Jump to content


Clan Wars Map Exhibition: Westfield

clan wars map exhibition westfield

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

Drison #21 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 03:16

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 12638 battles
  • 360
  • [RSSF] RSSF
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostLZ_Schneider, on Jun 28 2015 - 18:56, said:

Round 1
  • Battles begin every 20 minutes
  • 3 points are granted for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss
  • Each battle will last 15 minutes max.
  • ~32 teams will advance to Round 2
  • The top team in each group advances to Round 2
  • Other teams advancing to Round 2 will be based upon the highest point total
  • ~Teams must have a minimum of 3 points to move on to Round 2.

 

I assume that since the 32 teams line comes first that it takes priority. On the first day only 32 teams were even accepted so technically even though some clans got 0 or 1 point, they were automatically moved on since Round 2 is supposed to be 32 teams.

 

Yeah I assumed as much. Just made us wait through the tech vics again for guys that didn't show yesterday.



Huck_ #22 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 03:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 34095 battles
  • 3,134
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    03-09-2011
We just won our Day 2 bracket undefeated with 11 people. If we can make the finals we're going to bring 11 people to the livestream just to highlight what a joke these clan competition payouts are compared to [edited]tournaments. 

semiorange #23 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 03:22

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 18758 battles
  • 314
  • [BADGR] BADGR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2012

View PostHuck_, on Jun 29 2015 - 02:18, said:

We just won our Day 2 bracket undefeated with 11 people. If we can make the finals we're going to bring 11 people to the livestream just to highlight what a joke these clan competition payouts are compared to [edited]tournaments. 

 

Its a complete joke for the 100k for the clan vs the 12k i made in the fast five while calling the westfield shitshow

Huck_ #24 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 03:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 34095 battles
  • 3,134
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    03-09-2011

4 tech wins and Puff's carry hard vs. Droid.

 

 

And that's in DAY TWO. Not even day 1. I'm trying my best to motivate people to participate in clan activities, but it seems that Wargaming has no intentions of helping me.

 

 



DeltaVolt #25 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 03:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 19764 battles
  • 2,414
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostHuck_, on Jun 28 2015 - 18:27, said:

4 tech wins and Puff's carry hard vs. Droid.

 

 

And that's in DAY TWO. Not even day 1. I'm trying my best to motivate people to participate in clan activities, but it seems that Wargaming has no intentions of helping me.

 

 

 

Sorry friends, tier 1 tourney and our battle against you guys popped at nearly the same time. If our battle wasn't the last one (the one that coincided with tier 1 tourney while tier 5 tourney was still going) we'd have had a team for you.

__Crusader__ #26 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 03:38

    Captain

  • Players
  • 26617 battles
  • 1,329
  • Member since:
    07-17-2011

View PostVonStryker, on Jun 29 2015 - 01:59, said:

the problem is that you are talking like you know how WG set this up, you don't know how they did it. it could have been done in any manner of ways, but you decided that

oh no, it can't be random. WG set this whole thing up, they have a hidden agenda, etc.

 

it could have been something as easily as, picking names from a hat(a bit stupid, but hopefully you'll get the point)

 

 

Therein lies the problem.  It should not be random.  

 

Every sport has a season in which there is a general round robin of sorts to help figure out who the top teams are in the end.  Those teams are then selected and seeded, not at random, but based on their performance throughout the season.  Even the BCS system in college football, while controversial, used a system of metrics and polls to determine who the best teams were, and did their best to make sure that it was those teams playing for the biggest rewards.

 

If the Group Stages are to be considered the "season," then there needs to be a better system for seeding the teams to ensure that the best teams don't kill each other off before they get to the finals to face teams that would otherwise have never made it.

 

If only two clans per group make it into the finals, it will mean that out of the Group 4 clans, at least one of the top 5-ish clans on the server will not be able to make it in by default.  Then, at least two non top ten clans will get in by default, simply because they were the next best in the other Groups.

