Ties are irrelevant in warzone. There will always be a winner and loser of these games. Vote to end results in a loss for both players.

okay i didnt know that my bad

I think the 10% template deduction per previous league going back 6 seasons is too harsh.

Probably not a huge amount of players in CL today were playing in CL6.

I don't think popular templates are more at risk to strategic voting than less popular ones. Certain clans might have a really strong player for a less popular template, where as every clan is more likely to have players with experience on popular templates.

Also some templates are popular for a reason... *cough* EU 3v3 *cough*

Perhaps it could be 10% for the previous 2 or 3 seasons.

Edited 4/17/2020 16:21:12

i dont think template is the problem here
if it is you can make Cl Only Maps If You Need to
it's Just That human variable That makes us play inconsistantly

I think we should have a fixed rotation of templates.

or part fixed and part voted ( 3vs3 EU, 2vs2 guiroma, 1v1 ...)

or half changed every CL, with basic rule no templates can be included in 3 consecutive CLs.

1 benefit : we would spend less time to select the rotating templates
2 benefit : clan can better prepare for coming CL knowing part of the templates

some templates are just too good to pass... while it's nice to have new stuff, it's also nice to have traditions

strat ME and EU 3v3 are good examples, i wouldn't have a problem if these were guaranteed in every cl

Edited 4/17/2020 17:19:42

The idea of 60% is to almost guarantee that any repetitive templates can be skipped. Even then I don't know if EU can be passed with 60% deduction, since we're using Dowdall. Not to mention EU can't get the full 60% reduction until CL18.

@Cowboy How About CL Making its own maps? That Way We Can Make Sure Its Balanced?

Because CL is based off of community strategic templates.

There is no need to make CL specific templates. That would also make it overly repetitive

This is just a suggestion of course, but maybe restrict players to one template each. For example, if I represent Apprentice in French Brawl, I can't also be on 2v2 or 3v3 template. This would force clans to field a diverse line up, as opposed to relying on their best players to carry them on 2-3 templates.

just no Marcus, why punish people for being good or influential in their clans

Playing multiple slots gets punished in a way, since playing many games at a time is often stressful and some cant play their best anymore.

The point of it is not to punish, but for clans to play as, well, clans. If top players take the hardest templates, there is no incentive for clans to go on recruitment drives, there is no incentive for clans to train up their weakest players, and in a way it's cheating.

It's as if Real Madrid plays two Ronaldos for attack (I don't watch football don't know what position he plays), you can't do that, you have one Ronaldo, you have to choose where you want to play him. There has to be an opportunity cost to fielding your best players on certain templates.

That'd mean that clans MUST field 18 players. That's not possible for most clans, even looking at our own :P there is a cap on 3 slots/player for a reason.

Yes, for some clan the difference between top and bottom is very wide. And you d need 20 or more players, sub included

Ok, I understand that for practical reasons this can't be implemented. Maybe then reduce to a maximum of 2 templates?
The idea is to avoid any single player or small group of players carrying their entire clan to victory, and for the tournament to be a collective effort from each clan.
It's ok if it's too much of a hassle, just throwing the idea out there.

If your clan only puppets you in tournaments, search for another clan. Clan league is indeed supposed to be a team effort, and if my clan only uses me as filler as if they play with alts, I would refuse to play.

Daddy Deadman can Rufus me Aurelius.


{Despite Master's recent recruitment it seems they are missing some key member nicknames}.

Anyway, as have been said, the smaller clans struggle to fill the existing rooster. More slot limitations/reductions have been proposed before and many clans stated they would not be able to field a rooster under such changes. That being said, I do like the intention of the suggestion. Currently, however, I think the 3 slots compromise is pretty fair.

We keep the 3 slot limit, but within that limit, only allow for a maximum of one 1v1 template per player.
Clans can still field their best players on 3 templates, but can only field them once in each 1v1 template.

now I've seen a season with the clot starting the games off and the previous with it being tournaments. I far preferred the CLOT starting them. Just needing a single small tweak.
The first two games should start off closer together (game1 then game2 three days later - saves eight days). If you can commit to CL you can play 2 games at a time, if you need more days to pick than 3 the bank can be used immediately. Your choice to start dragging CL out with the first picks. Staggering the 2nd game so far from the first isn't helpful. Get the teams playing 2 games from the beginning as is normal.
Don't give them back these days with later games and then game 7 will start eight days sooner. Remember, you have a sitout in your block of games!


I would start the 1v1's sooner but it doesn't really make much difference to the end time of CL. They'll be done before the teams completes. Meh, is fine :)

In teams because your partner(s) can protect you the bank could be a day or two smaller. Perhaps a day less in 2v2 and 2 days less in 3v3. But 2 days isn't going to change the world. :)
If you disagree, are there many people booting? Discount noshows at the start of CL and how many players are booting? How many of the booted people came back shortly after?
I don't want someone to boot and then login a few hours late. Most people that boot need days after teh boot before they come back, something "came up", injury, hardware problems, burnout, blah blah. 3 days+13bank easy covers a 2 week holiday with a day's travel either side. Add teammates to help cover you and you can easy double that.

And see if there can be a way to stop the bank resetting after someone is booted. I'm sure you're looking at that

---

Playing 3 slots isn't advisable, never was and never will be. That's a third of your whole clan's games. Couple others do that in your clan and you can clan _League_ it with a team_of_3.
Once people generally stop playing 3 slots, then 2 slots is easy
If someone goes for 3 slots then they have to accept it's going to be tough going. You will have multiple games to pick, and multiple moves for 4 months. Having ~3 open games per CL slot is absolutely normal. The schedule will aim for 2 games at a time and CL players are the best. They play extra slow to get it right, they play on a couple more turns from a dead position hoping for a GOD turn or a mistake to get back in. They burn a few days bank at picking just because they can. If it's teams they want to talk over each new idea. If you play 3 slots, you could well have 10 games on the go. Far easier playing two slots and having half a dozen

Lastly, i do think the game allocation schedule can be public early enough for teams to use it in their picking. If a player is great and wants 2 teams slots and a 1v1, they can choose to pick the 1v1 that starts last type thing. Or one with offset game starts.