finish with the same number of points?

[IcePack]

I assume since it uses the automation system, its follows the auto touranament scoring / tie breaker procedures:

https://www.conquerclub.com/public.php? ... urnaments5

[Dukasaur]

I assume since it uses the automation system, its follows the auto touranament scoring / tie breaker procedures:

https://www.conquerclub.com/public.php? ... urnaments5

That's okay for the individual tournaments, but none of those really apply to the overall scoreboard.

Will give it some thought.

[dkmaster]

Looking at rl Olympics they always place gold higher than silver etc. So having 1 gold gives you a higher placement at the scoreboard than having 7 silver or more.

We could adapt that system if anyone ends up with the same number of points at our scoreboard.

Ofcourse we keep getting 1,3 5 and 10 points for medals, but in case of even points the one with the highest number of platin etc get the highest placement at the scoreboard.

If those numbers are even as well I am not sure, but at least that wont happen this year for our two top opponents

[josko.ri]

We can also look at Tournament structures in CC. They credit more wins as better, that is actually the first tie breaker criteria in every CC tournament. That said, "a win" in terms of CC tournaments is equal like "a medal" in terms of the Olympic tournament. That said, who wins more total medals should win the tie breaker.

To further support this, I think it is harder to win more medals at all than to win more platinum medals because it means you need to be constantly playing on high level on many various settings and earn medals on every of them. Winning more platinum medals may be that you are just better on the particular settings in the tournaments which offered platinum medals, while winning more medals overall means you played better in overall.

Question is should we follow the real Olympics criterium, as dkmaster is suggesting, or should we follow CC tournaments tie breaker criterium, as I am suggesting. I am ok with both decisions, just wanting clarification, as it is possible that two of us cross the finish line together.

[shoop76]

Wht can't we just have a tie. If there were no rules made from the beginning, it seems unfair to make one up at this point.

[Dukasaur]

Wht can't we just have a tie. If there were no rules made from the beginning, it seems unfair to make one up at this point.

Yeah, I have talked to BW about this and we will allow ties to exist. There's no point creating an unforeseen tiebreaker when nobody predicted the possibility. It will only leave one person pissed off, or the other. Ties will stand as ties. Both will get the designated prize.

[dkmaster]

Wht can't we just have a tie. If there were no rules made from the beginning, it seems unfair to make one up at this point.

Yeah, I have talked to BW about this and we will allow ties to exist. There's no point creating an unforeseen tiebreaker when nobody predicted the possibility. It will only leave one person pissed off, or the other. Ties will stand as ties. Both will get the designated prize.

Sounds like a very decent decision

Its a long and hard tournament, with a huge game count if you play all the tournaments. So would ofcourse be a pity to loose to a new rule this late

[josko.ri]

Wht can't we just have a tie. If there were no rules made from the beginning, it seems unfair to make one up at this point.

Yeah, I have talked to BW about this and we will allow ties to exist. There's no point creating an unforeseen tiebreaker when nobody predicted the possibility. It will only leave one person pissed off, or the other. Ties will stand as ties. Both will get the designated prize.

Thanks a lot. Very fair solution to this question

I have another question. I see there is GA medal for scoring 11 points and CA medal for scoring 30 points. Will players who scored more than 30 receive both medals, as they qualified for both criteria?