[CC2] 2nd Annual Conqueror's Cup!!

[Master Fenrir]

This is kind of a tough call. My gut response is to not care for this rule. If a player finds a home with a new clan and that clan just so happens to still be active in the cup, I don't think the player should be banned from playing alongside his new clanmates.

However, Chuck bringing up the concept of "ringers" made me think further on the issue. Based on seeding, the worst possible mis-match that one can currently envision would be THOTA (1 seed) vs. BotFM (15 seed) in the finals. If both clans were to go on a hunt for ringers prior to the start of their matchup, I would think the 1 seed would have the most success. In this case, the strong only get stronger and the odds start to lean even more heavily in favor of the higher seed. If this is allowed, it kinda begs the question, why should clans ranked 9 and below even bother signing up for the Cup?

It virtually limits their recruitment periods to a small time frame.

It doesn't limit their recruitment at all, just their recruitment specifically for the cup. And if you need to recruit mid-Cup just to be confident in a chance at winning, why bother signing up in the first place if you're not confident with your initial roster?

However, sometimes a player just does fall into your lap and I don't think the clan or the player should necessarily be punished just for circumstantial bad timing. I'm kind of at a loss. It's a funky issue.

But for what it's worth, should THOTA be inquiring about this on behalf of Pascalleke, I believe that Pasc should be allowed to play. He switched clans because he simply had more friends and regular teammates in THOTA than he did in FOED. Also, FOED is still active in the competition, so if had he not switched, he would still be active in this tournament.

[laughingcavalier]

It has not been a major problem in the CCups or the leagues, but we have had a few switch clans mid-way. Over 3 Seasons of the league, I think we've had about 5 in total.

For clan wars and the league I like the "free-and-clear" rule whereby you must have no active clan games with your prior clan.
For Tournaments, I like the "FULL-TOURNAMENT" rule whereby you are not allowed to switch clans or become an "in-eligible" player.

These are my current thoughts and was weaving them into the new policies. Does this sound fair?

I don't like the full tournament rule because it seems to penalise players like pascaleke who choose to change clans for good reasons that nothing to do with the tournament then have to sit out a long time. I just think we're taking ourselves a bit too seriously if we impose something so strict.

[Namor]

I would support the 'Full tournament' ruling, except the fact that it could mean a new recruit missing out on games, for up to 8-9 months.

Maybe the ruling could be; a new recruit (having already played in the tournament for another clan), is cup-tied for the the round following his last participation. So anyone that has played in round1, would not be eligable for his new clan, until round3.

[Chariot of Fire]

Or better yet just leave it to the discretion of the TO. Trying to formulate new rules that cover every eventuality simpy won't work. On the other hand I think Chuck's smart enough to see that a pascalleke case, for example, is different from one of hiring mercenaries to win a challenge.

Or is this too arbitrary to judge on a case-by-case basis?

[Ace Rimmer]

Or is this too arbitrary to judge on a case-by-case basis?

It works for the mods!

[jackal31]

so based on what we are all talking about, should each clan representative be given a vote for approval of new member participation? I think if a clan was purposely grabbing "ringers" that it shouldnt be invited back for any tournament thereafter due to the clan's reputation.

Also, since the medals thing is still in the air about implementing rewards for the top 8 teams (or beyond), why not regulate the clans to only play members who've had membership prior to getting in the top 8. So any new members cannot play from that point forward (3 matches?). I know, it sounds like I want the best scenario for my squad, but THOTA, as well as some other clans, really doesnt need to recruit "ringers". We are confident in the members we have (please dont take that statement out of context), but its nice to not carry such a big gameload among the active members.

[Chariot of Fire]

I must say MF's post did bring a smile to my face when I read THOTA may go on the hunt for ringers. Where from?

How about just doing away with the rule altogether (it was my half-cocked idea in the first place, back in CC1) ?

I appreciate there are some clans out there who don't give a damn about reputation but hey, if they're the clothes they want to wear then let 'em.

[Master Fenrir]

I must say MF's post did bring a smile to my face when I read THOTA may go on the hunt for ringers. Where from?

