Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  All

Author Topic: [pre-discussion] DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships  (Read 22614 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #75 on: June 21, 2012, 04:13:43 pm »
0

Also, if you're having a dilemma between 4p and 3p, there is a simple fix for this:

---

Organize players into pools of 4.
Each pool plays a 4-player game. The winner advances.
The remaining players then play a 3-player game. The winner of that also advances.
The two players who did not win are either eliminated, or sent to a loser's bracket.
In case of shared victory, play a tiebreaker between those players (2-player is fine here).

---

This scenario would be ideal if you could have two qualifiers at the end.
If you choose a winner's and loser's bracket option AND you need ONE winner, the final should go something like this:

2 players from the winner's bracket and 2 players from the loser's bracket go to the finals.
Do the format above, but if a winner's bracket player wins the 4-player game, the tournament ends and they are champion.
If a loser's bracket player wins, another 3-player game is played with that player and the two winner's bracket players, and the winner of that game is champion.

EDIT: Just read Kirian's idea...remember, I never did institute a point system in BGGDL, and wouldn't advocate for one here either. With such short notice, I think just having a knockout tournament of some form (and the above is technically a pseudo-quadruple elimination) will be much simpler, and capping at a certain number of players as well.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2012, 04:21:05 pm by metzgerism »
Logged

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #76 on: June 21, 2012, 04:23:58 pm »
0

Another pretty obvious thing is that they won't all be 4 player to start, correct? That is, if we get 61 people, we'll have 13 four-player games and 3 three-player games. And if so, how do we score these games? If not, are we kicking people out to meet a multiple of four? Or how is that going to work?
It's probably too short of notice to get a good "soft cap" format in. At a certain point, the tournament should be capped.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3593
  • Respect: +6021
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #77 on: June 21, 2012, 04:25:22 pm »
0

If we have:

12 registrants we do 3x 4p
13: we do 3x 3p + 1x 4p
14: 2x 3p + 1x 4p
15: 1x 3p + 3x 4p

And so on.  It shouldn't be an issue.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3593
  • Respect: +6021
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #78 on: June 21, 2012, 04:49:43 pm »
0

I would think that what you would want to do is not lock the pods in. So what you do is label everyone A1, B1, C1, D1, A2, B2, C2, D2, A3, B3, etc. Then in the first round, A1 plays against B1 C1 and D1; second round, no matter the results of the first, A1 plays against B2 C3 and D4, B1 plays against C2 D3 and A4. Third round A1 plays against B3 C5 and D7 (wrap around when necessary). There might be some issues with numbers not dividing evenly, but I think you get my idea. That way, you're not locked into opponents and necessarily competing directly with them, but you also get mucho games.

What is the drawback of this other than waiting around for your opponent?  This is what I am leaning towards now.

To be clear:

We get a list of X registrants for Day 1

We assign everyone 4 matches, ensuring everyone has fair seating order through the day

Match 1 starts at (let's say, this is randomly chosen) 2PM EST
Match 2 at 2:30PM EST
Match 3 at 3:00PM EST
Match 4 at 3:30PM EST

10 points for winner
5 points for second place
3 points for third
1 point for fourth

In the event of a 3p game, it is still 10-5-3. 

Top 4 players of the day are chosen.

Ties broken on sum of opponent strength (so 3p gamers lose out on tiebreaks) and performance in fourth position.
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #79 on: June 21, 2012, 04:51:45 pm »
0

If we have:

12 registrants we do 3x 4p
13: we do 3x 3p + 1x 4p
14: 2x 3p + 1x 4p
15: 1x 3p + 3x 4p

And so on.  It shouldn't be an issue.

Right. My only question is: How would we score a 3p game vs a 4p game?
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9366
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #80 on: June 21, 2012, 04:54:02 pm »
0

I would think that what you would want to do is not lock the pods in. So what you do is label everyone A1, B1, C1, D1, A2, B2, C2, D2, A3, B3, etc. Then in the first round, A1 plays against B1 C1 and D1; second round, no matter the results of the first, A1 plays against B2 C3 and D4, B1 plays against C2 D3 and A4. Third round A1 plays against B3 C5 and D7 (wrap around when necessary). There might be some issues with numbers not dividing evenly, but I think you get my idea. That way, you're not locked into opponents and necessarily competing directly with them, but you also get mucho games.
What is the drawback of this other than waiting around for your opponent?  This is what I am leaning towards now.

