Clan System Request for Proposals

Originally posted by moonbus
What's to debunk? It all depends on whether one sees collusion as the primary cause of what's wrong w/the clan system, or a secondary symptom of what's wrong with it.

PS Let me ask you this. Really, in all honesty, this is not a trick question. If EasyRiders had never existed and if there were no collusion going on, now or ever, would you think the clan system is just fine the way it is, no adjustments needed?

The only things I would have changed would be the points awarded for each challenge
I have complained about this before
Also the sandbagging only done by a few I know but it should be stopped
The collusion part of it could happen what ever the outcome of this ( "debate" ?)
I do not think that what Robbie did was very honourable and he should suffer the consequences of what he and two or three others did
If you take away the points that they gave Easy Riders they would have finished in about 5th place

Originally posted by padger
The only things I would have changed would be the points awarded for each challenge
I have complained about this before
Also the sandbagging only done by a few I know but it should be stopped
The collusion part of it could happen what ever the outcome of this ( "debate" ?)
I do not think that what Robbie did was very honourable and he should suffer the c ...[text shortened]... you take away the points that they gave Easy Riders they would have finished in about 5th place

Having thought about this a bit more
The only person who has been able to mount a challenge to the antics of Metallica was Wycombe Al and Robbie by doing what he did has driven him away
He must be punished for his actions

Originally posted by padger
Having thought about this a bit more
The only person who has been able to mount a challenge to the antics of Metallica was Wycombe Al and Robbie by doing what he did has driven him away
He must be punished for his actions

Blinded by rose tinted glasses, he was part of the problem

Originally posted by padger
Having thought about this a bit more
The only person who has been able to mount a challenge to the antics of Metallica was Wycombe Al and Robbie by doing what he did has driven him away

If there were ever only two clans in the running, out of scores, doesn't that suggest that the playing field was never level, even before a few other clans started colluding massively in 2016?

Originally posted by moonbus
If there were ever only two clans in the running, out of scores, doesn't that suggest that the playing field was never level, even before a few other clans started colluding massively in 2016?

Difficult to argue with such empirical evidence.

I think this thread has been productive.

But I don't think there has been new material for some time.

Maybe Russ can close this thread and commence with his analysis.

And we can continue our debates in the clan forum ?

Originally posted by Mctayto
Blinded by rose tinted glasses, he was part of the problem

No! You are one of the problems

Originally posted by moonbus
If there were ever only two clans in the running, out of scores, doesn't that suggest that the playing field was never level, even before a few other clans started colluding massively in 2016?

The reason Wycombe ran Metallica close was the amount of challenges he took the time to put in
Other clans could done much the same but either didn't want to put as much effort into it or didn't have the time
Much like yourself ,you could have helped your clan get more points but you either didn't want to or couldn't spare the time to help your clan buddies

Originally posted by padger
The reason Wycombe ran Metallica close was the amount of challenges he took the time to put in
Other clans could done much the same but either didn't want to put as much effort into it or didn't have the time
Much like yourself ,you could have helped your clan get more points but you either didn't want to or couldn't spare the time to help your clan buddies

Spot on any clan could win if they had 20 players willing to play lots of games hats off to clan leader that can do that
Some want a system were the winner can play much less games reward the lazy to me
None of the systems will stop collusion only a points removal and suspension will

let's go back to the beginning, this was the original post from Russ


Your chance to input into the future of the clan system.

I would like serious contributions on how you would like the clan system improved.

A brief one liner, with added detail where required in a further paragraph.

All deliberately disruptive/OT posts will be deleted.

A consultation vote will then be used to decide what and what doesn't get implemented


there's been good discussion

i'd like to see us condense our input, and give him what he asked for

i'm re-posting the suggestions from the previous two clan forums

please reply and add your new ones, then we can compile a complete list and vote


clan individual ratings should be uncoupled from RHP non-clan individual ratings, ELO is proposed as a respected and useful rating system

X number of clan games should be played with a provisional rating to ascertain a clan player's true strength, these initial matches do not count

no draws or resignations will be permitted until 30 moves have been made (or, permit no clan games to be resigned)

clan players that have not moved for 30 days will become unavailable for challenges

set a maximum rating differential of X between clan challenge opponents (currently 200 points, 100 points also proposed) (or, let this be at the clan leader's discretion)

each player should only be allowed to play for one clan (or, do not permit challenge against a clan where the other leader is also a member of their clan)

hide the results of a clan challenges until the match is complete

points for winning a challenge are allocated as is currently done (or, winner takes it all, for any drawn challenge each team gets 0 points)

clans should have a minimum requirement of X players, and are not permitted to issue challenge unless the requirement is met

a site referee, or a committee of proven clan leaders, should be set up to review clan play and place appropriate bans and cautions

set a point limit, so no clan can run away with the totals

prevent clans from starting challenges if they are rated X over the challenged clan

set a maximum number of challenges between clans involving the same players (currently this is 3)

score clan performance on net average rating change, this will give smaller clans, or slower clans, a measure of equality

Originally posted by Giannotti
i'm re-posting the suggestions from the previous two clan forums

please reply and add your new ones, then we can compile a complete list and vote


clan individual ratings should be uncoupled from RHP non-clan individual ratings, ELO is proposed as a respected and useful rating system

X number of clan games should be played with a provisional rat ...[text shortened]... net average rating change, this will give smaller clans, or slower clans, a measure of equality

I disagree with nearly all of this
Where did you get all this from
Sleeping in bed with Robbie
You must have had a nightmare

it came (as was said) from the previous two clan forums for clan reform

i compiled what was presented, there are many i don't agree with

please add your suggestions to the list so we can vote

Originally posted by Giannotti
it came (as was said) from the previous two clan forums for clan reform

i compiled what was presented, there are many i don't agree with

please add your suggestions to the list so we can vote

A rating system based on clan performance linked to individual clan members ELO should be implemented. This will negate sandbagging, throwing of clan games, dumping of clan challenges.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
A rating system based on clan performance linked to individual clan members ELO should be implemented. This will negate sandbagging, throwing of clan games, dumping of clan challenges.

But it won't prevent collusion, which is your ultimate goal, correct?