Dominion Strategy Forum
Miscellaneous => Other Games => Hearthstone => Topic started by: ashersky on June 17, 2014, 06:32:16 pm
-
Isohearth I:
bkirbit #1439
Nick #11795
KirbyHero#1343
mikohoy#1464
This thread is to note your participation in the upcoming f.ds Hearthstone Tournament. Format and rules to come.
Please post in this thread in the following format:
Username#number, Server, Last Season's Final Ranking, Timezone
Example: ashersky#1470, North America, 17, UTC+10
Signed Up:
North America
ashersky#1470, 17 (UTC+10)
theory#1157, 10 (UTC-4 / UTC-5)
SilentStrike#1453, 20 (UTC-8)
Archvile#1802, 20 (UTC-4 / UTC-5)
blueblimp#1516, 5, (PDT)
michaeljb#1812, 20 (UTC-6)
mpsprs#1749, 20 (UTC-4)
shraeye#1248, 18 (UTC-5)
HiddenTroll#11133, 17 (UTC-8)
Titandrake#1456, 17 (UTC-7)
AHoppy #1799, 20, UTC -4
EU
KingZog#1700, 16 (UTC-5)
EgorK#2917, 13 (UTC+4)
Grujah#2516, 9 (GMT+1/2)
PitrPicko#2221, EU, +-16, UTC+2
-
KingZog#1700, Connected to Europe, 16? I think, UTC-5 (Located in Montreal, Canada)
EDIT: I'm in the NA sever
-
theory#1157, North America, I forget (10?), EDT (UTC-4 / UTC-5)
-
SilentStrike#1453, Connected to Americas, Didn't play last season (have gone as high as 18 in this one), UTC-8
-
KingZog#1700, Murica, rank 37, GMT -5
-
Archvile#1802, North America, <no previous ranking>, EDT (UTC-4 / UTC-5)
-
blueblimp#1516, North America, rank 5, PDT
(The rank is meaningless because I got it by netdecking miracle rogue.)
KingZog#1700, Murica, rank 37, GMT -5
KingZog, really? :P And is that legend rank 37 or rank 3-7?
-
(The rank is meaningless because I got it by netdecking miracle rogue.)
That's not how rank works? That's like saying "I was level 30 on Isotropic but it doesn't count because I read online how good Goons and Chapel are."
-
EgorK#2917, Europe, ~13, UTC+4 (through our goverment is thinking about switching to +3)
-
KingZog#1700, Murica, rank 37, GMT -5
KingZog, really? :P And is that legend rank 37 or rank 3-7?
Looks like WanderingWinder forgot to switch accounts.
-
KingZog#1700, Murica, rank 37, GMT -5
KingZog, really? :P And is that legend rank 37 or rank 3-7?
Looks like WanderingWinder forgot to switch accounts.
I don't remember posting this. I must have many personalities.
-
I just started Hearthstone this morning, I'm possibly interested in this but don't know how long it will take me to get up to speed, or if I'll have the time to participate. How long will signups be open for this?
-
You should join!
-
I just started Hearthstone this morning, I'm possibly interested in this but don't know how long it will take me to get up to speed, or if I'll have the time to participate. How long will signups be open for this?
Don't join to win. Joining will make you learn much faster as you'll be playing advanced people, even if we have deck limitations.
-
Your Persuasion was successful! I'm in.
michaeljb#???, North America (I assume), (what are these seasons you speak of), UTC-6
edit: once I figure out the number thing I'll post in the ID thread
-
Your Persuasion was successful! I'm in.
michaeljb#???, North America (I assume), (what are these seasons you speak of), UTC-6
You number is important. Click where is says you're online/busy to see it. The seasons are each month. After a month, you ranking goes back down and people who were at least rank 20 get a new card back.
-
mpsprs#1749, NA, 20, UTC-4
I expect I'll be doing a hefty amount of learning.
