Attention Please 3 for 1

[Blitzaholic]

I would be happy with the map/touney medals being worth 1 medal, as long as it still says on the medal how many maps I have done.

good point

[Frop]

Who gives an ass about the medals? Even if it bothers you so much that these 'nooby' mapmakers and tourney organizers have more medals than you, what's stopping you from creating maps and organizing tourneys yourself? You could've easily drawn a draft map in Paint with all the time you spent whining in this thread.

[Army of Achilles]

Who gives an ass about the medals? Even if it bothers you so much that these 'nooby' mapmakers and tourney organizers have more medals than you, what's stopping you from creating maps and organizing tourneys yourself? You could've easily drawn a draft map in Paint with all the time you spent whining in this thread.

[Blitzaholic]

Hmmm - seems like the people who have lots of game medals are the people who don't like people having medals for non game related things.

How's about we all just drop our pants and compare cock sizes?

C.

YETI your comment is INAPPROPRIATE


you are missing the point, you simply should not be allowed to obtain MORE medals for making tourneys alone, I mean the way it is right now, a cc player could obtain well over 100 medals just for tournaments alone, and all others ways you can get medals, ALL combined, maximum is 27??? get it now? it is not right or fair, there is imbalance.


It is nobodys fault, just a change in the system needs to occur is all, you will still receive medals for your hard work of hosting tourneys, just perhaps slashed in half or a third, no biggie. so you made 9 tourneys lets say, you would get credit for 9 tournies made, but maybe only 3 medals for that, not 9.

[Blitzaholic]

Who gives an ass about the medals? Even if it bothers you so much that these 'nooby' mapmakers and tourney organizers have more medals than you, what's stopping you from creating maps and organizing tourneys yourself? You could've easily drawn a draft map in Paint with all the time you spent whining in this thread.

we all know this Frop, it is not the point!

If many started doing this it could water down cc some.


The point is to make it more realistic, why does no one else seem to get this simple concept?


It is not about they got more medals than ME??? lol, geez, it is a matter about distributing the medals more fairly and equally and balanced !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and I have created severals tourney's, at least 3 and put forth effort in a 4th one last year, I was asked to get a medal for this or questioned about it, and I told steelhorse NO i did not think I deserved a medal for that 2007 tourney , although I did do a lot of work for it, so if I wanted to get a medal for that I could of pushed the issue and got one, but I did not, so obviously, I beleif they should be earned honesty, just want them more balanced.

[sensfan]

It's hard to find a consistent way to reward tournament organizers due to the wide range of tournament sizes. For example, in the current system, a 16-player single elimination 1v1 tournament scores the same as a 144 all-map iron man event. I don't think it would be fair to give a third of a medal to a large tournament like that which takes a long time and a lot of effort to complete. There probably is a better way to score tournament contributions, but this isn't it.

And having to check the size for every single one of them is why the TDs haven't gone that route. Plus, where would the line be drawn?

Everybody, keep discussing possible solutions to the tournament medals system. The TDs have a few ideas, but more are always welcome. I might move this to Tournament General Info forum, but it's fine here for now.

You could have classes based on tournament sizes, for example
Class A= 16-32 players
Class B= 32-48 players
Class C= 48-64 players
Class D= 64-72 players
Class E= 72-128 players
Class F= 128+

And TD's wouldn't even have to check for every tournament, a new requirement when sending in tournament privilege requests would be listing the class size of your tournament

yes yes yes

[Frop]

I've seen not a single argument in this thread that validates the point you're trying to make (except for yeti's 'lets compare the size of our genitalia'). On the contrary, since the many maps and tourneys make CC such a versatile and titillating experience I think they should get even more medals for each contribution.

Maps

• Small (16 to 31 territories): 1 medal
• Medium (32 to 48 territories): 2 medals
• Large (49 or more territories): 3 medals
• Overly complicated: 50 medals when launched, but -1 medal each following month with a minimum of 6 medals (neutral infected zombie medals)

Tourneys

• Singles: 1 medal
• Doubles: 2 medals
• Triples: 3 medals
• Quadruples: 4 medals
• All of the above: 10 medals and an 'Optimus Prime approves this tourney' bumper sticker
• Fog of War: ? medals

[Scott-Land]

Who gives an ass about the medals? Even if it bothers you so much that these 'nooby' mapmakers and tourney organizers have more medals than you, what's stopping you from creating maps and organizing tourneys yourself? You could've easily drawn a draft map in Paint with all the time you spent whining in this thread.

I think Blitz has a valid point in saying that the distribution of medals may be a bit excessive . Pedron had mentioned that he didn't want to lose his medal for the tournament he ran and he absolutely shouldn't- no ones taking anything away, it's just consolidating them into a group in the same way as the gaming medals are being distributed.