 

If 3rd makes it into the thing because we beat a bunch of scrubs, and the only decent clan we faced was ESPRT...  Does that make us more worthy to be in the next stage than the one top 5 clan from Group 4 who didn't make it because they had to face way tougher competition, two other top 5 clans, to get there?  I don't think so.  I'd rather we faced the same tough opponents as everyone else and earn our spot in, not let it be basically given to us.



Huck_ #27 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 03:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 34095 battles
  • 3,134
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    03-09-2011

View PostDeltaVolt, on Jun 28 2015 - 21:36, said:

 

Sorry friends, tier 1 tourney and our battle against you guys popped at nearly the same time. If our battle wasn't the last one (the one that coincided with tier 1 tourney while tier 5 tourney was still going) we'd have had a team for you.

 

I don't blame anyone but Wargaming for this sh1t show. 

DEADP00L_ #28 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 03:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 25448 battles
  • 3,630
  • Member since:
    08-25-2011

View Post__Crusader__, on Jun 28 2015 - 21:38, said:

 

Therein lies the problem.  It should not be random.  

 

Every sport has a season in which there is a general round robin of sorts to help figure out who the top teams are in the end.  Those teams are then selected and seeded, not at random, but based on their performance throughout the season.  Even the BCS system in college football, while controversial, used a system of metrics and polls to determine who the best teams were, and did their best to make sure that it was those teams playing for the biggest rewards.

 

If the Group Stages are to be considered the "season," then there needs to be a better system for seeding the teams to ensure that the best teams don't kill each other off before they get to the finals to face teams that would otherwise have never made it.

 

If only two clans per group make it into the finals, it will mean that out of the Group 4 clans, at least one of the top 5-ish clans on the server will not be able to make it in by default.  Then, at least two non top ten clans will get in by default, simply because they were the next best in the other Groups.

 

If 3rd makes it into the thing because we beat a bunch of scrubs, and the only decent clan we faced was ESPRT...  Does that make us more worthy to be in the next stage than the one top 5 clan from Group 4 who didn't make it because they had to face way tougher competition, two other top 5 clans, to get there?  I don't think so.  I'd rather we faced the same tough opponents as everyone else and earn our spot in, not let it be basically given to us.

 

so lets say we do it your way, we divide the top clans using the wn8 metric

so that gives us, Relic, Otter, Bulba, Pbkac, Esprt

 

with second tier clans such as, D-O-S, Rel 3 and even foxey(all of these stat wise)

 

you are essentially just cutting off everyone else, and not leaving it up to chance like what happened with Esprt vs Rel_3, Esprt by all means should have won but guess what, whoever was calling it, called it better than Esprts did

and this time, the underdog(again stat wise) won

 

if you want a season, it really would have helped a lot more if, much more than 32 clans joining and 2 days to determine who will the be the remaining ones in the playoffs.

 

 



__Crusader__ #29 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 04:09

    Captain

  • Players
  • 26617 battles
  • 1,329
  • Member since:
    07-17-2011

View PostVonStryker, on Jun 29 2015 - 02:53, said:

so lets say we do it your way, we divide the top clans using the wn8 metric

so that gives us, Relic, Otter, Bulba, Pbkac, Esprt

 

with second tier clans such as, D-O-S, Rel 3 and even foxey(all of these stat wise)

 

you are essentially just cutting off everyone else, and not leaving it up to chance like what happened with Esprt vs Rel_3, Esprt by all means should have won but guess what, whoever was calling it, called it better than Esprts did

and this time, the underdog(again stat wise) won

 

if you want a season, it really would have helped a lot more if, much more than 32 clans joining and 2 days to determine who will the be the remaining ones in the playoffs.

 

All I am saying is that they split it up evenly among the Groups.  There were 7 statistically top ten clans in the Group Stages.  With 4 Groups, split it up with no more than 2 in each Group.  Then go down to the next tier, in which there were about 5 or 6, and fill it in that way, doing their best to even out the metrics each time they go to the next tier of clans.  And by all means, let Wargaming use their own metric of Clan Rating!  That would give clans wanting to enter these kinds of clan tournaments incentive to find ways to boost their Clan Rating so as to gain a better seeding.