-
Your Persuasion was successful! I'm in.
michaeljb#???, North America (I assume), (what are these seasons you speak of), UTC-6
You number is important. Click where is says you're online/busy to see it. The seasons are each month. After a month, you ranking goes back down and people who were at least rank 20 get a new card back.
I knew it was important, I'm just posting in class right now and didn't see my number before class. I'll get it tonight.
-
If you literally just installed this morning and haven't played ranked yet, you probably won't have a rank :-)
-
shraeye#1248, North America, 18?, UTC-5
-
HiddenTroll#11133, North America, 17?, Pacific (UTC-8)
I'll edit in my # number when I get the chance. (As to why I'm called HiddenTroll it was just the default one picked for me by Blizzard, I thought when the beta was over they'd get me to make a new account which I'd pick a name I like using for, woops)
-
I think you can choose to change it on their website?
Grujah#2516, EU, 9?, GMT+1 (or +2, daylight saving crap)
-
If you literally just installed this morning and haven't played ranked yet, you probably won't have a rank :-)
I figured as much, but I was also interested in more info on the seasons :)
-
I've updated the first post with sign-ups so far.
-
I've updated the first post with sign-ups so far.
I'm not signed up twice. Only my post is real.
-
Bump for editing in my #.
-
Bump for editing in my #.
You have a 5 digit number?
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
-
Looks like I have to sign up to make the numbers odd. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA
(Titandrake#1456, NA, 17 (may not be accurate due to arena focus), UTC-7)
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
Meh, you guys play w/o me.
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
I lose my cards on NA server right? Can't I switch my account and then switch it back? I could make a new one. But I don't understand why because you can still play people on your friends list no matter what server they are on.
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
Meh, you guys play w/o me.
Double post. But yeah I'm not sure this is very exciting. Just commons is boring, since there really are very few possibilities. I'll play with dust limits and stuff, but just commons is weird. I mean, just opening a couple packs gives you enough rares to live with a dust limit, and chances are you got an epic card.
-
It's a mix of a hassle of actually going through new account things + not that attracted to the format.
Are you sure you can play people on other servers? cuz I wasn't able to add them?
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
I lose my cards on NA server right? Can't I switch my account and then switch it back? I could make a new one. But I don't understand why because you can still play people on your friends list no matter what server they are on.
I believe you have to make an entirely new B.Net account to use the NA server. New email address, etc., and pretend you live in NA. Just learn to swear a lot and eat plenty of fast food and you can totally pass.
-
From the BNet launcher thingie, you can actually chose wich server to play on. You card collection and your friends list doesn't carry over. So basically the hassle you have to go through is getting through the tutorial + grinding classes and getting common cards. But you can't play with the cards you've acquired. I guess if someone on either server with a lot of cards and trust is willing to lend their account to other players from here, it could be doable that way. But I'm not sure I would want to do that myself.
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
I lose my cards on NA server right? Can't I switch my account and then switch it back? I could make a new one. But I don't understand why because you can still play people on your friends list no matter what server they are on.
I believe you have to make an entirely new B.Net account to use the NA server. New email address, etc., and pretend you live in NA. Just learn to swear a lot and eat plenty of fast food and you can totally pass.
But I live in NA. It put me on the Euro server without me choosing. I put that I'm in NA but it put me on that server anyway. And yes I have added people from both servers. However, I uninstalled an reinstalled Battle.net (for other computer reasons) and now my friends list in game is not the same as my list out of game. However a few of the people are on both. Egork is on both lists, but Watno and others are not. Try adding people when you're in the game, not on your list out of the game.
Either way, I've played Pops (Kirby Hero), markusin, theory as well as people on the EU server. So I know that you can, just not sure what's up with the different lists. And my cards were kept, so I'm guessing I was always on the EU server.
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
I lose my cards on NA server right? Can't I switch my account and then switch it back? I could make a new one. But I don't understand why because you can still play people on your friends list no matter what server they are on.
