Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
CaptLongline

Caln wars battles activity

119 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

8
[NCUS]
Members
23 posts
549 battles
On 3/19/2018 at 11:21 PM, Destroyer_Hagikaze said:

Lol no one is even bragging.  The barebone facts are being laid out.

The only bare bone facts are being shown is through the course of MM in clan battles where clans are being shoved into matches way further than they should be.  This causes smaller clans to get so far and walk away which isn't healthy for clan wars in the long term. MM can only choose from the clans actively playing so it cause unbalanced teams rank wise. Once you choose to play clan wars, all clans should be help to this commitment. If you choose to layout for any reason / excuse, then your clan should suffer a penalty. Its as simple as that. This penalty applies to everyone from top to bottom so nobody is being focused out or any type of favoritism. In most sports your team doesn't show up, well they forfeit that position /game. Its not very hard to understand.... I dont even understand why some are even worried if they loose points for a no show to begin with. Its not like you cant get them but but I believe it would improve the MM. 

 

Again, The point is very valid and having Squall 3 being put up against a Gale 1 team is just ridiculous. This is caused by lack of clan activity which throws off MM.

Edited by Motleytanker3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[-HON-]
Members
6 posts
8,293 battles
2 hours ago, Motleytanker3 said:

The point is very valid and having Squall 3 being put up against a Gale 1 team is just ridiculous.

Earlier in the thread you state that the ELO system is supposed to avoid situations like the one you described. You couldn't be more wrong. The ENTIRE point of an ELO system is to allow teams of different skill levels to be appropriately rewarded against other teams of DIFFERENT elo ratings. A team in Gale 1 should rarely lose to a team in squall 3, but if they do, they'll lose a TON of points because the ELO rating system has them much higher than the squall clan. On the other hand, if the team in Gale 1 beats the squall 3 team, they get almost no points because they are supposed to win most of the time. This is why elo systems work with any number of teams in the ranking. It doesn't matter how many teams are playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
390 posts
9,519 battles
2 hours ago, Motleytanker3 said:

The only bare bone facts are being shown is through the course of MM in clan battles where clans are being shoved into matches way further than they should be.  This causes smaller clans to get so far and walk away which isn't healthy for clan wars in the long term. MM can only choose from the clans actively playing so it cause unbalanced teams rank wise. Once you choose to play clan wars, all clans should be help to this commitment. If you choose to layout for any reason / excuse, then your clan should suffer a penalty. Its as simple as that. This penalty applies to everyone from top to bottom so nobody is being focused out or any type of favoritism. In most sports your team doesn't show up, well they forfeit that position /game. Its not very hard to understand.... I dont even understand why some are even worried if they loose points for a no show to begin with. Its not like you cant get them but but I believe it would improve the MM. 

 

Again, The point is very valid and having Squall 3 being put up against a Gale 1 team is just ridiculous. This is caused by lack of clan activity which throws off MM.

And again, they would make smaller clans not wanting to play out of that fear.  It will not affect big clans that much and frozzenfire is right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[ZR]
Members
380 posts
9,717 battles
13 hours ago, Motleytanker3 said:

This causes smaller clans to get so far and walk away which isn't healthy for clan wars in the long term

Natural selection is b**ch isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8
[NCUS]
Members
23 posts
549 battles
13 hours ago, FrozzzenFire said:

Earlier in the thread you state that the ELO system is supposed to avoid situations like the one you described. You couldn't be more wrong. The ENTIRE point of an ELO system is to allow teams of different skill levels to be appropriately rewarded against other teams of DIFFERENT elo ratings. A team in Gale 1 should rarely lose to a team in squall 3, but if they do, they'll lose a TON of points because the ELO rating system has them much higher than the squall clan. On the other hand, if the team in Gale 1 beats the squall 3 team, they get almost no points because they are supposed to win most of the time. This is why elo systems work with any number of teams in the ranking. It doesn't matter how many teams are playing.

