Clan League 3 - Standings & Results (4 Feb)

by **jpcloet** on Sat Mar 05, 2011 2:50 pm

Rodion wrote:Just going to get the ball rolling on the Hive/Das Schloss issue. Maybe some no spoils/flat rate rule such as "if one clan gets 20% or more armies per round than the other clan for 5 consecutive rounds, the former wins".

I'd go even further, the onus really should be on the clan that chose the map, so if the game goes past X days longer than the last game in a series (and the series requires and immediate winner), the home team loses it because they chose it. That way clans can still choose the map, but takes an additional risk in doing so.

by **Rodion** on Sat Mar 05, 2011 2:52 pm

Dako wrote:That rule would make TOFU win over TSM in FNNA game as they were getting +3 for 5 rounds there and still lost it.

Round 6 - TOFU got 10 armies, TSM got 12

by **Rodion** on Sat Mar 05, 2011 2:58 pm

jpcloet wrote:
Rodion wrote:Just going to get the ball rolling on the Hive/Das Schloss issue. Maybe some no spoils/flat rate rule such as "if one clan gets 20% or more armies per round than the other clan for 5 consecutive rounds, the former wins".

I'd go even further, the onus really should be on the clan that chose the map, so if the game goes past X days longer than the last game in a series (and the series requires and immediate winner), the home team loses it because they chose it. That way clans can still choose the map, but takes an additional risk in doing so.

That would only incentivate Hive/Schloss home teams to purposefully stall all other games (take 23 hours before playing) and play Hive/Schloss as fast as possible. Away teams would pretty much do the opposite, purposefully waiting 23 hours before playing Hive/Schloss and playing all other games as fast as they can.

What's wrong with setting a criterium to define which team is doing better and give the win to that team? I'd be more concerned in tweaking the formula I suggested (or coming up with another one) to find the right moment in which a defeat is imminent than in taking conducts that would stimulate gamesmanship.

by **Chariot of Fire** on Sat Mar 05, 2011 9:40 pm

Roddy makes a good point. Of course one team would simply stall taking turns on the map (I speak from experience having just been on the receiving end of such tactics).

by **stahrgazer** on Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:58 pm

Rodion wrote:
jpcloet wrote:While it was a joke, games on Hive and Das Shloss have been holding up challenge medals and the league. This is an emerging issue for me, but is minor. Playing these in the first round of a war is preferred, and for Season 4, they likely need a solution whether that be a ban or only on esc etc.

As for the All-Stars, I'm going to start the analysis. I spent most of my time recently on automating the clan results and have most of a leap ladder template/system built.

Just going to get the ball rolling on the Hive/Das Schloss issue. Maybe some no spoils/flat rate rule such as "if one clan gets 20% or more armies per round than the other clan for 5 consecutive rounds, the former wins".

If I was going to find a reason to ban maps, I would ban those that gave 12 territories per player (obviously, this format would ban maps for only one specific kind of game - a 12-territory each doubles map would be banned, but that same map would be ok for triples and quads).

And before Hive and Das Schloss, Waterloo was the big map on campus, but there are regular maps that turn into "build games" which can prolongue results. What's wrong with just letting the game play out and if that means another few weeks until results are in, so be it.

Or, you have to make a fair ruling that ANY game that goes beyond x number of rounds, will be "called" - in some predefined manner.

Seriously, Hive games don't normally last all that many more rounds than other quads can; maybe 20%, and a quads hive can be over almost as quickly as a quads classic, if players take their turns promptly rather than drag or miss turns. So if flat or none have to be banned on this map for certain parts of a league, they should be banned on any map for the same parts of the league.

by **Namor** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:47 am

I would hate to see ANY map banned. Hive isn't a big favourite of AoC but we intend to work on it.

If large maps continue to cause hold ups then we could try this;

The game is given a target number of rounds (eg. 15 for Hive). At the end of R15 the number of territories and the 'Last Bonus' for each team are totalled and the victory goes to the strongest team at that point. If they are tied, then another round is played out, until there IS a stronger team.

This could even result in an added strategy for such maps, as each team would have to start looking to these totals from R10 onwards and working toward making up any difference (maybe abandoning their original plan).

by **Dako** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:49 am

What will be done if the loosing team after R15 got a set of amazing dice (20-0 or so) and wins the Hive game?

by **Namor** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:57 am

Dako wrote:What will be done if the loosing team after R15 got a set of amazing dice (20-0 or so) and wins the Hive game?