I can't think of one.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3593
  • Respect: +6021
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #81 on: June 21, 2012, 05:00:11 pm »
0

10-5-3-1 vs 4-3-2-1 depends on who you think should advance:

4 second places
1 first place, 3 fourth places

I think 4-3-2-1 makes more sense.
Logged

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #82 on: June 21, 2012, 05:02:56 pm »
+1

I still vote wholeheartedly against having a point system at all, and giving only winners any credit.

From a competition standpoint, it prevents odd kingmaking and collusion scenarios.
From an organizational one, the book-keeping is much simpler.
Logged

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #83 on: June 21, 2012, 05:16:18 pm »
0

Ok, here's a concept:

Remember the rules I had set up for BGGDL for multi-player games, before we went to 2p only?
Do that, but segregate everyone into some moderate sized divisions (probably 10-12 per division).
Restrict play to 4p and 3p games, and advance 3n+1 players from the pools to the knockout stage, with a bye for division champs.

(BGGDL's format was based on wins, assuming 2p games. When you played a 3p/4p game, it was treated as having played 2/3 2p games at the same time. Winning only mattered, so if you shared victory or both lost, you could 'replay' them for a result. Ended up still working like a standard RR table).

Logged

RisingJaguar

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 527
  • Respect: +184
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #84 on: June 21, 2012, 05:22:55 pm »
+1

I still vote wholeheartedly against having a point system at all, and giving only winners any credit.

From a competition standpoint, it prevents odd kingmaking and collusion scenarios.
From an organizational one, the book-keeping is much simpler.
But does this really prevent collusion and Kingmaking?  I would think having the point system encourages people to always play for themselves, which is what you want.   

The point system also rewards consistent play though. 

FYI I can't participate, just throwing pennies. 
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3593
  • Respect: +6021
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #85 on: June 21, 2012, 05:30:55 pm »
+1

In practice I doubt it will matter, points vs wins.

Let's replace it with wins, and second places break ties.  Functionally equivalent.
Logged

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #86 on: June 21, 2012, 05:35:14 pm »
+1

I still vote wholeheartedly against having a point system at all, and giving only winners any credit.

From a competition standpoint, it prevents odd kingmaking and collusion scenarios.
From an organizational one, the book-keeping is much simpler.
But does this really prevent collusion and Kingmaking?  I would think having the point system encourages people to always play for themselves, which is what you want.   

The point system also rewards consistent play though. 

FYI I can't participate, just throwing pennies.
In a winner-take-all scenario, a player in second place is more likely to stall the game so that they have a chance to win. Because winning a game is usually all that matters in a bracket, this mirrors a bracket decently.

In a point system, a player in second place and a chance to end the game might do so, if they believe that they will lose positioning if the game continues. This is kingmaking for the first player. Because winning a game is usually all that matters in a bracket, this is particularly odd to give an incentive for.

You might get some nice participation points, but later on when you get to the "you must win" part of the tournament, you might have the WRONG type of consistency: more players that were good at rushing the end of the game with a nominal score than those who are actually good at winning a game.
Logged

Rabid

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Shuffle iT Username: Rabid
  • Respect: +637
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #87 on: June 21, 2012, 05:55:26 pm »
0

Surely winner takes all just promotes high variance strategies?
Ie treasure map without support.

Also from 4th seat I would consider finishing 2nd a "win".
Logged
Twitch
1 Day Cup #1:Ednever

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 626
  • Respect: +681
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #88 on: June 21, 2012, 05:57:04 pm »
+1

I've been playing a few 3- and 4-player games this week.

My vote is definitely for points (vs wins). There are many times when the spread is such that as a third player you have no hope to catch the first player, but you do have a chance to catch the second player. With points you will keep playing in self-interest. Without points you don't care and, your only incentive left is: (1) Help the player you think is your least competition overall, or (2) Just end the game so you stop wasting your time.

This is even more true in 4-player (where there could be a simultaneous batter for 1-2 and 3-4 at the same time). Without points both players 3 and 4 become kingmakers instead of playing for themselves.