I believe you have to make an entirely new B.Net account to use the NA server. New email address, etc., and pretend you live in NA. Just learn to swear a lot and eat plenty of fast food and you can totally pass.
But I live in NA. It put me on the Euro server without me choosing. I put that I'm in NA but it put me on that server anyway. And yes I have added people from both servers. However, I uninstalled an reinstalled Battle.net (for other computer reasons) and now my friends list in game is not the same as my list out of game. However a few of the people are on both. Egork is on both lists, but Watno and others are not. Try adding people when you're in the game, not on your list out of the game.
Either way, I've played Pops (Kirby Hero), markusin, theory as well as people on the EU server. So I know that you can, just not sure what's up with the different lists. And my cards were kept, so I'm guessing I was always on the EU server.
I am quite sure you are on US server because you are on my friend list on NA and not on EU
-
For the record, I popped into the EU server today (chose EU through the Battlenet launcher), and added Egork and Watno. Do not let that confuse people further. Of course, none of my stuff from the NA server transferred to the EU server, and I'd have to go through the tutorial in the EU server before I can do anything.
It might be fun to play of the EU server sometimes. More quests for more Gold for more Arena practice.
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
I lose my cards on NA server right? Can't I switch my account and then switch it back? I could make a new one. But I don't understand why because you can still play people on your friends list no matter what server they are on.
I believe you have to make an entirely new B.Net account to use the NA server. New email address, etc., and pretend you live in NA. Just learn to swear a lot and eat plenty of fast food and you can totally pass.
But I live in NA. It put me on the Euro server without me choosing. I put that I'm in NA but it put me on that server anyway. And yes I have added people from both servers. However, I uninstalled an reinstalled Battle.net (for other computer reasons) and now my friends list in game is not the same as my list out of game. However a few of the people are on both. Egork is on both lists, but Watno and others are not. Try adding people when you're in the game, not on your list out of the game.
Either way, I've played Pops (Kirby Hero), markusin, theory as well as people on the EU server. So I know that you can, just not sure what's up with the different lists. And my cards were kept, so I'm guessing I was always on the EU server.
I am quite sure you are on US server because you are on my friend list on NA and not on EU
Over my play button it says region/account and I have "Americas," but when I click my name above where it says whether I'm online/busy./away it says Connected to: Europe. that's why I'm confused.
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
I lose my cards on NA server right? Can't I switch my account and then switch it back? I could make a new one. But I don't understand why because you can still play people on your friends list no matter what server they are on.
I believe you have to make an entirely new B.Net account to use the NA server. New email address, etc., and pretend you live in NA. Just learn to swear a lot and eat plenty of fast food and you can totally pass.
But I live in NA. It put me on the Euro server without me choosing. I put that I'm in NA but it put me on that server anyway. And yes I have added people from both servers. However, I uninstalled an reinstalled Battle.net (for other computer reasons) and now my friends list in game is not the same as my list out of game. However a few of the people are on both. Egork is on both lists, but Watno and others are not. Try adding people when you're in the game, not on your list out of the game.
Either way, I've played Pops (Kirby Hero), markusin, theory as well as people on the EU server. So I know that you can, just not sure what's up with the different lists. And my cards were kept, so I'm guessing I was always on the EU server.
I am quite sure you are on US server because you are on my friend list on NA and not on EU
Over my play button it says region/account and I have "Americas," but when I click my name above where it says whether I'm online/busy./away it says Connected to: Europe. that's why I'm confused.
You connected to Europe via Battle.net client. It do not bear any significance to which server you connect when play
-
We're at a grand total of 12 (9 NA and 3 EU). Were the EU folks willing to make NA accounts?
I think we'd necessarily have to do commons + decks to be fair.
I lose my cards on NA server right? Can't I switch my account and then switch it back? I could make a new one. But I don't understand why because you can still play people on your friends list no matter what server they are on.
I believe you have to make an entirely new B.Net account to use the NA server. New email address, etc., and pretend you live in NA. Just learn to swear a lot and eat plenty of fast food and you can totally pass.
