Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6  All

Author Topic: [pre-discussion] DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships  (Read 22311 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4364
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #25 on: June 19, 2012, 05:19:34 pm »
0

I don't think 2p is an option. Further, since it's 3p later, I think it really really ought to be 3p from the beginning. 2 to 3 is a different beast, and it doesn't make sense to me to mix them. You wouldn't have people compete in soccer for the intro rounds before switching to a rugby tournament, even if you like soccer better.

well obviously mixing formats is not the preferred option dude. come on now. but we don't have the time to make a nice 243 player tournament spread out over two months. there needs to be concessions somewhere, and 2p saves time and is easier to arrange matchups.

i actually think you are underestimating game lenghts. 3p is longer than 2p, and all tournament sets have always taken longer than a few games casual on isotropic would. combining this leads to long games, and you just can't do that when trying to fit the schedule of 3p. it seems ridiculous to me that the tournament would be so heavily dependent on who has the most free time to play.
If it's so obvious that it's not an option, dude, why are you advocating it? I don't think 2p actually saves much if any time, at serious downsides in terms of what I would prioritize. I'm 100% against having anything other than 3p dominion here.
Let's hold our horses on how big the thing is going to be. I seriously, seriously doubt we'd have 243 people who are a) American b) have the time to play this, c)want to, and d) are able to make it to nationals. If we do, we may be forced into something like single elimination 3p, which would be sad of course.
I really do think getting a rough number is going to be really important in figuring out which formats are possible.

Ozle

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3625
  • Sorry, this text is personal.
  • Respect: +3349
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #26 on: June 19, 2012, 05:20:26 pm »
0

So, decide a date range
Then find out numbers
Then decide on format?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
= Profit
Logged
Try the Ozle Google Map Challenge!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7466.0

Sullying players Enjoyment of Innovation since 2013 Apparently!

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4364
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2012, 05:24:01 pm »
0

Competitively, I would say the rules should be as close as possible to what we'll see in the actual US Championships. I'm pretty sure that's not going to be my favourite choice :P , but it seems logical. I mean this in terms of how much credit goes to 1st vs 2nd vs 3rd (equal distance b/t 1-2 and 2-3, or is it more winner-take-all?), how sets are determined (if applicable), etc.
I would hope everybody gets to play at least a few games, if possible.

Axxle

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1664
  • Most Valuable Serial Killer
  • Respect: +1950
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2012, 05:24:16 pm »
+3

50p dominion.  One game.  Winner take all.
Logged
We might be from all over the world, but "we all talk this one language  : +1 card + 1 action +1 buy , gain , discard, trash... " - RTT

Young Nick

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 560
  • Respect: +269
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2012, 05:26:30 pm »
0

50p dominion.  One game.  Winner take all.

Better rush those Estates!
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3593
  • Respect: +6021
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #30 on: June 19, 2012, 05:26:34 pm »
0

The problem with identifying a number, and then deciding on a format, is that the format may dictate how many can come.  For instance, if we do a one-day thing, or even a three-day thing, you'd have to know that in advance in order to sign up.

169 Americans/Canadians signed up for the last DSC (which had a much smaller prize).  I'm using that as an estimate for now.
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4364
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #31 on: June 19, 2012, 05:32:09 pm »
0

The problem with identifying a number, and then deciding on a format, is that the format may dictate how many can come.  For instance, if we do a one-day thing, or even a three-day thing, you'd have to know that in advance in order to sign up.

169 Americans/Canadians signed up for the last DSC (which had a much smaller prize).  I'm using that as an estimate for now.
Right. But we can get an upper bound by figuring out how many have interest and can make use of the prize.

Ozle

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3625
  • Sorry, this text is personal.
  • Respect: +3349
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #32 on: June 19, 2012, 05:35:38 pm »
0

I would also have a cut off date on forum accounts created before you announced it....
Logged
Try the Ozle Google Map Challenge!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7466.0

Sullying players Enjoyment of Innovation since 2013 Apparently!