The point impacts do not need to be significant (although I think it would be better if they do), but I think then need to be there (i.e., I would prefer 10-2-1-0 to 1-0-0-0, but I think something like 4-3-2-1 or 3-2-1 or 4-2-1 would be more reasonable. I know I would be more worried facing someone who came 2nd in four games than someone who came first in one game and fourth is three others.)

-=-=-
The only case where I think points leads to a debatable decision making vs. wins is when a player is in second place with little hope of making first (but some hope), ends it to guarantee his second place finish.

I personally think this is part of playing the odds in Dominion and shows more skill on "when to end" vs just going balls out to win without any consideration of your chances. But I can see both sides.

I just think the earlier issues trump this debatable one anyway.


Ed
Logged

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 626
  • Respect: +681
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #89 on: June 21, 2012, 06:02:37 pm »
0

One more thought:

In the case of some games being 3-player and some being 4-player, I've seen models like this used before:

               4-player           3-player
Winner      6                      6
2nd          4                      3
3rd           2                      0
4th           0                    n/a

Recognizing that a 3rd place finish in a 4-player game is a much higher achievement than a 3rd place finish in a 3-player game. 2nd place in for player is marginally more impressive than 2nd in 3-player. Winning in each is the same.

Ed

Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #90 on: June 21, 2012, 06:09:59 pm »
0

Either way, is a win in a three-player match going to be equal to a win in a four-player match?

I agree with Ed. I think something like 8-3-1-0 and 6-2-0 sounds about right, though if you value winning more, you could make it 10-3-1-0 and 8-2-0.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #91 on: June 21, 2012, 06:15:01 pm »
+1

I've been playing a few 3- and 4-player games this week.

My vote is definitely for points (vs wins). There are many times when the spread is such that as a third player you have no hope to catch the first player, but you do have a chance to catch the second player. With points you will keep playing in self-interest. Without points you don't care and, your only incentive left is: (1) Help the player you think is your least competition overall, or (2) Just end the game so you stop wasting your time.

This is even more true in 4-player (where there could be a simultaneous batter for 1-2 and 3-4 at the same time). Without points both players 3 and 4 become kingmakers instead of playing for themselves.

The point impacts do not need to be significant (although I think it would be better if they do), but I think then need to be there (i.e., I would prefer 10-2-1-0 to 1-0-0-0, but I think something like 4-3-2-1 or 3-2-1 or 4-2-1 would be more reasonable. I know I would be more worried facing someone who came 2nd in four games than someone who came first in one game and fourth is three others.)

-=-=-
The only case where I think points leads to a debatable decision making vs. wins is when a player is in second place with little hope of making first (but some hope), ends it to guarantee his second place finish.

I personally think this is part of playing the odds in Dominion and shows more skill on "when to end" vs just going balls out to win without any consideration of your chances. But I can see both sides.

I just think the earlier issues trump this debatable one anyway.


Ed
I disagree wholeheartedly :D

This tournament has a couple issues you might be forgetting:

1. We don't have time to contemplate point systems;
2. Organizing with a point system might be a total mess for whoever admininstrates; and,
3. This is not a participation tournament - this is a tournament for WINNING.

As a player, sure you might FEEL better getting in 2nd place in a game instead of 4th place...but in a tournament setting THERE SHOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE. This isn't a "simulate game night" tournament, this is a "find the best 4p Dominion player" tournament, and a point system gets in the way of that while also making it complicated to organize.

*insert old-timey "in my day we didn't get trophies for losing" anecdote*

---

I think a lot of you are misinterpreting what a point system will do. It WON'T let you play in your self-interest - it will make you metagame. You'll be playing the point system, and not Dominion. You'll be "playing for the draw", instead of simply trying to win the damn game. When bracket time comes around, that's not going to work, and we should not be rewarding it at the expense of simplification.

"Playing for 2nd" means nothing when first place is the only thing that's going to get you a trip to Nationals. Why should we have people good at "playing for 2nd" get the best shot at the prize?
Logged

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #92 on: June 21, 2012, 06:24:42 pm »
0

Surely winner takes all just promotes high variance strategies?
Ie treasure map without support.
I don't understand...how is this is a bad thing when winner takes all?

