My idea to reform current controversy-dogged CW system

Atwar community has recently complained about the CW system. They think it is highly unfair to have a clan reaching first place with 100 CPs each game, while the majority have only 50.

Here comes my idea:
1) Abandon 50-100 CPs calculation and adopt another system: A win awards you 3 points and a loss results in a reduction of 2 points, and cw counts has no limit.

That said, 'A' clan has 25 win, 16 loss has a final score of 43 points
'B' clan has 22 win, 3 loss has a final score of 60 points
'C' clan has 10 win, 0 loss has a final score of 30 points
Since CW counts has no limit, 'A' clan and 'C' will keep CW to press 'B' clan. Meanwhile, 'C' clan, having strong results but little gameplay wont get 1st place. Therefore, CW will be stimulated and the season will become more intense.

2) competence is still in count, but is calculated once a year. Highest competence clan get annual champion award, and so on and so forth.

Support suggestion 1. Some parts of 2 I don't like. 1 year might be too long I like having seasons

Support suggestion 1. Indifferent towards suggestion 2.

Support your thread. Point 2 is interesting but 1 year is too long.

Kirjoittanut Acquiesce, 04.05.2014 at 12:11

Support suggestion 1. Some parts of 2 I don't like. 1 year might be too long I like having seasons

i think he means separate of the seasons, highest comp clan at end of the year gets a reward.

Kirjoittanut Permamuted, 04.05.2014 at 12:50

Kirjoittanut Acquiesce, 04.05.2014 at 12:11

Support suggestion 1. Some parts of 2 I don't like. 1 year might be too long I like having seasons

i think he means separate of the seasons, highest comp clan at end of the year gets a reward.

I agree clans with low comp get too much competence per win.

Anyway i agree also, though this system could also be abused by farming, but in the end every system can be abused..

Interesting suggestion, I had considered something like this but this involved totally changing the current system (refering to part1). This method also does not consider the relative strength of the various teams one may compete against, this is why I believe the differnce in the award of CP was created in the first place. By making use of the current system and considering more games I was able to achieve different results for the season. I will try to share with the community soon, it was a bit tedious going through the records of all the clans in the top ten. With the added aids of cp resets for certain clans at start of new season etc and bonus cp for clans finishing top 3, it helps to normalize the results vs expected results; suggesting that it is a more stable representation of the standing of the various clans within a given season and relative to their already established strength(competence).

I have said many many times that competence is a problem, it is not needed anymore with all the clan hopping and 'fair ranks' games so yes support idea 1 to change the way points are calculated.

I like the idea of all games within a season being counted rather then first ten or last 20 etc, but still think the percentage system with a qualifying limit is the best method (see Desu thread) lets not try to overcomplicate things.

Agreed on 1. Or, at least make the CW limit bigger, 20 is not enough for 3 months.
But like acqui said, once a year is too much.

BTW; For evoL haters, guess what? We would still be #1. Atm, only illyria has same win ratio ratio as us (13:7) but we have 2 more losses to replace.

I don't understand the need for a system anyways.

Set seasons to 50 CWs. Give medals to top three clans with most wins. Problem solved.

Kirjoittanut Fockmeeard, 04.05.2014 at 23:46

I don't understand the need for a system anyways.

Set seasons to 50 CWs. Give medals to top three clans with most wins. Problem solved.

Some clans, with strength, are not active enough. This system ensure that they still have a chance to win the season. Meanwhile, having insufficient CW wont ensure they having a good chance to reach 1st place.

Kirjoittanut Dragon, 05.05.2014 at 00:05

Kirjoittanut Fockmeeard, 04.05.2014 at 23:46

I don't understand the need for a system anyways.

Set seasons to 50 CWs. Give medals to top three clans with most wins. Problem solved.

Some clans, with strength, are not active enough. This system ensure that they still have a chance to win the season. Meanwhile, having insufficient CW wont ensure they having a good chance to reach 1st place.

Every clan that has a chance to win a medal this season is averaging at least 1-2 cws per day. That means every clan that could possible win a medal this season is already cwing often enough to meet the 50cw per season quota.

Http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=13591#m152451

Dont support the idea of unlimited cws counting, basically the winner will be whoever plays more cws, man clans will not have chance too compete for the title

If a clan with 11:9 score, has more points than a clan with 20:0... Something is fucked.

Maybe we need some league...

