|
Post by Canucksoldier on Jun 4, 2007 14:26:36 GMT -5
While this is an interesting idea, I don't think totally changing the way we currently get feedback for every CCC needs this radical of a change. But it is perhaps worth a look at letting the champs from the last CCC engineer an event for the next CCC. I'll look at that will the admin team. I shall be shortly starting the planning process for the next CCC.
CS
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on Jun 4, 2007 15:05:06 GMT -5
While this is an interesting idea, I don't think totally changing the way we currently get feedback for every CCC needs this radical of a change. But it is perhaps worth a look at letting the champs from the last CCC engineer an event for the next CCC. I'll look at that will the admin team. I shall be shortly starting the planning process for the next CCC. CS That's the problem. The CCC is what, 2-3 weeks away? We've been doing this for a year and a half now and the CCC as of late has been half assed. TDs not showing up, or in the case of 2 CCCs ago, it almost didn't start at all. There's no excuse as to why the events are only put up a week or two before the main event. It gives new/inexperienced clans very little time to prepare. Though you can generally guess what the settings are going to be, the more time you have to prepare, the better the overall quality of players/clans you'll have for the CCC. Plus, some of the zany as CCC settings just need to go. It puts into question your knowledge of the game and underlying mechanics. We're not only giving you an out on the responsibilities of the CCC, but lightening your load. This is also supposed to be a community comprised of Civ 4 ladder players, not a ladder comprised of Civ 4 admins who dictate what and when we will play. It's quite simple really, the admins complain about the lack of TDs, the amount of grunt work they have to do, and the little bit of appreciation they are shown. Well, it's all understandable. So, by allowing the top clans to pick events, you could also force them to give up a TD if they haven't done so. If their TD doesn't show up, you can penalize them 1 event pick for the next CCC which would go to say, the #5 team. That solves your TD problem. This also, at the same time, takes care of the grunt work of play testing event settings. If you're supposedly so damn busy, you just don't have the time to test out the settings properly. There is no possible way the admins have the time to be playing all the game types that are out there and their variations. Why not leave it to the top clans, who obviously have a clue of what's going on. They got to the top somehow, right? The players, we're only here because we love playing the game. Give us one less thing to complain about. If the onus is on us, it's only our fault if the CCC is screwed up, but somehow, I doubt that's going to happen. I just wonder when you're going to get tired of the complaining. Granted, it's only for a short time every 6 weeks, but it's got to be grinding away at you. If not, then I would re-assess your priorities.
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Jun 4, 2007 16:00:01 GMT -5
hmm that's a good idea.... by putting events up earlier (like say 3 weeks) the CCC could effectively control the types of ladder games that are played. I'd love to see some different types of games, however I am disappointed that we can't do large teamers in the CCC because of so many bad connections
|
|
|
Post by Death to ALL on Jun 4, 2007 16:15:29 GMT -5
Yea, a 8v8 would be really cool. What I wouldn't give for a server/client setup.
|
|
|
Post by metallian on Jun 4, 2007 16:33:52 GMT -5
Some restrictions that could be added are the following:
1. Team matches would all be 2 city elim
2. Era time limits and game speed A. Anc 100-120 turns (Blazing) B. Classical 90-110 turns (Fast) C. Medi 90-110 (Fast) D. Ren 80-100 (Fast) E. Industrial 65-80 (Medium) F. Modern 60-70 (Medium) G. Future: 60-70 (No space Race) (Medium)
3. Map sizes A. 5v5 Std, 5v5 large for Team battleground. B. 4v4 Std C. 3v3 Small, 3v3 Std for Team battleground. D. 2v2 Tiny, 2v2 small for Team battleground.