EDIT: There's a reason I keep getting +1's from rrenaud, and I'm waiting for him to speak up about it :P
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #93 on: June 21, 2012, 06:31:40 pm »
0

But if you have no chance at getting first place late in the game and have nothing to play for, then you begin to worry about kingmaking. This doesn't matter as much, as long as 2nd place finishes are used as a tiebreaker anyway.

However, I don't like that three-player and four-player wins are of equal worth. I understand we don't really have a lot of time to debate the merits of each person's idea and stuff, but winning a three-player game is a lot easier than a four-player, IMO.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Rabid

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Shuffle iT Username: Rabid
  • Respect: +637
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #94 on: June 21, 2012, 06:32:20 pm »
+1

Surely winner takes all just promotes high variance strategies?
Ie treasure map without support.
I don't understand...how is this is a bad thing when winner takes all?

It is not a bad strategy for a player given this structure, but I don't think it is player behaviour that should be rewarded heavily.
Promoting high variance low skill strategies is going to give you a fairly random winner I think.
My definition of "best player" would include a wider range of player skills.
Logged
Twitch
1 Day Cup #1:Ednever

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #95 on: June 21, 2012, 06:47:19 pm »
0

Surely winner takes all just promotes high variance strategies?
Ie treasure map without support.
I don't understand...how is this is a bad thing when winner takes all?

It is not a bad strategy for a player given this structure, but I don't think it is player behaviour that should be rewarded heavily.
Promoting high variance low skill strategies is going to give you a fairly random winner I think.
My definition of "best player" would include a wider range of player skills.
My definition of "best player" would stop at "wins the most." This does not include "appears to be most well-rounded."

The point about having a fairly random winner, that's more about the tournament organization and less about the debate of having a point system or not - there's a reason why we went to best 2/3 and 3/5 in BGGDL, and the DSC was 4/7.

A properly laid-out format will accurately prevent wild play from being successful. A point system will do that, too...but not accurately. Again, metagaming; players will be much more unpredictable when they have an array of results to go for (especially in the final game before a bracket), being conservative in an early game and wacky in a late one. "Winner take all" eliminates that unpredictability.

But if you have no chance at getting first place late in the game and have nothing to play for, then you begin to worry about kingmaking.
Or you could alter your strategy to take advantage of the only possible avenue left to you to win.
The big issue I see here from a theoretical standpoint is another player going non-optimal at the end game, and you're penalized for their derp. In that case, we need a format that allows recovery from that.

By the way, having a point system would make that WORSE.

However, I don't like that three-player and four-player wins are of equal worth. I understand we don't really have a lot of time to debate the merits of each person's idea and stuff, but winning a three-player game is a lot easier than a four-player, IMO.
You're jumping to that conclusion. Don't worry - if there's an inequity, it will be mitigated somehow.
Logged

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 626
  • Respect: +681
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #96 on: June 21, 2012, 06:53:59 pm »
+2

I disagree wholeheartedly :D

This tournament has a couple issues you might be forgetting:

1. We don't have time to contemplate point systems;
2. Organizing with a point system might be a total mess for whoever admininstrates; and,
3. This is not a participation tournament - this is a tournament for WINNING.

As a player, sure you might FEEL better getting in 2nd place in a game instead of 4th place...but in a tournament setting THERE SHOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE. This isn't a "simulate game night" tournament, this is a "find the best 4p Dominion player" tournament, and a point system gets in the way of that while also making it complicated to organize.

*insert old-timey "in my day we didn't get trophies for losing" anecdote*

---

I think a lot of you are misinterpreting what a point system will do. It WON'T let you play in your self-interest - it will make you metagame. You'll be playing the point system, and not Dominion. You'll be "playing for the draw", instead of simply trying to win the damn game. When bracket time comes around, that's not going to work, and we should not be rewarding it at the expense of simplification.

"Playing for 2nd" means nothing when first place is the only thing that's going to get you a trip to Nationals. Why should we have people good at "playing for 2nd" get the best shot at the prize?

Yeah. I think we definitely disagree. I'm happy with whatever Theory decides. Until he does, my two cents on your comments:

1. We don't have time to contemplate point systems

-> Agreed. Not a lot of time. But something like 3-2-1-0 doesn't take a ton of time. And I don't think it makes a ton of difference on what the system is. Theory can just make an executive decision.