I personally don't have a problem with the amount- Blitz and the others are trying to see if there isn't a solution that would satisfy all involved. Perhaps gaming medals have lost some of their value due to the excessive ones that the tournament and map makers are receiving. I don't think anyone is saying they aren't deserving.

[Diamonds14]

Who gives an ass about the medals? Even if it bothers you so much that these 'nooby' mapmakers and tourney organizers have more medals than you, what's stopping you from creating maps and organizing tourneys yourself? You could've easily drawn a draft map in Paint with all the time you spent whining in this thread.

I think Blitz has a valid point in saying that the distribution of medals may be a bit excessive . Pedron had mentioned that he didn't want to lose his medal for the tournament he ran and he absolutely shouldn't- no ones taking anything away, it's just consolidating them into a group in the same way as the gaming medals are being distributed.

I personally don't have a problem with the amount- Blitz and the others are trying to see if there isn't a solution that would satisfy all involved. Perhaps gaming medals have lost some of their value due to the excessive ones that the tournament and map makers are receiving. I don't think anyone is saying they aren't deserving.

I think it is a valid point too.. The only reason i care about tournament medals is for players to see how successful or how experienced I am at running tournaments.. Right now i have 2 completed tournaments, 2 active tournaments and 2 in sign ups.. (i dont know why i havent received any medals though.. but anyways) I think a fair way of doing is just how a standard achievement medal is given out. Give a bronze for 1-4 tournaments completed, a silver for 5-10 and a gold or anymore than that. Its a similar starndard to a player who is good at standard games, doubles or whatever plus it is a way for tournament organizers to get recognition or the hard work they do.. because it is harder than it looks.

[Blitzaholic]

Who gives an ass about the medals? Even if it bothers you so much that these 'nooby' mapmakers and tourney organizers have more medals than you, what's stopping you from creating maps and organizing tourneys yourself? You could've easily drawn a draft map in Paint with all the time you spent whining in this thread.

I think Blitz has a valid point in saying that the distribution of medals may be a bit excessive . Pedron had mentioned that he didn't want to lose his medal for the tournament he ran and he absolutely shouldn't- no ones taking anything away, it's just consolidating them into a group in the same way as the gaming medals are being distributed.

I personally don't have a problem with the amount- Blitz and the others are trying to see if there isn't a solution that would satisfy all involved. Perhaps gaming medals have lost some of their value due to the excessive ones that the tournament and map makers are receiving. I don't think anyone is saying they aren't deserving.

THANK YOU

someone else gets it besides me and some of the mods

[Night Strike]

Right now, there actually IS a defacto cap to the number of tourney medals that a person can earn: the roman numerals only go up to 30. I can't guarantee that some medals won't be removed from a person, because they might. But all those removed will be reclassified under a slightly different medal/system; therefore, they would still be represented (i.e. Pedronicus won't lose his solitary medal).

No offense Frop, but your tiered system for awarding the medals really does NOT work (although the bumper sticker comment is funny). A small map can be more intricate and detailed than a large map, and a quadruples tournament could just be a simple 16 team bracket (which is the easiest tournament to run).

At this point, medal levels will NOT be awarded strictly on the number of players within the tournament: there's just too much variety that can be done. Any such system would have to also include the number of games the organizer had to make. Furthermore, any proposed system of checking those types of game stats have to be easily doable. All three Tournament Directors are busy with things both in real life and on CC. At this point, adding a fourth is not really an option, so the system would have to be time efficient for the current directors.

[General Mojo]

No offense Blitz, but this whole thread is ridiculous. Since when are medals about competition? When you go to the scoreboard, is there a list of the members with the most medals?

All medals do is signify that you achieved a certain milestone that CC has decided to acknowledge. Why do you care if someone has 40 medals and you can only get 27 because you choose not to make maps or tournaments? I just don't get it....

I guess my ultimate point can be analogized to the scoreboard with KLOBBER. He could end up with 10,000 points and be conquerer by a wide margin and nobody would give two craps about it because we all know that he got there by pwning noooobs and hiding behind his foe list.

Why not treat someone with 30 map or tourney medals the same way (although I'm still confused why the amount of medals everyone has means so much to you)?

[Bones2484]

Did you decide on the number 3 because you made 3 tournaments?

What if you had only done 2... would you have said 2 for 1?

[Blitzaholic]

Did you decide on the number 3 because you made 3 tournaments?

