Juni
Worker
Posts: 137
|
Post by Juni on Mar 13, 2006 14:23:12 GMT -5
About the 2v2 random, I don't think that shuffle map is a good idea. Just imagine a 2v2 ancient in continents map Or a 2v2 future on team battleground north/south... We already have an event with often unplayable maps (the 1v1), and an event on the unfair Great Plains, we don't need one more.
|
|
|
Post by Random on Mar 13, 2006 15:00:04 GMT -5
Random maps are brilliant in the effect that you do not know who to play or which style to play, so you must decide who your best players in that they are the most adjustable, play said games.
On another note I was TD of one of the events.. and the first round lasted 9 and 1/2 hours for the 110 turn game. I agree with Fried that an auto disqualification in such situations. It is not comfortable for the players waiting nor the ones playing, and this would greatly improve the timelyness of the CCC. I admit that each player has the option of taking the full turn time, but taking the full time every turn to try double moving or end of turn attacking is just crap. Also I think that all Clans should have an established chat room of some kind, be it YIM or MSN, etc., so that the lobby or those waiting can get updates as to how much longer the wait will be..
|
|
ninou
Settler
The sexiest civer
Posts: 8
|
Post by ninou on Mar 13, 2006 15:14:47 GMT -5
I'm very disapointed when I see that.
CCC will becomes cup for only selected people who don't have lagg and connection issues?? That is crazy.
|
|
|
Post by Random on Mar 13, 2006 17:35:24 GMT -5
I hope that you are kidding... People who do not lag should be the only ones who play. And please do not blame lag on location, as I have played in many parts of the world and have had very few issues as to my own lagging. Connection issues are being worked on. If we were all as addicted to having respect for others, this would never have been an issue. There have been many "Famous" laggers in this community ie {IDI}Mix from Latvia and Deathling "Lagling" from Isreal, are 2 that come to mind. Anyway the point is, that your computer effects others, and being a person who want the respect of others know your limitations... ie I can play nice MP games on small maps with 4 people.. Set rules as such and most of these problems will be a burden of the past.. The other choice is to get rid of that Wang, or Tandy and get a real computer, and a connection that does not affect your telephone service...
JustBlu's Nickel of the day
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Mar 13, 2006 20:26:52 GMT -5
While I very much agree that preventing "laggers" from playing is unfair, is it any less unfair to make three teams wait seven hours for a first round game that took as long as two other rounds... just to get started?
It is a regrettable situation... but I'm not sure the answer is to "just deal with it."
|
|
|
Post by holocanthe on Mar 13, 2006 21:22:48 GMT -5
How you know who is the lagger ?
In the game room, MUD insult LKT (words as f**k.....). They said that there was one lagger's LKT and the MUD hosteur launch the game and it is a MUD's player deconnection....
Especially, the principal problem comes from your system of pulling to the fate. The BYE should not be possible with an even number of team. Résultat, 2 clans must often wait the end of the first turn, because they are in top and bottom of the table.
|
|
|
Post by Avogadro on Mar 13, 2006 21:52:53 GMT -5
The issues concerning finding who the lagers may indeed be a delicate one. Some players are known to lag though and this is problematic as it shows disregard towards the many waiting for their turn in the competition. I wont mention any names but we had a real bad lager on ladder here early. Every game he would say "cmon I fixed my lag, or it's a conflict with such and such..." Yet ever single time he played he dropped every 5-6 turns After a while I simply dint let this individual in my games I felt bad doing it but he could not handle 6+ player games. I'm not saying this was the case in your game Holo. I am simply saying if someone is KNOWN to ruin the games, steps should maybe be taken to protect the enjoyment factor for others involved.
|
|
|
Post by holocanthe on Mar 13, 2006 22:02:03 GMT -5
I'm not saying this was the case in your game Holo. I am simply saying if someone is KNOWN to ruin the games, steps should maybe be taken to protect the enjoyment factor for others involved. MUD's accusations and insults were before the game start. PS : it wasn't my game, i just listen with TS and see picture (but not enough) et tu sais ou trouver le récit.
|
|
|
Post by lorddragon on Mar 13, 2006 23:56:51 GMT -5
Well, the AI taking over can be a problem, but really its better than the alternatives. I mean what if the civ just poofed, then whoever was next to that civ would have been given a gift from god. Same thing if no one controls the civ, easy to conquer and free land.
