contact
June 18, 2019, 09:32:00 AM

Author Topic: 2nd JV Tournament  (Read 20634 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Empty

  • Member
  • Posts: 116
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2015, 08:43:24 PM »
If the person making the complaint is in the "larger player" category, then I would be tempted to think that the person doesn't want to be up against only other "larger players" and be hunted in turn by those larger players. I really don't see the difference between cutting off enrollment at some arbitrary rank # like 100 (or 80 like it was before) or offering open enrollment and limiting the larger players to hunting each other, except that you get more involvement and sets up some interesting ninja, and reverse ninja scenarios that wouldn't otherwise exist??? Maybe I'm missing something. And if so, please, somebody help me to see it. I mean, I would kinda understand some trepidation if my rank was in the 90s at the thought that I would be the easiest, and perhaps the ONLY target for a bunch of guys bigger than me. But how is that any different than normal? Except for 1 person in this game, somebody is ALWAYS bigger than you and you ALWAYS have to be on your guard, and they can't hit what isn't there. And even bigger players lose ships to smaller aggressive players sometimes. Feds played mouse to Beavers' cat in the 2nd varsity tournament. They had four top 15 players and one in the 50s. We didn't even have enough ships combined to ninja an attack coming in from 30 systems away. The disparity was tremendous. I spent lots of hours trying to figure a way to get SOMETHING done. Never did come up with anything successful, but it's not like it was weeks of harrowing running. I do think if I was upper 90s rank, I might be tempted to tear down some stuff, and/or sit in d mode for a few weeks to see if I could slip down to 100+ to have a greater level of participation in the war, if that was my goal.

One other note is that I'm really not sure how the COLD alliance itself is in keeping with the essence of the JV tournament. The alliance doesn't exist except as one d moder at the moment. Come time for war and it draws larger, active, experienced players from multiple alliances. It's basically a mercenary guild. There isn't the usual mix of lower ranks and trainees amongst the more experienced players like most, if not all, of the other alliances bring to the party. I'm not saying that I think it is unfair to do that, just that it seems incongruous to argue about the "essence" or "spirit" of the JV tourney when you're going up against villagers with the Magnificant 7.
Empty = MT = Marshal Tallent

Offline Prophets of the Dark Side

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #16 on: October 13, 2015, 06:38:28 PM »
The point was if all alliances are eligible then why call it JV tourney. We already have an all alliance tournament. It seemed to be a well balanced playing field the first time with limits on alliances and player rank. If it ain't broken why change it?

 Maybe you haven't noticed but COLD has always been an alliance made from mostly Autonomy players. We ask friends from other alliances that are not competing to help us reach the ten player minimum.

Offline Empty

  • Member
  • Posts: 116
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #17 on: October 13, 2015, 09:12:37 PM »
The point was if all alliances are eligible then why call it JV tourney. We already have an all alliance tournament. It seemed to be a well balanced playing field the first time with limits on alliances and player rank. If it ain't broken why change it?
Which player had the single most impact on the last tournament? The Axe. He led COLD to victory. He got every single one of COLD's war winning hits. It could be argued he WAS COLD. Who else was in the Finals? The Feds. And who wouldn't be able to participate based on the previous rules? The Axe and the Feds. Some would say that means that it IS broken.

Maybe Feds are too big now to be in the JV Tourney. That's not for me to say. That's for the tourney organizers. And you as a participant are right to bring your concerns to the organizers. But then COGF would not be able to participate either. That would leave 6 alliances - maybe 5 if a PM I got last night is any indication.

I think the JU has done a fantastic job listening to concerns, listening to suggestions and coming up with creative solutions and easily enforceable rules for these tourneys, while treading carefully to not take anything away from the other tourneys and all of the good work that Rayman has been doing. The 100 rank rule seems like it is actually better than the 80 rank rule before. Before the end of the last tourney, I was ranked in the low 70s and The Axe was ranked in the 60s. We were able to attack anybody. With this new rule, the smaller players will be on a much more even level. I can't see how that is bad.

Quote
Maybe you haven't noticed but COLD has always been an alliance made from mostly Autonomy players. We ask friends from other alliances that are not competing to help us reach the ten player minimum.
Why don't you just bring the whole alliance like everybody else is doing?
Empty = MT = Marshal Tallent

Offline Justice Umbiya

  • Member
  • Posts: 621
  • FlySavage
    • Facebook - Google me... Its not that hard to find me.
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #18 on: October 13, 2015, 10:31:44 PM »
If I do what members of COLD are suggesting, I would have to eliminate 2 or 3 alliances from the tournament... If COLD opts out of the Tournament, the tournament just losses them... I am willing to cut off a finger to save the hand. If COLD doesn't want to participate, I can live with that. I will wait for a final yes or no from their representative.
Get Down or Lay Down!