4. No more than 2 Civ bans for an era.
5. No crazy maps
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Jun 4, 2007 21:52:13 GMT -5
Dey and I were talking about this: How about a draft for the 7 teams events for the top 4 clans.There are 7 different eras therefore there will be 7 different events. Also, the Ironman, OCC cton, Cton, 1v1, and Random/Random events being staples in the CCC lineup. I recommend the following: Each team would get to pick the event they want, the map they want, and the time they want it. I also I assume that the team events would take place in this order 2 on Friday, 3 on Saturday, and 2 on Sunday. 1. MDR would get 3 picks 2. RaY would get 2 picks 3. MUD would get 1 pick 4. RUS would get 1 pick THe draft would follow 1st round: MDR,RaY,MUD,RUS 2nd round: MDR,RaY 3rd round: MDR I kind of like this idea... I think it would certainly weed out the noob clans (sorry to sound elitist here) by forcing them to play Fantasy Toroidal Modern game lol... I can imagine Dey, Mook, and Metallian bent over a map in their RaY War Room plotting ways to surprise their opponents by coming up with some crazy ass events. Good stuff, I'd be willing to give this a try once and see how we all like it.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Jun 4, 2007 23:25:51 GMT -5
While this is an interesting idea, I don't think totally changing the way we currently get feedback for every CCC needs this radical of a change. But it is perhaps worth a look at letting the champs from the last CCC engineer an event for the next CCC. I'll look at that will the admin team. I shall be shortly starting the planning process for the next CCC. CS That's the problem. The CCC is what, 2-3 weeks away? We've been doing this for a year and a half now and the CCC as of late has been half assed. TDs not showing up, or in the case of 2 CCCs ago, it almost didn't start at all. There's no excuse as to why the events are only put up a week or two before the main event. It gives new/inexperienced clans very little time to prepare. Though you can generally guess what the settings are going to be, the more time you have to prepare, the better the overall quality of players/clans you'll have for the CCC. Plus, some of the zany as CCC settings just need to go. It puts into question your knowledge of the game and underlying mechanics. We're not only giving you an out on the responsibilities of the CCC, but lightening your load. This is also supposed to be a community comprised of Civ 4 ladder players, not a ladder comprised of Civ 4 admins who dictate what and when we will play. It's quite simple really, the admins complain about the lack of TDs, the amount of grunt work they have to do, and the little bit of appreciation they are shown. Well, it's all understandable. So, by allowing the top clans to pick events, you could also force them to give up a TD if they haven't done so. If their TD doesn't show up, you can penalize them 1 event pick for the next CCC which would go to say, the #5 team. That solves your TD problem. This also, at the same time, takes care of the grunt work of play testing event settings. If you're supposedly so damn busy, you just don't have the time to test out the settings properly. There is no possible way the admins have the time to be playing all the game types that are out there and their variations. Why not leave it to the top clans, who obviously have a clue of what's going on. They got to the top somehow, right? The players, we're only here because we love playing the game. Give us one less thing to complain about. If the onus is on us, it's only our fault if the CCC is screwed up, but somehow, I doubt that's going to happen. I just wonder when you're going to get tired of the complaining. Granted, it's only for a short time every 6 weeks, but it's got to be grinding away at you. If not, then I would re-assess your priorities. Dey I'm not looking for "an out" and i believe that the last CCC was very well organized and ran, and other than a couple TD issues it was virtually problem free. I can't take full responsibility for CCC's before that but I certainly do now, and I'm not planning on handing that responsibility over to anyone else. And really other than looking at what mods to run were, the CCC isn't going to radically change this time as we had probably the best schedule and events we could have done last time. New and old clans should be able to use the last CCC's schedule to plan and only have to worry about minor changes within the final 3 weeks. And I don't call it complaining...it's feedback I'm afraid that although I appreciate your concerns the end responsibility to run the key MP event rest with me. That is not to say that I don't want this to be everyone's event or that I won't take into account everyones opinions as much as possible. That is why I start planning early and why we have these suggestions threads. CS
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on Jun 5, 2007 1:54:52 GMT -5
