| Author | First Battle of the Clans Tournament |
|---|
Question for clan leaders.
Steel Dragons and Dark Alliance had a match that was not balanced level-wise.
https://www.lordswm.com/warlog.php?warid=483388028
It was a 11/10/9 vs. 9/9/11 with AP differences making up for the lack of even levels. They both agreed to this. My question is does this count as an official match or are we holding to strict even level matches? Clan leaders only vote on this topic. Thanks. |
| To me the key point is that they both agreed on this. So I vote to count the result towards their respective scores. |
I was watching the battle and I have few comments if I may:
1. The combatants should have been announced in advanced. From their discussion, they found out during the combat.
2. I would suggest the clan leaders to interfere when one of the players starts to use not so nice words.
3. I would suggest if the clan leaders agree on such a combat, the troops for the higher level player to match the lower level player (not only the arts).
4. Is it me or I haven't seen any referee?
But, at the end of the day, I have to agree with Kotrin on this matter. So, I vote for 3 points for Steel Dragon. |
2. I would suggest the clan leaders to interfere when one of the players starts to use not so nice words.
Yes I saw that also and it wasn't cool at all. Experienced GBers playing the match should help their mates instead of blasting them. While there is no outside help allowed, team members playing the match are encouraged to discuss their moves with their clan mates. That sort of public humiliation will drive players away from GBs and that is exactly opposite of what we are trying to achieve. |
@160:
I agree Modi that the idea with the Group Battle room was and is excellent and I recommend at least the clans leaders to stay there whenever they want to pick a fight.
Moreover, SoD decided to allow clans also practicing matches because I know how it is to have players who haven't done GB's since a while and they need to practice. So, no referee, no points, only practicing.
The last point. We will try to reach 12 points with each clan, but our time is limited. For that reason, we recommend LoS as well since they are strong and willing to have GB's. But more than that, they showed a great respect for their opponents even when they were losing. That should tell everyone something (at least for us, they gained much from our respect).
Good luck everyone! |
#161:
I vote yes, as far as both sides agree it.
I have to admit I considered a ideal world when submitting my proposal. But let's face it, the proposal didn't work well for us. match lvl problem, time difference problem... it's the real life. :p
Anyway, the 1st run is to gain experience for our future tournament. BTW, who would like to host the 2nd tournament? If you are ready, we can stop the 1st, and start a new run. :) |
I have to admit I considered a ideal world when submitting my proposal. But let's face it, the proposal didn't work well for us. match lvl problem, time difference problem... it's the real life. :p
I think there was a lack of flexibility as one large problem. I submit that all clans nominate a war diplomat or someone who can also call players from their clans to the table if the leader isn't online. LOS has 3 people, me, DEATHisNEAR, and Limu who can set up matches. I also would like to state that this isn't about clan leaders, it's about the clan members and just because a leader can't play in a match, they shouldn't hold back matches that can be set up. I didn't play a single match but set up all our fights but one. SOD didn't have players at my level but so what? I was happy to watch our teams play. Clans shouldn't be held captive if their leader is offline. I am sure we all have at least one other member who is responsible and can help us out. Give them herald abilities so they can clan mail and find available members. More effort is needed to get this going. |
adding for #166:
I guess I didn't express myself well. I received a "complain" in 5 minutes:
"?????? What are you saying? clan xxx plans to keep our victories as they were well earned in any plan that is brought to the table."
I didn't mean the 1st tournament doesn't count and won't continue. I just want to say IF the 2nd tournament host are ready for the 2nd run, we may stop the 1st tournament earlier than our plan, 11 weeks. If someone comes up a better plan, why should we stick on the "tax-form-style" one? :p |
Anyway, the 1st run is to gain experience for our future tournament. BTW, who would like to host the 2nd tournament? If you are ready, we can stop the 1st, and start a new run. :)
If you decide to change format, LOS plans to keep our tournament record as we spent the time to organize and complete our set with SOD. I am not willing to tell our guys who fought hard that it didn't count. So please keep that in mind. All matches fought by tournament clans were approved and are in the record books for whatever we decide. |
binghuo, give a little bit of time to the clans to get used with this new idea. I agree that maybe this tournament final result will not reflect the real classification (and I am not saying that because we lost against LoS :P, but because the most of the clans have problems in organizing themselves), but at least each clan has the chance to evaluate itself on the battleground. At least, my clan started to learn few things about itself, but we did some pvp's. I suppose if we give a little bit more time, more clans will start to have a better organization which will be very useful for War Clans when/if there will be implemented (I suppose many players from nowadays pvp's will opt for joining a War Clan, and the experience they get now as fighters or leaders will be valuable).
