1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Format of CCV

Discussion in 'Crunch Cup' started by Narly Bird, May 23, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Narly Bird

    Narly Bird Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,993
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Country Flag:
    I thought I would create this thread to start a discussion about what people want the format to be for CCV. I would encourage both existing players and CCV hopefuls to voice their thoughts about what they think the format should be. Whilst it’s the admin’s call (Netsmurf’s) at the end of the day, I’m sure he would be interested to hear other people’s thoughts. Then again, perhaps the power of being admin has gone to his head and turned him into a tyrannical dictator? Its always hard to tell with Netsmurf… ;)

    As for me, I quite like the format of CCIV, with the first stage focusing on building up the team, whilst the 2nd stage is focused on getting the wins. Although I would probably prefer a slightly shorter season (divisions of 6 in the first round rather than divisions of 8).
     
  2. Thanatos

    Thanatos Member

    Messages:
    398
    Location:
    Ireland
    Country Flag:
    I'm playing in another league where we were randomly assigned our race.
    We were each given one veto (and halflings were not included in selection).

    This meant that there were no repeat races which was cool. Though obviously the Crunch Cup would probably have more than 19 players so there would be some repeats.


    But if that doesn't float your boat, the current league format is pretty cool, though I would agree with Narly that making the season shorter would be desirable.

    I would also advocate for Extended Inducements.
    I don't see them being overpowered (though that is probably because my potions never work!)
     
  3. Gallows Bait

    Gallows Bait Super Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    3,661
    Location:
    Scunthorpe
    Steam Username:
    Gallows-Bait
    Cyanide Username:
    Gallows Bait
    Country Flag:
    The more I read about it OCC matches, I like the idea of something that has the promotion/relegation structure to it as it allows people at all abilities/levels to have something to compete for, plus it does allow teams to continue to develop over the longer term.

    Administratively I suspect its a nightmare though, but if help was needed I'd be willing to do what I can.
     
  4. Creamster

    Creamster Member

    Messages:
    300
    Location:
    London
    Country Flag:
    Maybe a new league could have each player can pick an existing team, trim it down to 1300TV (including emptying all gold stashes) and playing from there. Would give the chance of newer teams to join mid-season without being butchered and older vet teams to cut a few stars to rejoin...

    I like the random team idea, but many players will end up with teams they hate ( Orcs and dwarfs for me :( ) and lose motivation to continue and I agree the format of games at the start would be better.
     
  5. Etheric

    Etheric Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,472
    Location:
    Stockholm
    Cyanide Username:
    Etheric
    Country Flag:
    For random teams I think a short tournament would be better, just one group stage then the knockout stage.

    I do think potions are pretty powerful. They cost a lot more than the equivilent stat, but you get to choose who gets them. They got me a long way in CCIII when my team got in trouble early when I lost a 10 spp saurus (I love it when dead players get the MVP).

    An Agi 5 or st 4 wd is a real handful. Even Ag 4 orc blitzers add a whole new dimension to the team.

    The potions are 40k=46% of +1 agi
    60k=26% of +1 str

    The problem is that only one player gets inducements so the drug tests require the opponent to put some money into petty cash.

    I would very much prefer it if we could roll back to tv 1000 starting teams again, some sort of league would be fine with a big mix of TV, but I very much prefer starting form scratch in the CC. It allows me to try out some different teams and see what I like.
     
  6. Rusty

    Rusty Active Member

    Messages:
    1,156
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Country Flag:
    I hope to join CCV, and I'd say a slightly shorter tournament would be better in general. I also agree with what was said on another thread whose title I forget, that the groups for the second round/the knockout matches should be manually assigned rather than letting Cyanide do it.

    Frankly I think it would be pretty nice to have a separate, OCC-style league to run alongside the Crunch Cup(s), but only if having two simultaneous competitions wouldn't spread our player-base too thin. Everyone clearly enjoys the CC already so it wouldn't do to make a separate league if it would detract from the CC. I guess there'd have to be some sort of roll call before such a league were set up to make sure that didn't happen. Or maybe everyone who wants such a league would just join the OCC anyway. Thinking aloud here. :p I'd be willing to throw in a helping hand with such a league if needs be.

