On an outsider-looking in's note...I find it hard to believe you can get an entire clan to turn up for a tournament.

Quite often in AAA, peeps have to be off for a month here or a week there through outside obligations. And I doubt other clans are different...

It won't affect me either way, but it may affect the chance of LATER tournaments, if this one gets hung...

Here are the rules which have been posted previously.

Rules:

1. All active members participate. If a clan has more members than their opponents, they will choose which of their members will compete. (Do to whining by some of the "first and second tier clan members" this has been revised to 80% of the clans active members must play, rounding to the nearest whole number just like in math.)There is a minimum requirement of five clan members to be able to compete.

2. The clan leaders (or person designated for the clan) will determine who gets to play whom. The lower seeded team will name one of their players, then the higher seeded team will name the opponent. Then the higher seeded team will name a player, and the lower seeded team will name the opponent. Then the process starts over until all players are matched. (Clan leaders please try and take into account your members timezones)

3. Battles are players choice (auto, novice, or practice) with the default battle type being auto. (meaning if two players can't agree on the battle type, then they play an auto)
4. Players can choose to use medieval or demi. But the default troop type is medieval. (players must both agree on the same type. They both use demi or they both use medieval. If they can't agree it is medieval)

5. If there is a tie, a single medieval autobattle game will be played between the 2 clans champions.

6. Once the clans are matched, there is a two week deadline for the matches to be finish. This includes any tie breakers.

7. When setting a time with your opponent use the WOL time as that should reduce communication errors about when to meet.

8. If a player misses two scheduled match times, it is up to the opponent to choose to forfiet them or give them a third chance.

9. This is a true tournament, and will be double elemination. Clans will be seeded based off of the current ranking system.

New rule still under discussion:

10. If any of a clans participating members has to sit out for a match due to the size of their opponent, the next time their clan faces a smaller opponent the members that sat out must be placed in the line-up while some of the members that participated must sit out.



When you sign your clan up please post whether the entire clan or only 80% of your clan is participating. If only 80% are participating please post which members they will be.

Question answered, I guess
It does seem a bit more realistic to draw from the 80% group, and the actives...
I guess, the only thing left now is to see if folks sign up while I sharpen MYSELF up for future tournaments

1. All active members participate. If a clan has more members than their opponents, they will choose which of their members will compete. (Do to whining by some of the "first and second tier clan members" this has been revised to 80% of the clans active members must play, rounding to the nearest whole number just like in math.)There is a minimum requirement of five clan members to be able to compete.


This is where I have the problem. FSA will not be able to get 80% of their clan to play and thus will not be participating in this tourney. For others in this situation and even if your not, your invited, there will be another clan battle tourney where we need only 5 members of your clan to play, plese see the other clan battle tourney thread.

Plus, the longer the tourney goes on, the longer the chance that it'll happens to others, not just FSA...?

Come on, be more leinient with this tourney
(can't believe I'm siding with Big )

I'm starting another tourney where you only need 3-5 players, 5 preferably.. Check it out.

AAA are still more campaign-centric atm which is why I said it'd be a future arrangement if at all. But if both tournaments knock themselves out competing, there mightn't be anything in the future for us to join

Both can co-exist. Sage's is for those with ALL battlers, mine is for those with at least 3-5 battleres.

I think it too....but I recall overhearing somewhere that only 4 or so clans intend to join so far, and if only 1 or 2 of those decide they only want to operate one tourney at a time....it becomes "clan battle matches" and not "clan battle tourneys"

I dunno....it's a bit close to call...

if you want to compete in battles, join the regular battle tornaments... for individuals. for a clan battle tourney, anything that doesnt involve the whole clan is invalid. I don't care if either tournament ever happens, I'm not going to participate in one that says its measuring one thing (a clan's battle skills) when it's going to be measuring another ( the battle skills of certain individuals.)

so, why make this 3-5 player "clan" battle tourney at all? its not measuring anything its supposed to...

why have THIS tourney at all if everybody is so sure CoC is going to win by the only fair rules for measuring what we are trying to measure? why not just put this whole thing off till there are a few more clans out there that are good at battling over all?