But I live in NA. It put me on the Euro server without me choosing. I put that I'm in NA but it put me on that server anyway. And yes I have added people from both servers. However, I uninstalled an reinstalled Battle.net (for other computer reasons) and now my friends list in game is not the same as my list out of game. However a few of the people are on both. Egork is on both lists, but Watno and others are not. Try adding people when you're in the game, not on your list out of the game.
Either way, I've played Pops (Kirby Hero), markusin, theory as well as people on the EU server. So I know that you can, just not sure what's up with the different lists. And my cards were kept, so I'm guessing I was always on the EU server.
I am quite sure you are on US server because you are on my friend list on NA and not on EU
Over my play button it says region/account and I have "Americas," but when I click my name above where it says whether I'm online/busy./away it says Connected to: Europe. that's why I'm confused.
You connected to Europe via Battle.net client. It do not bear any significance to which server you connect when play
I see. Then I'm on the NA server. That makes more sense. How do I change what my client connects to? It can't find it in setting or anything.
-
PitrPicko#2221, EU, +-16, UTC+2
-
On second thought, I think I'll back out of this. Not sure I'll have the time for this + Dominion League, and Dominion takes precedence.
-
On second thought, I think I'll back out of this. Not sure I'll have the time for this + Dominion League, and Dominion takes precedence.
Unfortunately, I'm going to say the same. I definitely want to keep playing in the Dominion League, plus I'm taking a summer class to finish up my degree so I don't want to have too many commitments. Maybe next time.
-
I'm not on the EU server, I'm on the NA server. Should be changed in the OP.
-
If these signups are still open I'm definitely interested. I still don't have a ton of cards, but I think it will be fun.
AHoppy #1799, NA server, 20, UTC -4
-
so .... this happening?
-
On second thought, I think I'll back out of this. Not sure I'll have the time for this + Dominion League, and Dominion takes precedence.
Unfortunately, I'm going to say the same. I definitely want to keep playing in the Dominion League, plus I'm taking a summer class to finish up my degree so I don't want to have too many commitments. Maybe next time.
I'll probably have to pass on this one as well. I haven't had time to play Hearthstone in quite a while and have a lot of other stuff going on. Maybe next time.
-
so .... this happening?
Not sure we have enough players, unless we want a small thing? I can put a bracket together.
-
So...we have 9 on NA and 4 on EU.
I just don't see the value in putting together a tourney. But if you want, EU could do:
Grujah vs. KingZog and Egor vs. Pitr, winners play for title.
We could do something similar in NA.
Or round robin, where we all play each other?
-
(Speaking for NA) I'm fine with a really small round-robin tourney. If all else, it's good practice and it will be fun playing with people I "know". I played with Shraeye and Kingzog in the past week and it was a lot of fun. I don't think tournaments have to be on the scale of Isodom/gokodom/dominion league
-
Again, if it's soulbound + some lower dust value, I don't see why the EU people shouldn't be able to play on the NA servers. I would be down for that.
-
p4ddy0d00rs #1485, NA, UTC-4
if this is happening pls send a PM as I don't hop on these forums a ton but the PM will generate an email
-
bamaman#1428, NA, UTC-5
-
out out
-
Bump.
Was the reason this stalled out due to not being able to find an agreeable format? I'd definitely love to have some sort of semi-regular format where I get to play against other F.DS users, whether that takes the shape of a league or a tournament.
-
Debianlinux#1369 , NA , 13 , UTC+5
-
Bump.
Was the reason this stalled out due to not being able to find an agreeable format? I'd definitely love to have some sort of semi-regular format where I get to play against other F.DS users, whether that takes the shape of a league or a tournament.
Yes, I believe the lack of format consensus was the issue.
-
Correct.
I mean, at this point free-for-all makes the most sense, right?
Round robin?
-
Correct.
I mean, at this point free-for-all makes the most sense, right?