Sorry, I didn't mean to say THOTA specifically would, I was just plugging their name into the seeding equation. It was about 1st seed ringer-hunting and not specifically THOTA. Apologies if it came off that way. And by "ringer" I don't mean an undiscovered genius, just a top player from a previously eliminated clan that wouldn't mind being borrowed. And the reason I imagine a 1st seed doing it would be for the reason Jackal stated: to be able to spread the games out better amongst great players after the first 4 rounds might wear out a starting roster. It happens in baseball at the trading deadline, which is what I was equating the situation to in my head.

[Chariot of Fire]

I know mate, you're quite right of course.

And if anyone is reading this I shall be available for the finals

[Chuuuuck]

And if anyone is reading this I shall be available for the finals

As will I... depending on how TOFU does and my ruling here of course...

[nippersean]

For info - is this pasca???
Or what COF suggested cup-tied 1 year ago, but what we talkin here?

[Bruceswar]

I am sure that is a rule last year we used. In fact thebest712, came to us from DVLL and we could not use him since he played 2 games for them in the play in round. I am in favor of this rule.

[chemefreak]

Or is this too arbitrary to judge on a case-by-case basis?

It works for the mods!

First, jake [insert really nice comment about jake] .

Second, this is the unique thing about the CCup...when there is a problem players do not go to the CDs, they go to the tournament organizer. This is what makes it a "tournament" and not a collection of clan wars. Now the CDs have looked at this and realized that the CCup is a huge deal and we absolutely love it so there will be some softening of this policy, especially as it pertains to medals. Thus, the whole "medals not issued at this time" thing. This will be revisited shortly. However, from a purely objective point of view...LoW (4 on the leap ladder) and in the Top 5 of most polls versus One Step Ahead (34 on the leap ladder) and probably not yet on most polls, has to be "farming" right? With only about 40 clans...how is it not? Now OSA is already getting pretty good and this is nothing against their effort (benga knows how I feel about this) but from a pure #s perspective, that was an inequitable match.

Third, all of the clans in the Newcomer's Cup were outside the TOP 25 of the preliminary leap ladder (and not on most of the voting polls). With only 40 or so clans they were all very close in rank. Thus, the chance of "farming" was almost non-existent. Therefore, medals were granted as agreed prior to the start of the NC.

Fourth, the tournament organizer for the CCup agreed with the policy of no medals for the play-in round. The TO is consulted on everything about this tournament, so why blame the CDs for the current lack of medals? Again, this will be remedied so worrying about it is pointless.

Fifth, (this is my opinion as a clan leader, not a CD) I agree with Si (CoF) that players switching clans can and should be judged on a case by case basis. Since no one here seems to respect or trust the CDs I'm not sure who should have the final say, but natural clan member changes should be allowed to happen. I mean, we aren't stupid right? We can smell bullshit when we see it. So a clan wins their semi-final match and moves into the finals and all of a sudden has 5 new players from clans that previously lost...pretty obvious. A player switches in the Round of 16 or Final 8 and contributes to the wars on the way to a clan's ultimate victory...why should this be problem? Again, not sure who is going to do this ultimate policing, but this is the way it should be looked at.

Sixth, I just wanted to type this...I don't think I've ever had a list with a "Sixth"

[ljex]

In the first cup it was agreed upon through discussion within the thread. Has been a rule ever since. Everyone that it has pertained to has known it was a rule before it ever affected them, including you and the horsemen as shown by your PMs sent to me acknowledging the rule and asking for an exception. I understand your frustration and sympathize, but I am not going to start making case by case exceptions because that opens up a much bigger bag of worms. The rule stands. Please drop it.

I approached you privately with concerns that you simply did not address. It was not my desire to have this discussion in public, because I like and respect you. But I simply don't agree with your reasoning here, and I'm not going to just drop it because you don't want to talk about it.

