16
The Lounge / Re: That Moment When...
« on: December 09, 2013, 01:49:04 pm »
That moment when you ram a junker with a galleon with carrosene and buffed engines. (no moonshine needed, trust me)
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
18
Community Events / Re: Lobby of Icarus: Dark Hour
« on: December 06, 2013, 03:02:38 pm »
This sounds verry interesting :O
19
Community Events / Re: Official Rule Suggestion Page
« on: December 06, 2013, 10:52:40 am »
POINTS
Each victory against a Competitive Team is worth 1 point for the victorious Team. It does not matter if the match is an organized Skirmish, or a tournament of any kind. If both sides are competitive teams, then a Skirmish point may be claimed. Any Skirmish is worth 1 point; however, if a team of lower Rank defeats a higher Rank team, an extra “underdog” point may be claimed, meaning that a maximum of 2 points can be awarded per Competitive Match.
RANKED LADDER
The Ladder is made up 3 tiers,
Tier 3 - Elite - is 17+Points
Tier 2 - Competitor - 8 to 16 Points
Tier 1 - Newcomer - 0 to 7 Points
POINT LIMIT
Each week, each team can earn a maximum of 3 Points with an exception for “underdog” points. An Official Skirmish week begins at 12 a.m. EST Monday, and ends at 11:59 p.m. EST Sunday, at which point the Standings are updated.
LADDER UNDERDOG POINTS
An extra underdog point is given to victories against higher tier teams meaning if a team in T1 wins against a team in T2 the victory is worth 3 points, and the same T1 team wins against a team in T3 the victory is then worth 4 points.
Just a bit of inconsistency in these parts. The point limit is listed at 3 points per weak but I believe you wanted it to be 4?
Also I'm not sure how great it is to give a team the ability to earn as many as 4 extra points from an underdog win. Does that mean a T1 team could earn as many as 16 points in one weak from beating 4 tier 3 teams? The wording is a bit vague on this.
If a new clan or a clan without points is able to beat 4 clans that have that many points (meaning those would be among THE BEST in the game) then i think it would only be fair if they would gain points a lot quicker. So they would catch up to the tier they belong in.
20
The Docks / Re: CLAN The Flying Dutchmen
« on: December 03, 2013, 05:40:05 am »
Wait... Coldcurse... I tought TFD never worked with planning :O But it really seems youre working on one right there!
22
Community Events / Re: Regarding the Regarding the structure of the next Competitive Season
« on: December 01, 2013, 11:07:21 am »
For small clans
A: Would be verry unfair towards smaller clans. Big clans with a lot of people can verry easily gain points on the same pile. 3 teams skrimming, playing tournements and such will greatly increase the chances of getting points then a clan with 1 team. A 1 team clan would have to play a lot more games then the clan with 3 teams to get the same amount of point revenue. This would mean that the numbers of your clan would as important (if not more important) as the skill of the team. I think that the points should represent the skill of a clan/team, not the amount of players.
B: This would be the most suitable for smaller clans. This option would mean that the points would represent the skill of a specific team. It would be verry clear how good a team is and smaller clans do not have to worry about getting more members for more teams to get more points revenue. Every team would have the same chance.
C: Would basicly mean the same for smaller clans as B, this would only restrict bigger clans to put in 1 team as opposed to multiple teams fighting for themselves. I do think Sammy is right and this would increase the chance of elitism within bigger clans (the best will be allowed to play while the other sit on the bench).
I do not understand where the limitation of 16 players for a team comes from. If there are 20 people for in a clan and they want to play as 1 team, why wouldnt they? Could someone explain this?
Option A could work if there is something set in place to ensure number>skill would not happen.
- Depending on the amount of teams a team would get less points. Say 3 teams every team can get 0.33 of their points actually earned. 2 teams means 0.5.
- Only an x amount of skrimss/matches can count for the points in a week.
Just quick toughts...
A: Would be verry unfair towards smaller clans. Big clans with a lot of people can verry easily gain points on the same pile. 3 teams skrimming, playing tournements and such will greatly increase the chances of getting points then a clan with 1 team. A 1 team clan would have to play a lot more games then the clan with 3 teams to get the same amount of point revenue. This would mean that the numbers of your clan would as important (if not more important) as the skill of the team. I think that the points should represent the skill of a clan/team, not the amount of players.
B: This would be the most suitable for smaller clans. This option would mean that the points would represent the skill of a specific team. It would be verry clear how good a team is and smaller clans do not have to worry about getting more members for more teams to get more points revenue. Every team would have the same chance.
C: Would basicly mean the same for smaller clans as B, this would only restrict bigger clans to put in 1 team as opposed to multiple teams fighting for themselves. I do think Sammy is right and this would increase the chance of elitism within bigger clans (the best will be allowed to play while the other sit on the bench).
I do not understand where the limitation of 16 players for a team comes from. If there are 20 people for in a clan and they want to play as 1 team, why wouldnt they? Could someone explain this?
Option A could work if there is something set in place to ensure number>skill would not happen.
- Depending on the amount of teams a team would get less points. Say 3 teams every team can get 0.33 of their points actually earned. 2 teams means 0.5.
- Only an x amount of skrimss/matches can count for the points in a week.
Just quick toughts...
23
Community Events / Re: Regarding the Regarding the structure of the next Competitive Season
« on: December 01, 2013, 07:55:11 am »
I dont think the team limit should be locked at all. If 20 people want to play for 1 team that should be fine in my oppinion. But multiple teams stacking points on 1 big pile just isnt fair to clans with only 1 team. This would mean that the amount of players would increase your chances, not your skill.
25
Community Events / Re: Regarding the Regarding the structure of the next Competitive Season
« on: December 01, 2013, 06:30:28 am »Except it goes against what a clan is supposed to be about. If ducks worked being three autonomous clans, we would be three autonomous clans.How is it fair for any competative scene in the world to have more then 1 "team" add points to the same pool. It would be like a soccer match where 1 team has twice the amount of players trying to score xD
Your chances in any competative scene should be about skill, not by who has the biggest amount of players available.
26
Community Events / Re: Regarding the Regarding the structure of the next Competitive Season
« on: November 30, 2013, 10:27:33 pm »
Then B would be the most fair for both small and big clans.
27
The Pit / Re: First Thought Game
« on: November 30, 2013, 09:41:41 pm »
There is always beer in my fridge.
28
Community Events / Re: Regarding the Regarding the structure of the next Competitive Season
« on: November 30, 2013, 09:38:14 pm »
Fact is that a clan with more then 1 team getting point for 1 clan will statisticly have a higher chance to get more points. Making it verry hard for smaller clans to get above big clans.
29
Community Events / Re: Regarding the Regarding the structure of the next Competitive Season
« on: November 30, 2013, 03:15:58 pm »
I was wondering if B also had a player limit like C?
30
Community Events / Re: Regarding the Regarding the structure of the next Competitive Season
« on: November 30, 2013, 01:51:59 pm »
oops