Round robin?
1 deck each? Or 3 games with the same deck? Or 3 different decks?
-
Correct.
I mean, at this point free-for-all makes the most sense, right?
Round robin?
1 deck each? Or 3 games with the same deck? Or 3 different decks?
I would say 4 decks with bans and bo5. Now, I do not have enough cards on US unfortunately
-
Correct.
I mean, at this point free-for-all makes the most sense, right?
Round robin?
1 deck each? Or 3 games with the same deck? Or 3 different decks?
I would say 4 decks with bans and bo5. Now, I do not have enough cards on US unfortunately
I don't have enough on Europe :P
-
I mean, at this point free-for-all makes the most sense, right?
It always did. :P
-
Can decks be altered mid-tourney? Or you submit decklists?
-
Can decks be altered mid-tourney? Or you submit decklists?
It depends on length. I think anything league/long tourney style (i. e. not single day) shoud allow to change decks between matches
-
3 out of 5, bring 3 pre-listed decks, winning decks swap out?
I'm well-placed to do this next week, actually.
-
3 out of 5, bring 3 pre-listed decks, winning decks swap out?
I'm well-placed to do this next week, actually.
The world championships format is actually a little different, if that's what you had in mind, because the loser can optionally swap decks also. Using the wc format sounds fine, but I'd just say so and link to the rules to prevent confusion.
-
Match format:
- All matches will be best-of-5. The first player to win 3 games within the match is considered the winner of the match and advances.
- Each player must submit decklists from three unique classes prior to each stage of the event. Players may submit new decks prior to each stage of the event.
- A player must win one game with each of his three decks to win the match.
- When a player wins a game, the deck used by the winning player cannot be used for the remainder of the match.
- The losing player can keep the same deck used or switch to a different one of their choice.
- Players will be told what classes their opponent has available, but they won’t know which class is picked until both players have picked.
The only change I'd suggest for IsoHearth is to limit this to 3 decks for the entire tournament, as it'll be smaller and with less organizers.
-
i'd rather copy the championships rules for practice, even if they're not superior
-
i'd rather copy the championships rules for practice, even if they're not superior
I think those are the championships rules...did I copy the wrong ones?
-
i'd rather copy the championships rules for practice, even if they're not superior
I think those are the championships rules...did I copy the wrong ones?
No I'm just spacey
-
Okay...
Please reconfirm here by posting newly your NA account name that you want to join. For simplicity's sake, and to get something off the ground, we'll play single-elimination until we get a final four, with the winners playing for 1st/2nd and the losers playing for 3rd.
The rules will be those posted above -- but basically, first to three wins, must win with three different decks (once a deck wins, it is ineligible for use in that round). Deck changes allowed between games for either side.
All decks must be submitted prior to tournament start -- exactly three decks from three unique classes required.
One question -- are decklists public before games are played? I'm guessing not.
Deadline to sign up is Friday, decklists due Saturday, tournament starts Sunday.
-
KingZog3#1700
Is this going to all be in 1 day? Or will we arrange a time to play the games?
-
KingZog3#1700
Is this going to all be in 1 day? Or will we arrange a time to play the games?
Arrange times during next week.
-
I'm in, bkirbit #1439.
we need three decks for this?
-
Nick #11795
-
KirbyHero#1343
-
I'm in, bkirbit #1439.
we need three decks for this?
Yes, 3 decks, 3 classes.
-
Signed up:
KingZog3#1700
bkirbit #1439
Nick #11795
KirbyHero#1343
Remember, sign ups close Friday, decks need to be PMed to me by Saturday. I'll post match ups on Sunday.
-
I think I won't have time or energy for this. Sorry, but it's really not convenient for me right now. I think I need to opt out.
-
If we don't have many people (6 or less), I think we should do a round robin.
-
If this is one week later, not next week, I can probably play.
-
mikohoy#1464
You should update the OP.