And yeah, I knew that the rule had been discussed, but you know who wouldn't? Anyone who didn't play in the first cup (be that a new clan or a player in an existing clan who was away last year), and anyone who didn't read through the first cup's thread (and seriously, if I were the leader of a clan that hadn't played in the first season, would your response be "well, you should've read through the first 10 pages of the first clan cup thread"?). Regardless of the motives of the rule, you can't just leave it in the ether as "common knowledge" when it's not listed in the very comprehensive first post of the thread and then expect everyone to just somehow know it.

Aren't we supposed to be making clan events more transparent? More to the point, as last season made manifestly clear, rules are rules. And if it's not in the rules when play starts, well, it's not a rule.

+1 if you didn't change the rules midway through last year when most agreed you should have you can not change them this year. I understand it was intended to be included but if you didnt include it in the very comprehensive first post I dont see how you can adjust the rules now.

I'm more of a fan of a retroactive rule that says any player who changes clans mid cup can only play for the clan they changed too the next year. This allows players to find new homes but also prevents the idea of ringers.

[lord voldemort]

i think the intention of the rule is obvious...
but it wasnt there at the start so it cant be changed now.
Jp had a good point that loyalty is a massive thing in clans around here...and that players fishing for players doesnt happen. I dont see a massive merger of power house clans should one fail to get through to the final.

Can this be cleared up asap though. We do have 2 new recruits that we thought were cup tied and it would be nice to use them and their skills

[Chuuuuck]

I am not really taking the argument that the rule can't be changed now. I can see that argument being used for both sides here because to me, and most others, it was understood that the rule was already in place and therefore, it can't be changed now. To others, it didn't show up, so it can't be changed now. I am just ignoring that argument going both ways.

In saying that, even CoF who originally wanted the rule, seems to think it won't be a big deal now and suggested getting rid of it. I also don't see too much of a problem coming out of this. Therefore, I will remove the rule and say all players under discussion right now will no longer be cup tied. However, there are two exceptions. A player must finish all active games with their old clan in the cup before they can enter into new games in the cup with another clan. AND I will also reserve the right to make arbitrary decisions that some players are not allowed to play due to being cup tied if I feel it is happening to only participate and bring in ringers into the cup. For the most part, i don't see myself using this right until the semi finals or finals. I will be hesitant to allow any new players play with the clans in the semi finals and finals who join right before.

I hope this makes everyone happy. I still think the cup tied rule is a good rule, but I am making this decision due to the longevity of this event as a whole and the understanding this is a website that we each get on to every day for entertainment and it should not be my place to limit the entertainment of someone else.

Good luck folks.

[thebest712]

I am not really taking the argument that the rule can't be changed now. I can see that argument being used for both sides here because to me, and most others, it was understood that the rule was already in place and therefore, it can't be changed now. To others, it didn't show up, so it can't be changed now. I am just ignoring that argument going both ways.

In saying that, even CoF who originally wanted the rule, seems to think it won't be a big deal now and suggested getting rid of it. I also don't see too much of a problem coming out of this. Therefore, I will remove the rule and say all players under discussion right now will no longer be cup tied. However, there are two exceptions. A player must finish all active games with their old clan in the cup before they can enter into new games in the cup with another clan. AND I will also reserve the right to make arbitrary decisions that some players are not allowed to play due to being cup tied if I feel it is happening to only participate and bring in ringers into the cup. For the most part, i don't see myself using this right until the semi finals or finals. I will be hesitant to allow any new players play with the clans in the semi finals and finals who join right before.

I hope this makes everyone happy. I still think the cup tied rule is a good rule, but I am making this decision due to the longevity of this event as a whole and the understanding this is a website that we each get on to every day for entertainment and it should not be my place to limit the entertainment of someone else.

Good luck folks.

[Denise]

Nice. Thank you, Charlie! Our new clanmates were disappointed to be excluded and now they don't have to be!

[Bruceswar]

Nice. Thank you, Charlie! Our new clanmates were disappointed to be excluded and now they don't have to be!

Same could be said for Thebest712 who sat out last year for us. He wanted to play, but could not.

[josko.ri]

Nice. Thank you, Charlie! Our new clanmates were disappointed to be excluded and now they don't have to be!

