As a change of pace, BF has asked me to keep track of the Sunday Tournament qualifiers, points, placers, etc, etc. Ill be sticking with his basic post. Six new people qualified and participated in this tournament, which is always good to see. Nice work new guys.
Clan Naga Sadow dominated this tournament. No other clan was even kind of close to the 131/119 250 points that CNS took this week. Im not 100% sure but I think thats the highest activity weve seen from a single clan ever. Congrats to CNS!
Coming in with First Place, representing Clan Naga Sadow, Voort with a record of 25-11, gaining himself 43 points and a Steel Cross! Nice job, Voort.
Coming in at Second Place, representing Clan Naga Sadow, Muz Ashen with a record of 23-34, gaining himself 62 points and a Star of Antei. Good job, Muz.
Coming in at Third Place, representing Clan Naga Sadow, Xanos with a record of 21-11, gaining himself 37 points and a Dark Cross. Good work, Xanos.
The following are the current individual scores:
MERLANCE (99) -0 = (99 Points)
Dranik (21) -0 = (21 Points)
Pyralis (73) -0 = (73 Points)
Kir (50) -0 = (50 Points)
Shadow (178) -0 = (178 Points)
Benevolent Whiner (45) -0 = (45 Points)
Demosthenes (1) -0 = (1 Point)
Dark Sabre (300) -0 = (300 Points)
Horus (106) -0 = (106 Points)
Elessar (9) -0 = (9 Points)
Smoke20 (280) -0 = (280 Points)
Lenzar (160) -0 = (160 Points)
Dalthid (11) -0 = (11 Points)
Shimas (10) -0 = (10 Points)
X-Pilot (26) -0 = (26 Points)
Predator (13) -0 = (13 Points)
Zacfer (63) -0 = (63 Points)
Dox (61) -0 = (61 Points)
Strategos (36) -0 = (36 Points)
Vail (209) -0 = (209 Points)
Chaosrain (119) -0 = (119 Points)
Selket (14) -0 = (14 Points)
NexusMage (111) -0 = (111 Points)
al'Lan (51) -0 = (51 Points)
NitChu (18) -0 = (18 Points)
Frosty (164) -0 = (164 Points)
Arania (203) -0 = (203 Points)
Wolf (24) -0 = (24 Points)
Jasru (50) -0 = (50 Points)
Exodius (6) -0 = (6 Points)
Erlandil (33) -0 = (33 Points)
Raidoner (1) -0 = (1 Point)
Korras (167) -150 = (17 Points)
Xhedias (84) -0 = (84 Points)
Kaiann (85) -0 = (85 Points)
Rakhai (6) -0 = (6 Points)
Tissaya (53) -0 = (53 Points)
Keiran (8) -0 = (8 Points)
Zadious (25) -0 = (25 Points)
Zekk (33) -0 = (33 Points)
Vally (55) -0 = (55 Points)
Vardar (32) -0 = (32 Points)
Raistlin (25) -25 = (0 Points)
Anshar (20) -0 = (20 Points)
Welshman (23) -0 = (23 Points)
Thomas Fene (20) -0 = (20 Points)
Windos (29) -0 = (29 Points)
Locust (65) -45 = (20 Points)
Odjn (20) -0 = (20 Points)
Phantom (34) -0 = (34 Points)
Voldemort (46) -0 = (46 Points)
Malik (20) -0 = (20 Points)
Ivillius (20) -0 = (20 Points)
Dask (20) -0 = (20 Points)
Duga (234) -0 = (234 Points)
Jerik Arca (3) -0 = (3 Points)
Tavin (2) -0 = (2 Points)
Doku (3) -0 = (3 Points)
Rax Joris (3) -0 = (3 Points)
Muz Ashen (138) -0 = (138 Point)
Fire-Knight (16) -0 = (16 Points)
Cipher (6) -0 = (6 Points)
Mav (10) -0 = (10 Points)
Kaine (5) -0 = (5 Points)
Morgan Mortiani (25) -0 = (25 Points)
Kraval (167) -0 = (167 Points)
Anikal (8) -0 = (8 Points)
Michael Arkarso (24) -0 = (24 Points)
Xanos Sadow (87) -0 = (87 Points)
Schisca (22) -0 = (22 Points)
Kith Staken (24) -0 = (24 Points)
Talon Jade (7) -0 = (7 Points)
Dark Hunter (8) -0 = (8 Points)
Kat Pridemore (122) -0 = (122 Points)
Source (3) -0 = (3 Points)
Rekio (6) -0 = (6 Points)