What if you had only done 2... would you have said 2 for 1?

no, doesnt matter, like i said I had the opportunity to receive a medal tourney back in 2007 in discussion with steelhorse, i said no i do not think i should of got one for that, (although I did do a lot of work in it) and he would of credited it to me cause it was close, but i felt after the discussions I did not do enough follow thru at the end and said NO, steelhorse thanked me for my integrity and honesty and i did not receive one but very well perhaps could of, it is not about me guys, lol it is about fair distribution. good grief

[Blitzaholic]

Right now, there actually IS a defacto cap to the number of tourney medals that a person can earn: the roman numerals only go up to 30. I can't guarantee that some medals won't be removed from a person, because they might. But all those removed will be reclassified under a slightly different medal/system; therefore, they would still be represented (i.e. Pedronicus won't lose his solitary medal).

No offense Frop, but your tiered system for awarding the medals really does NOT work.

Agreed, thank you, all I was asking is there needs to be some change because there is some slight over value to them compared to all else, and it looks like CC will prevail once again as usual in exploring a way or ways to balance this.

[Godd]

point in general- lots of the tourneys and maps were done before medals came along
Now that they are here we have them
And I tell you what my little 16 player tourney does not take as much effort as one of those smallest maps that the map makers make.
The map makers should be getting a medal and a free month or more out of each map they do.

as for the system to get medals for tourneys I would think it should be based on games and players combined to equal 100 for a single medal. If it is at 200 (games + players) then maybe 2 medals and so on.

It does not take all that much to run a small 16 player/16 game tourney but once you have a tourney with 32 or more players and a hundred games it does take alot to keep it going as well as a whole lot of your time and then those with 100 players and 200-500 games it turns into a job.
(tourneys also increases the joy of playing on CC for lots of the players)
as for me I am just addicted to this site is all

[Frop]

Creative Quoting™ again? I can do that too.

Who gives an ass about medals?

Agreed, thank you.

[Frop]

No offense Frop, but your tiered system for awarding the medals really does NOT work (although the bumper sticker comment is funny). A small map can be more intricate and detailed than a large map, and a quadruples tournament could just be a simple 16 team bracket (which is the easiest tournament to run).

If you are pretending to take my suggestion seriously and you're taking the piss out of me by doing so - I congratulate you, well done indeed. Otherwise...

[barterer2002]

I'm actually in agreement with Army of Achilles here. I really don't care one way or the other about medals for creating tournaments. They're nice but its not like I'm going to stop creating tournaments when I reach 30. I'll stop when they're not fun anymore. I would, however, like to see a system for having medals for Tournament WINNERS. I tend to think that the three tiered system is fine. something like

2 tournaments wins for a bronze
6 tournament wins for a silver
10 tournament wins for a gold. (I think there is only one of these out there-maybe two at the moment-Congrats Bones2484)

I'm also not averse to whatever is done for tournaments. Frankly, as I said I don't care. The three tiered system is fine however the current system is also fine (how hard is it really to look at the medals and see that I have 13 for tournaments. Is the subtraction that tough?).

Anyway Blitz, I understand where you're coming from on this, the numbers and such have always mattered to you (see thread top 5s, first 5s etc). Your numbers are off a little of course since you can't get "hundreds" of tournament medals but that's somewhat irrelevant to the general idea.

On the other hand, the TDs and foundry directors (FDs?) need a way to make it automated for them which it currently isn't.

I guess the question at hand then is "Is there a way to recognize the contributions to CC of mapmakers and TOs without watering down the medal system that rewards accomplishments for play?"

My solution, and I'm curious to know how this will be received, would be to separate out the display. So currently where my own profile reads Medals: 27, if we split it out so that it read Medals 14/27 (so that you get a total for gameplay (14) and a total for everything (27)). This allows the TDs not to have to go and reconfigure things (which they don't have the time for) and also takes into account Blitz's concerns about medal inflation.

[yeti_c]

I'm actually in agreement with Army of Achilles here. I really don't care one way or the other about medals for creating tournaments. They're nice but its not like I'm going to stop creating tournaments when I reach 30. I'll stop when they're not fun anymore. I would, however, like to see a system for having medals for Tournament WINNERS. I tend to think that the three tiered system is fine. something like

2 tournaments wins for a bronze
6 tournament wins for a silver
10 tournament wins for a gold. (I think there is only one of these out there-maybe two at the moment-Congrats Bones2484)

Disagree with this - should be 1 medal per win - it's hard enough to win a tournie as is - that 1 medal per tourney win should be fine.

Agree with the idea of splitting them out to keep *some* people happy.

C.

[Bones2484]

2 tournaments wins for a bronze
6 tournament wins for a silver
10 tournament wins for a gold. (I think there is only one of these out there-maybe two at the moment-Congrats Bones2484)

I wish! I'm at 5, but I'll make it there at some point.

I believe Godd and Baldy both have 10+ though

[killmanic]

heres a message from OP that he wanted me to post here:

I’m on vacation, but someone brought this thread to my attention and I felt the need to make some of my personal comments known as a Tournament Director (NOT as a player).

