|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 2, 2007 16:34:20 GMT -5
Some numbers to think about: For the second CCC in a row, 16 clans registered. For the 6 events held on Friday and Saturday that are run with Case's software: 13/16 clans particpated in the 1v1 11/16 clans particpated in the Future 12/16 clans particpated in the Industrial 12/16 clans particpated in the Ancient 12/16 clans particpated in the Renaissance 10/16 clans particpated in the Modern That's a total of 26 missing teams leading to an inordinate number of byes and waiting around. That's only 73% participation. The biggest culprits here were STYX and MCC, both of which missed 5 out of 6 of these events. On Sunday there are 4 more teamers restricted to the top 8 clans after the first two days, and 2 of these teamers were missing the ..A.. clan which resulted in more byes and waiting around. To me, the biggest question that must be answered is why are so many clans missing so many events? That would be my greatest concern, that while the "major league" CCC would have no problem with clans participating, until we get a solid 16 clans on the ladder, the "minor league" would have major problems with having full tournaments. And it's no fun if only 3 clans register for an event. The other problem is administrative, we sometimes have problems finding TD's as it is, let alone running two mirror CCC's at the same time. But otherwise I think the idea has merit even if we have to wait a bit for the right time to try something like this. In the mean time I think putting strict start time rules in place will help with the match lenght problems, we will continue to judge this issue in the next few CCC, especially if we continue to get 16+ clans that actually show up for a majority of events. CS
|
|
axius
Warrior
CCCAC Representative
Posts: 220
|
Post by axius on Apr 2, 2007 16:56:04 GMT -5
For the problem of more than 16 clans: add the extra clans to the 2nd division. That's where most byes happen because the little clans lack numbers and organization. These 2 problems will balance out. Even if there are 10 clans in the 2nd division, there is a very good chance that most events will feature no more than 8 of them.
|
|
|
Post by DustyDragoon on Apr 2, 2007 17:32:03 GMT -5
Interesting Idea Mookie but here are the problems I forsee. 1. The top clans (eg MUD, ..A.., GOD, RAY) tend to recruit mostly from the top 50 players only. Not saying this is wrong and completely understand the reasoning behind this. However it does limit the amount of people you are able to register for the CCC. 2. What tends to slow down the CCC the most is clans not prepared for events when the event is to start. Refer to 1. as to reason why. 3. The top clans only register their best players for the CCC even though their best is only able to make one or two games. And then have to scramble to make the rest, thereby holding up other clans while they try to manage the other games that are about to start. 4. The smaller clans find it hard to get more people in their clan because we all want to belong to a winning clan. 5. The CCC is not only a competition of the best against the best, it is also a training ground to see who is doing what right and and what can be done in the future to combat the newest winning stratedgey. By that alone, why would you want to "segregate" the ladder. The weaker clans would never learn how the better clans operate and why they win. It would become a permanent top 8 which would slowly die.
What I would propose is for the top clans to start opening their doors for newer members and train those members for the CCC. Increase the amount of players allowed to be posted (on roster) from 20 to at least 30 thereby making it a bit easier for the clans that have an abundance of players to sort out who is available for what.
|
|
|
Post by nemesis666 on Apr 2, 2007 17:49:41 GMT -5
* With a Minor League, the less competitive clans will not get stuck playing the top clans in the first round and will have more of an opportunity to advance deeper into tournaments and gain valuable experience. as a member of a new and "less competitive clan" ;D i totally agree
|
|
axius
Warrior
CCCAC Representative
Posts: 220
|
Post by axius on Apr 2, 2007 18:13:05 GMT -5
5. The CCC is not only a competition of the best against the best, it is also a training ground to see who is doing what right and and what can be done in the future to combat the newest winning stratedgey. By that alone, why would you want to "segregate" the ladder. The weaker clans would never learn how the better clans operate and why they win. It would become a permanent top 8 which would slowly die. But then again smaller clans have almost no chance to see the Sunday events - that's zero learning for those setups. Not everybody gets to play the winner anyway. You lose to clan A that has a good strategy which then loses to clan B that has an even better one - and you learn nothing about the winning strategy. It's not really different from playing in the 2nd division. If you are good enough - you win it and advance to meet stronger opponents next CCC. And if meeting the top teams for the purpose of learning is important (which is a good idea) - they actually have plenty of "Clan X VS ..." type games going on in which those strategies are practiced.
|
|
|
Post by longhorn on Apr 2, 2007 18:35:18 GMT -5
Well my inital reaction to this thread was Elitist Bullnutz, but this idea could possibly work.