    As for extended inducements, put me in the Dislike column.
     
  7. Gallows Bait

    Gallows Bait Super Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    3,661
    Location:
    Scunthorpe
    Steam Username:
    Gallows-Bait
    Cyanide Username:
    Gallows Bait
    Country Flag:
    I'm not a fan of the extended inducements either, I think they allow players to play around the specific design of their team and that to me defeats the object of trying to win with that team - +AG Khemri and +ST Elves are fine if you skill up, but they shouldn't be gotten simply by throwing cash at it in my view.

    That and the range of inducements always baffles me and a number of them don't have prices in the descriptions.

    I guess format wise it really depends if people want a temporary knock out cup feel to it or a long term progression feel. Just as CTA is there to allow pick up games, there's different ways of playing the game and I guess it depends which most people want.

    As for joining the OCC, I don't know why, I just find the feel of it a little oppressive, hard to explain, a bit stiffling and I'm not sure why I get that impression, other than it being a massive behmoth of a league.

    I was also under the impression you needed to be the friend of a friend of a member who knew the secret handshake to apply, but again I may be wrong.

    I'm afriad to start on such a big scale tbh.

    The other option I'd maybe suggest would be divisions based on timezones if possible, to reduce the amount of complexity in making arrangements, but that might impact player numbers or cause problems if one timezone hasn't got enough players.
     
  8. Doomy

    Doomy Member

    Messages:
    401
    Country Flag:
    I wouldn't call the OCC "oppressive" so much as "strict". ;)

    We do require a degree of commitment to playing on schedule and uploading replays, but I think that, generally, people enjoy their time with us. As for it being so big, there's no need to worry about it having 250-odd participants, you can limit interactions to the handful in your own division.
     
  9. Barninho

    Barninho Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,909
    Country Flag:
    Basically the only entry requirement is that you know someone from the OCC who is willing to vouch for you, so you'd have no problems on that score. You can count em in for a reference if you need one for a start.

    I would also say there's a mix of players to be honest. There are some unbelievable coaches, no doubt about it, but the promotion and relegation system means you will find your level.

    It's very rare, even when I've had to reschedule or cancel a match that I've caught any frostiness from anyone, and they do tend to give the benefit of the doubt to people as long as they just don't vanish.

    I certainly don't get the feeling of being out of my depth there, I have definitely had my toughest games against players from the Crunch Cup, although being in the lower tiers makes a big difference on that score.

    As far as the Crunch Cup goes, I like it at the moment, although it does seem like a long comp. I have two teams it would be tempting to bring back from the old tournaments but truthfully I think I like us all starting with new teams.

    As far as portioning out the teams randomly, I'd be up for it, but having seen the dropouts this time around I would say we're likely to have more if coaches are struggling with a race they hate than if they are struggling with one they chose.
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2011
  10. John McGuirk

    John McGuirk Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,697
    Country Flag:
    I've enjoyed all three Crunch Cups I've played in immensely. As they've all been completely different formats I can only conclude that this is because of the great community of coaches that the site has attracted :)

    You'd think I'd be happy then regardless of how CC5 was shaped but, no, I still have to stick my oar in :p

    Firstly to add to the tally who are against extended inducements. I agree the potions are just too powerful, especially the chance of +AG for just 40k.

    Secondly, I would probably say that this has felt like the longest cup by quite a stretch and I'm not surprised we've had quite a few drop-outs by this stage. I wonder if having two group stages (especially one where, counter-intuitively, a 1-0 win was a disaster compared to a 2-2 or 3-3 draw) is excessive.

    Finally, I'm sure I'm not alone in hoping that Coach takes part in the next one! Maybe we could start a petition? :D
     
  11. Vusfnuv

    Vusfnuv Member

    Messages:
    410
    Country Flag:
    I'd prefer only one group round, with smth like 25% best teams getting into finals. I didn't really like the first round, when there was no point in winning, especially for teams like orcs or dwarfs that have full starting roster right after creationg and don't really need any money. It was a game of getting spp and preserving players, not winning by TDs.
     