-
Final tally:
bkirbit #1439
Nick #11795
KirbyHero#1343
mikohoy#1464
-
I need three decklists from three players, still.
With only four players, we can go round robin.
Round 1:
Player 1 vs. Player 2
Player 4 vs. Player 3
Round 2:
Player 1 vs. Player 4
Player 3 vs. Player 2
Round 3:
Player 1 vs. Player 3
Player 2 vs. Player 4
Winners get 1 point, top two point getters play a final?
-
I think it would be unfair to have someone at 3-0 and someone at 2-1 play a winner takes all final -- I think if anything, we should do an advantaged final, that way you need two losses to get eliminated from the tournament.
-
If someone goes 3-0 in the round robin, they should just win the event, right?
I'll work on decklists and get them to you by the end of the day, Ash.
-
I would propose just double elemination. Round robin do not really work in Hearthstone it seems
-
Uh. Round Robin vs. Double Elim doesn't really have to do with the game being played in terms of accuracy of the winner. You'll have to expound if you want to explain what you mean here.
-
Uh. Round Robin vs. Double Elim doesn't really have to do with the game being played in terms of accuracy of the winner. You'll have to expound if you want to explain what you mean here.
In football and similar games there are neat tie-breakers and stuff. In HS using match scores as tiebreaks seems frowned upon. Actually if it would be up to me I'll make group stages in top football tournaments double elemination as well
-
Double elim is never more accurate than round robin or swiss, even if you use a d20 for tiebreakers. Tiebreaker methods that don't make sense look nasty and and make the tournament seem less fair, but are actually more fair than double elims arbitrary way of pairing players for matchups and fewer games played overall.
It's an awful a lot like whether Treasure Map or King's Court is more random. One of them is just more in your face about it.
-
Double elim is never more accurate than round robin or swiss, even if you use a d20 for tiebreakers. Tiebreaker methods that don't make sense look nasty and and make the tournament seem less fair, but are actually more fair than double elims arbitrary way of pairing players for matchups and fewer games played overall.
It's an awful a lot like whether Treasure Map or King's Court is more random. One of them is just more in your face about it.
I do not believe what you are say is relevant for 4 player groups
-
^consider 4 players called rock, paper, scissors, and trash. Trash loses to everything, and the rest is standard RPS. Whoever plays vs Trash first will win. Draw out the bracket. He will never have to face the deck that beats him, since that deck will be stuck in the losers bracket with his best matchup nowhere in sight.
-
Okay cool. I'm going to try streaming my games, if that's alright with everyone in the tournament.
-
Supose more probable win distribution. Here's results for both round robin and double elimination (calculated, not simulated):
Win probabilities
1 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.8
2 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.7
3 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.6
4 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.0
Round robin
Advance
1 0.7651199999999999
2 0.59824
3 0.40175999999999995
4 0.23488
Win
1 0.47312
2 0.28424
3 0.16176000000000004
4 0.08088
Double elimination
Advance
1 0.7858400000000001
2 0.6075466666666668
3 0.39245333333333327
4 0.21416000000000004
Win
1 0.5531754666666664
2 0.2763130666666666
3 0.1245696
4 0.04594186666666668
So both if we need to determine 2 advances and if we need to determine single winner double elimination is better. In case you provided there is no difference between double elimination and round robin - only the fact that however was paired with trash was decided by draw and not by skill, but supposedly skills are same
-
Code http://pastie.org/9911803 (http://pastie.org/9911803)
-
I love how mathy everyone is in a Dominion environment. You try to explain this stuff to fighting game players, they're like, "Huh, what, double elim the most hype, wanna pump some iron after grand finals?"
-
Final tally:
bkirbit #1439
Nick #11795
KirbyHero#1343
mikohoy#1464
Player numbers:
bkirbit is player 1
Nick is player 2
KirbyHero is player 4
mikohoy is player 3
Round 1:
Player 1 vs. Player 2
Player 4 vs. Player 3
Round 2:
Player 1 vs. Player 4
Player 3 vs. Player 2
Round 3:
Player 1 vs. Player 3
Player 2 vs. Player 4
Here are the rounds -- please post results as "Round 1, Match 1" and a final game tally (i.e., 3-0, 1-2, etc.)
