Solution to Cln War Rant - House League Proposal
Post: 109
Besøkt av: 112 users
A Remedial Appraoch of the Merger Idea of Croat
Laochra has in recent days warned against the ever shrinking competitive side of Atwar. In response, Croat has proposed to merge clans with a view to re-activating CW. But a number of players have voiced concerns:
1. Clan Cultures Incompatible with each other
2. Old Reputed Clans Destroyed
3. Stacked Clans Proven Ineffective
The concerns are fair and true. To find a middle ground between promoting CW and preserving clans integrity, I am writing to propose a remedial approach of the merger idea:
1. Create Four Houses based on Four Major Cultures in AW
A. Funny & Adventurous (e.g. EC)
B. Small Circle Elitism (e.g. Aristokrats)
C. Team Oriented Comrades (e.g. Illyria)
D. Slavic Community (e.g. MK)
2. Each Clan may Elect to Join a House
The principle is the same with NATO or the Soviet Bloc. You can be Germany and a member of NATO at the same time. Each clan has double identity.
3. House League
My proposal: In addition to the present CW system, Admin creates an additional house league, which is a competition among the four houses. In other words, MK can still CW EC; A clan of House A can CW another clan of the same house. The present CW structure is intact and fine. Integrity of clan not infringed. House league works in this way: Any player from the same house can CW against any player from another house. Suppose Illyria and SM are in the same house, and EC and Immortals in another house: Goblin or Bonker can join Acquiesce or Laochra to CW against Clovis or Njab or Cold Case or any other player from either EC or Immortals so long as he is in the same house.
Since the essence of Lao's complaint is that CW activity is low, I believe that the House League can best boost CW, with least prejudicial effect brought to the current structure. If you have 3 players in a clan, you CW against another clan, the same way it works now. If you do not have 3 players in a clan, you join with other player from your house against another house. Either way, you can CW, and there is going to have a lot of CW.
In Long Term, my Proposal may even transform into this way:
Once a new player reaches R4, he can choose a "career path" and (have to) elect to join a house based on the culture he prefers. As the size grows, each house can create training clans and train these low ranks into competitive players. This will be more efficient than the mentorship programme as new players are now formally nudged to the competitive side. We have to accept that no player is born to be competitive. The house system, however, can provide the necessary coaching and initiatives for the growth of this game.
What is also good about this proposal is that low ranks can play CW a lot. Under the current structure, few clans train low rank, and low rank can seldom play CW because there is no equalvalent opponent. Under house system, however, it is more easy to find 3 low ranks from a house against 3 low from another house. Low ranks can thus gain more CW experience, the essential element of growth.
Q&A:
Q1. What is needed to make this work?
A: Very Slight change to the programming. We only need 1. Creation of Four Houses 2. Clan leaders to decide on which house to join 3. Seperate House Elo Count 4. Allow players of each house CW against players of another house in the CW room.
Q2: How are new clans put into house?
A: By collective approval of leaders of each clan in the house. Then a notice should be sent to Admin to add the clan into the house.
Q3: Can a clan change its house?
A: No. The reason is to make things consistent and to promote bonding or a sense of belonging within a house.
Laochra has in recent days warned against the ever shrinking competitive side of Atwar. In response, Croat has proposed to merge clans with a view to re-activating CW. But a number of players have voiced concerns:
1. Clan Cultures Incompatible with each other
2. Old Reputed Clans Destroyed
3. Stacked Clans Proven Ineffective
The concerns are fair and true. To find a middle ground between promoting CW and preserving clans integrity, I am writing to propose a remedial approach of the merger idea:
1. Create Four Houses based on Four Major Cultures in AW
A. Funny & Adventurous (e.g. EC)
B. Small Circle Elitism (e.g. Aristokrats)
C. Team Oriented Comrades (e.g. Illyria)
D. Slavic Community (e.g. MK)
2. Each Clan may Elect to Join a House
The principle is the same with NATO or the Soviet Bloc. You can be Germany and a member of NATO at the same time. Each clan has double identity.