That would be a tough break, but they would have known what the goal was, at the start of the game.

by **Georgerx7di** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:35 am

Couldn't there be a rule that if you want to play one one of those two maps, you have to put in that game a week ahead of time. Then make it early, fill it a week early, so that it will be closer to finishing with the rest of the games.

by **Chariot of Fire** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:11 am

If we think about it in all honesty guys, has there ever been a scenario where a tourney can't continue because of Hive? I doubt it has ever come down to being the very last 'deciding' game (and if it does, then maybe the excitement is worth the wait).

I say this not only because I agree with Namor (that no map should be banned) but also because some programs or scripts check for game results which would end up being erroneous if, say, a Round 15 decision in favour of one team ended up being won by the other.

by **jj3044** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:37 am

Chariot of Fire wrote:If we think about it in all honesty guys, has there ever been a scenario where a tourney can't continue because of Hive? I doubt it has ever come down to being the very last 'deciding' game (and if it does, then maybe the excitement is worth the wait).

I say this not only because I agree with Namor (that no map should be banned) but also because some programs or scripts check for game results which would end up being erroneous if, say, a Round 15 decision in favour of one team ended up being won by the other.

Best Idea yet, Cof... I am against any map being banned, and love the suggestion of starting those maps early if they become problematic (or mandatory that they are rd 1 games, or not at all).

I don't see any possible way you can control for all variables in "calling" a winner, with the exception of if one team publicly concedes.

by **Namor** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:57 am

I would just add at this point; my suggestion wasn't intended as a solution to our current Hive game with Empire. It could only ever work, if it was implemented prior to the game creation.

It wouldn't be easy starting a Hive game 1 week early, if the clan wanting to use the map, is already late for a round, due to a delay in the current one. But I can see the point that CoF is making.

Chariot of Fire wrote:... some programs or scripts check for game results which would end up being erroneous if, say, a Round 15 decision in favour of one team ended up being won by the other.

by **Georgerx7di** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:41 pm

While we're on the topic of allowing every map. When are we going to allow manual and nuclear. We are in the quarter final round of cla, why can we play those settings. There's no noobs in this round, and they've been around long enough that we've had time to learn them. Why haven't they been added to what's allowed yet?

by **jalen45** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 7:16 pm

Georgerx7di wrote:While we're on the topic of allowing every map. When are we going to allow manual and nuclear. We are in the quarter final round of cla, why can we play those settings. There's no noobs in this round, and they've been around long enough that we've had time to learn them. Why haven't they been added to what's allowed yet?

right on, jorge!!

by **jpcloet** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 8:02 pm

Georgerx7di wrote:While we're on the topic of allowing every map. When are we going to allow manual and nuclear. We are in the quarter final round of cla, why can we play those settings. There's no noobs in this round, and they've been around long enough that we've had time to learn them. Why haven't they been added to what's allowed yet?

We can talk about that for Season 4. It was simply too late for S3. Personally I think nukes are ok, plays a lot like No cards. Manual I'm less hot on, I still see a lot of stacking to kill and unless the site limits the stacking, I'm personally not going to allow it. I've had some test runs with players who love it and I'm still not convinced. The argument that it is a site feature, we should be able to play, it doesn't fly with me considering freestyle, speed etc. are not in clan games for specific reasons. If you have a really strong argument for manual, that does not include stacking, I'd love to hear it.

by **Chariot of Fire** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 8:51 pm

Yay to nukes. Boo to wankers manual.

by **Incandenza** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 11:23 pm

Nukes are a garbage setting as well, IMHO.

by **Georgerx7di** on Mon Mar 07, 2011 8:21 pm

jpcloet wrote:
Georgerx7di wrote:While we're on the topic of allowing every map. When are we going to allow manual and nuclear. We are in the quarter final round of cla, why can we play those settings. There's no noobs in this round, and they've been around long enough that we've had time to learn them. Why haven't they been added to what's allowed yet?

We can talk about that for Season 4. It was simply too late for S3. Personally I think nukes are ok, plays a lot like No cards. Manual I'm less hot on, I still see a lot of stacking to kill and unless the site limits the stacking, I'm personally not going to allow it. I've had some test runs with players who love it and I'm still not convinced. The argument that it is a site feature, we should be able to play, it doesn't fly with me considering freestyle, speed etc. are not in clan games for specific reasons. If you have a really strong argument for manual, that does not include stacking, I'd love to hear it.

I have a very poor arguement for it. It would help me pick up some medals : p.

I see ur point jp, perhaps manual may not be for clan wars.

by **Bruceswar** on Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:19 am

Incandenza wrote:Nukes are a garbage setting as well, IMHO.

I tend to agree somewhat. Nukes can be fun, but I am really not for them in a clan war. As far as manual, without knowing who goes first then we cannot include it. As for maps.. All maps should be allowed.