Young Nick

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 560
  • Respect: +269
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #33 on: June 19, 2012, 05:36:13 pm »
0

169 Americans/Canadians signed up for the last DSC (which had a much smaller prize).  I'm using that as an estimate for now.

Well, I guess there are a lot of other factors to consider here. There are clearly several more people who are likely to see it than the last DSC, and considering there is a bigger prize, a larger percentage of people would be inclined to participate. At the same time, there are logistical matters which probably rules it out for many. I would guess there would be at most 100 Americans who will sign up.
Logged

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1095
  • Respect: +1061
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #34 on: June 19, 2012, 05:38:57 pm »
0

If it's so obvious that it's not an option, dude, why are you advocating it? I don't think 2p actually saves much if any time, at serious downsides in terms of what I would prioritize. I'm 100% against having anything other than 3p dominion here.
Let's hold our horses on how big the thing is going to be. I seriously, seriously doubt we'd have 243 people who are a) American b) have the time to play this, c)want to, and d) are able to make it to nationals. If we do, we may be forced into something like single elimination 3p, which would be sad of course.
I really do think getting a rough number is going to be really important in figuring out which formats are possible.

uh. i answered that in the section you quoted. it's not that it is an option, it just isn't preferred. i think you continue to underestimate A. how many people we will get B. how much longer 3p games with higher stakes will take and C. how easy it will be to get 3p games together. i agree that 2p is not the preferred, but i think that for at least elimination rounds it will make scheduling easier and faster.  you can feel free to disagree, but this thread was theory asking for opinions and sorry, your opinion is not the final one. as i said before, i would prefer to not see the tournament come down to simply who has the most free time.
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 626
  • Respect: +681
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #35 on: June 19, 2012, 06:02:58 pm »
0

At least some of the qualifying tournaments have time caps for the prelim games. If you can finish an in-person game in 40 minutes I'll bet you can finish an isotropic game a lot faster.

The Detroit tourney is doing it this way:

5 prelim rounds. 1-point per win. Half of the participants advance based on points (tie break on total vp earned). Max 50 minute games.

That takes them to a max 32 players.

Then they do single eliminatation quarter finals (terrible idea) to bring it to 10 players.
Then single elimination semi finals to bring it to 3 players.

Winner takes all in the last game.


Obviously the single elimination games are a terrible idea for any level of fairness, but the prelim method isn't bad: play a bunch of games (5+). Half of the people advance to the tournament. You could do that for a couple of rounds to bring thr numbers down.

Assuming more than 80 participants, something like this:

9am-1130am: seeding. Play five games. 81 advance seeded
1130-1pm: 27 groupings (seeded based on points from seeding round). Each plays 3 games. Once in each chair. Winner from each group advances
1-4pm: 9 groups (using earlier seeding). Play six games, twice in each seat. Top player advances.
4-7pm: 3 groups. Repeat process from last round.
7pm+ finals. 3 players, xx games to determine the champion

Assumes games are 30 minutes each. The final could be 10 games and it will still be done by midnight at the latest.

Or you could break it up and do one round a day. It would require the finalists to be available 5 days instead of one, but same principles will apply.

Fwiw I agree with WW that the games should all be three player (with the added benefit that, though they take longer and ate more random, they do eliminate 2/3rds of people per round instead of just half...)

Ed
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4364
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #36 on: June 19, 2012, 06:05:03 pm »
0

If it's so obvious that it's not an option, dude, why are you advocating it? I don't think 2p actually saves much if any time, at serious downsides in terms of what I would prioritize. I'm 100% against having anything other than 3p dominion here.
Let's hold our horses on how big the thing is going to be. I seriously, seriously doubt we'd have 243 people who are a) American b) have the time to play this, c)want to, and d) are able to make it to nationals. If we do, we may be forced into something like single elimination 3p, which would be sad of course.
I really do think getting a rough number is going to be really important in figuring out which formats are possible.