So, I propose a period of 2-3 more weeks before closing this tournament and start another. |
I didn't mean the 1st tournament doesn't count and won't continue. I just want to say IF the 2nd tournament host are ready for the 2nd run, we may stop the 1st tournament earlier than our plan, 11 weeks. If someone comes up a better plan, why should we stick on the "tax-form-style" one? :p
That's fine. If we go another route and another clan steps in with a format, be prepared to give your time to this. It is demanding and it depends on the host and all clan leaders and officers to keep the ball rolling. |
So, I propose a period of 2-3 more weeks before closing this tournament and start another.
If we want to finish this tournament, we can do elimination rounds and it will move quickly. Say, a certain number of clan vs clan losses knocks a clan out. I mean as a set, not as in total games lost. Clan A lost to clan B/C/D so they are out. Just an example. Then we can narrow things down to finally have a winner. |
| Does any clan wish to do some battles today and if so, what time and i will see who I can summon to the fight. We could also meet in the GB chat room at a certain time and any number of clans can set up matches from who is in the room. |
Well, Modi, I think I misunderstood binghuo's intentions. I do agree with 11 weeks. I just thought he wants to stop here. :)
So, to make things clear, I propose that this tournament to be over in the allocated time (11 weeks), period in which each clan should try to reach no more than 12 points with each of the other clans. No schedule from organizers and no time constrains to meet a certain clan during those 11 weeks. In such way, there will be seen which clan was active and which clan from those active won the most. If some clans are incompatible, the compatible clans can try to play again. In such way, all the clans will have 10 clans to face (even if some twice), but the final score will be from those 10 clans (i.e., the helping clan will not get points, but for its members it will be for their prestige, and I suppose any warrior has his/her honor/pride). |
So, to make things clear, I propose that this tournament to be over in the allocated time (11 weeks), period in which each clan should try to reach no more than 12 points with each of the other clans. No schedule from organizers and no time constrains to meet a certain clan during those 11 weeks. In such way, there will be seen which clan was active and which clan from those active won the most. If some clans are incompatible, the compatible clans can try to play again. In such way, all the clans will have 10 clans to face (even if some twice), but the final score will be from those 10 clans (i.e., the helping clan will not get points, but for its members it will be for their prestige, and I suppose any warrior has his/her honor/pride
I have no problem with the 11 week format or however long it takes to face each other but I don't think it is a good idea to play a clan twice. I am against that for some reasons. Each clan should have something on the line and that will bring the best competition and also eliminate possible collusion that could occur. |
| In reply to your proposal to have some clan spoke persons in case I am missing, Modi, I already appointed yesterday my replacements: Acolyte and Gsuwit. Even if I am most of the time online, I cannot play or organize GB's, but maybe they can. :) |
Can i ask ? i was decided that we should challenge each other 4 times. SO why there are 8 battles between #153 League of Shadows vs. #209 The Shadow of Death?
If they will fight more...how can u compete their score? or .. it's tournament bracket ( so clan can agree on whatever number of battles they can? ) |
Can i ask ? i was decided that we should challenge each other 4 times. SO why there are 8 battles between #153 League of Shadows vs. #209 The Shadow of Death?
If they will fight more...how can u compete their score? or .. it's tournament bracket ( so clan can agree on whatever number of battles they can? )
Binghuo set out the minimum number of battles. 4 battles IF you did four 3 vs. 3 matches. We decided to play to first team to 12 points wins the series. It only counts as one win total. We put in the effort to play for the weekend and wanted to allow as many players as possible to be involved. Both clans agreed. Can I ask, why couldn't you get 4 battles done in a whole week? |
We are working ppl. So only at the evening we are available. And not all.
At the weekend we can play whole week end , but our opponents have week-end so there we no ppl to play. 4 battles in one week is too much. If u have RL:) and ur not younger than 18.
12 points as winning means 3v3 7 battles. Dont know if that can be in one week. Maybe in 4-5 weeks ok..but not in 1 or 2. |
We are working ppl. So only at the evening we are available. And not all.
At the weekend we can play whole week end , but our opponents have week-end so there we no ppl to play. 4 battles in one week is too much. If u have RL:) and ur not younger than 18.
12 points as winning means 3v3 7 battles. Dont know if that can be in one week. Maybe in 4-5 weeks ok..but not in 1 or 2.
I guess you think our clan doesn't work? lol We agreed to meet on the weekend and put an effort into it to get it done. We also agreed to 12 points. I didnt say you had to do that. If clans can't get four 3 vs 3 battles done in a whole week then why even have a tournament? That is not a great demand. |