Ice Wolf (21) -0 = (21 Points)
Trazar (22) -0 = (22 Points)
Hideki (24) -0 = (24 Points)
Quejo (52) -0 = (52 Points)
Dessan (22) -0 = (22 Points)
DarkMarine (15) -0 = (15 Points)
Uzbad (3) -0 =(3 Points)
Braecen (24) -0 =(24 Points)
Brujah (2) -0 =(2 Points)
Lucien (4) -0 =(4 Points)
Reaper2004 (10) -0 =(10 Points)
Voort (74) -0 =(74 Points)
Esca (26) -0 =(26 Points)
Korbin (7) -0 =(7 Points)
Isaiah (9) -0 =(9 Points)
Thran (16) -0 =(16 Points)
Luke Alexander (7) -0 =(7 Points)
Storm (10) -0 =(10 Points)
With that said, the current Clan Point standings are as follows:
Clan Arcona: (238) -0 = (238 Points)
Clan Exar Kun: (147) -0 = (147 Points)
Clan Naga Sadow: (1161) -170 = (991 Points)
Clan Satal Keto: (118) -0 = (118 Points)
Clan Scholae Palatinae: (550) -0 = (550 Points)
Clan Taldryan: (1,490) -0 = (1,490 Points)
Clan Tarentum: (1,100) -0 = (1,100 Points)
Great job on making this Tournament a HUGE success, and congratulations to everyone. For anyone who wants to purchase items, the list is here, and all you need to do is email me with your choices. Keep up the awesome gaming, everybody.
You need to be logged in to post comments
CNS pwnz j00 all. =P
Azyrith and Esca is on there again.... :P
PPPWWWWNNNEEEEDDDD!!!!!
most impressive performance, Naga Sadow. Congrats on a huge sweep. You guys pwn'd the ICTE and the Sunday Tournament!
Please, enlighten me as to the manner of placing. 22-11 is a far better win/loss record than 23-34. The tournaments shouldnt be about awarding activity, they should be about awarding victory.
I agree, Merlance, which is why we go by number of wins before anything else. If two or more people have the same number of wins then we look at losses.
Wooooah there sonny, we are rewarding winning, with every CF you earn. Not happy with the standing I presume? Think about this, if we rewarded straight up winning, would you go out and play only the people you KNEW you could win against or just went out and played?
As it stands, you have to play anyone that challenges you. If you only challenge people you know you can beat, thats up to the player, but odds are that there is someone better than them who could challenge them. If not, then you deserve to win the tournament.
If you dont reward by winning, you might as well just organize the top 3 by who played the most matches.
You have a point, Merlance, to a point. If we go strictly by win-loss ratio, I could technically go in, play one game against someone I KNOW I can beat, then high-tail it out of the tourney, log off, etc. Now, if you play 20 games and win 19, I still win.
It's an exaggeration, sure, but I hope you get my point. But if you don't... =P
The system in place is there for a reason; specifically, it's so those who play a lot are rewarded for the games they play as well as the games they win; it'd be pretty assinine to have the aforementioned player take home a StA because he percentage ration was mathmatically higher than yours. While I agree that someone who loses 268 straight matches maybe shouldn't win first place because of numbers, he/she should get something for putting in the time and the effort to lose that often. =P
In short, the system works, and you haven't offered a better alternative. If you have one, I'm sure we're all ears.