Dey I'm not looking for "an out" and i believe that the last CCC was very well organized and ran, and other than a couple TD issues it was virtually problem free. I can't take full responsibility for CCC's before that but I certainly do now, and I'm not planning on handing that responsibility over to anyone else. You are not the community. We, the players, are the ladder community. I tried to think of a polite way to put this, but after looking at that statement, I'm going to have to just be blunt about it. I'm not exactly sure what you'd be relinquishing in terms of responsibility. You would still have to delegate the TDs to running the events. The framework for the CCC is there, there's not much to change. You have your: 1. Cton 2. 1v1 3. Random/Random 4. OCC 5. Ironman 6. OCC Teamer We would leave those settings up to the admins/TDs. What we want is for the Teamer settings to be decided by the top clans who participated in the prior CCC. 7 Teamers for the 7 eras. It's quite simple, you could lock in several of the settings to the point where the clans could only decide whether the event would be a 3v3 or a 4v4 teamer and the choice of map for the event. This is basically what the CCC boils down to in terms of structure. For one, it adds a new dimension to the CCC. No longer would it profitable to just throw a random team up or create a clan right before the CCC. Coming up with the settings two weeks before the CCC just doesn't cut it. A clan had best have some damn good players on their roster to be successful to win a team event on that short a notice. I believe the sound alternative would be to follow the course of action that we are suggesting to allow the newer/small clans more time to be successful. We want a higher quality of competition, more competitors does not necessarily equal better competition. And really other than looking at what mods to run were, the CCC isn't going to radically change this time as we had probably the best schedule and events we could have done last time. New and old clans should be able to use the last CCC's schedule to plan and only have to worry about minor changes within the final 3 weeks. I just agreed with you that the format of the CCC is fairly set. Adding mods, I could be wrong, but they aren't widely played on the ladder. You could easily replace the OCC teamer with a MOD that the admins would to see played. Other than that, I could be only speaking for myself, but being forcefed something that is rarely played is nothing more than a novelty factor. Time and roster slots are limited over the course of 3 days. If anything, adding mods is more disruptive to the flow of the CCC from one CCC to the next. We don't need disruptions, we need to keep a format that enables the newer/smaller clans to build up and actually have a chance at becoming contenders. And I don't call it complaining...it's feedback I'm afraid that although I appreciate your concerns the end responsibility to run the key MP event rest with me. That is not to say that I don't want this to be everyone's event or that I won't take into account everyones opinions as much as possible. That is why I start planning early and why we have these suggestions threads. CS I'll say this again. You are not the ladder. That kind of thinking has no place in a community that is supposed to be for the players. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with that mindset. I'm not sure if you're recieving accolades for being the head of the Civ4Player ladder, but a one man show doesn't help out the rest of us. I'm not saying the ladder has to be a democracy, but you have a vast resource that is waiting to be tapped.
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on Jun 5, 2007 2:11:10 GMT -5
Perhaps, I was a bit too crass with that last post, but it's a bit frustrating to be shot down so quick without even letting the proposal be thrown out to the community.
Here are the main problems I have with it being shot down so quick. It's definitely an improvement in the way the CCC is currently being run in terms of knowing the CCC event schedule.
It resolves some of the scheduling conflicts in that those that did the best are given a "reward" in that they get to pick a time that is most beneficial for them in the next CCC. Also, if we set a deadline as to the setting of the events, it would give a lot more time for clans to prepare for the CCC.
Our proposal does not take away from the CCC. The 7 era teamers are staples, they will not be going away. It just would not be a CCC without having all the eras represented in a teamer. In fact, it adds to the flavour of the CCC without that much more work for the admins or TDs.
Lastly, and more importantly, it will represent what the players want to play. Maybe a clan wants to play an era teamer as a 3v3 instead of a 4v4 or vice versa. 2v2 and 5v5 generally does not make for an exciting teamer and we can easily keep the choices to be 3v3/4v4. Why the admins get to pick the maps is beyond me. This system we're proposing is an equitable solution to the draw a map from the hat system that seems to be in place. It would cut down on the proposals as to what maps would be played as we'd have a system to pick maps and number of players per team.
As to the CCC advisory council. Either it's been really successful in that's not needed or it's a solution that isn't being utilized and therefore needs some sort of replacement, which we have just provided you with.