There are some possible alternates as well that could be considered if the ladder wants to go down this route.
a) Division by Clan Size
b) Golf method: winner of CCC gets exemption (automatic bid) to CCC and 7 other clans must qualify through performance in COT's.
c) Keep existing format and possibly try things like shuffling order of events and start times around.
d) Keep existing format and order BUT conduct all preliminary events prior to the CCC weekend (Ironman, Cton etc.) and just have the actual final game for those evnts CCC weekend.
Also some of the smaller clans could consider partnerships for CCC if they think that they might not have enough players to fill events-- until they can grow their own clans in size.
|
|
|
Post by DrShot on Apr 2, 2007 18:47:07 GMT -5
"If your baby's crib is on fire, you don't speculate that its flame re-tard-ant (thx gs editing software)-- You take action! (former VP Al Gore)" had not noticed that b4... but most r-tard-ants are non earth friendly
|
|
|
Post by DrShot on Apr 2, 2007 18:47:39 GMT -5
I like drshots way of thinking more. Add more events to CCC at varying times. Make it so that say there are 20 events, a clan can take part in 16. Or if its a 2day then final day, then say 15 events on first 2 days, a clan can take part in 12? All final day clans can take part. Or I'd really like to see a return to the playoff style we had in civ3 though. Would be nice A series of 3 games say. 1 in anc, 1 in class/medi 1 in rene/indu/modern. Could be randomized a bit(the eras). Maybe the finals could be a best of 5 I like Red's Idea ;D
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 2, 2007 18:51:50 GMT -5
b) Golf method: winner of CCC gets exemption (automatic bid) to CCC and 7 other clans must qualify through performance in COT's. The one thing I don't like about this and other "prequalification" suggestions is that clans would miss out on the entire CCC. That sucks. I hate that some clans have to miss out on a whole day of the CCC as it is (but I understand and agree with the reasoning -- Sunday can't lag on like the other days with Monday coming quickly and people playing from all over the world). That's where the 2 divison / 2 league / whatever you want to call it (you know what, as much as I love baseball, I'll use something from Futurama, we'll have "Division A and Division 1") format really shines -- with two identical CCCs running, one with the contenders and one with the newer clans, everyone gets to play, the CCC should run more smoothly, and the newer clans will actually have a chance to play more games and gain more experience. They'll get to play on Sunday and enjoy a full weekend of Civ rather than only Friday and Saturday. I don't know if it's really a practical solution, but it's an idea .
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Apr 2, 2007 19:02:34 GMT -5
Blurnsball FTW!
|
|
|
Post by mansurji on Apr 3, 2007 8:27:39 GMT -5
The more i think to this idea, the more i like it Someone said that it would be a mess in the 2nd division once teams know they won't be able to reach the first places. I think it's missing faith in teams for playing first for fun. When you have players waiting to play an event for a long time, they will play it no matter the situation. At least for enjoying an important game, the kind of game you sweat while playing it, when you have even more fun, should it be by loosing a glorious way. I think this idea is more interesting for weaker teams, so they can fully play a CCC with semi, finals and victory, even with few training. The real excitement on CCC is when you move to rewarded games, and this, not all teams do on the actual scheme ( just looks at how many teams end with 0 or 2 points ). So you can play exciting games, and know you can play even more exciting games if you succeed to do a good result once, by moving in 1st division. Someone else said this way weaker teams would not learn great tactics. I think that before learning high levels tactics, you better know the basics. Once you master enough the basics to win over 8 or 10 teams with about same level, then you're able to learn more by playing with better teams. And teams playing for fun with no trainings will be able to have some fun without getting schooled at the first game they'll play if they hadn't enough luck to play vs a same level team. And for the first 8 teams, they'll be able to play directly in good conditions, no troubles on who get the easiest path or such, only the best will move to the end of each event by playing since the begin vs others good teams. The 2nd point of this, is there will be less byes, at least in the 1st division, where the number of teams is locked ( to 8 probably ). So when you're here to start an event, you'll play it. I see few matters, the biggest being the numbers of admins required to deal with 2 CCC's at same time. Well, perhaps with CCC was an exception with 16 teams, but if in the future this number continue to increase, it will be a real mess to deal with
|
|
grilla
Worker
CCCAC Representative
Have a banana!