I understand your point but as you loose clans in QUE , this throws MM off in placing teams in brackets they are not ready for which brings negative repercussions gives them no reason to continue. This isn't about who is better but keeping clans active in clan wars. I don't feel the current system in place is working. Maybe WG should consider sending out a pole to players in game and see what response they receive? A lot of people don't go into forums for obvious reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8
[NCUS]
Members
23 posts
549 battles
1 hour ago, Swagger897 said:

Natural selection is b**ch isn't it?

Why doesn't your response surprise me from a clan that already has a well known tarnished image.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[ZR]
Members
380 posts
9,717 battles
55 minutes ago, Motleytanker3 said:

Why doesn't your response surprise me from a clan that already has a well known tarnished image.

Pretty easy to say if you're basing everything off of public opinion, versus getting to know people on a personal level.  I've never met you in game nor talked to you ever before, so it's pretty rude of what you said imo. But I guess everyone has an opinion so what does that matter...

 

I just find it odd though that someone who is in control/leadership positions of 2 clans, has played zero battles of Clan Battles this season, and yet thinks he/she has devised a stunning plan that will help all clans across the board, by somehow punishing them for not playing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,011
[UDEAD]
Beta Testers
1,298 posts
12,407 battles
42 minutes ago, Swagger897 said:

I just find it odd though that someone who is in control/leadership positions of 2 clans, has played zero battles of Clan Battles this season, and yet thinks he/she has devised a stunning plan that will help all clans across the board, by somehow punishing them for not playing. 

Some people just want to see the world burn Swagger .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[-HON-]
Members
6 posts
8,293 battles
5 hours ago, Motleytanker3 said:

I understand your point but as you loose clans in QUE , this throws MM off in placing teams in brackets they are not ready for which brings negative repercussions gives them no reason to continue.

This just isn't how elo systems work. It doesn't matter how many people are in the queue, you will end up at a rating representative of your skill level regardless of how many teams are playing in an ELO system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
191
[R-R-R]
Members
1,019 posts
7,833 battles

I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with OP's suggestion.

Why are so many against extra reward as motivation to keep ppl playing? Currently, a lot of players are just done with CWs after they get the 30win reward. Some more motivation is good to encourage ppl to play.

I don't get the 'burn out' thing either. You don't have to play CW like a full time job. All you need is to get ppl together for a day or two each week and play 5-10 games each time and earn some more rewards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[-HON-]
Members
6 posts
8,293 battles
1 minute ago, Exciton8964 said:

Why are so many against extra reward as motivation to keep ppl playing?

This would be a punishment for not playing, not a reward for playing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
191
[R-R-R]
Members
1,019 posts
7,833 battles
Just now, FrozzzenFire said:

This would be a punishment for not playing, not a reward for playing...

Well, then it is really your own mentality that is causing issues here.

You feel entitled to earn EVERYTHING available. 

You are not punished for not playing. You just earn less than those who played more than you. This is pretty fair IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[-HON-]
Members
6 posts
8,293 battles
6 minutes ago, Exciton8964 said:

You are not punished for not playing. You just earn less than those who played more than you. This is pretty fair IMHO.

Lets take this down to the third grade level. If something happens that is worse than nothing happening, that is not a reward, it is a punishment. A reward would be something similar to the hurricane rewards where you some sort of incentive every 10 games.

I don't understand why you have an infatuation with forcing people to play to the end of the season? Skill should be the primary reason you get typhoon rewards and a good ranking. There's already a fair amount of grind involved. Why should they add more?

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
191
[R-R-R]
Members
1,019 posts
7,833 battles
1 hour ago, FrozzzenFire said:

Lets take this down to the third grade level. If something happens that is worse than nothing happening, that is not a reward, it is a punishment. A reward would be something similar to the hurricane rewards where you some sort of incentive every 10 games.

I don't understand why you have an infatuation with forcing people to play to the end of the season? Skill should be the primary reason you get typhoon rewards and a good ranking. There's already a fair amount of grind involved. Why should they add more?

