07 Mar 13
Originally posted by drdonIf you're going to offer advice please at least spell it correctly. Ambiguous not ambigous. Well she wasn't real constructive in this instance was she. Lets see her offer something intelligent to this thread other than critisism
Please avoid ambigous pronouns. I have never known Keewpie to be nasty, rude or anything other than constructive please try to be constructive too.
07 Mar 13
Originally posted by radioactive69Simply put, there has to be a difference between winning and losing.
IVV would support anything that they thought would benefit themselves in some way. As under the present clan system they could never be competetive they're always whining away to change things, then when they're changed and they still don't win, they whine away again. The above system would signal the collapse of competetiveness in the clan system. Ter ...[text shortened]... one man challenges and still rewarding teams who lose the tie if their team has played well.
Otherwise, this just becomes a contest for who can make the most challenges !!
07 Mar 13
Originally posted by mghrn55Exactly ! Don't know what the doc's going on about. One minute he's supporting one thing, the next minute another thing. Tell me doc what exactly would be your plan to fix the clan points system?
Simply put, there has to be a difference between winning and losing.
Otherwise, this just becomes a contest for who can make the most challenges !!
07 Mar 13
Originally posted by radioactive69I'm flattered uou are so interested in my opinion! My position has been made eminently clear in this thread. Commenting any further is unnecessary however for those who may wish me to do so for whatever reason: 1 point for each game won, 0 for a draw plus 1 or 2 bonus points for winning a challenge. Because this is a discussion forum, I'm open convincing arguments
Exactly ! Don't know what the doc's going on about. One minute he's supporting one thing, the next minute another thing. Tell me doc what exactly would be your plan to fix the clan points system?
07 Mar 13
Originally posted by mghrn55This has always been about who can make the most challenges
Simply put, there has to be a difference between winning and losing.
Otherwise, this just becomes a contest for who can make the most challenges !!
Unless you are suggesting putting a limit on the amount of challenges
I still think my original proposal is the best way forward
I cannot think of another competition where negative points are involved
07 Mar 13
Originally posted by drdonOf course I value your opinion. Intelligent opinion needs to be balanced by stupid opinion so that the intelligent opinion can be seen for what it is. Under your considered scheme there would be no challenges above 1 man challenges by any clan. What would be the point of winning 1 extra point for a win in a 20 man challenge when you could win 20 extra points for 20 1 man challenges. Imagine a 20 man challenge that sits at 19 games a piece with 1 draw and one game remaining. Who would give a stuff who wins the final game and thereby the challenge if the difference was only 1 measly point. The winning team would recieve 21 points and the losing team 19 points under your brilliant plan. As I stated earlier it would spell the end of the clan challenge system
I'm flattered uou are so interested in my opinion! My position has been made eminently clear in this thread. Commenting any further is unnecessary however for those who may wish me to do so for whatever reason: 1 point for each game won, 0 for a draw plus 1 or 2 bonus points for winning a challenge. Because this is a discussion forum, I'm open convincing arguments
But thanks for your imput anyway, it just makes my plan look so much better
07 Mar 13
The debate about points and challenges has been going on forever.
I run a clan with my own formula for a league table.
I took the liberty of noting the games won/drawn/lost of the top 10 clans on the clan list and applying my formula.
This is how it turns out- not revolutionary but still a differnece don't you think?
Site list:-
Wycombe 402
Metallica 327
Ivv 197
Spinning 169
Cccp 117
Wellington 115
Clan/Mission 109
Express lane 105
Tod 104
Cpu 87
My list
wycombe 342
metallica 299
spinning 231
ivv 204
cccp 182
t.o.d 167
c.p.u 164
express 163
clan /mission 158
wellington 112
07 Mar 13
Originally posted by vendaWhat formula were you using ?
The debate about points and challenges has been going on forever.
I run a clan with my own formula for a league table.
I took the liberty of noting the games won/drawn/lost of the top 10 clans on the clan list and applying my formula.
This is how it turns out- not revolutionary but still a differnece don't you think?
Site list:- ...[text shortened]... o.d 167
c.p.u 164
express 163
clan /mission 158
wellington 112
My system is trying to encourage larger challenges and get away from one on ones which the current system is driving clans to
07 Mar 13
Originally posted by radioactive69No, you miss my point. It's not rocket science. In a 20/20 player challenge example, 40 games would be played, each player plays 1 game as black, one game as white, 40 points a would be up for grabs since both players in each game pair would win a maximum of 2 points with a draw or a loss winning 0 points. The clan winning the majority of the 40 ( i.e.) more than 20 points,wins the additional point/ points. The decision to issue or not to issue series of 1 man challenges would be a clan choice, and so it should be. 1 man challenges may also be discouraged if bonus points were not awarded in these challenges.
