Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3  All

Author Topic: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules  (Read 16325 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« on: November 20, 2011, 09:29:15 am »
0

The Ten Official Rules

1. Registration will close in one week, on Sunday, November 27 at 11:59:59PM EST.

2. Dominion Strategy ("We", "us", "our") will make every effort to accommodate all registrations.  But we reserve the right to cut off registration after a certain number if necessary, and to deregister any player suspected of registering under multiple names.  People associated with Dominion Strategy (namely, theory and rrenaud) are not permitted to enter.

3. To register, you must post in <a href="http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1017.0">this forum topic</a>, stating both your time zone and Isotropic username.

4. Players will be seeded into a single-elimination bracket.  Seeds will be determined by <a href="http://dominion.isotropic.org/leaderboard">Isotropic rankings</a> on a date of our choice.  Any player who does not appear on the Isotropic leaderboard will receive either an appropriate seed based on past Isotropic leaderboard rankings, or be unseeded.

5. Every game will be a 2-player game and must be played on <a href="http://dominion.isotropic.org">Isotropic</a>.  Each round will last for one week.  The first round begins on Monday, November 28 and ends on Sunday, December 4.

6. Each match will be first to four wins (ties do not count).  Players may, upon mutual consent, agree to play under any constraints they wish (e.g., with/without veto mode, sets limited to a particular expansion, with/without point counter).  If the players are unable to reach an agreement, they shall play with randomly selected cards (excluding any fan-made cards), no veto mode, identical starting hands, and the official point counter.  (Although we understand the objections to point counters, we have no choice but to permit their use because we simply cannot effectively enforce otherwise.)

7. The most recent losing player should go first in the next game; Isotropic should automatically give starting position to the person who most recently lost.  If the match has already been completed, however, failure to alternate starting positions is not grounds to dispute the match result.  First player in the first game of the match is randomly determined.

8. Players are expected to arrange convenient times to play with their opponents.  In the event of a dispute, players can provide evidence of their presence on Isotropic at the agreed-upon time by linking to an Isotropic or <a href="http://councilroom.com">CouncilRoom</a> log of themselves playing a solitaire game at that time.  If neither player submits such evidence, both will forfeit.

9. Results must be posted in <a href="http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1018.0">this forum topic</a> with links to Isotropic or <a href="http://councilroom.com">CouncilRoom</a> logs.  We greatly encourage players to review their games and discuss the match in the topic.

10. The winner of the tournament will receive a copy of Dominion: Hinterlands.
Logged

glasser

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2011, 11:31:28 pm »
0

7. Players shall alternate starting position throughout the match; Isotropic should automatically give starting position to the person who most recently lost.  If the match has already been completed, however, failure to alternate starting positions is not grounds to dispute the match result.

I don't understand what this means; it appears to be two conflicting statements. Let's say I am player 1 and I lose.  "Players shall alternate starting position throughout the max" implies I should play second next game; "Isotropic should automatically give starting position to the person who most recently lost" (and my understanding of Isotropic's behavior / the rulebook) implies that I should play first next game (assuming we play the next game of the match immediately). Which should we try to make happen?
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2011, 07:14:00 am »
0

My mistake.  I meant to write that loser goes first, but somehow it got turned into something else entirely.
Logged

painted_cow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2011, 09:33:02 am »
0

Would be cool, when theory and rrenaud would also play in this tournament :-) Apart from the first pairings or matchups you dont have any advantages?
Logged

Mean Mr Mustard

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
  • First to 5000 Isotropic wins
  • Respect: +118
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2011, 10:33:10 am »
0

I agree with cow.  I see no conflict of interest.  If this is a best of the best tourney than two of our best should play.
Logged
Jake <a href=http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201203/17/game-20120317-030206-6456f97c.html>opening: opening: Silver / Jack of All Trades</a>
<b>IsoDom1 Winner:  shark_bait
IsoDom2 Winner: Rabid
Isodom3 Winner: Fabian</b>
Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalie ar Atanatári, Utúlie'n auré!