3. House League
My proposal: In addition to the present CW system, Admin creates an additional house league, which is a competition among the four houses. In other words, MK can still CW EC; A clan of House A can CW another clan of the same house. The present CW structure is intact and fine. Integrity of clan not infringed. House league works in this way: Any player from the same house can CW against any player from another house. Suppose Illyria and SM are in the same house, and EC and Immortals in another house: Goblin or Bonker can join Acquiesce or Laochra to CW against Clovis or Njab or Cold Case or any other player from either EC or Immortals so long as he is in the same house.
Since the essence of Lao's complaint is that CW activity is low, I believe that the House League can best boost CW, with least prejudicial effect brought to the current structure. If you have 3 players in a clan, you CW against another clan, the same way it works now. If you do not have 3 players in a clan, you join with other player from your house against another house. Either way, you can CW, and there is going to have a lot of CW.
In Long Term, my Proposal may even transform into this way:
Once a new player reaches R4, he can choose a "career path" and (have to) elect to join a house based on the culture he prefers. As the size grows, each house can create training clans and train these low ranks into competitive players. This will be more efficient than the mentorship programme as new players are now formally nudged to the competitive side. We have to accept that no player is born to be competitive. The house system, however, can provide the necessary coaching and initiatives for the growth of this game.
What is also good about this proposal is that low ranks can play CW a lot. Under the current structure, few clans train low rank, and low rank can seldom play CW because there is no equalvalent opponent. Under house system, however, it is more easy to find 3 low ranks from a house against 3 low from another house. Low ranks can thus gain more CW experience, the essential element of growth.
Q&A:
Q1. What is needed to make this work?
A: Very Slight change to the programming. We only need 1. Creation of Four Houses 2. Clan leaders to decide on which house to join 3. Seperate House Elo Count 4. Allow players of each house CW against players of another house in the CW room.
Q2: How are new clans put into house?
A: By collective approval of leaders of each clan in the house. Then a notice should be sent to Admin to add the clan into the house.
Q3: Can a clan change its house?
A: No. The reason is to make things consistent and to promote bonding or a sense of belonging within a house.
Didnt want to interfere because its 2017 and we still talk about the same shit, but i feel like i had to, since I am also a player who moved from ancient and scenarios to 3v3's and cw's. My first clan (team bacon) was literally the first ancient clan in aw, i played tons of ancient, lotr, got, 100 year wars and ww2 and other scenarios as well. I also was recruited to the 3v3 scene by spart when they joined an ancient game and i raped his friends. Does this mean i was better than them? Hell no. They taught me so many things about the game, i would of never learned in the scenario/custom map world. Things like tb's, attrition, merging, range skills, strat understanding, optimally expanding against neutrals, are all things you perfect on the default map. Its not a coincidence or conspiracy that out of all the players who played both scenarios and cw's, new ones like fer, zone, dizabo, recent ones like opi, evic and trystane and older ones like mauzer panteri, unleashed, scezar (anadolu panteri) all say (i believe) that they perfected their gameplay in 3v3's. There is just a skill ceiling in these maps and unfortunately after a while its hard to keep it interesting or it takes too much time to play a decent game. I still enjoy scenarios but i have to play with a rank 6 alt to keep things interesting. I usually get allyfaged by high ranks and die but its the only way i enjoy it now. Anyway, tldr we know you are just a contrarian, i dont really buy it that you believe the things you say, the only thing we can agree on is that 3v3 gets boring and we wish there was a way to make scenarios more competitive. But you beating Laochra in a duel or Laochra beating you wont prove a damn thing anyway. You guys need to grow up.
----      
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
LOL? No way, they were already quite skilled before joining Eu. And from my perspective, the adaptation to Eu+ is not that hard coming from Ancient, all you got to do is get used to the units and to the new city organization. Ofc, Eu can give you further experience, specially considering it's a different map with different posibilities, nontheless our base skill comes from Ancient.
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people. 
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Don't do that, khal. By crediting a map for your knowledge instead of Spart and the people who actually taught you that, you're basically saying that it makes no difference if it was Spart or a random R3 noob. You're just saying that you've learned all that because it was Eu+ map, which is so wrong on many levers. I'm sure that you can agree with me that if Spart and the clans of theses ages were used to Destoria instead of Eu+, you would have followed them there.
I guarantee you that they joined Eu+ due to the people and not due to the map itself. There are way better choices for a map, and I'm sure that we can agree on that. Speaking about how Eu+ became the standard for 3vs3's and cws is another history. The Keyboard example which I grave pretty well fits here.
