+- One Man Left Studios Community Forums (http://www.onemanleft.com/forums)
+-- Forum: General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tournaments (/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Thread: 1st GG Clan Tourney (WINNER: Anonymous Clan) [Concluded] (/showthread.php?tid=2435)
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/23/13] - lawtai - 10-24-2013 09:56 AM
(10-24-2013 07:41 AM)jesusfuentesh Wrote: Every clan has been given the same opportunity against each one.
I would almost say that this statement isn't true since some teams have 13 and anonymous and iPro have 6 players. Those with more players allowed everyone to play, and had different matchups for each opponent.
This rule is essentially like 5 soccer teams playing round robin, but the 2 teams that scored the most goals move on instead of the 2 that won the most. Granted most of the time the team that scores the most will win the most, but it might not necessarily be the case.
I just wanted to bring this up since this may be a possible outcome depending on how the matches finish up.
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/23/13] - jesusfuentesh - 10-24-2013 12:21 PM
(10-24-2013 09:56 AM)lawtai Wrote:(10-24-2013 07:41 AM)jesusfuentesh Wrote: Every clan has been given the same opportunity against each one.
I would almost say that this statement isn't true since some teams have 13 and anonymous and iPro have 6 players.
Each leader could have chosen his best 6 players to play against iPro, and wouldn't this be the same chance? 6 vs 6. If they are better or not, I can't do anything else but to say they played like they did. There wasn't any rule that said someone HAD to let all the members play. This issue has been mentioned before and I thought it was clear. It's not my fault if a clan has 100 members while others have 50.
In a soccer team, it's up to the coach who players he should chose. But then he shouldn't be regreting like saying "Oh if only I had chosen this or this one! It wasn't fair!". Like most of the interviews we've seen. They should correct their mistakes, but accepting the defeat without excuses (if they lose).
As for the scoreboard and the possible outcomes, like it was said before "The two teams that get more points will be the two great finalist". I think this was clear. It's just fair that if a team had more wins will have more points. The clan-war threads show you whether if you beat "individually" a clan or not, but also show the advantage one clan could have over the other, which should be taken into consideration, in comparison to the result the other clans could have over that same team.
It seems that the results of the meeting matches will be decisive for the final score. Wasn't this what many players wanted from the beginning?
Peace
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/23/13] - lawtai - 10-24-2013 12:27 PM
I don't have any issue with it not being clear. I just think that there's a hole in the rules to keep things fair. It might work out to not be an issue but It looks like it could be possible that a team has more points but actually loses the team matches.
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/23/13] - Fluffysox - 10-24-2013 03:59 PM
First of all, it's football :P
There are positions which certain people excel(is that how u spell it? :S) at. If a clan has more, they have a larger pool of players to choose who is good at what. Great for the clan overall, but bad for individual players if they want game time.
Me? I play as a right wing or center forward. But that's a different story :)
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/23/13] - amoffett11 - 10-24-2013 11:22 PM
(10-24-2013 03:59 PM)Fluffysox Wrote: First of all, it's football
There are positions which certain people excel(is that how u spell it?) at. If a clan has more, they have a larger pool of players to choose who is good at what. Great for the clan overall, but bad for individual players if they want game time.
Me? I play as a right wing or center forward. But that's a different story
I understood the football bit, but he lost me when he started talking about right wings and center forwards.
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/27/13] - jesusfuentesh - 10-28-2013 11:21 PM
Does anybody know if Anonymous started a meeting match? Thanks in advance.
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/27/13] - Mag!cGuy - 10-28-2013 11:26 PM
Diamond VS anonymous did not start.
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/27/13] - Thrutchy - 10-29-2013 12:09 AM
We've also mentioned that iPro was ready to start a meeting with Anonymous as well.
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/27/13] - GreatGonzales - 10-29-2013 12:10 AM
Oh man, this competition has become CLOSE. O.O
It's going to come down to the meeting matches.
RE: 1st Good Game Clan Tournament (iPro takes the lead) [Updated 10/27/13] - jesusfuentesh - 10-29-2013 12:46 AM
Every single match has finished or at least reported as started and there are just a few. I think there is enough time to have two meeting matches on-going, plus the time limit per turn haven't been reduced yet.
I will let this weekdays (5 days = 120 hours) pass so Anonymous gives any good reason (posts something) why they haven't started at least one meeting match. If not, I'll make an announcement about some measures that might be applied, giving another reasonable time so they can start.
We don't want this facet to last forever nor that some players to become inactive (which is what happens when something takes so long)
Note: if you are an Anonymous team member, spread this message in your private forum so Pastil* get informed. Thanks.