Geronimoo

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1047
  • Respect: +843
    • View Profile
    • Geronimoo's Dominion Simulator
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2011, 10:35:14 am »
+1

They need to decide on the Kingdoms for the final.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2011, 11:02:04 am »
0

What Geronimoo said.  Plus, we can't award prizes to ourselves.
Logged

Rabid

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 839
  • Shuffle iT Username: Rabid
  • Respect: +641
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2011, 01:02:55 pm »
0

First player in the first game of the match is randomly determined.

Above is kind of hard to enforce on iso I think.
Is there any way to tell if your opponent won or lost there last game before you start?

Also, who goes first after a draw?
Logged
Twitch
1 Day Cup #1:Ednever

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2011, 02:28:52 pm »
0

You can always just both log out and in.  If you really don't trust your opponent, you can play an unrated game, have one person resign immediately, and have the other log out and back in.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5354
  • Respect: +2750
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2011, 04:29:34 pm »
0

Im so confused.  Why can't you just both log out and back in?  I watch your name disappear from isotropic.  You come back.  You watch my name disappear from isotropic. I come back.  Isn't that easiest?
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

papaHav

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 76
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2011, 09:23:46 pm »
0

What if shipping the prize costs more than the prize itself =[

- Sydneysider
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #11 on: November 22, 2011, 08:44:47 pm »
0

UPDATE: We're going to cap this tournament at 256 entrants.  Not in my wildest dreams did I think we were going to reach this number, but I simply cannot imagine running a tournament bigger than 256.
Logged

Thisisnotasmile

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1493
  • Respect: +672
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2011, 11:51:19 am »
0

What if shipping the prize costs more than the prize itself =[

- Sydneysider

If I won (which I won't) I wouldn't expect theory to send me a package from the US to the UK. I'd just find a copy of the game on a local website and get him to order it to my address from there. I doubt the prizes have already been bought.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2011, 04:22:25 pm »
0

What if shipping the prize costs more than the prize itself =[

- Sydneysider
If I won (which I won't) I wouldn't expect theory to send me a package from the US to the UK. I'd just find a copy of the game on a local website and get him to order it to my address from there. I doubt the prizes have already been bought.
This sounds fair.  We're happy to work out any arrangement necessary.

(By the way, if you DO win, I might just hand-deliver your prize, since I'll be in the UK for work for a couple months ...)
Logged

painted_cow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2011, 07:35:14 pm »
0

It looks, that this tournament is a really good idea, seeing that many players to participate. This also should push this forum a little bit with that many new accounts.

On the other hand I have to ask myself: Is a single elimination mode really appropriate with 256 (+) players? What about double elimination with Loser Brackets or Group Phases? Just my two cents about it.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #15 on: November 23, 2011, 07:41:52 pm »
0

It looks, that this tournament is a really good idea, seeing that many players to participate. This also should push this forum a little bit with that many new accounts.

On the other hand I have to ask myself: Is a single elimination mode really appropriate with 256 (+) players? What about double elimination with Loser Brackets or Group Phases? Just my two cents about it.
I'd love to do double elimination, but that's much more practical with a smaller bracket than a 256 player bracket.

Besides, there's only a prize for first place.
Logged

16hp

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2011, 04:07:35 am »
0

The tournament rules do not mention anything about if the games should be with identical starting hands or not. Does that mean identical starting hands won't be used if an agreement can't be reached?

I would prefer that identical starting hands were enforced in order to reward skill rather than luck.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2011, 06:53:46 am »
0

The tournament rules do not mention anything about if the games should be with identical starting hands or not. Does that mean identical starting hands won't be used if an agreement can't be reached?

I would prefer that identical starting hands were enforced in order to reward skill rather than luck.
Done.  Identical starting hands are a default rule -- but this can be changed by the players if desired!
Logged

Reyk

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2011, 07:57:31 am »
+1

Done.  Identical starting hands are a default rule -- but this can be changed by the players if desired!