So other than the it's your responsibility argument, give us a better reason as to why we can't implement this proposal into the CCC.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Jun 5, 2007 2:18:39 GMT -5
I'm not saying that "I am the ladder" Dey, what I am saying that ultimately it is my job to ensure that Civ4players succeeds as representing the MP community. And since the CCC is a major part of that strategy, it to is ultimately my responsibility. That is what I am saying that the buck stops here, someone has to have responsibility in the end and that person is me.
Notwithstanding this I firmly believe that the success or failure depends on every member of the ladder, this is a community, we need everyone to want this ladder and this community to succeed, and the CCC needs that commitment from everyone as well. And I certainly have tried to ensure that as much as possible everyone has there say in everything that goes on here. This is a team effort, but every team still has a leader that is held to account for the team in the end.
I certainly do want to use every resource available within this community to make it a success, that is what the Admins/HTD and TD are about. As well I just re-created the CCCAC to use that pool of knowledge and experience to make our community better.
I am certainly not saying that I am better or know more about this game or community than anyone else all I am saying is that it's failure or success does finally rest on my shoulders, and for that I reserve the right to make the key decisions when they are required, with the best help and advice I can find.
CS
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Jun 5, 2007 2:35:52 GMT -5
As to your second post: I think I will let the CCCAC evolve into what it needs to be, before I go and declare it a failure or not. It was a success for the one CCC it was used for, and I believe that it can now have long term positive effect.
The concept of rewarding the CCC champs with the ability to design an event is something we can look at for sure, probably something the CCCAC can study. But I am a little perplexed by some of your comments. You say we don't listen to you in respect to maps etc, but today Mookie posts that we shouldn't fix what isn't broken. Apparently we did listen last CCC and can up with events that every liked for the most part.
I'm not sure why you think we "draw maps from a hat", I go threw a two step process; I ask the admin team/HTD's for input 3-4 weeks before a CCC, then I ask the general ladder 2-3 weeks before the CC for input. All of which is based on the pro's and con's of the last CCC(s), now last CCC was likely a bit rougher only because it was my first one as HA, and trying a new process. Now we will have a 3 stage process with the CCCAC looking at longer term issues, of how to improve the CCC.
So I really do not think that the current system is broken beyond repair and needs to be totally replaced. But I will let your ideas stand and be discussed and I will be watching the debate. But I really can't see the Admin team completely removing there oversight of such a key part of the fabric of this community.
CS
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on Jun 5, 2007 2:36:03 GMT -5
I'm not saying that "I am the ladder" Dey, what I am saying that ultimately it is my job to ensure that Civ4players succeeds as representing the MP community. And since the CCC is a major part of that strategy, it to is ultimately my responsibility. That is what I am saying that the buck stops here, someone has to have responsibility in the end and that person is me. Notwithstanding this I firmly believe that the success or failure depends on every member of the ladder, this is a community, we need everyone to want this ladder and this community to succeed, and the CCC needs that commitment from everyone as well. And I certainly have tried to ensure that as much as possible everyone has there say in everything that goes on here. This is a team effort, but every team still has a leader that is held to account for the team in the end. I certainly do want to use every resource available within this community to make it a success, that is what the Admins/HTD and TD are about. As well I just re-created the CCCAC to use that pool of knowledge and experience to make our community better. I am certainly not saying that I am better or know more about this game or community than anyone else all I am saying is that it's failure or success does finally rest on my shoulders, and for that I reserve the right to make the key decisions when they are required, with the best help and advice I can find. CS This does not really address the question as to why this proposal is being shot down so quickly. We all know that you are the head of the C4P admin staff. Fine, I'm sure not many people would really want to tackle such a labour of love. What I am asking is why the buck is being stopped on the proposal that Metallian put forth? You are asserting your authority, but over what? We've laid down our argument that our proposal adds to the CCC while keeping the amount of extra work by the admins and TDs to a minimum. We even included provisions that would help ensure future CCCs go smoother in terms of TDs. Instead of allowing this to be discussed, you tried to shut down the argument. I don't understand how this vision of streamlining the CCC and adding another layer of strategy for clans is an affront to your authority. This is what this is starting to turn into from my viewpoint. Instead of arguing against our proposal and/or allowing it to be aired out, you quickly dismissed it. What's the deal here? I could be wrong and maybe the ladder community doesn't want this modification to the CCC, maybe it is unfair in that home advantage is just too much of an advantage for the teams that get to decide events. But you're shutting the argument down through the power of your authority alone. It seems a bit odd to me or maybe I just have a different expectation as to what we can expect from the ladder. I believe this approach we are handing you is a pro-active approach that still respects the authority of the admins. I could be wrong, maybe after reading our proposal you quickly came up with a few scenarios where this could all go wrong. If so, I'm curious to hear them. If not, I'll assume there are no real good reasons as to why we're being shot down so quick. At which case, my opinion on what I believe you think your place in the current Civ 4 ladder community will stand.