-
Supose more probable win distribution. Here's results for both round robin and double elimination (calculated, not simulated):
Win probabilities
1 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.8
2 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.7
3 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.6
4 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.0
Round robin
Advance
1 0.7651199999999999
2 0.59824
3 0.40175999999999995
4 0.23488
Win
1 0.47312
2 0.28424
3 0.16176000000000004
4 0.08088
Double elimination
Advance
1 0.7858400000000001
2 0.6075466666666668
3 0.39245333333333327
4 0.21416000000000004
Win
1 0.5531754666666664
2 0.2763130666666666
3 0.1245696
4 0.04594186666666668
So both if we need to determine 2 advances and if we need to determine single winner double elimination is better. In case you provided there is no difference between double elimination and round robin - only the fact that however was paired with trash was decided by draw and not by skill, but supposedly skills are same
I'm not sure how you judge that double elimination is better based on that. The winner distribution is lower entropy because more games are played, and by averaging over all potential initial brackets you avoided the major issue which is the impact of the initial matchup. The problem is that the result depends too much on who plays whom first.
-
Round 1 Match 2 0-3
(mikohoy>kirbyhero)
-
Rule clarification questions:
1. Are we supposed to reveal what our 3 classes are before the match or not?
2. What is the timeframe for the "rounds" and does the order matter?
-
Supose more probable win distribution. Here's results for both round robin and double elimination (calculated, not simulated):
Win probabilities
1 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.8
2 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.7
3 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.6
4 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.0
Round robin
Advance
1 0.7651199999999999
2 0.59824
3 0.40175999999999995
4 0.23488
Win
1 0.47312
2 0.28424
3 0.16176000000000004
4 0.08088
Double elimination
Advance
1 0.7858400000000001
2 0.6075466666666668
3 0.39245333333333327
4 0.21416000000000004
Win
1 0.5531754666666664
2 0.2763130666666666
3 0.1245696
4 0.04594186666666668
So both if we need to determine 2 advances and if we need to determine single winner double elimination is better. In case you provided there is no difference between double elimination and round robin - only the fact that however was paired with trash was decided by draw and not by skill, but supposedly skills are same
I'm not sure how you judge that double elimination is better based on that. The winner distribution is lower entropy because more games are played, and by averaging over all potential initial brackets you avoided the major issue which is the impact of the initial matchup. The problem is that the result depends too much on who plays whom first.
Player one is the best player and also wins more of the time in double elimination. I haven't checked his math yet, though.
-
This is a single example of a win probability matrix, and it's clear that player 1 is the best because he is 50%+ in all matchups.
So any reasonable format should have him win more of the time, and the one that involves more games will increase that chance. This is not particularly interesting.
In fact, let's make this super mathy...
Let the win probability matrix be a random variable X, and call the max wieght row k
Let the format be a mapping f:X-->y, where y is the win probability vector.
In this example it seems we are trying to maximize y(k) subject to X=A.
But I contend this is not what we want to maximize. What we want is that the random winner be the best predictor of the best player, that is:
maximize P(A(i) >= A(j) for all rows j | z = i, where z is drawn from the distribution given by y).
By making A non-random, this example doesn't really show anything.
-
This is a single example of a win probability matrix, and it's clear that player 1 is the best because he is 50%+ in all matchups.
So any reasonable format should have him win more of the time, and the one that involves more games will increase that chance. This is not particularly interesting.
In fact, let's make this super mathy...
Let the win probability matrix be a random variable X, and call the max wieght row k
Let the format be a mapping f:X-->y, where y is the win probability vector.
In this example it seems we are trying to maximize y(k) subject to X=A.