I think the problem people had with the AIs in this Ironman(I wasn't next to them) was that in an Always War setting the AIs will ally with each other. So they were working together, trading tech, etc. What is needed is for AIs to stay at war in Always war I think.
|
|
icbm
Settler
Posts: 60
|
Post by icbm on Mar 14, 2006 0:34:54 GMT -5
axe dominate for abour 20 turns ya - but even they u may try horserush or defedn with archers or chriots or spear vs chariots - u just got these stone .. principe after inf u need about (or more?) 7 expensive techs for tanks - thats too far away it all comes down to some boat landings .. in ren u got pikes and muskets and catas and mace and ..... then shooter come after 3 more techs This is not true. After AL, you can go(and I usually do) Sci Met(which is very fast) -> Physics-> Elec -> Indus to get marines and ships, sure infantry is good but you can cannon it if you go quick steel and indus games tend to be more about how you play with navy anyway so land units are not that decisive than in all the previous eras, which is another thing I like about industrial.
|
|
|
Post by eiffel on Mar 14, 2006 0:47:32 GMT -5
While I very much agree that preventing "laggers" from playing is unfair, is it any less unfair to make three teams wait seven hours for a first round game that took as long as two other rounds... just to get started? It is a regrettable situation... but I'm not sure the answer is to "just deal with it." I don't know what event you're talking about. LKT had a 14 hours renaissance event without accountering any lag... lag wasn't the issue. The problem is that there was only 1 game to be played at first round, all others started playing their 1/4 finale while we had to play our round. And anyone who plays this era often knows that a renaissance event can last long if it's not decided by kills. Your tourney system is not optimized for this, just don't try to get a weird reason to this. Just start using our brains and make a tourney system of our own. Ellestar proposed, i can help too and I guess others can do their part. A great community as ours should have its custom tools and not rely on already made tools that doesn't fulfill our dreams ;D Anf that's not what I'd call "deal with it"... "deal with it" would be to find crappy solution to selfmade problems
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Mar 14, 2006 1:54:19 GMT -5
I think the problem people had with the AIs in this Ironman(I wasn't next to them) was that in an Always War setting the AIs will ally with each other. So they were working together, trading tech, etc. What is needed is for AIs to stay at war in Always war I think. Always war means only that all AIs are at war with all humans but not with each other (i think they may or may not be in a war to each other). Probably "Permanent war or peace" should help (AIs should be in a war to each other by default and that way they'll not be able to make peace).
|
|
|
Post by venceslas on Mar 14, 2006 2:12:42 GMT -5
In the rennaissance event Illuminati has won in quart(maybe speedily). In the same time, LKT has played two hard round(no bye in the first round). I do hope you are not speaking about the rennaissance event. If a round has lasted two round, you would have waited at least three hours more It will be nice to think about why you are waiting and not just say "please auto-elim these two teams I have waited for a long time". Another nice thing would have been to ask to others teams if games was lagged, rather than asserted that "game was lagged". So it's quite normal that Illuminati has waited a very long time. In the side note, I would say that MDR has waiting much more than you because the LKT-Illuminati has lasted a long time also. Actually your words, with a such example means "auto-eliminate team which do not get bye". chris.
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Mar 14, 2006 8:05:16 GMT -5
Actually gents, I was referring more to the fact that, for whatever reason, your game had not even started yet in the first round when every other game in the second round had been completed.
And I wasn't speaking specifically of the Illuminati situation; I also had MDR's plight in mind. As far as that goes, this situation is by no means new to any CCC - I'm simply looking for a solution. IMO, if one pair of teams fails to even play a turn when every other pair has fully completed, a problem exists.
Does that refer to you in this case? If it does, so be it. If it does not, then don't feel defensive. I was told that LKT/TX had not even STARTED their first round match when MDR and Illuminati were both done with their second. In that very extreme case, yes, I think something should have been done. In less extreme cases, I do not.