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on Jun 5, 2007 2:46:20 GMT -5
While this is an interesting idea, I don't think totally changing the way we currently get feedback for every CCC needs this radical of a change. But it is perhaps worth a look at letting the champs from the last CCC engineer an event for the next CCC. I'll look at that will the admin team. I shall be shortly starting the planning process for the next CCC. CS Well, as I see it, the only real feedback you get from the post-CCC threads is more about balance. Like how in the later eras of the game, certain maps don't ensure that you'll have a key military resource or something similar. In essence, you're mainly deciding the map types, the number of players per team, and other various things. I believe the place of the admins is to ensure fairness in the competition, where we remove the unbalanced aspects of eras that just make the gameplay unfair, such as Russia/England in the Renaissance era. All we're asking is to streamline the decision process on how many players per team, type of map, and event time. You can still go about taking input on how many turns per era, number of city elim, the trivial details that are slightly modified from CCC to CCC. Those aspects are fairly easy to practice around as long as you have number of players and a map type. The CCC is in just a little over two weeks. Once again, that's just piss poor planning in regards to getting your teams together for the newer/smaller clans. There are 6 weeks between CCCs, it's been a year and a half since the start of CCC play for Civ 4. You'd think this process would have been streamlined by now. Instead, I see the same requests/arguments from CCC to CCC. The times are bad for this clan or that. This era should be played on this map and with this many people. I don't see why you don't see the benefit of the proposal we've made. The onus would no longer be on you for such trivial settings that don't really need your attention. I'm sure you, as an admin, have better things to do with your time to improve the ladder community than to spend an entire 4 weeks on what the next CCC should look like when we already have a basic format that doesn't change very much. If I'm wrong in that the format does change from CCC to CCC, why are these changes being made? In which case, I think you're using your authority a bit too liberally.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Jun 5, 2007 3:01:50 GMT -5
Well I've re-read your original post, and I think we both are just looking at this issue starting from different view points. You didn't take well "to being shut down" well in the same light your original comments that CCC's have been run "half assed" as of late didn't hit it off with me either. IMHO we have improved the process of late, although there were growing pains for sure as with anything.
As to the proposal to force clans to contribute TD's, we actually have looked at that idea several times in the past and we never tried it simply because TD's really need to be volunteers to be useful and not every clan has people that would really be good at being a TD. If clans want to encourage there members to become TD's that would be great, but I really don't think forcing players to be TD's would product the best quality TD's.
Like i said before I'll let this discussion continue, and it could be a subject that the CCCAC can look at as well. But for now I do think that what we have is not broken, and we as the Admin/TD staff are trying to be very responsive to feedback from the ladder.