That's a shame. You might get screwed by different starting hands sometimes, but not so often I guess. In a best of 4 skill will still prevail.
I'm very much convinced that some very interesting games with diverse strategies are the result of different starting hands, at least partly. I don't like this rule change, especially considering the kingdom design challenge. I understand why you have to allow point counter (it's simply not controllable), but this seems to be unnecessary.

Anyway I don't have to complain, because I don't even take part in the tournament (I've thought about kingdom design though). I've decided that I'm too busy this time and didn't want to risk a forfeit loss. I really like the tournament ideas - thank you, for organizing. Just wanted to point out the identical starting hand issue for future events. But like point counters this will cause many different opinions I guess ;-)

Good luck to all players!

PS: I understand that you can't design a kingdom speculating on certain starting hands - but the resulting games might become even more interesting if different starting hands appear.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6034
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2011, 10:01:24 am »
0

I think you're right that it lowers the interestingness of a game, but on the other hand, in a 7-game match, you'd expect around one or two instances where someone starts 5/2 and the other doesn't.  I'd hate for a top seed to get knocked out early on by Mountebank/Chapel.

For the finals, if our sets don't end up supremely favoring 5/2 over 4/3, we might scrap this rule.  But for now, I'll take slightly less interesting games in exchange for a little less luck. 

(If I had my way, we'd enforce identical splits through turns 3-5 as well, but c'est la vie ...)
Logged

toaster

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +46
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2011, 12:52:57 pm »
+1

I can understand the point counter rule because there's no way to enforce otherwise, but this start split rule is just moving away from the rules of Dominion out of personal preference.  I think the variation adds a lot to the game, it's part of the rules, and with 4 wins needed to win a match, it's very unlikely to "knock a top seed out early".  Luck is a part of the game, and a 7 game series should be plenty to deal with the few cases where different starting hands is a strongly determining factor in a game.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2011, 12:58:00 pm by toaster »
Logged

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1095
  • Respect: +1061
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2011, 01:18:45 pm »
0

I can understand the point counter rule because there's no way to enforce otherwise, but this start split rule is just moving away from the rules of Dominion out of personal preference.  I think the variation adds a lot to the game, it's part of the rules, and with 4 wins needed to win a match, it's very unlikely to "knock a top seed out early".  Luck is a part of the game, and a 7 game series should be plenty to deal with the few cases where different starting hands is a strongly determining factor in a game.

moving away from the rules of dominion?  that is a bit extreme.  this change only will only affect half of the games played (arguably 3/4) and is only a small deviation from the original rules. not only that, the rule is explicitly for the purpose of ensuring a more balanced tournament. it is not a matter of personal preference, and the ones making the rules have no vested interests that they are catering to here.

and fwiw (allowing for random openings) probability would indicate that 1 person in the tournaments first round will get four straight games of a 5/2 open to an opponents 4/3. im going to go out on a limb and bet the people on the receiving end of that kind of luck would favor the identicial opening hands. as it is, there is sure to plenty of lamenting over luck in the match reports.

edit: my quick maths are all a bit off
« Last Edit: November 28, 2011, 03:43:00 pm by greatexpectations »
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +541
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2011, 01:26:09 pm »
0

moving away from the rules of dominion?

is only a small deviation from the original rules.

Not really sure what's going on here, but I don't think I understand your post since you seem to be agreeing that using identical starting hands is moving away from the rules. It also seems theory is specifically saying he's catering to a group of players, namely the top seeds, with this decision.

Anyway I don't think it's a huge deal I guess, but I'm firmly in favor of allowing 5/2 vs 4/3 splits, both in regular play and in this tournament. I'm a top seed too, so supposedly I shouldn't be. Oh well :)
Logged

toaster

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +46
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2011, 01:47:45 pm »
0

moving away from the rules of dominion?  that is a bit extreme.  this change only will only affect half of the games played (arguably 3/4) and is only a small deviation from the original rules. not only that, the rule is explicitly for the purpose of ensuring a more balanced tournament. it is not a matter of personal preference, and the ones making the rules have no vested interests that they are catering to here.