Posts: 165
|
Post by grilla on Apr 3, 2007 11:25:43 GMT -5
I think divisional play is a very good idea. First, it will speed up play within each division as you have less teams in each event. second, the level of play will be equal thus sparking more intense gameplay. third of course more teams will make it to the semi-finals. For the division B players, they will be fighting to make it to Division A. The Division A teams will be fighting to stay in Division A and also for the crown of champs. We are growing and need to do something to make things run smoother. When the next Civ pack comes out, i'm sure we will see a great influx of new players. thats only 3 CCC's away.
|
|
|
Post by NumberOneMercury on Apr 3, 2007 11:39:02 GMT -5
I'd like to point out that our first CCC we took out RaY in one event. We wouldn't be able to do that in this system, which is a bit of a shame since for many events like the occ or the ironman you never know who will win.
Let's face it, while clans like RaY are good at many events like the teamers generally they are pretty nooby at the others. Wouldn't it be ironic if the "minor league" had better players in certain events than the "major league."
Well that said, I think it's really noble for Meekie to offer to have RaY play in the minors for the first CCC under his system to show he is not elitist and there is no stigma with the minors.
Good show Meekie!
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 3, 2007 11:45:22 GMT -5
Heh. We defeated the Illuminati in the finals of the Medieval event way back in our very first CCC. It was quite thrilling for us. It also happened to be the very final game of the CCC to be completed, and unfortunately for the Illuminati they needed to win that game to win the CCC. You're welcome MUD . [Me, Rokkit, and Bonsai vs. Mark_Weston, Gogf, and Zhenon if you're wondering] It would certainly be a shame to miss out on great moments like this, but at the same time, drawing a clan like MUD in the first round of nearly every event in our second CCC wasn't very much fun for us. All we learned then was that we weren't nearly as good as we thought we were and still had a lot of improving to do (probably still do!).
|
|
|
Post by Speaker on Apr 3, 2007 12:13:42 GMT -5
Let's face it, while clans like RaY are good at many events like the teamers generally they are pretty nooby at the others. Wouldn't it be ironic if the "minor league" had better players in certain events than the "major league." We have won every event but the Ironman (placed 2nd this CCC) and the OCC. Nooby? I don't think so. Or were you just posting rhetoric without any factual basis?
|
|
|
Post by NumberOneMercury on Apr 3, 2007 12:30:11 GMT -5
Ten of the thirteen events are teamers.
|
|
|
Post by cryptococcus on Apr 3, 2007 12:35:07 GMT -5
Let's face it, while clans like RaY are good at many events like the teamers generally they are pretty nooby at the others. Wouldn't it be ironic if the "minor league" had better players in certain events than the "major league." We have won every event but the Ironman (placed 2nd this CCC) and the OCC. Nooby? I don't think so. Or were you just posting rhetoric without any factual basis? Another great post speaker, we are so lucky to have you as admin. I really think when people say they hate RaY they really mean speaker. Just one noobs opinion.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 3, 2007 13:26:53 GMT -5
Ten of the thirteen events are teamers. If you're saying we've done badly at the none-teamer events, how do you figure? Wiz has won the Cton 3 times, he finished 2nd in the Ironman once, Mark finished second in the Ironman once, Rokkit won the 1v1 once and has scored points nearly every time he's played it, and well, in the OCC Semi-Cton, I admit we've not done too well, but Islandia is one of the best OCC players around but hasn't had much luck in the CCC yet. (So I guess only 9 of the 13 events are teamers, not 10!) Perhaps that's not as stellar as the track records of some other clans, but certainly respectable and far from nooby.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Apr 3, 2007 13:28:10 GMT -5
We have won every event but the Ironman (placed 2nd this CCC) and the OCC. Nooby? I don't think so. Or were you just posting rhetoric without any factual basis? Another great post speaker, we are so lucky to have you as admin. I really think when people say they hate RaY they really mean speaker. Just one noobs opinion. Come on Crypto, re-read NOM's post. He called RaY nooby at certain events, Speaker responded. No matter how much you dislike Speaker, he's just pointing out that NOM made an incorrect generalization attacking RaY.
|
|
|
Post by NumberOneMercury on Apr 3, 2007 13:33:07 GMT -5
while clans like RaY are good at many events ... they are pretty nooby at the others. We seem to have a bit of a reading comprehension problem here. I said RaY is good at many events, and the events they are not good at they are nooby at. Um? Duh? This my friend is a tautology. Any inferences you drew from it regarding which events (good at many events like the teamers) are your own. LOL if you think this is an incorrect generalization regarding RaY please read your own posts about slavers etc. Now FFS get over it, and please stop picking on any post that you suspect might imply RaY is not as good as you seem to think it is. GET OVER IT. AND NO I DON"T THINK YOUR CLAN IS THAT GREAT--LIVE WITH IT. I AM SO GD SICK OF ARROGANT RAY PLAYERS.
|
|