CS
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on Jun 5, 2007 3:10:56 GMT -5
As to your second post: I think I will let the CCCAC evolve into what it needs to be, before I go and declare it a failure or not. It was a success for the one CCC it was used for, and I believe that it can now have long term positive effect. Fair enough, I'm not on the CCCAC to know what's been going on with it. I just know it's inactive and that we've had a fairly stable CCC event line up, which points to it either being a success due to the stability of what we can expect from the CCC or it's a failure due to the inactivity of the CCCAC. The concept of rewarding the CCC champs with the ability to design an event is something we can look at for sure, probably something the CCCAC can study. But I am a little perplexed by some of your comments. You say we don't listen to you in respect to maps etc, but today Mookie posts that we shouldn't fix what isn't broken. Apparently we did listen last CCC and can up with events that every liked for the most part. While the era types are more or less stable for the CCC, in that we can expect a teamer of some sort for every era, the maps for each of these eras and number of players per team has not been so stable. The times of each event has not always remained stable, though for the most part you can expect certain events on certain days, mainly the Sunday events. I don't see how you think the top clans picking these basic settings for the CCC is a complete re-working of the entire tournament. It's a way to streamline the decision making process of settings that seem to change from CCC to CCC based on merit. This is all within the framework of the CCC that we've played since the inception of the CCC for Civ IV. We're not asking to get rid of the staples, we're not asking for more events, the only thing that would be affected is the decision making ability of the admins for 7 events. I don't see the problem in it, if the format is going to be the same and under the framework that we all know. I'm not sure why you think we "draw maps from a hat", I go threw a two step process; I ask the admin team/HTD's for input 3-4 weeks before a CCC, then I ask the general ladder 2-3 weeks before the CC for input. All of which is based on the pro's and con's of the last CCC(s), now last CCC was likely a bit rougher only because it was my first one as HA, and trying a new process. Now we will have a 3 stage process with the CCCAC looking at longer term issues, of how to improve the CCC. So I really do not think that the current system is broken beyond repair and needs to be totally replaced. But I will let your ideas stand and be discussed and I will be watching the debate. But I really can't see the Admin team completely removing there oversight of such a key part of the fabric of this community. CS We never said the current system is broken. Our recommendations, we see them as an improvment. We saw some failings that needed to be addressed, mainly in the area of TDs and it was something that we think we've fairly addressed. Maybe you forget that I was once a TD and well, I know about the frantic scramble for admins for each CCC. It was just really apparent during the last two CCCs. We're asking for a little, while giving back a little in return. And you would not be removing complete oversight over the CCC. Once again, we're talking about either settings that are changed from CCC to CCC on a regular basis and on the ability to pick times for certain events. Generally a time that is good for one French clan is usually good for the other French/European clans. While the same can be said for the Americans/Canadians the 4 hour spread across the N.American continent can really hurt. Also, with the rise of the Russians as contenders, I'm sure they have concerns that need to be addressed. I don't think the current system, though it works, could be better tweaked to provide some concessions for a majority of the clans involved in a manner that is merit based. You just can't be fair to everybody, but you can create a system where you've earned something, if only an event for the next CCC, which could help better your chances at winning the entire damn thing.
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on Jun 5, 2007 3:29:25 GMT -5
Well I've re-read your original post, and I think we both are just looking at this issue starting from different view points. You didn't take well "to being shut down" well in the same light your original comments that CCC's have been run "half assed" as of late didn't hit it off with me either. IMHO we have improved the process of late, although there were growing pains for sure as with anything. Well, I suppose you're right on that. Point taken. As to the proposal to force clans to contribute TD's, we actually have looked at that idea several times in the past and we never tried it simply because TD's really need to be volunteers to be useful and not every clan has people that would really be good at being a TD. If clans want to encourage there members to become TD's that would be great, but I really don't think forcing players to be TD's would product the best quality TD's. Well, first off, the top clans tend to participate in the CCC on a regular basis. There was always a call for TDs when I was a TD. Two CCCs ago, the tournament started an hour late, when there was a TD around who could have recreated the event and kicked the whole thing off but did not and then the last CCC where you just had TDs absent on Saturday. If there are teams around