Of course I value your opinion. Intelligent opinion needs to be balanced by stupid opinion so that the intelligent opinion can be seen for what it is. Under your considered scheme there would be no challenges above 1 man challenges by any clan. What would be the point of winning 1 extra point for a win in a 20 man challenge when you could win 20 extra ...[text shortened]... challenge system
But thanks for your imput anyway, it just makes my plan look so much better
Smart clan leaders would however issue challenges involving as many games as possible each to maximise the potential number of points for each challenge to best utilise the resources of the clan. Negative points would be eliminated. Draws would be discouraged. in 5/5 player challenge ( that's 5 pairs of games) a max of 10 points would available, with additional points being won by the clan winning in excess of 2 points. In a 3/3 player challenge, bonus points would also be available to the clan winning more than 3 games out of 6 games played.
07 Mar 13
Originally posted by radioactive69The player to who you refer is a very well respected, long term member of this site and one time clan leader and moderator who rarely criticises anybody. I would not like to feel that any player with modesty and natural reticence to comment on controversial issues feels unwelcome to make comments through fear of attracting any of the bullying and abuse , direct or oblique, that goes on in some other forums? All member should feel free to comment and make suggestion withou fear of having their head bitten off. That was the point of my comment.
If you're going to offer advice please at least spell it correctly. Ambiguous not ambigous. Well she wasn't real constructive in this instance was she. Lets see her offer something intelligent to this thread other than critisism
08 Mar 13
Originally posted by padgerI always try to find the biggest challenges I can for my clan but the problem is always being able to "match" the individuals in fair games.
What formula were you using ?
My system is trying to encourage larger challenges and get away from one on ones which the current system is driving clans to
This often proves to be impossible due to the number of small clans, the number of inactive clans, and the number of clans with permanently unavailable players(presumably just in a clan for the site leagues).
I see a lot of challenges where the totals are about equal at the bottom of the page but the individual matches are way out of sync.
I won't accept these challenges and vet all challenges on an individual and historical basis.
If you can't find enough fairly matched individual games within a challenge you're not going to get bigger challenges whatever the points system is.
08 Mar 13
Originally posted by vendaAfter a bit of to and fro work, you will generally get an acceptable match up form IVV and the Simpsons but it is not always easy and it is always time consuming, ESP given the sandbagging element that dogs the site (NOTthose clans in particular)I think a 1 game win equals 1 challenge point in each challenge suggestion) might go at least) some of the way to addressing this issue because it rids the system of the all or nothing approach. On the other hand, it will increase leaders' focus on individual match ups and forget almost entirely on the "bottom line" parity issue, which, as you indicate, is often misleading.
I always try to find the biggest challenges I can for my clan but the problem is always being able to "match" the individuals in fair games.
This often proves to be impossible due to the number of small clans, the number of inactive clans, and the number of clans with permanently unavailable players(presumably just in a clan for the site leagues).
I see a lo ...[text shortened]... within a challenge you're not going to get bigger challenges whatever the points system is.
09 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by vendaI have checked on the top 5 teams using my system
The debate about points and challenges has been going on forever.
I run a clan with my own formula for a league table.
I took the liberty of noting the games won/drawn/lost of the top 10 clans on the clan list and applying my formula.
This is how it turns out- not revolutionary but still a differnece don't you think?
Site list:- ...[text shortened]... o.d 167
c.p.u 164
express 163
clan /mission 158
wellington 112
Wycombe my way 780 site 401
Metallica 434 315
In Veno Veritas 474 315
Spinning Stars 545 185
CCCP 283 125
Also checked on the Beer Clan 283 125
Any comment radioactive69 ?
I would like to congratulate Spinning Stars on their amount of large challenges
Which goes to prove that my system would work very well
09 Mar 13
Originally posted by padgerProof if you were Spining Stars! Not so convincing for others I would think? I'm still not convinced that this proves anything other than you may have a formula
I have checked on the top 5 teams using my system
Wycombe my way 780 site 401
Metallica 434 315
In Veno Veritas 474 315
Spinning Stars 545 185
CCCP 283 125
Also checked on the Beer Clan 283 125
Any comment radioactive69 ?
I would like to congratulate Spinning Stars on their amount of large challenges
Which goes to prove that my system would work very well