Well, based on theory's posts, I know that he has a dislike of the more random elements in Dominion: he favors layouts, cards, and rule sets which minimize the influence of luck.  I don't think his decision is coming from maliciousness or a desire for personal gain, of course not.  I do, however, think the ruling is colored by his own personal preferences for minimizing luck in Dominion.  Also, fwiw this change will affect about a third of games (the probably of one 5/2 split and one 4/3 split in a game is 10/36).

Quote
and fwiw (allowing for random openings) probability would indicate that 1 person in the tournaments first round will get four straight games of a 5/2 open to an opponents 4/3. im going to go out on a limb and bet the people on the receiving end of that kind of luck would favor the identicial opening hands. as it is, there is sure to plenty of lamenting over luck in the match reports.

Yep, that's bound to happen, although I'd also point out that there's a 50% chance that person you gets the 4/3 splits is the lower ranked player, plus 5/2 isn't always the better split.  Dominion, however, is not chess.  The presence of luck does not make skill-based tournaments unworkable, just look at poker.  I know there are many people who wish Dominion had less luck than it does, but there are also those who would probably want more.  I just think the tournament should be done with the rules as written, not modified by personal taste.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2011, 01:50:52 pm by toaster »
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9371
    • View Profile
Re: 2011 DominionStrategy.com Championships Rules
« Reply #24 on: November 28, 2011, 02:07:13 pm »
0

I can understand the point counter rule because there's no way to enforce otherwise, but this start split rule is just moving away from the rules of Dominion out of pure personal preference.  I think the variation adds a lot to the game, it's part of the rules, and with 4 wins needed to win a match, it's very unlikely to "knock a top seed out early".  Luck is a part of the game, and a 7 game series should be plenty to deal with the few cases where different starting hands is a strongly determining factor in a game.

We discussed this for several weeks when the BGG Dominion League still existed (essentially, before the advent of the leaderboard).  Though those were best-of-three matches, there was widespread agreement that identical starting hands were the way to go for competition.

The thing is, the 5/2 vs. 4/3 split does not make the game more interesting in most circumstances.  On some boards, one or the other split is vastly superior; in the great majority of cases this advantage is much higher than the first-player advantage.  The outcome of one person opening Witch/Chapel vs. 4/Chapel (or Silver/Chapel) is determined (90% is a good estimate) at the start of the game; so is the advantage of someone opening Double Ambassador (or Amb/Silver) vs. a forced Ambassador/-.

This isn't more interesting in a competitive environment.  Sure, in a non-competition game, a skilled player might find the challenge interesting (oh, hey, look, a possible within-the-rules way of handicapping!), but in a competitive game it just predetermines the outcome of some games.  So, let's look at this mathematically:

30.6% of games will open with an unequal split.  In a best-of-seven setup, one expects an average (over all 255 matches) of 2.15 unequal splits per match.  Even if only half of unequal splits give one player an advantage (and I would argue more do), then on average one game in each match has a predetermined outcome.

In the first round of 128 matches, we can expect 4 matches to have 5 or more unequal splits.  Mostly five, with the small (0.5) chance of 6.  In 25% of those (so, one match) we can expect 4 or 5 of those splits to all favor the same player.

This is looking worse and worse.  We can actually mathematically expect one whole match is almost certainly predetermined.  That's an average.  With N=128, we might see zero, or maybe two.

But if we can expect, on average, one match is literally rigged by the very cards... then there's no reason to include this luck factor.

Certainly there are shuffle luck factors that might be similar.  I'm not going to spend time calculating the chances that, in a theoretical 906 games, one game with Familiar will see P2 getting 2-P on T5, which is still probably only a 70% win (the chance is probably in the realm of 10 games total, with an infinitesimal chance of two being in the same match).  But we can't expect those bad shuffles to determine the outcome of an entire match.

We can expect allowing unequal splits to determine the outcome of at least one match.

And that's unacceptable.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.
Pages: [1] 2 3  All
 

Page created in 0.166 seconds with 23 queries.