Same could be said for Thebest712 who sat out last year for us. He wanted to play, but could not.

yeah, in the first edition it was normal to not give fun to thebest712 in whole tournament because he played only 2 games in play-in round for DVLL. it seems like someones are treated "more equal" than others.

[Dako]

Nice. Thank you, Charlie! Our new clanmates were disappointed to be excluded and now they don't have to be!

Same could be said for Thebest712 who sat out last year for us. He wanted to play, but could not.

yeah, in the first edition it was normal to not give fun to thebest712 in whole tournament because he played only 2 games in play-in round for DVLL. it seems like someones are treated "more equal" than others.

Yes, that decision was made to hurt KORT.

[Bruceswar]

Nice. Thank you, Charlie! Our new clanmates were disappointed to be excluded and now they don't have to be!

Same could be said for Thebest712 who sat out last year for us. He wanted to play, but could not.

yeah, in the first edition it was normal to not give fun to thebest712 in whole tournament because he played only 2 games in play-in round for DVLL. it seems like someones are treated "more equal" than others.

Yes, that decision was made to hurt KORT.

No I do not think that is what he meant. If it hurt anybody it hurt those players last year who had to sit out all year. Just one of them happened to be in KORT. Though I do think we will see some players who jump ship for better clans come the semis and or finals.

[Dako]

I guess we are not talking about last year here. That event has already ended. As for people jumping in semis/finals this year - chuck has reserved a right to deny their participation on player by player basis.

I think it will work just fine.

[josko.ri]

chuck has reserved a right to deny their participation on player by player basis.

the easiest way how someones can be treated "more equal" than others.

[stahrgazer]

To be honest, I really don't care if we have the rule or not. I don't care if clans grab ringers or not. I am just trying to stick to an arbitrary ruling that keeps it fair for everyone and keeps this from being abused.

But I do understand this is a website that makes up a small part of our lives for entertainment only, and I do appreciate the longevity of an event like this. I am fine with adjusting the rule, but can we please discuss now what kind of limitations you all think are best. Do you think we should allow it for 1 player per clan, 2? Do you think they should have to sit out any active challenge and the next one after they join? That would prevent a clan from picking up a guy from the elite 8 and using them in the final 4. Or do you think no restrictions what so ever?

Like I said, not trying to be hard here for any reason other than I don't want to see someone like Empire just go pick up the best players TOFU, BotFM and IA for the final 4 after they beat us. (Those Empire players are cheating, lying rotten bastards).

I agree that limiting the ship-jumping-but-still-eligible-to-at-least-play could be limited to one player in a clan... but I have to say, it's a pretty piss-poor person who'd leave a clan just because they lost a skirmish, and it wouldn't reflect well on the clan who accepts people who just want in on a medal.... so it hurts my head that you have to make rules to prohibit this sort of thing.

I have another idea that might work as well, though it's a little more complicated than yours:

Any player who changes clans midstream can play, but is ineligible for any medals for any of the clans that player participated in for that event.

I'm thinking of my decision to leave my prior clan, that happened in the middle of a different challenge. My decision wasn't based on wins or losses, but other things. It frustrated the heck out of me that I was ineligible to participate with my new clan at all in the only wars they were involved in for the first several months I was in LoW.

Eliminating their ability to pick up any medal for the event, still allows them to participate but doesn't reward them for jumping ship just to get a medal. If they lose any medals they would have been entitled to (I'm assuming that eventually CC will see that they're treating these wars wrongly by refusing to give clan war medals, and that when they do, they will agree that rounds of Chuuuck's Cup shouldn't be ineligible if rounds of Benga's Cup are given these awards)...

It would require that all medals (not just the cup, but also individual war medals) not be awarded until completion of the entire Cup challenge so that anyone who did jump ship would be eliminated from the final medals awards; and it would require that those responsible to award clan wars medals agree that jumping ship in the middle of an event disqualifies the player.

But it would ensure that a player think real carefully about being loyal to the clan he or she began with rather than leave for medal-hunting.