I agree, but it will at least calm him down for a while.
Trust me, there's just so few that you can learn by playing a map alone. The people are the ones who makes it interesting. I've learned a lot from players like Pera, Eagles, NateBallers, in our encouters in the Eu+ map. I do not credit that knowledge to the map however, because again, it was due to the people and not due to the map itself. There are things such as range glitches or extreme walling skills which I've learn in scenarios. There I would tell you that it makes no difference if my opponent was another person. So I credit that knowledge to the scenario itself.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Nice cop out. Youve time for a casual and to write essay posts but no time for a few east duels. And you keep bragging about those 2 duels but now you agree that mos and pd are a handicap? I literally played those duels for fun. I thought mos would be better than it was but it couldnt handle the gw spam. I knew pd would be disadvantaged but i wanted to try it anyway. Yet here you are still rubbing those losses in my face a year later as if it proves something. This is why i stopped dueling. I couldnt just enjoy games without some fags(you njab and soldier particularly) trashtalking me in games and on the forums if they won. You guys made it so high stakes and not fun. I am not at my best, i do not tryhard as much as i once did nor do i put in the time and effort. The original death of illy just before html ended it for me. I stopped going for tourney trophies and elo. I lost the drive for world games and now find them boring. I've done it all. These east games would be perfectly fine because i dont 1v1 in east anymore either. You're facing an old and tired laochra who lags when unit counts get big. You have a shot to remove me from the game once and for all. Take it. It is the first step towards killing off the old competitive crowd that you hate so much inspite of all fun it gave.
---- 
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Where is the better map than eu, please point me in the direction of it. I've waited for one for years.
No, not for a while. I am not like the other drama queens. I don't make retirement threads everytime i feel like quitting. I don't rage delete my account. When i say ill go ill be gone for good.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
I could leave at anytime and I can do my casual turn or write the essay posts later. I can't however quit in the middle of a quick duel. Can we move on in the death duel if we're gonna have it please. If you want to go PD/MoS again then go ahead, but I wont fit into your playstyle. I will play the strategy that I'm better at and go with all since the start. You shouldn't handicap yourself either.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Well, whether its the actual map or the people that play it is a big conversation ill give you the benefit of the doubt and agreeing that its the players that make all the difference, but in the end does it really matter? We all became better players there and its the only setting that you can compete atm so...
Or you could not death duel, how bout that? how bout that, how bout that, cash me outside yo, yo, yo, yo. Anyway, let the death duels for useless accounts like Commando eagle's, you or laochra deleting will both have a devastating effect to our precious esthonian browser game's future. I wont let you do that.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Except thats not what i believe. And clovis is saying that the default map is not the best competitive map and players learn more from scenarios. And i dont give a shit if its childish. He insults and patronises me and my clanmembers, shits on the competitive community that taught him so much, tells lies about me, tried to get me removed from mod.and then trolls threads with his stupidity. Either he goes or i go, ive enough of this shit.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
bullshit. You have dozens of duels on that setting and who even knows which side is actually better through trial and error other than you. You've more east duels than me, more games than me, no reason to not play on that setting. You've said turk is disadvantaged so i will even take turkey twice if it goes to 3 games. You suggested the death duel. Now either play or it or fuck off and stop being a dick on the forums. This is classic clovis btw, you want me to play on your terms and are frightened of playing on an even battlefield.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Nice ruining a perfectly good thread with another argument about competitive vs scenario. I fail to see how this discussion is even tangentially related to Invisible's idea.
---- The church is near, but the road is icy... the bar is far away, but I will walk carefully...
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Or you can try reading my previous posts and correctly surmising from them this time...
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Dunno what are you talking about. Will we have the casual death duel yes or no?