 

Sorry I don't get you.

There is no 'forcing' ppl to play. If you don't want to play,  then just don't play. But if ppl still play, let them have more goals and incentives to pursue.

There is nothing changed for YOU. If you decide 30 wins is too much a grind already, by all means, just stop playing. You are not punished for anything. You won't lose anything you earned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[-HON-]
Members
6 posts
8,293 battles
15 minutes ago, Exciton8964 said:

goals and incentives to pursue.

You keep using those words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

I've played in 95% of my clans matches. I'm the primary shot caller. I still don't understand why you would punish people for not playing till the end of the season. You clearly still have enough reason to play. Why would you force that on other people that'd rather stop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8
[NCUS]
Members
23 posts
549 battles
17 hours ago, FrozzzenFire said:

Lets take this down to the third grade level. If something happens that is worse than nothing happening, that is not a reward, it is a punishment. A reward would be something similar to the hurricane rewards where you some sort of incentive every 10 games.

I don't understand why you have an infatuation with forcing people to play to the end of the season? Skill should be the primary reason you get typhoon rewards and a good ranking. There's already a fair amount of grind involved. Why should they add more?

 

You made that choice to do clan wars. Clan wars are only 4 days a week so if you layout / stop playing, then your group should loose points. This is far from being a job since most employers would replace you if you decided to lay out and expect a paycheck.  Anyway you choose to look at this. Its a commitment  when you started in clan wars. Its very clear some feel they just slam their way up and stop playing but feel they shouldn't be punished for this action . I'm all for continuing receiving rewards for those who stay playing.  The only one's who would be affected are those who stopped. Its very simple

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
399
[KRAB]
Members
771 posts
7,232 battles

I would support a system where clans lost points for inactivity, but it would have to apply to EVERY clan, over the course of a WHOLE SEASON. There would then be two metrics:

The Clan's Current score which includes activity for some component, used for the leaderboard and player rewards

The Clan's highest score that season, used for things like tag color, bragging rights and seeding for future seasons. 

Basically, if your clan goes inactive (like QP sadly has) you can lose some of your standing, but only pertaining to the rewards available within the season. After the season is over, future seeding is based on the highest score obtained , ensuring that good but inactive clans don't get severely under-rated when beginning a new season.

In a competition consistency is important, but it can't be everything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,050
[CUTER]
Members
2,459 posts
11,320 battles
On 3/23/2018 at 7:32 PM, Motleytanker3 said:

You made that choice to do clan wars. Clan wars are only 4 days a week so if you layout / stop playing, then your group should loose points. This is far from being a job since most employers would replace you if you decided to lay out and expect a paycheck.  Anyway you choose to look at this. Its a commitment  when you started in clan wars. Its very clear some feel they just slam their way up and stop playing but feel they shouldn't be punished for this action . I'm all for continuing receiving rewards for those who stay playing.  The only one's who would be affected are those who stopped. Its very simple

Think about it a minute.  Who is more likely to go inactive?

A clan like CUTER who every member joined solely to compete in every competition in WoWs.  We run year around non stop between CB, ranked, King of the Sea, Supremacy League, and have done a few Latin American tournaments in the odd down time as well.  We are literally staffed for this constant demand level to the extend we have plenty of depth to let guys sit out a few seasons if they wish.  We could easily not miss a day for the next 10 CB seasons while maintaining our current levels of competition if we cared to.

Or the clan that can barely scrape together 7 guys including using the rental ships over the weekends. 

Its just not fair.  All your proposal does is give an unfair advantage to clans like mine that organized and manned to use this attrition to our advantage.  I do view this as unfair to smaller clans.  That is the root of the problem.  Do you really want a system that makes the large competitive clans even stronger?

ETA:  You talk about committing to CB.  Commitment is work.  This also seems like a real good way to kill a clan that struggles to field a team's interest quickly because of the constant loss of progress on points they earned.

Edited by Destroyer_KuroshioKai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×