This is not an issue of one team attacking another, and shouldn't be defended from a personal perspective. It's a CCC-wide and historical problem: events which stretch FAR, FAR beyond their expected timeframes. That's what we should be focusing on; not who's to blame for the most recent occurence.
|
|
|
Post by eiffel on Mar 14, 2006 10:20:06 GMT -5
There was no delay before starting our events. I wonder where come this idea from ? And we may have used 5 minutes between events to get some coffee. We'd rather get a bye too, next time, just switch with the ones not getting a bye and kill your opponent fast ;D Our first round lasted a bit more than 3 hours... our second event against TX lasted 3 hours and wasn't decided until the very last turns where we finally and surprisingly won after a very hard and exciting game. Hopefully our next match against Illuminati was quite fast so MDR wouldn't have to wait too long. Look at the standings Renaissance ... for 1st round... 7 byes and 1 game to be played, something not logical here. If those 7 lucky clans pass their second round fast, they'll have to wait long... that's the way it is with the current system.
|
|
|
Post by markweston on Mar 14, 2006 11:49:57 GMT -5
Eiffel is correct about the sequence of events, though he's being a bit optimistic if he's remembering that each game only took 3 hours.
LKT faced FUN (I think) in the only first round game. Everyone else got byes. So several of the 2nd round games started straight away, and finished quite quickly, while the LKT/FUN game went the full distance.
So by the time LKT got to start their 2nd round game againts TX, all the other 2nd round games were already over. And that one also went the full distance.
Meanwhile, we (Illuminati) started our 2nd round game just after 6pm GMT, when the event kicked off, and had finished by 7pm. We had to wait until 4am GMT for LKT to finish their 1st and 2nd rounds. Actually, I was impressed by how quickly they were ready to play again; and at the time I thought that 9 hours of non-stop playing must put them at a disadvantage. In retrospect 9 hours of playing looks like much bettter preparation than 9 hours of waiting around.
Hard to see how it was anyone's fault. It was just the worst-case scenario for what can happen with single-elim, random seeding, and more than eight teams going into the draw.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Mar 14, 2006 12:44:34 GMT -5
oh well if my solution d be used in next ccc u can stop this descusion
Ai was np - I think it s best way to handle a "out" player I attacked it at some time - it defended decent - not great but really decent - imo exactly as good as it should - and even when 3 ais were trading it was far away from outteching some1
about lag players ... easy solution d be rule to not allow people with pings above 500 to host (host should be some known decent host) to play. above 400 is really bad and above 500 should be the last barrier
|
|
|
Post by Atomation on Mar 14, 2006 13:27:28 GMT -5
I was told that LKT/TX had not even STARTED their first round match when MDR and Illuminati were both done with their second. In that very extreme case, yes, I think something should have been done. In less extreme cases, I do not. Yep, and because of this TX did not play its first chosen players (myself, willburn, ironclad), and it probably cost us not only that match but perhaps even the whole tournament...(this was the era that we had practiced the most and had a very very strong chance of winning, with our first string).
|
|
|
Post by eiffel on Mar 14, 2006 17:25:48 GMT -5
I was told that LKT/TX had not even STARTED their first round match when MDR and Illuminati were both done with their second. In that very extreme case, yes, I think something should have been done. In less extreme cases, I do not. Yep, and because of this TX did not play its first chosen players (myself, willburn, ironclad), and it probably cost us not only that match but perhaps even the whole tournament...(this was the era that we had practiced the most and had a very very strong chance of winning, with our first string). Not "Yep" since the initial statement from Fried is wrong. Btw, who are you ? phitrigger is Atomation ? And we had to play from 7pm (france) to 9 am (france), we should be the one allowed to complain about the 7 byes at first round, and we aren't. I'll stop talking about it, looks like it's useless ;D We're just not guilty for Illuminati's results or victory going to MUD instead of TX ;D
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on Mar 14, 2006 18:16:38 GMT -5
I put up a post on my suggestions for what I'd like to see out of the CCCs. Unfortunately, no replies on anyone's thoughts on the whole matter. My topic is "CCC Extended League/Playoff System". I am quite curious as to what people in other time zones (other than US East) think about my proposal.
|
|