Topic: Suggestions/Poll for the next tournament
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2017-01-22, 23:03
I will host another tournament in a couple months, and I want to ask your opinions on it. Not because I expect that a lot of you will comment or give useful insight, but because that way if someone will complain during the tournament I will point him there and say "if you don't like this and that why didn't you say it in the proper thread when it was the time?" So, if you want to keep your right of complaining, you should definitely answer here format will still be the swiss system, with maybe some minor modifications from the one I used for the 2016 tournament, unless there is a small number of participants, in which case round robin (i.e. everybody plays against everybody else) works better. I don't think there's any question on that. The ideas I want to ask your opinions about are
Top Quote |
auktionadmin |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 02:13
2v2 tournament is a good idea if there is the same time zone. We are enough to play a little European tournament in teams, I think. In the 2016 tournament I missed the tenor to find bugs and I don't know that somebody did watch parallely at the map editor during the the game window is open or did study extremly the map before. I realized that some players gave up quickly and I think they didn't do that because of time (they joined the tournament and knew the time intervals). Because not every player can read the English language well I suggest a simple declaration for the few or new players who want participate. I also suggest a very simple map voting (with very good description) for these players who don't know the maps and don't have the time to study them. My map WideGreen: |
SirVer |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 07:41
I did not mean the final rounds specifically, but the swiss style tournament in general. I think it the format produces very good games from very early and the games have been entertaining throughout the tournament. but since there is no bracket, it feels like any single game is not as important and there is no clear 'path' for a player to proceed through the tournament. There is no concept of quarter, semi and finals and it is just not as climatic for this reason. I understand now why soccer tournaments do not use it. I still think the swiss tournament style is a great choice for Widelands! The ups beat the downs as far as I am concerned. As for suggestions:
Top Quote |
GunChleoc |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 08:49
I really liked the Swiss system too, because I'm not a good player and it allowed to play me more than 2 games. Busy indexing nil values Top Quote |
kaputtnik |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 09:22
This would be great but a decision for one tribe may be difficult. Isn't it feasible to have one border for a team with different tribes? Yesterday WorldSavior blocked his Teammate (king_of_knowhere) to build a road, because WorldSavior's border prevented it.
One bug was found, and i think if a bug is encountered, it will be reported.
While i would love to see the tournament playing on 'secret' maps, maps that nobody knows, it is difficult to make such maps. Couldn't find the related posts where this was discussed some time ago. With official maps every Player has the chance to study the map before the tournament, so the conditions are equal to every player. Fight simulator for Widelands: |
auktionadmin |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 12:57
I added that tenor in context with the extremly attitude to win the challenge. i think some players didn't want play a challenge where the tenor to win is higher than the tenor to play with new players or to find bugs. As I said: I think some players didn't have time or didn't want study extremly the maps before. I think 'secret' maps aren't a good solution but rather the main tenor should not be mainly to win and to scare off new or interested players. I think interested and already joined players shouldn't loose interest during the tournament. Ok they found the tournament thread for joining but did they find the Suggestions/Poll for the next tournament to vote for maps? That's why I suggested a more simple voting, I suggest the voting with graphical chart in the same thread where the joining is.
You are right I think official maps are the best for new and interested players because they probably know the maps. You can't forbid to open a second window with a map editor while the game window is open because nobody can control the other players. But if every particpant engage to vote and discuss for 'their' maps they won't loose interest. The declaration of the rules was too long for players who can't read the English language good enough, I didn't find the discussion about the tournament maps in time and I wish there will be a better discussion about the tournament maps with all players who really have interest. I also prefer a system which allows more rounds. Autocrat is my favorite end condition. And I love big maps with big building ground. But I really suggest that there will be a final voting in the final announcement thread. My map WideGreen: |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 13:01
oh, i see, it is less spectacular. elimination is spectacular, but it does not bode well with fairness or competitive gameplay. that's why soccer tournaments are elimination, because they are shows made for the publlic; and the winner is very rarely the team that was actually stronger. in chess, where there is not much show business - and what little is there cares for high level competitive games, not for spectacularization - to assign the world championship they made a 12-games match. Top Quote |
einstein13 |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 14:28
Swiss-system This is good for not experienced players to have a chance to play more than one time (they can play even 5 or 6 times). So it is good. Probably best solution is about playing both swiss-system and double-elimination tournaments. Maybe one swiss-system, then double-elimination, then swiss-system, and so on.
Another thing is about inventing a bracket for swiss-system tournament. The system is not very clear for laymen (I spent several minutes to get the point and calculating for the first time) and it should be cleared for people who can't speak English very well and don't understand math on more abstract way. King, you tried to do so and you did well, but not well enough. Maybe some wiki pages about tournament systems here? Big maps I like to play on big maps and I can say some words about that: not every big map means long game. Let's get Ice Wars as an example. You can have quite close starting positions (reaching the enemy is in short time) and on players skills depends the result of the first clash. If players are with different level, then the game will end quickly. One of them crushes the second one. If players are equal power, then the game will last for a long time. But as you think, most of big maps means long time of playing. I looked on "big maps package" on my site and try to find best fits for the tournament. And there were several answers:
When to play big maps For sure not at the beginning of the tournament! Random players position means huge differences between them. If we allow to play strong vs. weak one, there will be no fun. Two week players and two strong players will have fun of that games. So I suggest to play big maps only at the end of the tournament (last rounds). How many big maps If we allow to play one big map in the tournament, the winner don't have to understand big economies. He/she can make some mistakes, but still be strong enough to win one fight or cause a tie and finally win the tournament. Allowing two big maps in the tournament will force the winner to be able playing on big maps as good as on small ones. It will make the game more exciting. Three big maps in current tournament will affect that people will be bored because of them. (half of the games will last for 28 days?) So two games will be enough for the tournament. Last phase: tie As we got in this tournament, we had a tie of 4 players reaching 4 points. It caused some complains about the amount of the games that should be played more. I understand that, but probably solving the tournament by one last game can be problematic: from one point of view, one clash of 4 people should solve the situation, but it allows the politics to be more important than the real skills. We can solve the situation by using "the last arbiter"* position: he/she will decide if the game was real "one against each other" or "1 vs. 3". But if we want to give players freedom, we can allow politics there. What do you think? Should be the second phase one game or more games to get the winner? *- this position can be more than one person here: we can use more opinions about the game. einstein13 |
auktionadmin |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 14:59
WorldSavior and me played The Nile - official map - the day befor yesterday two times against six random AI players with Trading Outpost and the game crashed two times after a while. I have played it alone yesterday against three AI players with Trading Outpost and nothing crashed yet. But I don't know what happened if there are too many movement in this big map through tournaments. I like big maps like The Nile. But I hate small maps sith bad build condition like fjords. Perhaps we can make different tournaments in the future, with bigger maps and with snaller maps. So I can participate the one with bigger maps. Edited: 2017-01-23, 15:00
My map WideGreen: |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2017-01-23, 16:17
ok, so two big maps seem reasonable. ideally it could be 6 turns, two big maps (long games), two small maps, two nonstandard win conditions (regardless of map size, those are limited to 4 hours), for a total estimated time of 4 months. the tie break turned out to be especially long this tournament because there were 4 people with equal score, but that required some coincidences. most likely it would be 1 or 2 games. Top Quote |