Offline occuli imperator

  • Member
  • Posts: 897
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #19 on: October 14, 2015, 04:29:49 PM »
the AXE in a Junior tournament..

LOL
may as well unleash Thor versus the smurfs...
The Axe would have a place anywhere in the TOURNAMENT...
My enemy’s enemy is a problem for later: In the meantime, they might be useful.

Offline Prophets of the Dark Side

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #20 on: October 14, 2015, 07:08:01 PM »
All I said was a limit. I did not say the same limit as before. Although I can see where I may have implied it by saying if it ain't broke, but my meaning was really just a limit of the collective cores choosing. I understand Alliances have moved up the leader board. But say a top ten limit is not the worst idea.

 Just expressing a concern. I am not trying to change the whole game here. No need to get all worked up over this.

 Yes the Axe ( who is no longer playing ) did have several war winning hits. Also cost us wars to a ninja. He did not have every war winning hit, Cmdr Martin had a few also among others. Please remember he started within the rules at 84 on the leaderboard. Also he would not of had war winning hits if players didn't leave their toys out.

Offline Justice Umbiya

  • Member
  • Posts: 621
  • FlySavage
    • Facebook - Google me... Its not that hard to find me.
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #21 on: October 14, 2015, 08:17:48 PM »
I totally agree PODS.... I really think that this format is one that can stick for a while. I doubt very highly that Based On, HOD, Pilgrims, BAD, SIOS, etc (basically any alliance that participates in the varsity tournament) would want to compete in the JV Tournament. If this format doesn't work out, then we can discuss adjustments moving into the future. I want ppl to keep playing as well as participating in the tournaments. Sooner of later, I am sure that 1 or 2 of the JVT participants will have a go at the Varsity tourney.... We might just win.
Get Down or Lay Down!

Offline Prophets of the Dark Side

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #22 on: October 15, 2015, 05:57:36 PM »
Absolutely a great format. Played in the first three tourneys. Spent most of the time running for my life. lol  It seemed to me the JV tourney had a good balance which allowed a greater number of players per alliance to participate. Really don't want to loose that balance. You have done a great job with this tourney. Thanks for all your efforts.   

Offline Toxic

  • Member
  • Posts: 212
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #23 on: October 15, 2015, 07:42:34 PM »
due to my recent lack of play .....Anvil now qualifies for the jv tournament ...before i bring it to vote , on my side , is this an issue ????

Offline Toxic

  • Member
  • Posts: 212
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #24 on: October 15, 2015, 07:57:46 PM »
a lot of my guys are 200's rank though..... do they qualify ....not sure the format .....

Offline Empty

  • Member
  • Posts: 116
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #25 on: October 15, 2015, 10:39:46 PM »
Sounds like you guys are perfect. Pertinent rules are below.

1. No Alliance Overall cap.

2. 3 or more active players at all times.

3. Nobody stays in Pmode longer than 16 consecutive hrs.

4. No players ranked 45 or higher.

5. No tag dropping

6. If a smaller player (101-5000) attacks a larger player (100-46), the larger player is allowed to respond in kind for the remainder of that war.

7. A larger player can respond aggressively if their alliance mate is attacked, this includes oracle locks and group defends.

8. wars will be sent in this format... 20 million points... No inactives... No Dmode percentage. 3 week time limit.

9. 10 player minimum in each alliance.

12. If other players don't want to take part in your bantering, keep it to yourself.
Empty = MT = Marshal Tallent

Offline Justice Umbiya

  • Member
  • Posts: 621
  • FlySavage
    • Facebook - Google me... Its not that hard to find me.
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #26 on: October 16, 2015, 07:01:42 AM »
That is fine with me. Anvil is a welcome addition.
Get Down or Lay Down!

Offline T.H.O.R.

  • Member
  • Posts: 86
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #27 on: October 16, 2015, 03:26:45 PM »
I like Smurfs
On the wrong side of Heaven and the righteous side of Hell!

Offline occuli imperator

  • Member
  • Posts: 897
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #28 on: October 16, 2015, 08:01:06 PM »
LOL
wasnt you i was etoo BUT the Thor from Marvel.
My enemy’s enemy is a problem for later: In the meantime, they might be useful.

Offline Justice Umbiya

  • Member
  • Posts: 621
  • FlySavage
    • Facebook - Google me... Its not that hard to find me.
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd JV Tournament
« Reply #29 on: October 17, 2015, 08:43:00 AM »
It looks like there will be 10 alliances in this tournament. Lets see if any other alliances are interested in doing something besides hunting NPCs or buying resources.
Get Down or Lay Down!