But I contend this is not what we want to maximize. What we want is that the random winner be the best predictor of the best player, that is:
maximize P(A(i) >= A(j) for all rows j | z = i, where z is drawn from the distribution given by y).
By making A non-random, this example doesn't really show anything.
Wait, a double elim bracket takes more games than round robin, for four people?
-
Yeah. Round Robin is 6 games. Double elim is 6 + P(LB winner beats WB winner)
-
Nkirbit beats Twistedarcher 3-2.
-
nkirbit 3 - HME 0.
-
Kirbyhero over twisted archer 3-2
-
i tried to stream and record the set against twisted archer but the graphics froze and i only got audio
-
Rule clarification questions:
1. Are we supposed to reveal what our 3 classes are before the match or not?
2. What is the timeframe for the "rounds" and does the order matter?
1. Not required, but allowed.
2. I would generally say 2 days per round. Since the format is round robin, the only reason to force the rounds to be played in order (i.e., no round 2 matches until round 1 is over) would be to build suspense. So I think you can just play your matches.
-
Supose more probable win distribution. Here's results for both round robin and double elimination (calculated, not simulated):
Win probabilities
1 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.8
2 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.7
3 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.6
4 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.0
Round robin
Advance
1 0.7651199999999999
2 0.59824
3 0.40175999999999995
4 0.23488
Win
1 0.47312
2 0.28424
3 0.16176000000000004
4 0.08088
Double elimination
Advance
1 0.7858400000000001
2 0.6075466666666668
3 0.39245333333333327
4 0.21416000000000004
Win
1 0.5531754666666664
2 0.2763130666666666
3 0.1245696
4 0.04594186666666668
So both if we need to determine 2 advances and if we need to determine single winner double elimination is better. In case you provided there is no difference between double elimination and round robin - only the fact that however was paired with trash was decided by draw and not by skill, but supposedly skills are same
I'm not sure how you judge that double elimination is better based on that. The winner distribution is lower entropy because more games are played, and by averaging over all potential initial brackets you avoided the major issue which is the impact of the initial matchup. The problem is that the result depends too much on who plays whom first.
I was more interested in advancement percantages. And there double elim is supposedly better even with less game played. Also if there is no clear order I do not see any metrics to use
-
Round 1 results:
nkirbit (Nick) defeats Twistedarcher (bkirbit)
mikohoy (HME) defeats kirbyhero (pops)
Round 2 results:
nkirbit (Nick) defeats HME (mikohoy)
kirbyhero (pops) defeats TwistedArcher (bkirbit)
Current standings:
nkirbit (2 points)
HME (1 point)
pops (1 point)
TA (0 points)
Round 3 remains:
Round 3:
TA vs. HME
nkirbit vs. Pops
-
nkirbit 3 - pops 2
-
Nick takes the tourney!
-
mikohoy 3 - bkirbit 2
Now that we're all done, are deck lists going to be posted? It would be interesting if everyone knew how the deck matchups went.
This one was
me : TA
warlock < shaman
paladin > warrior
warlock < warrior
priest > hunter
warlock > hunter
vs nick was:
warlock < warrior
paladin < mage
paladin < hunter
vs pops I don't quite remember, but I think it was:
warlock > priest
paladin > warrior
priest > priest
-
Mine (I think) were:
Me : TA
Warrior > Warrior
Mage > Warrior
Hunter < Warrior
Hunter < Hunter
Hunter > Shaman
vs HME was:
warlock < warrior
paladin < mage
paladin < hunter
vs Pops was:
hunter < Warrior
Warrior > Priest
mage < priest
mage > paladin
hunter > paladin
I'm not 100% sure about the match vs pops. I know that the order of wins and my classes were right, but his might be off.
I definitely wouldn't play my hunter deck again. I ended up going 3-3 with it, and all of the losses were not at all close and all of the wins I barely got and I felt like I drew well above average. I was very happy with my warrior deck, and my mage deck was okay.
-
I was playing Druid, not Paladin