2. Organizing with a point system might be a total mess for whoever admininstrates; and,

-> Might be, but I don't think it has to be. The players in a group can self-report. Even into a shared Google Spreadsheet.

3. This is not a participation tournament - this is a tournament for WINNING.

-> I guess the question is "what does winning mean". My feeling is (and I might be very wrong) is that you feel the player who wins a particular game is the "winner". I think my general philosophy is the player who performs well in a series of games is the "winner".

It goes back to, which of these two players is the "winner" in a series of four-player games:

1st, 1st, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th
1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd

If no criteria were set out at the start I would vote for the second guy (sounds like you would vote for the first guy).
If the question was: Which of these two players is most likely to win the "9th game", I would bet on my guy every time.

If there was defined criteria beforehand - i.e., only first place matters. Then the first guy may indeed be the best player - playing to the criteria.

But playing so 'first place only matters' leads to some weird incentives - things like opening Treasure Map consistently, or, as fourth player playing just to spoil your competition (since you have better odds of that then you do of winning)

Ideally I like an incentive system that encourages players to just play the best they can.

Dominion has so much chance involved already, that encouraging players to increase that variance doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

(And I would hate to be neck and neck for a 1-2 finish with someone and have it decided on the whim of the 3rd/4th place player. Or be in the position as 3/4th place to be kingmaker in the game - feels lot like "where does the Robber go" that Donald talks about all the time)

Ed
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2786
  • Respect: +1510
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #97 on: June 21, 2012, 07:05:14 pm »
0

One good thing about a point system is the following. A major obstacle in Dominion tournaments is lacking enough games to distinguish which player is best. So you want to get at much information from each game as possible.

If you only know the winner of a game, there are only 4 possible outcomes. If you know the finish order (1st-4th) of the players, there are 4! = 24 possible outcomes. So, 2 bits of information from winner-takes-all, and ~4.6 bits of information if you know the finish order, which is more than twice as much.
Logged

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #98 on: June 21, 2012, 07:05:29 pm »
0


3. This is not a participation tournament - this is a tournament for WINNING.

-> I guess the question is "what does winning mean". My feeling is (and I might be very wrong) is that you feel the player who wins a particular game is the "winner". I think my general philosophy is the player who performs well in a series of games is the "winner".

It goes back to, which of these two players is the "winner" in a series of four-player games:

1st, 1st, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th
1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd

If no criteria were set out at the start I would vote for the second guy (sounds like you would vote for the first guy).
If the question was: Which of these two players is most likely to win the "9th game", I would bet on my guy every time.

If there was defined criteria beforehand - i.e., only first place matters. Then the first guy may indeed be the best player - playing to the criteria.

But playing so 'first place only matters' leads to some weird incentives - things like opening Treasure Map consistently, or, as fourth player playing just to spoil your competition (since you have better odds of that then you do of winning)
Yeah, we're going to disagree.

* In the two players you mentioned, the criteria they play under is far more important than you assume. Are we playing for fun, or for keeps? With nothing defined beforehand, I would refrain from betting completely. People play different when different things are on the line.

Brush up on your PPR theory here. It may serve you well.

* I did mention that the format needs to allow for high-variance strategies, but not as much as I think you believe.

What if I went for 2 points every time I scored a touchdown, or kicked onside every kickoff, or went for it on 4th down every time? As a coach, I'd be fired. However, those things ARE done situationally, and can be used successfully.

What if, instead of lining up for the play, my entire defense started doing jumping jacks? It probably wouldn't work 99 times out of 100...BUT IT MIGHT WORK ONE TIME!
Logged

metzgerism

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: DominionStrategy qualifiers for US National Championships
« Reply #99 on: June 21, 2012, 07:07:17 pm »
0

One good thing about a point system is the following. A major obstacle in Dominion tournaments is lacking enough games to distinguish which player is best. So you want to get at much information from each game as possible.

If you only know the winner of a game, there are only 4 possible outcomes. If you know the finish order (1st-4th) of the players, there are 4! = 24 possible outcomes. So, 2 bits of information from winner-takes-all, and ~4.6 bits of information if you know the finish order, which is more than twice as much.
Agreed on the tournament format issue.

Here's an alternative that keeps winner-take-all and gets you more information:

Play two games.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  All
 

Page created in 0.266 seconds with 20 queries.