"Well I think your going to be hard pressed to validate this tourney"

Of course we are. There's too many campaign clans that don't like battles trying to tip the tournament in their favor. We're outnumbered. But that doesn't change the fact that the rules are fair. If you were as devoted to battles as CoC, you could play by these rules, no problem.

Oh C'mon guys all your doing is saying that you can get all of your clan to play so you want to have a tourney that requires all of a clan to play, so when noone else can then you win. What is stupid is that if I only had 5 members then I'd be a valid clan to participate, but because I have 9 I can't, even though I can get 5 to play.

BA I'll refer you to grumps post on page three of this thread, I think he says it best.


CTD we have been lienent in saying a clan only has to use 80% of their active members. These people are active, its not like they are gone for months, then return for a day and then are gone again.

There is a two week time period for a clan to complete all of their battles. Once the tournament gets going, and we see how the timezones are affecting it, we may need to adjust it a little.

I have looked through the clans and many of them have a serious chance of being able to win it with the 80% requirement. I am leaning towards a Crusaders victory but then, I am bias.

In my oppinion the problem is a certain first tier clan afraid of being defeated by one of those second or even worse third tier clans. So they are complaining and trying to create a tournament that will be as favorable for them as possible.

From what I have seen looking through the clans, several of them have a serious chance at winning the tournament besides CoC. Especially if they get the proper player match up to maximze their chances of winning, while minimizing their opponents chances of winning. I would say that BOS looks like almost as nasty of an opponent as CoC.

Does this tournament favor a clan that has alot of battlers? No more than a campaign tournament favors a clan that has five good campaign players. Some people would try and convence you that it is being created for CoC by CoC, but I can assure you that is a lie. When I started this thread it was to establish the battle rank of the clans, just like the current tournament is establishing the campaign rank.

I honestly do not think it is expecting to much to have all of a clans active members participate in such an event. After all it is the only way to get an accurate representation of the clan.

Last Edited : Thursday, 23 September 2004 - 08:59

"Oh C'mon guys all your doing is saying that you can get all of your clan to play so you want to have a tourney that requires all of a clan to play, so when noone else can then you win"

This tournament wasn't created by a CoC member, so that argument is invalid.

Besides, I would rather there be no tournament than an unfair tournament. If nobody else joins...fine. Thats because they're not good enough for this tournament. The Crusaders have stepped up to the plate, why can't other clans?

Sage,
AAA, as a clan, hasn't been interested to a high degree in battles, however we do have a couple players that have been active in battle matches.
I have not spoken to the entire clan on their wish to participate, but I'll gamble a statement that we'll join in even though the majority of our members are not active battle match gamers.
The scheduled matches can at least sharpen skills and build confidence not only in battle matches but campaigns as well.
We have a few inactive members atm, but I'll check with everyone and see if we can meet the team requirements to participate.

Ghengis, my CLAN is not complaining about it, I am.

I am complaining about it because of this issue here...

If I were to remove from FSA anybody that did not want to play in the tourney, then it would be ok for my team to participate, but because some players dont want to, then we're excluded, even though we still can get 5 members to play. The conditions of the tourney are designed to exclude clans not to promote involvement. I just think thats wrong.

hey BA let them make their tournament were 2 or 3 clans take part... did i say tournament...? ...errrm.

You could at least go for the normal 5 v 5 layout. It's what we have to do for clan campaigns, and YES - we do normally field the best players available, and occasionally a rookie to go with it. It's been fine so far, and my apologies if it's already been mentioned....but isn't it fine now too?

The rules of the tournament are the rules of the tournament. They're not perfect, but they're more perfect than the rules you suggest. Take it or leave it. If only 3 clans can meet the "high standards" required in this tournament (if by high standards you mean that its unfair to suggest that the top battle clan on WoL should be composed at least 80% by battlers) then fine. That doesn't make it less legitimate.

Are you actually suggesting the campaign clan match is of lousy standard?