Kirjoittanut lOrd pOnteZ, 05.05.2014 at 15:28

man clans will not have chance too compete for the title

man clans suck anyway.girl clans rule

Kirjoittanut Khal.eesi, 05.05.2014 at 15:51

Kirjoittanut lOrd pOnteZ, 05.05.2014 at 15:28

man clans will not have chance too compete for the title

man clans suck anyway.girl clans rule

girls rule anything, love girls <3

Kirjoittanut lOrd pOnteZ, 05.05.2014 at 15:52

Kirjoittanut Khal.eesi, 05.05.2014 at 15:51

Kirjoittanut lOrd pOnteZ, 05.05.2014 at 15:28

man clans will not have chance too compete for the title

man clans suck anyway.girl clans rule

girls rule anything, love girls <3

Kirjoittanut Mauzer Panteri, 05.05.2014 at 15:36

If a clan with 11:9 score, has more points than a clan with 20:0... Something is fucked.

Maybe we need some league...

hi friend.your idea is interesting, can you elaborate please?Also i will kindly ask you,to stop using words like "fucked" here in the forums.I dont know how you do things in your clan, but here we like to keep the enviroment healthy and friendly.
cheers!

I was chatting with a clanmate earlier and this was the exact topic of discussion. I believe the "fairest" system is one which combines two aspects, as in many other sports. The first phase can be similar to the system we now have(with some ajustments or not) , all the first phase will do is qualify teams to the play offs. Based on the scores at the end of the first phase, teams can be seeded and the rest is knockout; direct battles bwteen 2 clans to progress to the next round until the champion is determined. The knocout games can be best of 5 or something like this. This is just the general idea, the specifics can be worked out but at least this way the winner can never be determined as a direct result of farming or some other "system flaw". Maybe the playoffs can be top 4 or top8, whetever the case the winner will have to have to directly beat the stronger sides in a series of games to claim title of champion. My only concern about such a system is of course the willingness of the admins to actually implement something like this since it is not the most straightforward.

Kirjoittanut b0nker2, 04.05.2014 at 15:36

I have said many many times that competence is a problem, it is not needed anymore with all the clan hopping and 'fair ranks' games so yes support idea 1 to change the way points are calculated.

I like the idea of all games within a season being counted rather then first ten or last 20 etc, but still think the percentage system with a qualifying limit is the best method (see Desu thread) lets not try to overcomplicate things.

Percentage system discourages CW when the clan has reached the set CW count, and having a fair percentage of winning. This proposed system, yet, rewards active clan by giving them 3 points each win, given that CW count is unlimited. Of course, active clan, with much loss, anyway wont score high when each loss results in a reduction of 2 points.

Invisible, as I mentioned before, after some thought I am starting to like this system except the penalty for loss is too high. I get the idea of penalizing for loss and not just rewaded clans that lose a lot. If a clan must be penalized for lose maybe we can consider,0 points for loss or at most -1 for loss but this could have clans with negative points;an idea I do not like. So maybe just 0 points for a loss. Aqui's point about 1 point though was still trying to encourage as much activity as possible.

No matter what is eventually decided any such is system is certainly better than the current one! No way 12-9 should be able to score higher than 20-0.

Kirjoittanut Silent One_deleted, 06.05.2014 at 07:24

Invisible, as I mentioned before, after some thought I am starting to like this system except the penalty for loss is too high. I get the idea of penalizing for loss and not just rewaded clans that lose a lot. If a clan must be penalized for lose maybe we can consider,0 points for loss or at most -1 for loss but this could have clans with negative points;an idea I do not like. So maybe just 0 points for a loss. Aqui's point about 1 point though was still trying to encourage as much activity as possible.

No matter what is eventually decided any such is system is certainly better than the current one! No way 12-9 should be able to score higher than 20-0.

I would prefer Acqui's idea of -1 points for each loss. I dislike the idea of more active=champion. Champion should be a balance of activity and strength.

I support 1st. For competence I suggest instead of a year it be made for that season itself. So even if a clan plays a little less cws if their win ratio is high they should also be awarded. The current system only gives preference to whoever farmed most sp in the last 20 cws.

Kirjoittanut Mauzer Panteri, 05.05.2014 at 15:36

If a clan with 11:9 score, has more points than a clan with 20:0... Something is fucked.

Maybe we need some league...

agree and support

Kirjoittanut Mauzer Panteri, 05.05.2014 at 15:36

If a clan with 11:9 score, has more points than a clan with 20:0... Something is fucked.

Maybe we need some league...

What if those 20 clans were complete noobs and the 11 were much better? Does the difficulty mean anything or is it just quantity?

I agree with mauzer, league is the best option.

I am against a league for the fact that they simply do not work when put into place. People have tried to start CW leagues many times and ALL have failed due to people not playing matches. Honestly, no matter what system you create, there are going to be flaws that people will complain about. The best solution I believe is to not ditch this system altogether, but rather, we should perhaps close the competence gap range so the max allowable to be gained is not double the minimum.