Cheers,
Zad
Okay so first off:
This system has been in use since BF started running these Sunday Tournaments. Just so everyone is clear it goes by: Whoever has the most wins, if there is a tie then it goes to whoever has the most losses.
Second:
If you want to complain at least be able to back it up with a better system. As was said before going solely by W/L is a bad idea. That would just promote the old way of playing just who you can beat, which I don't want to see us all go back to. If you have a better system than the current one say it. If it's any good we may actually use it.
Third:
I'm not sure why this started. Probably because I'm the one posting this stuff now and you think I've changed things - I dunno. No one bitched before when BF did the same thing for the better part of a year. Either way this has worked for a long time so we're probably not going to change it just because someone randomly thinks they deserve higher medals.
Final Note: I think the awarding of DC-SC is disgusting over-rewarding especially on top of CFs and points. So expect to see those go bye-bye :P Now you all have something real to bitch about :P
Well, if we're gonna suggest system changes, how about either:
1) Do away with the placings.
2) Base the placings on number of CFs recieved, using w/l record in case of a tie (ie 30-0 beats 0-60, but 0-60 beats 19-0).
1) I gotta say I like this placing system.
2) If you want to win by # of CFs, play in the ICTE.
3) Merit awards for placings suck. Crescents would be sexier.
4) Naga Sadow pwnd the Tourny.
Randomly want higher medals? hardly. I went 1-12 for the tournament, so I dont want or expect anything.
Go by how (I think) the old ORW's were. +2 points for a win, -1 for a loss, +1 for a draw. A fair system, if anything, giving a bit more benefit to those with some skill.
Err....you'll penalize those who may not be as good, but are still active? Yup...that'll bring people out in droves.
This system is fine since it both rewards those who are skilled AND active. Good system.
1) My thanks to Shadow for taking on this assignment. I asked Shadow to do this, so that results would no longer be delayed by any fault of my own, with trying to coordinate (juggle) my summer schedule. I appreciate him doing this, and I would suggest, you should appreciate it as well.
2) I know Esca is on there twice. I haven't had a chance to send Shadow my stuff, which is corrected. He put this up from scratch, where I have a template for it. It will be rectified, so no worries.
3) A W/L ratio standing would be better, if we were to go on the assumption that everyone would play the same number of people, the same number of matches, etc., as in a Bracket Tournament, a season of your favorite pastime sport, etc. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen. A 23-0 record is undefeated; however, 31-4 is a better record to me, simply because that second record shows more activity. When it comes down to intial scorings, I reward wins, but ties in wins then are decided by who played more. 23-11 is more valuable than 23-0 to me, because again, 23-11 means that person played more. They put themselves out on the line, giving more opportunities to win, but also more chances to be beaten. I don't see the point in elevating the person who, for whatever reason, stopped at 23 wins.
4) This is how it's been since the Tournaments began, as has been stated, and this is how the Tournaments will continue to be run, so long as they are in effect. If you have issues with it, these issues should've come up a long time ago, and should've been addressed with me. My email is always open, and still is, and if you'd like to state your opinions or objections, you're still welcome to at shwbloodfyre@gmail.com, but you do need to realize, the rules for the Tournament have been up on the old MBs, and the new forums, since the inception of the Tournament. Not looking them up, and not asking before this is no excuse.
Just because you are suppose to play anyone that challenges you, doesn't mean you will. I've often gotten the "I will l8r im busy" speech, come back later and guess what? They logged off.
I believe a mix of Halcyon's and Pyralis' ideas would be great. Less merit awards and more crescents. The ORW system is just as Halcyon described, pointless and not as rewarding for people that may not have a high skill level in the area of gaming.
I just say leave it as it is... if it isn't broke why fix it? Its been this way for months and there hasn't ever been a problem before.
Great Jedi Wars and Rites of Supremacy are about winning. Regular events are about giving people something fun and enjoyable to do. If you start penalising activity by saying -1 per loss you're just going to nerf activity. I'd rather see fifty people participate no madder how bad they are than only five people bothering to take part.