uh. i answered that in the section you quoted. it's not that it is an option, it just isn't preferred. i think you continue to underestimate A. how many people we will get B. how much longer 3p games with higher stakes will take and C. how easy it will be to get 3p games together. i agree that 2p is not the preferred, but i think that for at least elimination rounds it will make scheduling easier and faster.  you can feel free to disagree, but this thread was theory asking for opinions and sorry, your opinion is not the final one. as i said before, i would prefer to not see the tournament come down to simply who has the most free time.
I'm not saying my opinion is the final one. I merely disagreed with yours. And gave reasons why I think your idea is bad. Nothing personal. Just think it's a bad idea, and certainly think it's not the only possibility.
Man, if it were the only possibility, to get things in, why would he have asked for ideas? And why would you need to suggest it.
I don't understand how you're NOT saying this is the preferred option giving the circumstances though. So maybe I'm misunderstanding you? Because it seems pretty clear to me that you're pushing for some 2p in all your suggestions, even as in your non-concrete fluff, you're saying 'oh no, this is bad'. They don't seem to jive to me.
And with all due respect, I have no reason to see why you should have any better than the absolute vaguest idea how long 3p isotropic games should last. Add to that that you've not actually given supporting reasons, and I'm not inclined to buy your arguments on how long the games will take. Again, nothing personal against you, I just don't think you're right at all here, and you've given me no reasons to make me think you know something I don't here.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4364
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #37 on: June 19, 2012, 06:11:01 pm »
0

...sample proposal...

I generally like the look of things, but if I had my druthers, I would redistribute some of the prelim stuff into making that 11:30-1 thing.

Other, larger problems: The time-frame looks good, except that 9 am on the east coast is 6 am on the west coast, and 7 pm on the west coast is 10 on the east coast. Also, you have got to give people some time for breaks. Particularly to eat meals.
It's going to be a little tough to ensure who sits where on isotropic. Also, having person X or Y always behind/ahead of you in play can be somewhat of a strategic advantage/disadvantage.
If you throw the seating thing away, you no longer need to have a divisible-by-three number of games, which gives you some more flexibility on round length.

Finally, how do you determine who did best? Is it just most wins? Surely you don't want total VP? Is it a 2/1/0 for 1st/2nd/3rd? Or should winning mean more than that?

All that said, I generally like it, if we determine that one-day is the best way to go.

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3593
  • Respect: +6021
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #38 on: June 19, 2012, 06:13:50 pm »
0

I would also have a cut off date on forum accounts created before you announced it....
This won't happen.  A lot of people registered for the forum for the 2011 DSC and became active members afterwards.  And I see it more as an "internet qualifier" rather than a "DS qualifier".

There's a huge proportion of people that read the site / lurk the forums without registering.
Logged

HiWay2Hello

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #39 on: June 19, 2012, 06:31:05 pm »
0

Quote
Finally, how do you determine who did best? Is it just most wins? Surely you don't want total VP? Is it a 2/1/0 for 1st/2nd/3rd? Or should winning mean more than that?

Somewhere along the way, there ought to be a tiebreaker that takes into account seating position, assuming this can't be fully equalized.  For example, if Player A wins 3 out 5, but his seat order was 1/2/1/2/1, all else equal he should be ranked lower than Player B who has an identical record but whose seat order was 2/3/2/3/2.  Perhaps something like "tiebreak" points could be given, with 3 points for every game in third seat, 2 points for every game in second seat, and 1 point for every game in first seat.
Logged

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1095
  • Respect: +1061
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #40 on: June 19, 2012, 06:36:55 pm »
0

And with all due respect, I have no reason to see why you should have any better than the absolute vaguest idea how long 3p isotropic games should last. Add to that that you've not actually given supporting reasons, and I'm not inclined to buy your arguments on how long the games will take. Again, nothing personal against you, I just don't think you're right at all here, and you've given me no reasons to make me think you know something I don't here.

ok, a few problems here.  first off, you call me out for having no evidence but you provide non yourself.  not sure that is how things work. it seems to me that the reasons why 3p games are longer than 2p games are actually painfully obvious.  more players, more analysis paralysis, more reactions to attacks, attacks generally having more power, more provinces/colonies to clear, trickier end game calculations to manage. the only case i see for 3p games being faster is that piles can run faster.  but again, with 3p that is something you need to be more aware of anyway and play might be tailored to avoid that situation.