waiting to play, I'm sure one of them would be a top 4 finishing team, which under our proposal would mean that they would have a TD in the clan, at least for that CCC. If you have a TD sitting on their ass, not using their position to ensure that the CCC is running smoothly, yes, I'm going to assume the CCC is being run half-assed. Either the TDs did not read the guidelines or do not have the maturity to make a call that they are responsible for. This happens in nearly every CCC, but one of the issues to be addressed is what to do in the situation where one team is having problems connecting to a game and they have no subs available to replace the player with the problem connection? I believe I made such a call, where I DQ'd a team, this was during the era of 12 hour events for 3 rounds. I got dinged so bad on this, but I made a hard decision. Also, the best organized teams tend to be the top finishing clans. Often times, you have to tell your teammates that they're simply not good enough for an event, it's a fairly hard thing to do without trampling all over the comraderie that has probably been built up to that point. It's people like this that you want as TDs. There seems to be alot of controversy over one thing or another for each CCC. As long as you have responsible people and Levi is doing his thing as head TD, I don't see what the problem is. Like i said before I'll let this discussion continue, and it could be a subject that the CCCAC can look at as well. But for now I do think that what we have is not broken, and we as the Admin/TD staff are trying to be very responsive to feedback from the ladder. CS Again, we never said the whole system was broken. We see our proposal as an improvement. Also, we're glad that this will be open for discussion. As I told you two CCC's ago, if we ever came up with a suggestion, we wouldn't expect it to be implemented until after the upcoming CCC was finished. I had been advocating a league style system, however, after taking things into consideration, it just seemed to be more trouble on everyone's part than it was worth. However, this proposal, again, works under the framework that we are all accustomed to and provides possible improvements in several different areas. Then again, the ladder community may not see our proposals as improvements or changes that they'd like to see made at which case we'll stop pressing the issue.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Jun 5, 2007 7:58:10 GMT -5
Well we can discuss the issue of mandatory TD's within the CCCAC, and issues such as penalizing clans for not providing a TD....but I personally of the opinion that there are better ways of handling the TD activity level and there professionalism.
I already did act to make both myself and DTA HTD's as well as Levi and Nolan, which makes four people that can take over tournaments in an emergency. As well other TD's can start new tournaments if another TD is not around for some reason to start the original one. And as you probably noticed we have recruited a few more new TD's as it is. A trend that I hope continues.
And as too letting the top clans design the team events, I know that that sounds interesting in theory, however it does add another layer of planning to get the CCC off the ground. And believe me there is always stumbling blocks as it is. I think if we were to move in this direction we should do so in incremental steps like everything else that we try.
I will encourage the CCCAC to discuss the idea of just letting the CCC champs design a CCC event and use that as a trial run. If that works we can always expand on the idea.
CS
|
|
|
Post by knupp on Jun 5, 2007 17:06:01 GMT -5
After reading the idea yesterday and thinking a lot about it I definitely think it is interesting and has the potential to be a good system. I only see one problem with it. We make this system so the major clans of Civ4 can practice the events and the new clans have a chance to get their sh1t together and improve, correct? Well what happens when some clans who score well decide to create a crazy event? Let's say Ancient, Large, Hub, 5v5. If some clans were to do this, then the whole idea would backfire. Nobody plays that type of event and nobody probably wants to practice for it. Regarding TD's : Requiring clans to put forth a TD would definitely help how smoothly the CCC and NC are run. However, some clans may not be able to put a TD forward. And what happens when somebody from Clan A notices that the TD from his clan hosted 5 tourneys, and the TD from Clan B only hosted 1 tourney? Unfortunately there are people in this community like that and it could cause an issue that nobody wants. The easiest solution in my eyes is for more people to be TD's. I'd like to see some of the players out their who are in the lobby all CCC talking but not playing, volunteer their time to help everybody out. EoN do you volunteer?
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Jun 5, 2007 17:45:12 GMT -5
Yes in theory there is a potential for a clan to make a off-centre event, but that is why the Admin team still exercises some oversight on the whole process, and I'm sure that the CCCAC and the players in general would be vocal in there opposition to any really wacked out idea Yes there could be all sorts of pitfalls in forcing clans to contribute TD's, I'd much rather come up with a way to positively reward active TD's for there efforts, there by encouraging more players to be TD's. And I'm open to ideas of how to positively re-enforce the honour of being a TD. CS
|
|