 

All I know is that for a clan like 3rd, we only faced one decent clan in this competition, regardless of if we won or lost.  Whereas if BULBA hadn't placed their skirmishes first, Group 4 would have seen the top clans in there having to face two of each other, and everyone else facing all 3.  That's 3 times the potential competition we had to face, and with all due respect to ESPRT, who is a quality opponent, they are not Otter, BULBA, or even Relic Main.

 

Sorry Von, but I am not interested in giving Wargaming the benefit of the doubt.  We all want a quality thing to be run, where the competition level is as fair as can be attempted.  When that happens, the truly deserving and best clans will end up in the finals.  And you know what?  If an underdog clan like ours can make it in based on winning results against statistically better competition, then that is great!  But we certainly did not earn our place over someone who had to face the likes of the clans in Group 4...  not when we only had to face one top 10 clan, and the rest were scrubs who only made it in because they were the only other clans who applied.  



lozarus #30 Posted Jun 29 2015 - 13:27

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 37913 battles
  • 9,318
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    07-07-2010

View Post__Crusader__, on Jun 29 2015 - 03:09, said:

 

All I am saying is that they split it up evenly among the Groups.  There were 7 statistically top ten clans in the Group Stages.  With 4 Groups, split it up with no more than 2 in each Group.  Then go down to the next tier, in which there were about 5 or 6, and fill it in that way, doing their best to even out the metrics each time they go to the next tier of clans.  And by all means, let Wargaming use their own metric of Clan Rating!  That would give clans wanting to enter these kinds of clan tournaments incentive to find ways to boost their Clan Rating so as to gain a better seeding.

 

All I know is that for a clan like 3rd, we only faced one decent clan in this competition, regardless of if we won or lost.  Whereas if BULBA hadn't placed their skirmishes first, Group 4 would have seen the top clans in there having to face two of each other, and everyone else facing all 3.  That's 3 times the potential competition we had to face, and with all due respect to ESPRT, who is a quality opponent, they are not Otter, BULBA, or even Relic Main.

 

Sorry Von, but I am not interested in giving Wargaming the benefit of the doubt.  We all want a quality thing to be run, where the competition level is as fair as can be attempted.  When that happens, the truly deserving and best clans will end up in the finals.  And you know what?  If an underdog clan like ours can make it in based on winning results against statistically better competition, then that is great!  But we certainly did not earn our place over someone who had to face the likes of the clans in Group 4...  not when we only had to face one top 10 clan, and the rest were scrubs who only made it in because they were the only other clans who applied.  

 

You know what would fix this?


A league, not a cup.

 

Or at least, play the Cup to qualify for the league (or visa-versa) and when you have it narrowed down to 12 teams, you go into League format where everyone plays each other twice, once from either side, Win = 3 points, Draw = 1 point, Loss = 0 points, whoever comes 1st wins, 2nd & 3rd place (equal on points u get a playoff).

 

  • Also, if the clan get paid X no. of gold for each win, nothing for a draw or loss you discourage playing for draws...
  • Also, if the players who play get paid gold for playing, you encourage players to prioritize the exhibition over tournaments.
  • Also, if you give a greater overall gold incentive, you get more clans applying, you get more clans taking it seriously, and you get an overall more competitive exhibition.

 

You cant have a Clan War Exhibition on the under-card to Skirmishes and expect an exciting and competitive Exhibition.

 



veganzombiez #31 Posted Jul 01 2015 - 17:22

    Production

  • Administrator
  • 14320 battles
  • 787
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    08-16-2011

Congratulations to BULBA for winning Map Exhibition Westfield!

 

Thanks to all the Clans who participated (and for the IS-5 match up). Payouts should be processed within 10 business days.






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users