furthermore, you completely ignore the other half of my reasoning - 3p games are harder to arrange.  i have not played any 3p tournament games on here, but i will open it up to all the players who played multiplayer in the Isodom: Challenge. was it easier or harder than in 2p tournaments to set up your game dates.  i seem to recall a thread which indicated that arranging multiplayer matches was difficult. now lets that expand that past a single case of just a few high level players who play far more than average in the first place to potentially hundreds of players.

and you say that i shouldn't have the vaguest idea of how long 3p games will take?  what are you basing that off of exactly?  my 3p game total under this nick? i can freely provide you with both of my alternate user names if you would like, and you can count up my 3p games there.  likewise i can point you to friends on isotropic who i have played with IRL.  your opinion on whether to buy a gold or a duchy turn 10 in a BM game might be more valid than mine, but i see no reason to believe why the same should hold with our opinions on 3p games.
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1095
  • Respect: +1061
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #41 on: June 19, 2012, 06:40:47 pm »
0

a few things to consider:
- forum membership and isotropic users have both increased drastically since the DS.com championships.  we could easily see more than the DS.com tournament.
- there does not seem to be any reason why a player would not sign up.  if they miss a match and forfeit, oh well. there is no conceivable punishments for dropouts. this tournament seems to offer some level of prestige as well as a very nice physical prize.  there is no reason why people who might be pressed for time might not start, see how it goes for them, and carry on from there. 
- collusion? kingmaking? tiebreakers? higher stakes and anonymity could cause trouble.
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 626
  • Respect: +681
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #42 on: June 19, 2012, 06:56:37 pm »
0

I generally like the look of things, but if I had my druthers, I would redistribute some of the prelim stuff into making that 11:30-1 thing.
[/quote]

I don't follow. Do you mean you would increased the 1130-1pm slot, or decrease it? Or something else?

Other, larger problems: The time-frame looks good, except that 9 am on the east coast is 6 am on the west coast, and 7 pm on the west coast is 10 on the east coast. Also, you have got to give people some time for breaks. Particularly to eat meals.

True. The last one day tourney started at 6am Pacific Time, so worse case you do that. You could split the difference - start at 7 or 8am PT and have the finals start at 8 or 9pm Eastern Time. Or even have the finals happen on a separate day.


It's going to be a little tough to ensure who sits where on isotropic. Also, having person X or Y always behind/ahead of you in play can be somewhat of a strategic advantage/disadvantage.
If you throw the seating thing away, you no longer need to have a divisible-by-three number of games, which gives you some more flexibility on round length.

Makes sense. Easiest way would be to use the isotropic default which will give preferred seating to whoever lost the previous round (I have no idea what iso does with the person who came second? Would it just reverse the order. If three players came in 1-2-3, would their order be 3-2-1 automatically in the next round?

Finally, how do you determine who did best? Is it just most wins? Surely you don't want total VP? Is it a 2/1/0 for 1st/2nd/3rd? Or should winning mean more than that?

I thought I would leave that to someone else. I think the three obvious options are:
(1) 1 point for a win, nothing for 2nd/3rd
(2) 2 points for a win, 1 point for 2nd (i.e. 2-2 ties with 1-3)
(3) 3 points for a win, 1 point for 2nd (i.e., 2-2-2 ties with 1-3-3)

I don't like total VP for a tie breaker. Maybe you use seating order for a tie breaker - as is seating order in the first game, or 'seating order points (same as the points above for seating instead of winning, but higher number is bad for the purposes of tie breaking only)

All that said, I generally like it, if we determine that one-day is the best way to go.

Same type of thing works for multi-day. Just do 1+ round per day instead of all on a single day.