I proposed to allow scenario CWs as a better alternative than Invisible's idea but they took it off the track. A mod should indeed clear this mess. I can solve my issues w/ lao through an off-topic thread I guess.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
well personally i started playing EU+ because its rly fun, i didn't even start in a competitive clan, i'm sure others can say the same
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Mfw Clovis thinks Scenario CW is a better idea. I wonder if any clan has enough player or time to play a scenario CW now. What I am proposing is a long term solution. Yours just add another feature impractical under the present circumstances. Your only argument against my proposal is that it looks good on paper. But what I am proposing can have a long term revolutionary positive change to AW. If it looks good on paper, cant we be patient and develop the idea? I think the mere fact it looks good on paper has been a sufficient ground for further serious exploration. Your opposition is insufficient. And your counter proposal is not tackling the crux of the problem. This topic is a response to Lao's CW rant thread in regard to the dying (which you refer as drying) competitive side. To follow your logic in this thread has been an exceptional challenge for me. For example, you mentioned that Opi played RP before being competitive, and thus asserted that "oh the irony" RP map is competitive. Opi laugh out loudly ruled out your logic. I understand thay you are very keen on writing an essay to rebut my ideas and lao's comments. But please be logical and relative to the subject matter of this thread. This is the end of my response to Clovis in this thread until he can produce another sensible argument.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Save yourself the assumptions. It's a lot easier to say that you don't understand than trying to find it out by yourself.
What my comment means is that you're somehow expecting the clan leaders to agree to certain things. That is of course, easier said than done. You somehow expect to put clans like EC Illy Aristo MK in the same house and we'll be nice because we want to save the game? Obviously not. What will happen is that the clan leader(s) will disagree and get angry to each others. They won't "group up". They will follow their own interest. Some kind-of vote system won't work because the majority will just group up. The minority won't respect/care about their decision and become dissidents. The only solution that I could come up with was to make some sort of tournament and give a sole clan the power to rule the house. But even then, you'll have dissidents which doesn't agree with the clan. With few houses, that'll do more bad than good. Aristokrats already declared that they won't group up with anyone (See commando's comment). Personally I won't let someone play knowing that he could potentially ruin the house's chances of winning. This distrust to your "housemates" becomes worsen when you believe that they indeed, play to lose. Whenever you make a proposal, you should think about anything that could possibility go wrong. I believe that you failed (5 times) in that aspect. The house idea is good and it does have it's benefit. but like I already said:
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Nope, you've just twisted my words once again. That's called the Straw man fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man You argued about how Eu+ is a top supreme map where you can learn all the skills. I provide you example of players that came from another map and still beat the Eu+ players that in that time, used to play Eu+ a lot. You can't explain how people like opi, who was a RPer managed to beat people like you and lao, which played Eu+ a lot more than him. You can't explain how opi became more skillful than you and lao, who have been on the metagame a longer time. You can't explain how opi became the strongest Eu+ player, achieving the 3rd highest ELO peak of all the times and bypassing people like Goblin, Eagle or Eagles, all of which had a lot more time than him playing the Eu+ map. So you've ignored the fact and made a straw man fallacy: "clovis pointed out how opi came from RP but still became stronger than us. Therefore, RP must be a better competitive map".
My proposal is a long-term solution to the problem, which is not necessarily exclusive to your proposal. Because you're just stating that it doesn't tackle "the crux of the problem" without providing any fact to back it up, in a clear ignore to my arguments, I will just assume that you're biased toward it.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
I had learnt everything I could in the games that I played and most my friends had left atwar so thats why I started playing 3v3's on europe as it was a new field i hadn't really tried, then i did make friends which kept me playing it. that was just me though, others might have joined for the reason which you said, but unlike them i still play other maps.
---- Lest we forget Moja Bosna Ponosna
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
You seem to underestimate the size of the scenario community, it is at least 3 or 4 times larger than EU community and setting up CWs between scenario clans would be very easy.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Yes. 10/10 would join House Targaryen
----  
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
This is so pathetic lol...
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
I did not want to actually go in to the debate but to maybe shut all of you up I respond to clovis: I can explain why I think you are death wrong here Clovis...
What I know from the years ive played this game is, the more active you play this game, the better you become, which is logically and works the same for most of the things in life. Opi was in the beginning from his move from RP to 3v3/cw pretty noob, I think we all could agree on that, he knew how to wall, he knew what the units did etc., but his expansions were not as good as they are compared to his expansions now, his gameplay was not as it is now, and this goes the same for ALOT of other people who you mentioned. Not to even mention the horrible timing of all the strategy changes over the years, which made people like soldier and elcreyente and etc (RA & Blitz) rise up from nowhere. (Same is happening with the DS discussion at this moment and also GW happened).