  12. Strobinator

    Strobinator Member

    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    Country Flag:
    I love long leagues, but this is a bit much. Also, I don't like the seeding in the rounds. Personally, I do not like a round where the win rate doesn't matter - just the SPP accumulated. The way I would put it is that switching those objectives turns it into somewhat of a different game - and I only really like one of those games. SPP needs to stay a secondary objective in a match in my opinion.

    Also, the seeding should make sense. Typical playoff seeding rewards good records in the regular season. If you have 8 teams, round 1 should be (numbers correspond to ranking)

    1 vs 8
    2 vs 7
    3 vs 6
    4 vs 5

    This is not the only way of doing it, it is just my favorite way of doing it. In this case, the long shot still has a chance at winning it all - but they are going to have a touch match up to get there.

    At the same time, you are not going to pair off who would likely be two finalists in an early round.

    The disadvantage to this format (and any playoff really) is that it can be a long wait while players who get eliminated early have to wait for the whole cup to finish. With 32 teams - it is about a month for those eliminated in round 1 playing one game a week.

    I think that it might be a good idea to have a shorter crunch cup after this. We can do another longer one again later. Mix it up.
     
  13. Netsmurf

    Netsmurf Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,899
    Location:
    Denmark, GMT+1
    Cyanide Username:
    Netsmurf
    Country Flag:
    I think that we should play with the seeding system of jrpearts fencing tourneys:pow:

    The idea with this cup was to have a period of teambuilding before the vital stages. Teambuilding is also a very important aspect of BB and yes it focus on SPP, but if you dont win you get less cash and your FF will never rise - that is for me very important reasons to win a game. We can cut that for the CCV and aim for a first round of 5-6 matches - then playoffs.

    For the playoffs there will have to be either 2,4,8 or 16 teams. So with 24 like this time only 8 will be cut from playoffs.:powdodge:
     
  14. Narly Bird

    Narly Bird Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,993
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Country Flag:
    Sounds like a plan.

    So are you set on limiting numbers to 24 or will you wait and see the interest you get for CCV?

    Also, any idea when you will start signup?
     
  15. Netsmurf

    Netsmurf Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,899
    Location:
    Denmark, GMT+1
    Cyanide Username:
    Netsmurf
    Country Flag:
    If we get more than 24 I will change to more but that is the starting point. Think signup will start once I get internet and the playoffs are started:pow:
     
  16. Thanatos

    Thanatos Member

    Messages:
    398
    Location:
    Ireland
    Country Flag:
  17. jrpeart

    jrpeart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,385
    Location:
    Northumberland, UK
    Steam Username:
    jrpeart
    Cyanide Username:
    jrpeart
    Country Flag:
    I do like having had the varying lengths of Crunch Cups so far. I've been using them to try out teams I've been interested in trying. I've still got a few to try and I'll probably pick from the list based on how long the competition is.

    The longer the format the more likely people are to drop out but also the better for being able to try out and get attached to the team.

    For example after a few games with Amazons I wasn't really that struck on them but now as they develop I'm becoming quite fond of the girls. That could have something to do with rolling nearly as well as Netsmurf on my skillups though :p.
     
  18. Narly Bird

    Narly Bird Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,993
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Country Flag:
    Are you sure its nothing to do with the g-strings they wear?

    Im with Thanatos in giving the thumbs up to extended inducements. I like the different wizard options even if some of them are a bit lame.
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2011
  19. John McGuirk

    John McGuirk Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,697
    Country Flag:
    This isn't a question about the CCV format but the CCIV one (the client is vexingly unforthcoming with the details): how many teams are progressing from the current group stage - is it the top two or the top four?
     
  20. Netsmurf

    Netsmurf Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,899
    Location:
    Denmark, GMT+1
    Cyanide Username:
    Netsmurf
    Country Flag:
    I think it was only the top two:powdodge:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.