Ed
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4364
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #43 on: June 19, 2012, 07:41:53 pm »
0

And with all due respect, I have no reason to see why you should have any better than the absolute vaguest idea how long 3p isotropic games should last. Add to that that you've not actually given supporting reasons, and I'm not inclined to buy your arguments on how long the games will take. Again, nothing personal against you, I just don't think you're right at all here, and you've given me no reasons to make me think you know something I don't here.

ok, a few problems here.  first off, you call me out for having no evidence but you provide non yourself.  not sure that is how things work. it seems to me that the reasons why 3p games are longer than 2p games are actually painfully obvious.  more players, more analysis paralysis, more reactions to attacks, attacks generally having more power, more provinces/colonies to clear, trickier end game calculations to manage. the only case i see for 3p games being faster is that piles can run faster.  but again, with 3p that is something you need to be more aware of anyway and play might be tailored to avoid that situation.

furthermore, you completely ignore the other half of my reasoning - 3p games are harder to arrange.  i have not played any 3p tournament games on here, but i will open it up to all the players who played multiplayer in the Isodom: Challenge. was it easier or harder than in 2p tournaments to set up your game dates.  i seem to recall a thread which indicated that arranging multiplayer matches was difficult. now lets that expand that past a single case of just a few high level players who play far more than average in the first place to potentially hundreds of players.

and you say that i shouldn't have the vaguest idea of how long 3p games will take?  what are you basing that off of exactly?  my 3p game total under this nick? i can freely provide you with both of my alternate user names if you would like, and you can count up my 3p games there.  likewise i can point you to friends on isotropic who i have played with IRL.  your opinion on whether to buy a gold or a duchy turn 10 in a BM game might be more valid than mine, but i see no reason to believe why the same should hold with our opinions on 3p games.

I have no evidence except my experience. I have played a decent amount of multiplayer (not a ton, but a decent amount). CR says you've played... one game. IRL games take way longer, of course, but that's irrelevant. And games with your friends tend to take longer too, but again, not relevant. 3p games take longer of course, but given that you need only 2/3 as many, it seems to roughly cancel out, from my experience. Actually, it seems a little faster, because mega-turns still mega, and 3-piles come sooner. If you get attacked to death, it can detract some, but... well, this is at least cancelled out.
As for scheduling, first of all, I WAS one of the people in isodom challenge. It wasn't noticeably more difficult to set things up. Moreover, if you're thinking this is going to be a 'here are your opponents, figure out when is good for you thing'... well, it won't be. There isn't time. So, given that it's going to be pre-arranged day(s) X, time(s) Y, finding games shouldn't be too hard. It's pretty hard to get multiplayer games of decently-leveled people on iso now, because most people play 2p. But with the backdrop of the tournament, it shouldn't be difficult at all.

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #44 on: June 19, 2012, 07:45:30 pm »
0

A couple things I have to say. I generally like Ed's format, and would like to throw my hat in the ring for a multiple-day tournament, as opposed to one day, because it allows for us to play more games per round if we want to. Everything's really limited if we force it into 12 hours worth of playing time or so.

Also, is it possible we could have a scoring system based on what player wins? As in maybe if first player wins he gets 3 points, 2nd player gets 4, and 3rd player gets 5? Those are just arbitrary numbers, and I think it would work best if the winner got all the points, though I am certainly no expert on these things. Anyway, what do you guys think about that?
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4364
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #45 on: June 19, 2012, 07:47:08 pm »
0

A couple things I have to say. I generally like Ed's format, and would like to throw my hat in the ring for a multiple-day tournament, as opposed to one day, because it allows for us to play more games per round if we want to. Everything's really limited if we force it into 12 hours worth of playing time or so.

Also, is it possible we could have a scoring system based on what player wins? As in maybe if first player wins he gets 3 points, 2nd player gets 4, and 3rd player gets 5? Those are just arbitrary numbers, and I think it would work best if the winner got all the points, though I am certainly no expert on these things. Anyway, what do you guys think about that?

I dislike the idea. A lot. 1p is an advantage, and moreso in multiplayer. But not to THAT extent.

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #46 on: June 19, 2012, 07:51:25 pm »
0

A couple things I have to say. I generally like Ed's format, and would like to throw my hat in the ring for a multiple-day tournament, as opposed to one day, because it allows for us to play more games per round if we want to. Everything's really limited if we force it into 12 hours worth of playing time or so.