First things first here. We need to make sure that everyone understands the difference between the types of medals that we have. Right now there are two different kinds: gameplay and contribution. Now, perhaps it is just me, but it seems like everyone here is experienced enough to understand the underlying difference between the two and why they are awarded the way they currently are.

Gameplay medals are awarded in a three-tier system of 20-100-400, with the exceptions being the medals for ratings and cross-map (both of which make sense on their own). This system works wonderfully for gameplay because it forces you to at least play a significant number of games (and win them) in order to be awarded the medal. Certainly, there is the debate on how much skill is involved to get to a gold medal in each, but that is not a concern of this discussion.

Contribution medals are something entirely different, and therefore do not fall under the same set of rules as gameplay medals and never should. They are exactly what they are named: contribution medals

As such, they should never be subjected to the same criteria as a gameplay medal. Each map that is made and each tournament that is run is enhancing the experience for not just 1 player, but many, possibly hundreds of players over time. Because of this, they should be awarded on a 1 for 1 basis. Each individual map is worthy of a contribution medal to say the least, nobody is going to dispute that given the many, many hours that are required to polish the product into something that can be used by everyone.

Tournaments are a little bit different, but follow the same principle. While a mapmaker has to deal with conflicting opinions about their map, fixing problems at the whim of the public and such, the tournament organizer also has their struggles too. They have to deal with missing players, finding replacements, making games, dealing with accusations of cheating within the tournament, etc.

Now, the debate can rage on and on as to whether every single tournament is worthy of its own medal, but that is not the issue here. What needs to be understood is that the two types of medals are awarded in different ways.

Yes, there probably could be some improvements to the way that tournament medals are handed out, but I can tell you right now it will never be based upon some formula involving number of players or number of games because after weeks and weeks of research it was concluded that those numbers are entirely impossible to fit into a set system. It will also never be the case that you have to complete multiple tournaments just to get your first medal. I’m sorry guys, but that is just silly.

In the future, there will certainly be tweaks, I’m sure, but they won’t be anything nearly as drastic as is being discussed here. Tournament organizers will continue to receive recognition on a case by case basis for each tournament that they successfully complete. There does not need to be a three-tier system for completing tournaments.

Some of the posters in this thread have been dead on in saying that just because a profile lists someone as having 38 medals and 30 of them are tournament contribution medals does not mean that they are better at the game than anyone else. It simply means they contributed 30 times in a positive manner to the Conquer Club community. If you have all 27 gameplay medals then you have accomplished a significant feat through dedication and skill, however you prefer to look at it. Everyone that is fretting about “confusion in the medals system” because of the higher totals for some needs to take a breather and realize it isn’t hard to figure out what that player has accomplished.
Yes, tournament winners will have their own medals at some point, and most likely it will also be a 1 for 1 system because after over 400 completed tournaments there are merely a handful of players who have one more than 2. It is a BIG accomplishment to win a tournament, and therefore it should be awarded on a case by case basis.

There are currently some minor changes being considered to the tournament medals, but it will be a little while before they go into effect because it is not a high priority at the moment.

The most important thing for everyone to remember is that gameplay and contribution medals are two ENTIRELY DIFFERENT things, and everyone needs to remember that. You cannot compare gameplay medals in the same vein as a contribution medal.

I likely won’t respond past this post until after I return in a few weeks.

Regards, Optimus Prime

[Frop]

THANK YOU Optimus for getting it and for giving me an excuse to randomly use CAPITALIZATION to express my gratitude.

[Blitzaholic]

THANK YOU Optimus for getting it and for giving me an excuse to randomly use CAPITALIZATION to express my gratitude.

Frop not sure what your issue is, however, It does seem that I have a good point and agreed by others, so we can agree to disagree. I understand they are 2 total different things, but they are added into the total, use a separation perhaps like others suggested, if you have 30 total and 20 are for game play use 20/(10) 30 total or keep them separate, just some change is all, and it looks like they are going to explore it and change it some. That's all I wanted to know.

[General Mojo]

THANK YOU Optimus for getting it and for giving me an excuse to randomly use CAPITALIZATION to express my gratitude.

Frop not sure what your issue is, however, It does seem that I have a good point and agreed by others, so we can agree to disagree. I understand they are 2 total different things, but they are added into the total, use a separation perhaps like others suggested, if you have 30 total and 20 are for game play use 20/(10) 30 total or keep them separate, just some change is all, and it looks like they are going to explore it and change it some. That's all I wanted to know.

Just curious, Blitz. If we are separating out medals, what is your stance on the comment medals? Should they be tallied differently? I mean I would have two additional medals if I took a bit more time to rate every single player that I have played with (as opposed to only the ones that stuck out in my mind), but I don't think that reflects negatively on my gameplay abilities...