^ Read above. Idk if Opi is more skillfull than lao atm, same goes for invis, I haven't seen invisible playing for a while now so I cannot have an opinion about that, but if I refer to my response on ur other question, I said ''the more active you play this game, the better you become'', so therefore I can see opi being more skillfull than invis, but not sure about Lao. But that part also anwsered your question right there.
This may sound like I hate opi and I am trying to put him in a bad spotlight or whatsoever, but AW has already reached its peak a long time ago, both you and I know this, alot of good old players who are still mentioned while they havent log on for years now, left. I am not sure if opi is the strongest eu+ player atm, but he is doing fine, but like I explained above is why he is as he is now. Achieving the 3rd highest elo peak is mostly because of the inactiveness of players who actually went for the seasonal elo. Players like Eagles, Goblin etc. quit going addictively for seasonal elo a while ago, the most people who raped all of us in 3v3's and cw's quit, they quit, like tophats and chess, people who raped us in worldgames quit, like learster. To make a long story short, because of all these people quitting, they made alot of space for the remaining people, which include you, opi, laochra, aqollo, and w/e more people I dont knwo the names of. This has nothing to do with being the best or having the most skills, it simply just has to do with the fact that the skill level of this game lost a huge part of it because of all these people leaving it. ----- I think if opi would come here and read ur comments about how scenario is better than competitive scene, he would laugh out loud, am not sure if he already did, but its a fact most of the people who come from scenario to competitive become better and know more of micromanaging and economics etc, in scenario most of the units and countries you have are already giving at turn 1, remaining most of the skills you need for that game is the lategame part. Which is why most of the people say competitive needs more skills than scenario. Anyways who cares about what takes more skills, look at both of you calling eachother out on who has more trophies and who didn't deserve that trohpy and this and blabla, its a shame and a fucking spit in the face towards all the people from the competitive side who left this game dead years ago, and to those who are still here but have to put up with the shit you 2 post. 
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
How is opi more skilled than me, hes never even beaten me in an east duel. Great player but no... And how have me and invis played eu more than him, hes a r13 with almost 50% more sp... Invis is only a little r9 and never became addicted like we did, hes only as strong as he is cause of dem asian brains  .Also i love how everyone is telling clovis hes wrong but he still thinks hes right. We are all brainwashed apparently. Only he sees the truth. 
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Waff, by that logic some op farmer that plays aw 24/7 would'be the best. As a counter-example you got Prometheus who came in few months and achieved a greater success than a lot of the players here. As for opi, yeah he won both Master of the east and Master of the west tournaments. Regardless of the current atWar activity, he proved himself. People like Eagle which you named played and lost, that's all there's up for it. As I've said hundreds of times he didn't became better due to the map itself, but due to the people which he fought and learned off. If the same people that played Eu+ were to play, say, Destoria instead, there wouldn't be any difference. I can agree that atWar had better times, but that doesn't changes the facts. Also a special callout for lao for running away from the death duel.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Prometheus was a ds faggot. Nerf ds.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Oh no, I'm certainly not you. What others have stated here might as well be right. I could'be wrong. But I've applied my "wrongness" to the game and achieved success with it. All my trophies, all my badges and awards. I've achieved all of it by having what you guys call a wrong theory about the game. I've won all theses CWs and Duels by applying what you guys says is wrong. I've saw players before and after me that achieved success by using the same "wrong" theories. I could'be, like Desu very well said, "universally wrong in every subject". But as long as I keep winning over players like him and you with my theories, I will keep applying them. I'd rather use a wrong theory to achieve the biggest ELO peak ever than a right theory that gets me nowhere. I've always been this practical. Like the song says, "If you tell me I'm wrong, I don't wanna be right". Let me just say that I can always sit over my awards and let the high ranks says whatever they want. I do however care about theses players (mainly low ranks) who comes to forums looking for another perspective about the game. My posts are for theses players. If Invisible realizes the flaw in his ideas, or if you realize your mistakes. I don't really care. But some players might need another point of view about Invi's proposal or your ideas. I came here to give them one.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
njab Brukerkonto slettet |
|
Still loses to ds poland
Laster...
Laster...
|