Also, is it possible we could have a scoring system based on what player wins? As in maybe if first player wins he gets 3 points, 2nd player gets 4, and 3rd player gets 5? Those are just arbitrary numbers, and I think it would work best if the winner got all the points, though I am certainly no expert on these things. Anyway, what do you guys think about that?

I dislike the idea. A lot. 1p is an advantage, and moreso in multiplayer. But not to THAT extent.

Fair enough. Just out of curiosity, would you like it if there was a smaller difference between the numbers (like 3-3.25-3.5 or something smaller), or are you against it entirely?
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4364
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #47 on: June 19, 2012, 08:37:27 pm »
0

A couple things I have to say. I generally like Ed's format, and would like to throw my hat in the ring for a multiple-day tournament, as opposed to one day, because it allows for us to play more games per round if we want to. Everything's really limited if we force it into 12 hours worth of playing time or so.

Also, is it possible we could have a scoring system based on what player wins? As in maybe if first player wins he gets 3 points, 2nd player gets 4, and 3rd player gets 5? Those are just arbitrary numbers, and I think it would work best if the winner got all the points, though I am certainly no expert on these things. Anyway, what do you guys think about that?

I dislike the idea. A lot. 1p is an advantage, and moreso in multiplayer. But not to THAT extent.

Fair enough. Just out of curiosity, would you like it if there was a smaller difference between the numbers (like 3-3.25-3.5 or something smaller), or are you against it entirely?
I'm against it entirely. Probably, if there's a small enough discrepancy in the numbers, you could make it balanced. But it just seems weird to me. A win should be a win should be a win, even if it's not entirely fair between the players. Especially because 1st-turn advantage moves a lot from kingdom to kingdom, and man, you do NOT want to have to control for that.

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #48 on: June 19, 2012, 10:30:10 pm »
0

Okay, yeah, I understand, I just wonder if there could be a quick fix to the turn order problem since isotropic doesn't allow you to designate turn order. I suppose you could just all sign out and keep proposing games until you get the correct turn order instead.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7089
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9358
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #49 on: June 20, 2012, 02:05:55 am »
+3

I wonder if Jay realizes at all how much easier 2P tournaments are vs 3P, just from a tournament logistics standpoint?  This would be true even in an IRL tournament; I'd love to know how they'll run Nationals and Worlds.

For the sake of putting matches together, obviously this has to happen on the same day or days.  Weekdays are likely a no-go; if you do "Tuesday evening," you can't reasonably start before 5:30 PM Pacific, and can't reasonably end after, say, midnight Eastern--a 4-hour block isn't going to be enough to do much.

I'm going to cautiously advocate a "Swiss-like" qualifier with a semifinal elimination round and longer finals.  Format as follows:

Qualifier:

Individual three-game matches between three players.  Within the match, players receive 2 pts for 1st, 1 for 2nd, 0 for 3rd; ties split all points.  Points from the three games are totaled, and those scores reported to the hosts.

Match points are given as 2-1-0, again with points split for ties.  Triplets are formed so as to match players who have equal numbers of points.  Alas, this will have to be hand-calculated, but I know we have a few people here who are good with Google spreadsheets (and who, you know, run the place), so I wouldn't worry too much about that.  This creates an ordering of any field <243 within five rounds--about 8 hours including food breaks, calculations time, etc.  Sure, it's not a perfect ordering, but it's enough to create a smaller elimination field of 27.  If we get >243 players, well, tack on an extra round there.

Swiss tie-breaker:  sum of player positions over the 15 or 18 games played.  This acknowledges the importance of position in the same way Dominion itself does, by using it as a tiebreaker.  Second tie-breaker by whatever standard Swiss-style tiebreaker you wish.

Day two, three elimination rounds.  Three games in the first, five in the second, seven in the finals.  About 4 hours.

In fact, maybe better to play 6 Swiss rounds anyway, 3 each on a Saturday and a Sunday, then eliminations the following weekend.

Anyway, my two cents.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6  All
 

Page created in 0.095 seconds with 20 queries.